Doswin

downandin: You’re in the U.S. or Israel?

Thank you for the delicious recipes!

In rural areas (such as the Catskills) they used to give people “party lines”, which meant the phone line was shared between two and four households.

DY: Chareidi tuition committees understand. Do MO schools also understand? I always hear MO complaining about tuition, even though they have smaller families than Chareidim, while Chareidim (with generally much larger families than MO) I don’t hear complaining nearly as much. (Of course everyone complains about it.)

My grandmother starts cleaning for Pesach as soon as Chanuka is over. (And the house ain’t that big.)

A chup would be the hair on the forehead. That needs to be all gone.

The peyos, obviously, should be untouched.

What do I know? All I notice are his semi-frequent citing what are obvious pop culture references. I never heard of Henny Youngman before (in fact, until you repeated her name I misread DY as saying *Henry* Youngman), but it is an obvious reference to some pop culture.

The latter half of your run-on sentence, zahavasdad, is a falsehood.

DaasYochid: I notice you are frequently up to date with pop culture. How are you so familiar with it?

They aren’t.

I never heard a child being named after a living PARENT. Even by the Sefardim. I do not believe it is acceptable.

Give her a debit card (which you cannot spend more than is put into the account) rather than a credit card.

It’s beautiful that among Acheinu Bnei Yisroel this is a question. You will not find such a question as above on a Yahoo message board or general forum. If you tried posting this on a travel forum, you’d be laughed off to your face. By them, if you want it, you take it. M’fregt nisht kein kashas. Some of them, at most, might wonder if it’s okay to grab a handful to take home, off of the hotel maid’s cart. Many would have no compunctions even doing that.

Where did you find data from the 1921 census?

She made it the publics business with her posing for the media.

I see, 000646. So you are effectively saying that this book is dissimilar to Mein Kampf because while Hitler claimed outright lies as fact, Deborah Feldman only published false rumors. Gotcha.

A lot of the Chasidish oilem shtam from that area. It had a higher survival rate, as the area was part of Hungary during the war (and the Nazis ym’s didn’t go into Hungary until 1944.) One of the Spinka Rebbes lived in Seilish. Aside from the Chasidim, there were also other Orthodox and Neolog (similar to Conservative) living in those areas. Rav Menashe Klein zt’l learnt in the Yeshiva in Ungvar. Munkatch was a majority Jewish city (somewhat over 50% of the population.)

snjn: Just because you don’t like a part of the S”A, does not mean others share your disdain for portions of the S”A. In fact, I fully adhere and accept every part of the S”A, including the portions you reference.

Satmar and Minkatch, which are Hungarian not Polish, says avoisaini not avoiseini (and always has said it as such, afaik.)

The S”A says to use a small strap to hit your child.

Mishlei 13:24, S”A OC 551:18, S”A YD 245:10

The 7 mitzvos are binding upon the gentiles, and it strictly prohibits these kinds of relationships, upon penalty of death. And the gemora says one of the reasons Rome was destroyed was because of the institution of civil homosexual marriage.

Oberlander havara is very similar to Chasidish. Certainly much closer to that than to Litvish havara. The only difference between Chasidish and Oberlander havara that comes to mind is tzaayraai (C) instead of tzeirei (O).

Why did you went go out with him again after he did that to you?

Oberlander havara is the same as Chasidish havara.

What Nusach does Vien daven, and has it ever changed?

And how are shtreimlech today different than they were 30 years ago?

First, The Oaths are quoted L’Halachah in numerous sources, including but not limited to: Piskei Riaz (Kesuvos 111), Responsa Rivash #110, Responsa Rashbash #2, Megilas Esther on Sefer HaMitzvos of Rambam Ramban (Maamar HaGeulah #1 regarding why all Jews outside of Bavel – the majority of Jews at the time – did not go to Eretz Yisroel at Coresh’s call), Rambam (Igeres Taimon – warning peple not to violate the Oaths or else face grave danger), Maharal (Netzach Yisroel 24) writes that even if the Goyim try to force us to take Eretz Yisroel for ourselves during Golus, we must allow ourselves to be killed rather than take violate the Oaths, as well as other places.

Second, Rabbeinu Tam writes that you DO pasken from Agadita unless it is against Halachah.

Third, the Oaths are NOT Agada. By definition, Halachah means when the Gemora tells you it is forbidden to do something, which this does. In fact, it says You may nto do this, and if you do, you will die. That makes it Halachah. Thats the definition of Halachah. (Similarly, the Oath of Naaseh V’Nishmah is also used by Chazal as Halachah, as in Shevuah chal al Sehvuah etc.)

Fourth, even if it is not Halachah, it still represents the Ratzon Hashem, meaning, negation of Halachah would merely relinquish us of any obligations in regard to makign a State. But the Gemora clearly says that doign so will cause the deaths of Jews, like animals in the field. Even if that does not create any Halachic obligations, it surely tells us that the State is against the will of Hashem and that its existence causes deaths of Jews.

The Oath that G-d gave us not to rebel against the Goyim was NOT for the sake of the Goyim, but for our OWN sake, that we dont end Golus early. It says this in every single interpretation in the commentaries about the Oath. It was not for the sake of the Goyim but for us. So just because the Goyim violated their Oath and hurt us does nto mean we can violate another one and hurt ourselves more! Shevet Efraim left Egypt in violation of the Oaths. Egypt surely violated their Oath when they tortured Jews for centuries. Yet Ephrain, Chazal say, were all hunted donw and killed in the deset for violating their Oath by leaving Egypt early.

The Oaths are brought down l’halachah in Rishonim and Achronim as viable and very real. This, despite the fact that the Goyim have been violating their Oath for thousands of years.

The Rambam in Igeres Taimon warns the Jews not to violate the Oaths, or else. He writes there that the Jews are suffering an evil, persecuting government that commits atrocities and wars against the Jews, and therefore the Jews should watch out not to violate the Oath by rebelling against them. It’s clear that even though the Goyim violate their Oath we cannot violate ours.

The Medrash Aichah says clearly that the Romans violated their Oath, yet the generation of Bar Kochba was punished Chazal say because they violated the Oaths.

The Maharal writes that even if the Goyim force us wuth torturous death to violate the Oath, we should rather submit to torturous death than violate them.

And the Gemora itself disproves the idea, since the Gemora says that the reason Chazal commanded us not to go from Bavel to Eretz Yisroel is due to the Oaths, even though Bavel violated their Oath for sure with the atrocities they committed during the Churban (The Shulchan Aruch writes that the Brachah of Vlamalshinim was enacted to praise Hashem for destroying the evil kingdom of Bavel).

The Gemora then asks on R. Zaira who says that the Oaths only include not taking Eretz Yisroel forcefully, but the Oath not to rebel against the nations is nto included. The Gemora could easily have answered that Bavel violated their Oath and therefore our Oath of rebelling against them is null. But the Gemora says no such thing.

R. Avrohom Galanti (Zechus Avos) brings a story of the people of Portugal who wanted to defend themselves against the government by making a rebellion. The government then was making forced SHmad and all sorts of persecutions. They asked the “shem hameforash” and were told not to do it because it would violate the Oaths.

And besides all this, the second Oath, nshelo yaalu b’chomah has nothing to do with the Goyim, and woud not be dependent on the Goyim’s Oath anyway. The Maharal and R. Yonason Eyebushitz write that even if the Goyim give us permission to take Eretz Yisroel we are not allowed to do it. Better we should die than take Eretz Yisroel, the Maharal says.

What I wrote above is not rocket science. It’s pretty obvious. Takes no genius or encyclopedic knowledge to understand it. Anyone who learns about the Oaths is immediately confronted with the reality that they Goyim violate dtheirs but we still cannot violate ours.

It’s just plain dishonesty that would make people come up with this.