☕ DaasYochid ☕

“Most people who prefer Gucci, Armani, Borsalino, Lexus or any other brand name will justify it on the basis of “quality.” Skeptics will say they bought it for “status.”

And a thinking person will not lump everything together.

You speak in generalities. Can you please cite some specific examples?

Because Hashem said so in no uncertain terms. Period.

That works for you, and it works for me, but I don’t know that it works for T613’s Partner in Torah.

Daniela, please look at T613’s words in context. She is saying that a focus on externals rather than internals is not Jewish, or to paraphrase, not in line with Torah values. The answer to her question lies, I think, in understanding how this din, if viewed properly, is actually significant beyond the physical.

It shows you how strong emotion can be binding. Sadly, Holocaust denial, which is purely based on sinas Yisroel, will not become any less rare.

Needless to say, it was roundly rejected.

So when a group which admits to deviating from standard Orthodoxy incorporates a whole plethora of of halachot, which, each on its own, would be roundly rejected, it shouldn’t cause surprise when the group as a whole is roundly rejected.

(every Erev Shabbos during Sefirah)

Minhag RSA?

That solution to the Agunah problem was proposed by Frum Rabbonim in the past as well.

That’s really hard to believe. There were agunos in the times of Chaza”l, and they never proposed it.

The OP was written over a year ago. He probably landed by now.

Also, why would R’ Teitz argue in the R’ma?

I’m sure there’s a deep reason why a ba’al mum specifically can’t do the job, but in terms of “fairness”, which really seems to be her question, the assumption is wrong. Everything we have, including oppurtunities to serve Hashem, is really a gift from Him, and it’s not reflective of proper hakaras hatov to ask why we don’t receive even more.

There’s no word in Loshon Hakodesh for “fair”, because the concept is not real.

We perceive our existance as a given, so we think that yashrus, justice, demands equality. In reality, our very lives are matnos chinam, free, undeserved gifts, so if His wisdom sees fit to create people with different jobs, we are silly to complain. A cow has no right to complain that he’s not a person.

I’m sure there’s some inherent flaw in the service performed by a ba’al mum. The same is obviously true for a flawed animal, which is passuk (disqualified) for a korbon (sacrifice). The disqualified animal has no more right to complain that he can’t serve Hashem as a korbon than he has a right to complain that he’s not a person.

Similarly, a Kohen who has a mum is not being discriminated based on his blameless mum, but for a reason only Hashem knows, the job to perform avodah was not granted to him.d

If Hashem makes every person perfect for who they are, why should people with one physical feature be considered lesser and unable to participate in the holy service?

Why can’t a Yisroel do the avodah? Because it’s not his job. Nor is it a Ba’al mum’s job.

That must be a typo, since R’ Moshe held 18 tefachim b’dieved, and the six feet quoted as b’dieved would be higher than the heads of the vast majority of women.

Wolf, you paid more for a better product, not as a status symbol. That’s a different debate (I’m with you on that one).

1) I don’t know what R’ Henkin ZT”L held, but the halachic norm is only to allow 18 tefachim, as per R’ Moshe ZT”L, and only b’dieved.

2) The issur is not only to look. The reason is also to avoid “kalus rosh”, hence, R’ Moshe holds that the ordinary 10 tefach shiur is not applicable here, and in fact, is meikil (b’dieved) even if the mechitza is transparent.

3) R’ Moshe writes (and proves) the obligation to have a mechitza is d’Oraisa. (O.C. 1, 39)

4) R’ Moshe is referring to the issur of having an improper mechitza. I didn’t see him address the specific issue of someone davening there if its already that way. However, he writes that one is obligated to protest with all his might against a mechitzah which is below 18 tefachim, so it’s mistaver that it’s assur to daven there (even at the expense of t’filah b’tzibur), and, in fact, you’re probably obligated to register your protest at the disregard for halachah (although I don’t know if it’s a situation in which it will definitely fall on deaf ears).

If they really care about halachah, why do they distort it so terribly? They’re working straight out if the old conservative playbook.

Or, as the case may be, welcome back. No way to know.

Ubiquitin, I think HaLeiVi answered your questions nicely, and it’s unfair to narrow it down to a yes or no question (as in, “Did you stop beating your wife? Yes or no!).

Before matan Torah, the mitzvos existed in a different form. They were all about the “spirutal achievement” (to coin a phrase which probably misses the point), not about the technical “kiyum ha mitzvah”.

That all changed after matan Torah, when we became m’tzuveh v’oseh, and the benefit of the mitzvah became bound to the technical performance of the mitzvah.

Yibum might be a good example. There was a concept of Yibum which existed before matan Torah; that’s what Yehudah marrying Tamar was about. After matan Torah, the issur of marrying a daughter-in-law doesn’t allow this type of “Yibum”.

It’s possible that before matan Torah, the accomplishment of the mitzvah of Tefillin could be achieved without what we would consider to be kosher Tefillin, but after matan Torah, it would be a meaningless act.

Some mitzvos may have been tied to the limud of those inyanim, similar to our saying korbonos, tefilah b’mokom korbonos, saying the Avodah on Yom Kipur, etc., even today.

This approach could also explain Succah, but one can also say that the “l’maan yeidu” before matan Torah was a yediah of the future, and afterward, a yediah of the past.

It’s also worth noting that the z’manim of the year are bound to the events which occurred, but not necessarily in the way of cause and effect in which we normally think of them. We call Pesach “Z’man Cheiruseinu”, and we normaly assume that we commemorate the cheirus of yetzias Mtzrayim. Realy, it’s more than that. HKB”H created the world so that 15 Nisan is a z’man of cheirus, and therefoe, that’s when yetzias Mitzrayim took place (histakel b’Oraisa uvara alma). So too Z’man Simchaseinu, and Z’man Matan Toraseinu. It’s therefore possible for the avos, even before matan Torah, to have celebrated the moadim.

For those concerned about wasting money on name brands, does this hold true for Borsalino as well?

In theory, yes. In practice, no, because Borsalino makes a much higher quality product than the competitors, both in look and in durability.

Do if he doesn’t west a Gucci belt, he looks overly poor?

The very fact that they have mechitzahs, oppose same-sex marriage, and keep Shabbos shows they do have some boundaries and generally care about Judaism and Halacha in general.

Or, it shows that they’re smart enough to realize that they would not attract anyone if they were so blatantly non halachic.

There was somewhere in the profile to add a link, but I can’t find it.

If it was upto me I’d be Mevatel all the Dinim of Sefira. Why? Because in our Dor – all I find is people grabbing the Toful and Not doing the Ikkar. They use the Dinim to look down on others. The ones that listen to music or even the ones that listen Acapella are cursed out. The ones that shave or take haircuts during some days are cursed out by others who don’t keep that Minhag.

While you’re at it, be mevatel all halachos involving bein adam laMakom, for the same reason.

Even the unsolicited shaimos (a pet peeve of mine)?

“The organization derives their name from the passage in Exodus Ad matai ha’Edah ha’ra’ah ha’zot”

You spelled the passuk wrong. Don’t worry, I fixed it. 😉