Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sam: Thanks, I’ll take a look when I get home.
Kozov: You are 100% correct.
It is Offen a Gemorah. ??? ???? ?????? – ??????? ??.
The fact that someone’s Boich Svara doesn’t agree with a Tanna and he dares to voice it just shows how far his Da’as is from Da’as Torah. Rav Gifter used to say Da’as Ba’al Habos is Hepech to Da’as Torah, and we see that here. Hopefully, whomever disagreed will come back and be Moide to the Emes of Da’as Torah.
Yasher Koach!
GAW: No, Rabbeinu Yonah actually holds that. Then again, he holds that even eyes are Ervah because they are praised in Shir Hashirim. Suffice it to say I think no one holds like the Rabbeinu Yonah.
Source?
In addition, based on the Gemaros in Brachos, it would seem that (if that is what Rabbanu Yona says) that he is correct (besides that the Amoraim on the Gemorah disagree. I would like to think that the Amoraim on the Daf had a reason).
Toi: Halacha is Halacha. I’m glad you follow it.
Choppy, correct, but that is exactly the problem. If you don’t know the Halacha, then how will you ever convince anyone to be Tzanuah?
GAW, Rabbeinu Yonah, off hand.
MDD, Rabbi O’Shanter, off hand.
Naming names is not a source, and Rabbanu Yona’s ???? ????? (unless you mean the perush on Brachos, then maybe) is not a Halacha Sefer, nor is it used to source Halacha.
Once again, source?
yitay: Re: The A”H. Covering hair is not erva by an unmarried woman, hence the difference between covered hair (by an eishes ish) and something that even unmarrieds should cover due to erva.
This is completely incorrect. The determining factor is whether the girl is still a Besulah, and has nothing to do with Keddushin. Hence a woman who gets married in many communities does not cover her hair during the wedding itself.
Source: Chelkas Mechokek (also Bais Shmuel) SA AHZ 21:2.
Yitay, a woman is obligated to be dressed tzniusdic so as not to cause men to stumble as far as hirhurim( and histaklus) are concerned.
Source?
GAW: some argue on R’ Wosner with this. My Rosh Yeshiva told me that years ago, the first women who wore pants were not allowed to because it’s a beged ish. Now, however, there are pants made specifically for women, and it is normal for women to wear them. Therefore, it is not a beged ish anymore. He said it is a problem of tznius because women’s pants are made to accentuate certain body parts. However, he said that theoretically, someone could make pants which don’t show off the body, and they would be 100% ok for a woman to wear.
I am aware of this, but most of the Yeraim Olam is Noheg/Paskens like Rav Vosner.
P.S. “Showing off the body” needs its own source (IMHO, it is Das Yehudis and included in “Vered”, which is dressing or acting in a manner that shows the girl is “available”).
If someone dresses non-tznius, but will dress tznius to meet a Rov (or Moshiach), that is an indication that she is dressing non-tznius other times, and should mend her ways.
I agree wholeheartedly. If someone dresses not tznius (for example in tanktops & shorts) and will dress differently to meet a Rov, then they should dress Tznius at all times.
I’ll go even further. Even if she doesn’t dress Tznius to meet the rov, she should STILL dress Tznius at all times!
And people say I’m not a Machmir. I’m even more Machmir than Choppy! 🙂
Square Peg – according to your reasoning, if a woman would wear a full length body suit covering her from head to toe (ala’ Blue man group) it would be OK?
Why is it not? Source!
Therefore, it must be covered in a way that does not show it’s form.
Source? Rav Vosner disagrees.
The source is a Shevet Halevi (Rav Vosner), who says that Pants are inherently a Beged Ish. L’cheorah tights are included in this as well, as the form of the “pants” does not make a difference (as per the Shevet Halevi (chelek 6, siman 118).
P.S. Rav Vosner says in the same Siman that Snowpants that are specificly worn to protect from snow are allowed to be worn (are not Assur) by a woman witout a Skirt. Ayin Shom.
Are you looking for a source that “shok” includes up to the knee?
Jewish Law, as codified in Shulchan Aruch and all the other codes, prohibit the teaching of Oral Law (most notably Talmud) to girls and women.
No one taught it to her, she self-taught (or learned it on her own). Therefore, no Tiflus was taught.
@GAW – the look that the OP was decrying sounds like a problem at least according to your explanation of hatznea leches.
I don’t disagree. It might also come under ????? ????, which is Das Yehudis (Ask your LOR for practical Halacha). It is important to know what the Halacha is, so that when asked, you can actually trace sources. Otherwise, people become Tzeddukim C”V.
I was browsing a frum judaica web site and found that they sell those Reform scarf “talisim”. I was wondering how are they able to sell these, they are not a kosher shir and alot of those reform people make bruchos on them causing them to make a brucha levatula. I sent them an Email asking them but have not heard a response.
Yasher Koach! If you have not yet heard a response, perhaps they need a reminder? Perhaps they are busy with the Siyum HaShas & will take care of it tomorrow?
Keep us updated.
“Tznius is a halacha for all Klal Yisroel! “
Agreed. As I posted earlier:
As promised:
There are THREE (really four) different aspects of what is known as “Tznius” (which is like calling lighting a fire on shabbos “Mukzta”). They are:
1: Ervah
2: Das Moshe/Yehudis
3: Tznius
4: Histaklus
1: Ervah is a din in Kriyas Shema (which is why the halchos are in Keriyas Shema). Many Rishonim hold it applies to other brachos as well. The idea is that a Davar Sheb’kedusha may not be done/said before any Ervah. That includes for a man (as per the Gemorah Brachos) a woman’s hair, shok, etc. This has NOTHING to do with the general idea of a man looking at a lady. See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 75 for more details.
2: Das Moshe/Yehudis is what the Torah (add: or Chazal) perscribes that a female should not have uncovered when she goes out in public. This includes hair of anyone who is not a Besulah (as per Even HaEzer 21:2). The Mishna in Kesubos (72B) differentiates between the two. Ayin Shom. (Rav Moshe IIRC also has some teshuvos on the matter).
3: Tznius: There is a general concept of Hatznya Leches. This applies to both males & females, both in manner of dress and action, to be “low-key”. (There are also halachos of Tnzius in OC 240, which I will ignore for this discussion). An example is a woman covering her hair in her own yard (a private domain), where there is no Chiyuv (seemingly even if others will see her), but there is a concept of “Tznius”. (Offen a Bais Shemuel in Even HaEzer). In general, Chassidim are more Machmir in this.
4: Histaklus: A man may not stare at a woman. Period. If he does, he is Over “Lo Tasuru”. It certainly is a good thing for women to make sure that men have no reason to stare at them, but unless it is “Trai Ivri Nahara”, then it is not “Lifnei Iver”.
(I’m not saying anything new)
if i were a mod, i would delete every thread that openly talks about arayos and proud people. i dont understand why the CR has beome the correct venue and forum, from all places on the internet, to yell about things that should be whispered about. i think its disgusting.
I agree, and would add that euphimisms should be used for anything that we don’t want a ten year old to read.
In addition, I would temporarily block myself for purposefully getting OTB’s goat.
OTB: 🙂
I just wanted to add that you should feel free to vent, as I have nothing else to say.
I also wanted to thank you for calling me a Ba’al Ha’bos. Much better than some other names that have been thrown at me 🙂
However, I would need to learn much more to even be called ignorant. You can call me a Chiloni (as per Onkelus), Gavra, or a Bor Raikam (which assumes the Kli is there. Not a good assumption).
OTB:
That is all I have to say on the subject. Sorry if you don’t like it, but that’s what makes the world go round. 🙂
Feel free to vent.
gavra: You are mistaken about the Satmar Rebbe’s opinion of R. Kook. I’ll start another thread with his writings on him, since its a bit lengthy.
I’m looking forward. I just wanted to use the example of an universally agreed “Frum” Rabbi, as my first choice of a talmudic scholar (Rabbi Saul Lieberman) would have been jumped on (again) by OTB.
“Therefore the Torah is not scared of information which is derived from the vernacular of different times and places. “
Like lice growing from eggs? 🙂
Thanks gavra. I never learnt gemara, so if you have time, can you please explain? Thanks.
I don’t think that it would be correct to do so on an english language thread. It is not exactly something that should be known, lest it become a l’chatchila (IMHO).
Feel free to look into the Artscroll on the gemorah there, or the Shulchan Aruch if you don’t wnat to learn gemorah.
That is all I have to say on the subject. Sorry if you don’t like it, but that’s what makes the world go round. 🙂
If you want to start a new thread, I’ll agree to you regarding his Gadlus in Torah. The Satmer Rov also held of Rav Kook’s Gadlus in Torah.
If anybody knows more about this case or how it would potentially work please post.
If you send a Get via a Shliach and then go to Bais Din & cancel the Get (instead of telling the Shliach), and then the Shliach gives the Get to the woman.
Gittin 33a:
???? ????? ?????: ??? ???? ????? ????? ?’ ????? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ?’ ????? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???? ????? ??????? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?’ ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ?????? ??? ????? ?”? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???”? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ??”? ?? ?? ?”? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?? ?”? ??? ????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ?? ????? ????? ????? ???? ????????? ???? ???????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ????:
smoking cigarettes is not cause for divorce. you decry divorce as an obvious option for frum couples, then go on to say that smoking is severe enough of an issue to end a marriage. that is retarded.
The Gemorah brings Raicho Ra as a reason for divorce. If that is the case, then that is the halacha (as usual, I’m not getting into details, just bringing a point it).
I asked a Rabbi and was told a girls skirt must extend approx 4 inches past the knee when standing so that when she sits bends…no part of her knee will be showing. How many women may be covering when they stand but the second thsy sit down WHOOPS?
And what if even at 4 In. it still goes up? Does that make it Muttar? What if at 3.5 In. it still stays down? Is that Assur?
(One of my pet peeves) I don’t disagree with the Halacha, but putting an inch length on it is just silly, and also a Nichshal to those whom the length is too short.
“HaRav Falk shlit”a IS one of the Gedolim today. “
You are entitled. That’s what makes the world go round. 🙂
Kiddushin 81
“‘Logic’ would would dictate that Hadlakos Neros for Shabos was only for the days of Chazal when they had no electricity.”
Rav Newirth (in Shmiras Shabbos K’Hilchasa) holds that a light bulb is Kosher for Hadlakas Neiros. My Rov holds like this as well. As a solution to possible problems of Brocha L’vatala, we light in a room that either has food (as candles are an enhancement to the shabbos feast) or in a darkened room, where the light is needed.
Interestingly enough, I once spoke to my Rov about the difference between Shabbos & Chanuka Neiros in the din of using a light bulb, and there is an interesting Chiluk.
5 points for the person that gets it right.
You go to a talmid chochom with very much experience in Shalom Bayis issues.
Which wasn’t done here. She went to an unknown “Gadol”, who may or may not have any experience in the issues.
A big problem is when the family doesn’t have a “rov” with whom both sides feel comfortable. My Rov has told me that he will not discuss shailos that may affect shalom bayis without both sides present, let alone actual shalom bayis issues.
Feif Un:
It is a Michshal, but don’t blame it solely on Rabbi Falk. He specificly says in one of his books that everyone must ask their own Rov, and not pasken from his books. In addition, in his actual Shailos U’Teshuvos, he is more reasonable (or meikel, pick your poison) than the books.
I blame the sems (and the high schools that felt the need to follow or be judged “not frum enough”), who decided that getting normal American girls to adapt minhagim of Yerushalmi yidden is a good thing. (decided the rest is too harsh, even for Sems.)
on the ball:
It didn’t fit in the sentance structure, but when I refer to him personally, I do call him Rabbi Falk.
I also ask the mods that they should put an R’ before the name, it shouldn’t mess it up too bad.
Tell him he is contributing to the shidduch crisis.
Sneaky! I wish I would have thought of that.
Gavra: You surely know where flyers end up, most people not even bothering to read them, besides all practicalities involved. And the idea is to be specific for the mussar to be effective, not generalizing.
Most Unsolicited spoken advice & musser ends up in the same place, except that it has the added effect of getting people to want to do the exact opposite. No worries 🙂
P.S. Who says I was kidding?
Ask a Gadol what to do.
It will be what you would do anyway, so why bother?
Not free as in it costs the owners for you to use it. It doesn’t cost you anything!
You crack me up gavra, but as you said you are not a woman, so you are obviously not wired like one…
I thank Hashem every day for it.
I believe my suggestion fills the requirements (no embarassment) of what you are looking. If everyone is handed the pamphlet, no one is singled out.
Don’t get me wrong I CAN’T STAND THEM. However why do they maintain a standard and we can’t???
Racist. I have nothing to say to you.
Whatever you would do if you saw your neighbor eating a cheeseburger with shrimp you should do if you saw your neighbor in public with above her knees showing.
Nothing in either case.
I’ll disagree.
Limud HaTorah, by definition, is asking your Rabbonim to explain why P’sak is what it is. Only through “Riska D’oraysa” can we come up with a mehalch.
As such, if someone asks “why” to be M’kanter, the OP is correct. However, a Rov (or gadol) is MECHUYAV to explain his p’sak to his talmidim (and everyone in Klal Yisroel is a talmid of the gedolim), so that they may learn from it.
Torah he V’lilmod Ani Tzarich.
It’s probably cus I’m from “oot”, and wouldn’t ever agree to live the big city life. My gut tells me living somewhere that actually has girls to date is very conducive to dating… May you and your family be mevorach.
Then a simple solution is to date OOT girls ONLY who want ot live OOT. They have a different mindset than in town (east coast north of DC), and are very practical (which by definition resists brainwashing).
Rav Shteinman Paskened that it is Assur to play sports, let alone go to a game.
I’ll try again:
thinkinghard: That is why Histaklus is Assur. His “glancing” made an impression, even though she was appropriate (your words) & did nothing wrong. Chazal di not require women to be Lovesh Shechorim. Now his Avodah is to not be “Sassur” after that Ta’avah.
Sounds like a good job done.
3) Where do you factor G-d into all of this?
Hashem was there picking us up, and giving us what we needed (both what seemed to be good or bad). Are you arguing that Hashem made the Gedolim prohibit leaving because it was part of His plan that those who were wiped out should be killed (like what happened to Achav)?
As promised:
There are THREE (really four) different aspects of what is known as “Tznius” (which is like calling lighting a fire on shabbos “Mukzta”). They are:
1: Ervah
2: Das Moshe/Yehudis
3: Tznius
4: Histaklus
1: Ervah is a din in Kriyas Shema (which is why the halchos are in Keriyas Shema). Many Rishonim hold it applies to other brachos as well. The idea is that a Davar Sheb’kedusha may not be done/said before any Ervah. That includes for a man (as per the Gemorah Brachos) a woman’s hair, shok, etc. This has NOTHING to do with the general idea of a man looking at a lady. See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 75 for more details.
2: Das Moshe/Yehudis is what the Torah perscribes that a female should not have uncovered when she goes out in public. This includes hair of anyone who is not a Besulah (as per Even HaEzer 21:2). The Mishna in Kesubos (72B) differentiates between the two. Ayin Shom. (Rav Moshe IIRC also has some teshuvos on the matter).
3: Tznius: There is a general concept of Hatznya Leches. This applies to both males & females, both in manner of dress and action, to be “low-key”. (There are also halachos of Tnzius in OC 240, which I will ignore for this discussion). An example is a woman covering her hair in her own yard (a private domain), where there is no Chiyuv (seemingly even if others will see her), but there is a concept of “Tznius”. (Offen a Bais Shemuel in Even HaEzer). In general, Chassidim are more Machmir in this.
4: Histaklus: A man may not stare at a woman. Period. If he does, he is Over “Lo Tasuru”. It certainly is a good thing for women to make sure that men have no reason to stare at them, but unless it is “Trai Ivri Nahara”, then it is not “Lifnei Iver”.
I hope this clears things up. This is from memory & is not fully comprehensive, so if you have sources that I missed, you are probably correct.
Orach Chaim is one of the sections of Shulchan Aruch.
Yup. Knew that one. It just doesn’t discuss Tznius (there. It does in 240, but I don’t think you mean that type of Tznius).
OC: Good. What does Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 75 discuss? What a woman should and should not be doing? Or something else like MEN and what they may or may not see while reading Kriyas Shema?
I believe your source should have been Even HaEzer 21:2, where the Shulchan Aruch actually discusses women. See the Bais Shmuel there, you may find it interesting & informative (in a good way).
interjection: If OC doesn’t deal with the question by tomorrow, then I’ll discuss. You can also search older threads.
“Siman & Sif? (Just to prove it to everyone)”
OC, we are still waiting? Have you ever seen the Gemorah Brachos (third perek) inside? Know what it is discussing? Or are you just an Am HaAretz spouting what you hear from your Sem teacher?
Siman & Sif!