Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The idea behind it is nothing like the kosher lamp, which is a cover over the bulb. This is a different type of switch.
Rabbi Oelbaum’s endorsement is limited to the melachah aspect, but he alludes to the zilzul Shabbos issue when he tells you to speak to your own rav.
I don’t think the kosher lamp has an endorsement which says, “ask your rav”. I bought an urn made under Jewish ownership, and the endorsement, where a rav says it doesn’t require tevila, doesn’t say, “but ask your rav”. The hechsher on my box of cereal doesn’t say, “kosher l’mehadrin, but ask your rav”.
That would be this one:
The list of rabbis who hold it’s assur might be even more impressive, but of course, they don’t publish it.
To give some credit, they do allude to the fact that they were unable to receive endorsement from some rabbis. They claim that most who wouldn’t endorse it were for “non-halachic” reasons. If that means zilzul Shabbos (which I don’t see a way around, and their rationalization is a bunch of empty words), I would call it halachic. They could use the term Rabbi Oelbaum (who strongly hinted that he holds it’s zilzul Shabbos) used, and say that their lack of endorsement was not for melachah reasons. Even this is far from clear (and they hint that some asser for melachah reasons). The miskaven issue is difficult to get around.
If you look carefully (to be honest, I looked at only a couple), at least some of the “endorsements” are pretty tepid.
Sure, if the orice is substantially more. Otherwise, how does he explain the teshuvos?
When is the price equal? I’ve never seen such a thing, and with more supervision required, it would be very surprising to see it.
How does R’ Dovid, according to R’ Frankel, explain the teshuvos?
What did he confirm with you?
He told mosdos to pay more, and individuals in the letter to R’ Weinfeld, which was in his own name, so is at least as good as someone else in his name.
Who is R’ Dovid Frankel? Is he related to R’ Yitzchak Frankel?
I consider it on the level of being in the Igros. It is his own son.
I consider the letter to R’ Weinfeld on the level of being in the Igros. It is his own self.
And it is quite clear that there is no special circumstance, rather, he’s stating the obvious.
Rav Dovid Feinstein shlit”a’s holding in the name of his father that it is mutar even when cy is readily available is not in the Igros either.
And you keep asking for a source for the story, but what difference does it make? It’s not in the Igros.
Also, where in Igros does it say that something which is not in the Igros is wrong?
And if you think that teshuvah is wrong, why did he write it?
Oh, boy, is that frustrating. I’ve had similar happen to me a number of times.
You should definitely appeal.
Technically, you can probably insist on a hearing with the accusing officer there. It’s probably not worth your time.
Chalk it up to the cost of owning a car.
Sure, similar shape. So what? It’s significance as something which opens is obvious, and in no way comes from a goyish minhag.
And really, you should be more careful who you accuse of amaratzus.
Ubiquitin, I actually have a source, but I don’t have permission to post names, so I’m uncomfortable doing so.
It’s third hand, so I can’t swear to the veracity, but I think it’s true.
It is permissable; that doesn’t mean it’s recommended or equal to CY. Rav Dovid himself, I am told, today is makpid. Of course, that could be because of the treifos shailah. Unless he still costumes cholov stam products aside from milk, which would mean it’s the supervision issue.
I happen to think the family, and perhaps close talmidim, have a reason to consume CS, to demonstrate his psak, but that doesn’t apply to everyone else.
Ubiquitin, Really No parallel? “OR WITH A CROSS SHAPED KEY” No parallel at all?
Because the tool they used to make a cross was a key, you consider it a parallel? If they draw a cross with a pen, should we stop using pens?
We know the significance of a cross to them; the significance of a key is completely different. That is not a parallel.
ZD, those aren’t minhagim. They have, and never did have, religious significance.
Ubiquitin, nowadays minhagim are passed down from father to son (or in some cases, mother to daughter), but that’s because we are living in a melting pot. Minhagim used to be based on where one lived, and even today, if one moves to a place with firmly established minhagim, he probably should adopt them. Most places are not that way, though.
Old man, although I think I’m agreeing with you on that point, I disagree with dropping a minhag because “it doesn’t make sense”. Minhag Yisrael Torah hi applies even when we don’t understand it.
Thanks, Charlie.
Ubiquitin, I agree with you, but I think the reason this one has taken off is the same reason as parshas hamon – they’re a segulah for parnassah.
As JT pointed out earlier, it is not currently practiced as far as we know by any religion.
More importantly, why make assumptions that it was copied from the goyim? Just because goyim may have done something similar doesn’t mean it was copied, abd that the reasons are all horoas heter.
This is unlike Chanukah presents, which people from our generation have observed was copied from goyim (albeit with a good reason, so that Jewish kids shouldn’t feel underprivileged when their goyish friends got presents on their chogo).
OTOH, schlissel challah being copied is mostly conjecture. When we are told Jewish reasons by big Jews, why be cynical?
147, is this minhag common among Jews of German ancestry?
What a tzaddik! He didn’t carry the bag, which was unnecessary, just the supplies, insulated in the tallis so they (perhaps medications, or a certain food needed by the choleh). wouldn’t spoil.
You don’t think saying, “Move them to Jordan and be done with it” is provocative??!!
I honestly think that if you had more respect for Chassidim, especially some very great ones, you would second guess your conclusion that it’s chukas hagoy.
Probably back in Mendelsohn’s.
Ubiquitin, the Gr”a’s chiddush was that a Yiddish minhag could become assur if adopted by goyim for avodah zarah (e.g. trees in their houses of worship).
The point here (I don’t know if this is what LF means) is that when a minhag has roots even merely hundreds of years ago, and is not only practiced, but advocated for and explained by great gedolim, to to assign the entire origin to a similar goyish minhag (especially in this case based on the flimsiest of evidence brought by someone with no track record) is arrogant, unwise, and an affront to the great people who did explain the reasoning and/or practice it without any reluctance.
Even if the Vilna Gaon himself were to have denounced it, at this point in history, even someone of litvish background should have the decency to respect an accepted Chassidish minhag even if he doesn’t practice it. Even if you disagree with that last sentence, the fact, though, is that we don’t have any such statement from the Gr”a.
You should be dan l’kaf z’chus that in the tallis bag there were supplies for a choleh sheyesh bo sakanah.
I am not surprised that you were in Mendelsohn’s last night.
I’ll take what Rav Henkin zt”l himself said.
AK, JT: One of the things he debunked was the assertion that the source is a goyish one.
I disagree. And I don’t think the virulent anti schlissel challah rants come from a good place.
ZD, if I knew for a fact that it was true, then no. If I don’t know for a fact that it’s true, then it depends on who, the “Daas Torah” is. I very well may not trust people you think I would call Daas Torah.
In these cases, usually very few people know anything for a fact, so it’s a judgment call as to whether there’s enough evidence to act. There are people you might think I would trust to make that judgment, who in fact, I wouldn’t.
As you are fully aware but neglect to mention, R’ Yair Hoffman has debunked this.
Goq, even if it violates halachah?
So Joseph is saying that you can’t trust what he says in his grandfather’s name because of what he said about the Satmar Rav, and PAA is justifying what he said about the Satmar Rav based on what he claims his grandfather said about him.
My head is spinning.
No hisgarus b’umos going on here. None whatsoever.
I assume you mean because b’rachos are d’rabbonon, and milsa d’lo sh’chicha lo gazru bei rabbonon?
No, 147, I mean that you remembered to make your seder.
🙂
See, the reminders worked!
What you just quoted from the Chofetz Chaim was about living in E.Y., not Zionism, and about a state after Moshiach comes, not before.
And yes, the Chofetz Chaim, as well as most, if not all gedolim respected R’ Kook tremendously, but disagreed with him on Zionism.
That’s sad.
Who held R’ Elchonon’s shittos were extreme? He was known to closely follow his rebbe, the Chofetz Chaim, who was anti Zionism, and R’ Reuven Grozovsky’s B’oyos Haz’man, which is strongly anti Zionism, is considered standard yeshiva hashkofo on the matter.
It’s worth noting that it was published under the auspices of the Debriciner Rav zt”l, a huge gaon in his own right.
They got it from R’ Forst’s sefer.
🙂
I googled ????? ?????? ???”?, and with lots of siyata dishmaya, found it.
Here it is, on page 6 (moderator, please allow. It’s just a PDF of the ????? ??????, mentioned above).
There are some teshuvos in ‘? which they have told talmidim are not accurate.
In R’ Forsts ???, it says, above the ?????:
(??? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???-???? ???”?).
So, to answer your second question, it had been printed once prior to R’ Forst reprinting it.
There’s no kula involved, unless one abstains from doing a mitzvah (e.g. doesn’t eat matzah) or insults someone (which shouldn’t be an issue if it’s a general policy).
I know people – talmidei chachomim – with such a policy as well.
Let there be an increase in [the number of] those who fear (lit. tremble for) the words of the Torah that will purchase this (Jewishly supervised) milk.
Thanks for the eruv tavshilin reminder reminder.
What are ???? ???? I quote from the Toronto ?????:
?????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??
If someone was a butcher and “accidently” sold trief meat, would you be so forgiving?
Yes, actually more so, but I probably wouldn’t buy meat from him. Just as I wouldn’t let my kids near an accused abuser, even if there wasn’t enough evidence to convict.
In other words, wrong as he may be, what he did doesn’t warrant the punishment you want to give him.,
It very well might, but only Hashem can make that judgment and carry it out.