Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
shlomozalman is probably in EY, where there is an issue of Meleches Yisroel.
My boss knows I am on & doesn’t mind.
Last time I was in Brooklyn I looked for a tree.
I couldn’t find one.
They claimed there were trees in prospect park, but they said it was too dangerous to go there.
Who knows what could happen if you see a tree?
🙂
Maybe the amount deducted for tuition, in the chesbon on Rosh HaShana, is also based on the amount of emunah one has in this concept. <Don’t know, just speculating.>
I can see this:
Parent: I can’t pay full tuition, I don’t have the money.
Administrator: It is your own fault! You didn’t have enough Emunah! If you have to raise the funds going door to door, perhaps you will have more Emunah next year!
LOL, and sad.
gavra-of course I am interested ! will look it up at earliest convenience ! now yo uhave to tell me where it is- IN “ben yehodiyohu’?
Yes, on that Gemorah in Megillah.
And thank you for getting me to remember some of my “Toras Neurai”. I may be wrong on the aspects of the Chakira, as it was a while ago. (Perhaps someone who is in the Sugyah can shed some light here?)
ROB: If you are interested, see the next piece in Ben Ish Chai regarding what actually happened between Rabbah & Rav Zeira.
Ah, but that’s the magic question… if there can be said to be a cardinal rule of Jewish marriage law, it’s that a woman cannot be married to two men at the same time. Saying that she can have two husbands at the same time is such a major chiddush (and that’s a huge understatement) that you need to have *really* good sources to allow it.
Practically, she can’t. Halachicly, she might be able to. See the gemaros I quoted (They are NOT Halacha, but the concept does exist). Delve into why the “rule” is true, and there are halachic loopholes that can around it.
(There is a Chakirah as per why an Eishes Ish can not get married to another individual. IIRC, The s’ddadim are Kinyan and Ervah, neither which apply if the husband dies (although there is a sa’ad to say the kinyan still exists in some respect, but it becomes non-exclusive, due to Missah being a Matir on a Gezaras HaKasuv level)).
What will happen when Moshiach arrives, I have no clue. I’m only discussing the lomdish aspects of the question.
SJS: There is a similar (Hebrew Charter) school in Brooklyn. I remember an article from the NYT praising its diversity (some Jewish, some not). A family friend also works at one of these schools somewhere in Florida.
ZeesKite: See what I have said before from Rav Wolfson about that. Don’t disseminate misconceptions which just hurt those who believe in them.
Are you Joseph?
Plain flour does not really need a hechsher, as long as there are no shmitta/T&M issues.
G@W
ROB:
1: Yes, Leachar Z’man is the case Keddushin 60a. Conceptually, the idea does exist, even if there are issues in practice (Ayin Shom).
2: Eishes Eliyahu is different because the question there is if he is still halachicly alive or not.
I just remembered Rashi in Keddushin 2a (which Bobchka quoted the mishna) says Misa allows her to be in her own Reshus to remarry, which would lean towards the Ben Ish Chai.
Emphasis mine
Way back when (for those that remember), they had two shifts for the public schools. They can simply eliminate the overcrowding caused by yeshiva children by implementing a second shift.
The Unions would complain, but with the other coice being hiring non union techers, thye would go along.
Bobchka: That is part of the question, if Get & Misa do the same thing (and what it means “V’Kone Atzma”, to get remarried or to dissolve the first relationship completely).
cherrybim: This has spawned an interesting halachic discussion, while it may have no practical Nafka Mina, it helps in understanding the sugyos. The thread is very useful.
But that being said, why wouldn’t our case be comparable? She is permitted to remarry (since she has positive evidence that her husband died) but if he should somehow return (say via Techias HaMeisim) then her children by her second husband are mamzeirim.
Wolf: You are equating BD allowing the wife to remarry to Hashem allowing her to remarry. That is just not true.
In the case of Ba’ah Memedinas HaYam, as far as Hashem (who is omniscient) is concerned, she is not allowed to remarry. The fact that she can return to her first husband is only due to her being an Ones. As far as Hashem is concerned, she is only married to the first and hes never been married to the second.
As opposed to the case of Techiyas HaMaysim, as far as Hashem (who is omniscient) is concerned, she IS allowed to remarry. When her first husband gets up (let’s say like R’ Zeira), she will Halachicly be married to both. (And the concept does exist in Halacha, see Gittin 82B, Keddushin 60a).
WADR I think this is where it gets confusing: Mamzerus is only created by Biyas Issur. If a woman has two husbands B’heter, then a Mamzer can not be created.
Go out. Worst case you will like the girl. Best case you did a Chessed by not breaking up.
(or is it the opposite?)
WADR, I believe you are confusing two different cases.
An agunah is allowed to marry based on the testimony of one witness. However, if she does so, she is required to perform an investigation and if her first husband shows up, she’s out of luck in that she loses both husbands.
If she marries on the basis of two witnesses and with the permission of Bais Din, however, she is afforded the protection that if her husband returns, she does not have to leave him (the first husband). In this case, the marriage is sanctioned by Bais Din and is perfectly permitted. And yet, her kids (with the second husband) end up as mamzeirim anyway.
The Wolf
Nope.
The fact that it was sactioned by BD does not allow her to remain married to the second husband!
The “Assur L’Baal Ul’Boel is waived “Mipnei Sheasah B’Rishus”, but that is NOT an issur Torah, since there was an Ones (see Rashi Yevamos 87B). The children from the second relationship are still Mamzerim.
The first case (where there is only one ayd) is to be machmer on her at the end so she should check well at first (See Yevamos 87B). Also see there regarding relying on BD.
The MB specificly discusses this. He says one should be Makpid even if you hold like Rabbanu Tam.
(I apologize that I can’t remember the actual Marr’a Makom).
Does that make her children from the second marriage mamzeirim after Techias HaMeisim since her original marriage is still valid?
The Wolf
Since the marriage is not an illicit relationship, they are not Mamzerim. The case of Ba’a Memedinas Hayam they are Mamzerim, because even though she is allowed to marry, sof davar, the relationship is illicit (i.e., we only allowed her to marry due to our own ignorance, not due to it actually being muttar).
Think of it like the Torah allowing the woman to marry a second husband. The child would not be a Mamzer in that case.
As far as the Ben Ish Chai, the death of Klal Yisroel was permanent, and required an Act of God to reverse. As far as Keddushin is concerned, the point is good but questionable. BB 120a talks about Amram doing a “Maaseh Lekuchin” to Yocheved to take her back. Also see Rambam Ishus 1:1, and a similar question exists there.
G@W
The Ben Ish Chai discusses this issue, if death dissolves the relationship.
From the ?? ??????
??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???/ ???
?????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?????, ???? ?? ???
???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ???? ???
???? ????? ??????? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ???.
???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????
???? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ?? ???? ????? ????
????? ?????, ????? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ????.
???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????
?????? ?? ??????? ?? ????, ????? ??? ?? ????
???? ?? ???? ???? ??? :
It seems they are still Halachicly married, but she is allowed to marry someone else.
Ctrl Alt Del: I just quoted the law. You find me the law that forbids it.
I believe the 0.02% BAC is only for drivers, but I could be wrong.
Two additional thoughts come to mind:
1: pour me a brimming cup so holy & divine, and I will share with you some Purim wine
Country Yossi (paraphrase)
2: But this is sacramental wine. It’s only used to bless things.
Wait a minute! There’s things here.
There’s trees, there’s rocks…
…there’s birds, there’s squirrels.
Besides, Its a mitzva!
Come on! We’ll bless them all
until we get fahshnickered!
(with apologies to Rabbi Tuchman)
I heard a story a number of years back (don’t know if this is urban legend)
Urban Legend. I think something similar happened in the Five Towns, and the school board ended up being taken over. The threat was probably to take over the board, not the schools.
Wolf: I was going to post similar regarding the racist attitudes of many co-religionista, but thought better of it. That would apply as well.
2. He gives or sells or causes to be given or sold any alcoholic beverage, as defined by section three of the alcoholic beverage control law, to a person less than twenty-one years old; except that this subdivision does not apply to the parent or guardian of such a person or to a person who gives or causes to be given any such alcoholic beverage to a person under the age of twenty-one years, who is a student in a curriculum licensed or registered by the state education department, where the tasting or imbibing of alcoholic beverages is required in courses that are part of the required curriculum, provided such alcoholic beverages are given only for instructional purposes during classes conducted pursuant to such curriculum.
(Emphasis mine).
Most if not all states have an exception of parental consent or parental supervision, even if one is under 21.
I know its off topic, but I liked the hall @ Moshav Ora.
The takanos were never meant to be serious for everyone, they were meant to be an excuse. Those who want to use it can do so, and as such it did work.
Unilever, Cisco, J&J, Toyota, Chrysler (only because of their recent commercial. An amazing piece of advertising).
That Rema is based off the Kesef Mishna (my mistake) (i.e. the Bais Yosef), and basically says the same thing. Have a look at the Shach there who says this.
Also, you have much anger in you. Please don’t take it out on us.
L’kula, is the minimum standard of halachic chiuyv. it IS the halacha that Hashem gave us. He also gave rabbonim the power to pasken, and they often pasken far more than is required by the perfect halacha that we were already given. we make a choice to be more strict, or follow the given halacha.
I source, please? I do not believe this is true.
(IIRC) We have a system of P’sak. B’shaas H’Dichak, one can “rely” on a kula (a shitta that is not paskened by) due to it being better to the alternative (such as hefsed meruba, for example). That is not the Halacha that should be followed in the normal case.
That Gemorrah doesn’t apply to people sitting and learning all day!
Why not? After all, the statement is said by an Amorah to an Amorah, who worked & did not learn full time?
There is a famous Maggid Mishna on the Ramabam that says one may not take money for learning (IIRC) that askes the question of “Kardom” i.e. how can people live off their learning? The answer given is that without it, Torah will not be learned to the requirements of what Klal Yisroel needs (that is how I understand it, others may differ).
AKA: Es Laasos L’Hahashem Heferu Torasecha.
So the Gemorah does apply to people who learn full time, we just choose to ignore the halacha based on other neccessities (as we do in other cases as well, such as writing the Mishna).
But people “forget” the gedorim involved.
Guys:
Can’t we push this into the Halacha thread I created instead of discussing the Halacha here?
I believe David is talking about Halachic Mechitzos that exist in some cities, like rivers, than can be used for an Eruv.
My understanding is that there are areas in brooklyn near Coney Island that use this concept.
HI 🙂
SJS:
There is something other than “the yeshiva world”?
Over/under on # of comments to a Scotsmen comment?
Why Do I Even Bother
Again:
To those who want the school to run the way they want:
As I have said before, if you show them the money, they will follow. Feel bad that you don’t have it, not that those who actually pay the bills do what thye think is best.
When you walk down the street, you see plenty of women scantily clad. If the frum woman who’s skirt is mid knee is bothering you, it has nothing really to do with what she is wearing and more to do with your own issue.
But that is the truth.
IMHO, that is the fault of the yeshivos & Bais Yaakovs.
Did the board ask a shailoh to any of our esteemd gedolim in eretz yisroel?
Like R’ Chaim really knows about & cares about the politics of a school in Chutz. If you have an agenda….
Put your money where your mouth is!
WIB:
It is their forum, their rules, as much as I don’t like some of their decisions.
Mom88: How much do you pay in tuition for your daughter?
To those who want the school to run the way they want:
As I have said before, if you show them the money, they will follow. Feel bad that you don’t have it, not that those who actually pay the bills do what thye think is best.
aries2756:
You underestimate the power of the dark side. Melech Menashe was Mayid on Rav that he would lift his hems to run faster to Avoda Zara.
Many goyim will stay and gawk, it would take a special goy to walk away. Most frum men would walk away it would take a very weak frum man to stay.
IMHO, this has nothing to do with jew vs. non jew. This is a question of morality. The Amish, Mormon or even devout Catholic will turn away.
And it takes a strong jew not to look, especially if there are only three in the room: the guy, girl and the RBSO, and no one else will ever know.