☕ DaasYochid ☕

CY, R’ Moshe is saying that because it was already accepted in many places in Europe to have a nochri turn on the light (lantern), the idea of having lights go on is not zilusa. He might have said the same thing about Shabbos clocks having become accepted, but that doesn’t seem to be what he actually said.

Interestingly, the prior teshuvah is about the havla’ah of bank interest, which is what I compared the prize money to.

Yosi, please be more clear – what case are you talking about?

Another question for the women: how would you feel if you didn’t dress tznius or cover your hair, and suddenly your rav told you that you have to?

Why, Matan, was there a sudden change of policy?

Sam, we reject doing it, but we don’t reject the notion that pain or suffering doesn’t have the ability to be mechaper if it’s the person’s fault or even doing. Please bear in mind the context in which I brought the idea. I’m not saying we should be rolling in the snow or allowing ourselves to be bitten by bees; I’m simply saying that there could be a kaparah from suffering due to negligence, and I’m bringing a raya from the rishonim who did believe in those things. The reason we “reject” it is not because self inflicted suffering inherently can’t be mechaper.

Apushatayid, shkoyach for your sensible posts on this. I don’t have much to add, other than saying that anyone who thinks we can contemplate this being abusive loses a lot of credibility in the seichel department.

Gavra, likely, neither side will consider the “monitor” objective.

Besides, though I’m not going to pretend to know what all of the issues/taynas are, let’s take ZD’s issues (although a couple seem a bit far fetched) as an example. One community considers separate busing and special ed in KJ to be necessities, and art and music to be extras. The other says the opposite. Who’s right? It’s subjective. Who gets to decide? We live in a democracy, and an independent monitor might just serve to take the ability to decide out of the hands of those who should have it, namely, the voters, whose money it happens to be.

Bigben2, how does ???? even come into this discussion? The ????? was on ???.

CY, As far as the lights, I would like to point out that if the ??? was told to leave them on and he did not follow instructions, then he may even be told directly on ??? to turn them back on.

Told directly? I’ll have to look into that. I do recall that there’s no issur to be ????.

R’ Moshe didn’t quite hold that timers were the same as ????? ????”?; his position was a bit more nuanced than that. He was mattir timers for lights, even where ????? ????”? would be problematic.

Gambling has ruined many a family. Even if technically muttar, it’s a bit seedy. Horseracing is not quite as bad as casino gambling, as it has an element of sport in it. It’s still not necessarily an endeavor I would recommend for a nice Jewish boy, but I think it may be a bit much to call involvement a chillul Hashem.

They want to drive around on Shabbos??!! I don’t think anything as bad as that was done here, and I don’t see how that can be blamed on this story.

And Joseph is an expert on assumed identities.

😉

I was told he got around the prize money by selling it to a Goy somehow.

If he did, that’s great. I mentioned that possibility a couple of times.

Getting Wealthy from Mechalel Shabbos- What Happens?

American Pharoah: Kiddush Hashem or Not

That might take care of the a”l issue as well, but I believe that I correctly refuted gavra’s point, and the fact he’s even more motivated to succeed than other schirim makes no difference.

Regardless, it should have been publicized.

No it’s not.

Setting up is part of the job.

There’s no job here. It’s a prize for winning.

If you want to make a comparison, compare to receiving interest from a bank. There is havla’ah because they pay for Saturday, which includes part of Shabbos and part of Yom Rishon, but if that weren’t the case (which happens when Yom Tov falls on Friday and Shabbos or Shabbos and Sunday) we wouldn’t say that preparing the money for deposit makes it havla’ah.

Syag, I am not fighting transgressors. I am pointing out transgressions so that people don’t think it’s muttar.

I’m not saying he’s bad. I have no idea as to his level of knowledge; he may very well be a shogeg not a meizid.

Chillul Hashem most definitely does apply to frum Jews. The gemara I’m aware of referring to chillul Hashem is referring to actions done in front of frum people.

I don’t know which other Shabbos transgressions you think I should be fighting. I have written here about such things as the Shabbos App and the Kosher Switch; if you know of other areas which should be spoken about, I’ll try to look into it.

ZD, an aveirah done in public most definitely is a chillul Hashem. I don’t know why you think otherwise.

I believe they made both a kiddush Hashem and a chillul Hashem.

A kiddush Hashem was made in that they didn’t drive there on Shabbos.

A chillul Hashem was caused by the issurim d’rabbonon which were violated. I do think amira l’akum is an issue; it’s assur to ride a b’heima on Shabbos. The prize money is schar Shabbos. There may be workarounds (e.g. a shtar mechirah) but I haven’t heard such a thing, and at the least it would be maris ayin.

Someone (ZD?) pointed out that the whole idea of involvement in the gambling business is improper. I hear the tayna.

I’ve seen some try to say that shvisas b’hemto is an issue, but I don’t think any melachah was done by the b’heima.

I’m pretty sure Kapusta isn’t too happy that this thread was posted. 🙁

Sam, as far as we know, yes. But there are some very great talmidei chachamim who haven’t printed seforim.

If I had to guess, I would guess differently. I’m not posting it, though.

If one accepts R’ Vosner’s take that it’s a gross violation of tznius, the application, even if one could hypothesize that it would change the specific psak, cannot be called irrational, illogical, or be called dishonest to present as tznius.

So, no matter how you try to soften it, you are still essentially saying it about R’ Vosner.

Although I believe R’ Vosner may have the only written teshuvah against it, it should be pointed out that each chassidus has its own poskim, and they aren’t beholden to R’ Vosner. The fact that several are against women driving tells me that his opinion is by no means that of a daas yochid.

LC, for a non tinok shenishba, you would say it’s a problem?

Kapusta, I lost you there. What I do see is you seemingly making a couple of incorrect assumptions.

Also, I’m curious: what justification does your rav have for running horses on Shabbos? (I’m sure you’ve shown him this thread, because you surely wouldn’t make such accusations without asking him first.)

Not incorrect; perhaps incomplete.

I don’t think eilu v’eilu precludes there being an ultimate emes which is in conflict with one or more of the positions. It refers to the process; if two chachomim explore a halachah, and all of the steps are legitimate, Torah based sevaros, the results of the two psakim may be different, because there might have been a conflict between two legitimate sevaros, and each resolved it differently.

Lo bashomayim hi, so we are only held accountable to follow the opinion which has greater weight (yochid v’rabbim, etc.). There is still an ultimate emes; klapei shmaya galya which opinion is correct (perhaps even a third unstated one).

I’ll give a (perhaps imperfect) example. Say a bais din paskens that someone is chayav misah based on two eidim, or a rov, etc. Turns out that the eidim lied, or the metzius was with the miut.

Was putting him to death assur? Klapei shmaya galya that it was, but they were still correct to do it.

I would say the same thing using the word moral. Killing an innocent person is inherently immoral, but they did the right thing.

Same with psak. Say klapei shmaya galya that the Tzitz Eliezer was wrong, but a talmid who is a doctor follows him. Klapei shmaya, what he did was assur and immoral, but after 120, he will get schar for a mitzvah.

My understanding of eilu v’eilu is based on Rashi in Kesubos, and other sources which I can’t pinpoint. It may be in conflict with other opinions on it.

“Regardless, it’s still completely different from “morality” changing with the times and societal whims. “

Granted. I did not mean to imply anything different.

Then you shouldn’t be arguing with Oomis.

So regarding morality, much like halacha youd say eilu veilu?

Yes, but what that means depends on how to understand eilu v’eilu.

(or insert a better term) Subject to machlokes. It’s still absolute, it’s just a machlokes what the absolute truth is. I know you’re going to ask from eilu v’eilu, and the answer will depend on how to understand eilu v’eilu.

Regardless, it’s still completely different from “morality” changing with the times and societal whims.

I take that back, no need to call. They will call him. My cousin is a big yarei shamayim, though, so put her on top of the list.

BB2, he writes that he knows from experience that it leads to problems, and that the inherent problem is difficult to explain in writing. That is partially why I call it a “sensitivity”.

I do have my thoughts, but I don’t think this is the venue for it.

Are you asking new, unrelated questions? I’m not sure I follow you.

The ??? ???? linked above (here it is again):

http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1414&st=&pgnum=9&hilite=

does indeed say it’s a matter of tznius. The ??? ???? ??”? was neither irrational nor illogical, and not dishonest. My community, and my poskim, are okay with women driving, and my female relatives drive, but I respect those who don’t as having a legitimate tznius sensitivity. I’m sorry if you can’t.

Welcome back.