Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
That was his point.
Do Canadian coins work?
The Chazon Ish was apparently very makpid.
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=46506&st=&pgnum=309&hilite=
A case in point is not leaving eggs, garlic or onions unpeeled overnight
That’s not the best example, since many, probably most, poskim are machmir.
See, for example:
Then you’re also not understanding the reason for the din.
You’re misunderstanding me. Artificially adding other clauses to the prenup wouldn’t change its purpose, which is clearly to prevent a man from withholding the get.
I don’t understand why you are holding me to your interpretation of popa’s paraphrasing of his rebbeim.
Not if the girl is in Lakewood.
You are not the first person Ive heard this “distinction” between a prenup and kesuba from.
Maybe because the distinction is true?
Reminds me of waiting in line for the keilim mikvah on erev Yom Tov. A woman was waiting to toivel some plastic containers, and some guy was making fun of her. I pointed out that that some poskim do require it, because the same reason the Gemara uses to require tevilah for glass also applies to plastic.
So, the guy goes on an anti-chumrah rant, and yells, “People say not to eat strawberries, but Hashem created them!”.
I told him that Hashem also created the sheratzim in the strawberries, and He also created chazir, but we can’t eat those either.
He said, “You’re the second person to give me that answer!”.
You make it sound as if I answered your question. I did not.
Just because rebbeim told their talmidim controversial things doesn’t mean they belong on a public website.
Of course it wouldn’t fix it. It wouldn’t fool anyone.
PAA, I wasn’t trying to guess why popa’s sevara was, I was trying to guess what his rebbeim’s sevara is.
I think it’s more than just bringing up divorce, it’s bringing up the possibility of being treated cruelly.
Also, what ubiquitin did by removing half of my comment was to negate popa’s point, which I was also trying to make, that the kesubah deals with a lot more than just divorce, whereas the prenup deals just with divorce.
??? ????? ?? ??????: ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ??? ?? ???? ????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???
By cutting out part of my comment, you lost most of my point.
It’s also inaccurate to discuss what would be if part of the kesubah was not in force without looking at the whole picture.
The whole discussion of pros and cons of the prenup is kind of off topic. The discussion is following rebbeim/daas Torah even without agreeing. Once it’s come up, though…
the prenup is designed to help an already “divorced” woman (i.e. divorced in the legal sense or practical sense)get her get and allow her to remarry.
In other words, it’s not designed to deliniate the marital and post marital obligations as a kesubah is, it’s designed to deal with a scenario in which the marriage ends and the spouses are acting spitefully and maliciously towards each other. Quite a negative thought to start a marriage with.
This is PAA’s point, I believe, and popa’s rebbeim’s point as well. In fact, it seems very much the issue the BDA itself grapples with when they lay out their arguments why a couple should sign it.
One can argue that the benefits, preventing the malicious actions, outweigh this negative, but again, this is where daas Torah comes in, where we accept that our rebbeim are more tuned in to the ratzon Hashem then we are in being machria this shikul.
To me it sounded like another facet of daas torah namely accepting anything from a rosh yeshiva wether it makes sense or not.
If your rav said the KosherSwitch was assur, would say, “but that doesn’t make sense – you’re just moving an isolated piece of plastic!”? Or perhaps you would try to understand, but not say that ” it doesn’t make sense”.
Yes, that is part of daas Torah, accepting, just as we do in halachic matters, that something may be true despite our not understanding it.
the students who are following may happen to personally agree.
This is an important point. According to this qualification, we need to define “following daas Torah” as being “m’vatel daas”, meaning following it even when disagreeing. If a guy follows his rebbeim 90% of the time, but the other 10% not, because he doesn’t agree on those matters, he can’t really be said to be following daas Torah.
I’m not posting my thoughts on popa’s strawman DT thread.
There’s a major shidduch crisis for older women. Just look at census statistics, and you’ll see that there a lot more women than men in an increasing percentage, as age increases.
This has little to do with the shidduch crisis for younger women, which in my view is related to age gap; this has to do with the fact that women live longer than men.
I don’t know the age you’re referring to, but if you’re referring to an age younger than what I am, the demographics still play a role. There are never married women available, so single men might prefer to go out with and marry one. Nothing to do with value; it’s just less complicated.
Maybe the scale was from the orange juice.
No (that’s a response to your last question. I don’t know what the beginning of your post means).
That’s not a psak, that’s an ultimatum.
Sam, the point is, this isn’t a psak.
(I have not seen that this agreement was portrayed as something everyone must do)
That’s precisely why they wouldn’t feel the need to listen.
The YU roshei yeshiva don’t believe in daas Torah, so if the talmidim do, they’re not listening to daas Torah…
CY, agreed. That post wasn’t meant to be taken seriously.
It there’s loshon hora in the CR (see: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/lashon-hora-in-the-cr), and, as in the famous story of the Chofetz Chaim, it’s assur to say loshon hora about oneself, was it loshon hora for nfgo3 to post that he voted for Obama?
😉
Any one relying on it would have to be nuts.
So can we be oiker all of their kiddushins l’mafrea altz mekach taos?
I don’t know which of the signatories took a different view, or how that’s even relevant. The kol koreh was kind of pareve on the issue of direct melachah, since even grama is normally assur. The kol koreh acknowledges the use of grama devices in hospitals in E.Y., but nevertheless assers the KosherSwitch.
Again, see Shvus Yitzchak (it’s on Otzar Chochmoh, in case you have access) who quotes Rav Moshe, Rav Elyashiv, Rav Chaim Ozer, the Chazon Ish, and even Rav Shlomo Zalman leaning in that direction, that using “grama” devices is actually, al pi din, direct melachah.
This is not merely about comfort level.
I have heard that people think oats should be like rice, and that the fifth min is a variety of barley. One of the arguments is that the gluten in oats is just cross contamination from other species.
I haven’t really looked into it much, since I’ve heard b’shem gedolei haposkim that our mesorah is that oats are from the chameshes minim, and I suppose I accept the argument that gluten free oats are just oats without gluten.
Those are not exceptions. Those actions are not for the purpose of those melachos, and those aren’t the exclusive purposes of the devices. The purpose of the KosherSwitch is expressly to turn the light on and off, and that is your express intention when you flip it.
The purpose of an oven door is to keep the heat in and to access the food. The purpose of the button in the water cooler is to get water. Occasionally, the door will activate the fire, and the button will activate the compressor, but it’s not your kavanah, not a psik reisha, and not the purpose of the door and button.
I have no idea what R’ Ovadiah held about Tzomet, but he didn’t seem to hold of this.
As far as what R’ SZA held, don’t take my word for it, check the Shvus Yitzchak I cited, and his quotes from Minchas Shlomo. It’s hard to understand how this fits with what Tzomet does, but not impossible. Even if R’ SZA leaned towards saying it’s a direct melachah, he also heard the other tzad, and was mattir for a tzorech gadol.
There are two important things that come from this understanding.
1) It’s impossible to be mattir for anything short of a big sha’as had’chak.
2) It’s quite understandable that a posek such as R’ Belsky would not even be mattir b’sha’as had’chak, which seems to be in line with what R’ Elyashiv, R’ Moshe, the Chazon Ish, and R’ Chaim Ozer held.
It is also quite important to point out, as I did earlier, that as far as I know, the Tzomet devices don’t activate aish, whereas this device was being marketed to turn on bulbs which would be considered aish.
The earlier post was to besalel.
Ubiquitin, I’m actually taking an even stricter stance than you as far as melachah. You’re saying it’s a grama, I’m saying it’s a maaseh.
As far as my “view” as to whether or not it was organized, obviously, all four poskim weren’t mechaven to the same nusach and coincidentally sent it to the printer at the same time, and then he decided to save paper and put all four signatures on the same sign.
Rather, rabbonim, concerned that their kehillos would believe the misleading promotional material, arranged for a public kol koreh before the devices were actually sold. I’m told that attempts were made to reach the inventor of the switch before it went public.
And the author of Shvus Yitzchak was paid off by whom?
It happens to be that I originally thought like you do, that to to say there’s melachah mamash doesn’t make sense, considering all the devices used for refuah/bitachon, but I looked into it, and there are some very legitimate, apolitical sources to asser here, and they’re more compelling than the reasons to be mattir.
Even Rav Shlomo Zalman, who held electricity is d’rabbonon and was mattir these devices, only did so out of great dochek, but in some places writes that it should be a direct melachah if the device us made to do this.
I was under the impression that gluten free oats were the same min as regular oats.
It’s not that hard to understand. Numerous baalebattim, seeing the promotional materials for KosherSwitch, asked their rabbonim for guidance. They, in turn, did research, including contacting some of the supposed endorsers, and ultimately, the gedolei haposkim. One was probably ambitious enough to write up (or have written up) a kol koreh to be presented to the poskim to sign.
At the same time, one or more of these rabbonim, hearing that the gedolei haposkim asser, approach Ami and Mishpacha to have the articles appear. As a hot topic, they’re happy to oblige, and sell magazines. Alternatively, they become aware on their own of the issue, and issue their latest issue with articles on the issue.
Not so difficult to “organize”.
We interrupt this debate to bring you a halachic point…
Some have claimed that most bulbs today are not incandescent, which is considered aish and a d’Oraisa according to all accepted opinions, but rather fluorescent, so we would be dealing with a d’rabbonon.
This might be true of LED (if electricity itself is not d’Oraisa, which is a big machlokes), but fluorescent bulbs do in fact have glowing filaments on either end, and are considered aish.
This all happened within a couple of weeks of KosherSwitch starting its funding and publicity campaign. I don’t know why the timing should be an issue.
In ???? ???? ??? ?’ ??? ?”?, he quotes several of the ????? ??????? as holding that a device whose purpose is to perform a certain action cannot be considered a grama no matter the mechanism it uses. It would be a full fledged melachah.
Yes, Sam, we follow our mesorah, despite what current agricultural science may say.
ZD, if you’re referring to either R’ Oelbaum or R’ Steinberg, both have publicly distanced themselves from any perceived “endorsement”.
Joseph, they never started selling them. They haven’t been manufactured yet.
I’d be shocked to see an ad in next week’s edition. I’m sure it was printed before the kol koreh came out.
Lesschumras, so what’s the downside?
😉
And how would you have reacted in popa’s story?