Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@shlucha22, a sneeze doesn’t require an immune system. You might mean to say that a light cold was able to take then down. But that would mean that they actually got sick.
1) That’s not the way things work in the natural world as we know it. And Hashem generally works within the realms of nature.
Whatever happens on a constant basis is nature. This was obviously not a small sneeze, but a sneeze-like sound of the wind leaving the lungs.
2) If Hashem changed that nature, we should have historical evidence of such a radical change form other cultures.
How do you know it was radical? There always existed a concept of sickness, and people got weaker as they grew older.
Nor is there reason to think we have such a good understanding of what went on before the Avos.
3) People sometimes do not get sick before they die; they die suddenly. Even great people.
Right. There was no promise that every single person will know when it’s time to go. Even great people get treated harshly, we all know.
4) People definitely had physical weaknesses when they got older, even before Yakov’s time. (Yitzchak became blind, as an example)
Yes. They got predictably weaker and weaker as they grew older. This has nothing to do with the dying sickness.
5) There’s a concept in Pirkie Avos about doing teshuva one day before your death, which the commentaries expound upon to mean that one should do teshuva every day, since one doesn’t know their day of death. This seems a direct contradiction to what Yakov was trying to accomplish.
Are you trying to make the case that people don’t get sick before they die? People don’t know when they will get sick, and when they are sick they don’t know for a fact which sickness will be the last, and even if they know that they don’t know the day.
And, as you mentioned, not everyone is lucky enough to get a warning.
Why do you think they died fron sneezing? The point of the Medrash is that there was no prior sickness warning the person that his time is nearing.
Rather than dying from sneezing, they sneezed from dying.
For what it’s worth, airplane air is not recycle again and again. Fresh air comes in, compressed, from the engine and air is let out through a valve.
“As the Torah forbids cruelty to animals (tzaar baalei chaim), it has been shown that our shechita is the most humane way to kill them without any pain.”
That is not the reason, but it works out. The animals are lucky, and so are we.
“Fair. Just because he did not have an opportunity. History of last 100 years: whenever socialists had a chance to take power by violence, they did or tried.”
That’s an argument against communism but doesn’t speak to this point.
“The issue with Trump’s incitement, as I see it, was that he stood in front of the rioters knowing that they will march on the Capitol and start a fight.”
How can he know what no one else knew? Nobody what suspected large scale trespass, which is evident from the lack of defence. From your own team you’d expect it even less.
UJM, I haven’t joined any shiduch conversations here.
Holding a door (for a person down the block) has become a behavior of decency in this society. It wasn’t always. I don’t need anyone holding it for me, I can usually open it myself. In our own culture it was never a big deal, since we hardly focused on formal stuff.
And so, per original Jewish outlook there was no need to behave that way. Now there is, and by doing so and not being a barbarian (בַּרְבְּרוֹן) it is a Kidush Hashem.
The media machine is very powerful. They can create a whole reality in which even those who disagree with them end up within the same framework.
Right after the elections, many people spoke about the oddities. The media create a narrative of how dangerous that talk is, how absurd it is and a big lie. They did this without outright arguing the case, for then you would simply disagree. They went way past this and used these ideas for the backdrop of future discussions.
This causes everyone to be ashamed to ever bring it up. It is hard to make an informed decision in such an environment. But at least keep an eye out to these methods and don’t fall prey.
To me it seems that the whole Jan6 committee was created for thus purpose — to stamp out any remnants of the annoying election critics, that isn’t dying fast enough. Notice that nothing was ever put out to directly contradict the claims, just counter-lawsuits, arrests, service denials, committees, and ridicule.
Wait a minute. Zionism is a topic for itself. Why not start as new thread, or seven of them?
But then again, you can just copy and paste from the old ones. I doubt anything unsaid will be said now (besides for my own opinions, obviously).
To quote a 20th century philosopher: Never trust a fool’s version of what a smart person said, for he had to translate it into something he can understand.
Now, with that out of the way, all these one-issue activists are crazy. Obviously there is a kernel of importance but they are the wrong guys for the job.
“It is just as clear that we (i.e. Yidden) do not hold by that a man should hold a door open for a woman moreso than a woman should hold open a door for a man, as it is clear that we do not hold by vegetarianism.”
Notice that I did not mention this weirdness about man for a women. It is normal decency to hold the door for someone not far behind you, and not let it slam shut as soon as they arrive.
You must be so steeped in goyish culture that this is what came to mind when I mention holding a door. Or so obsessed with doing the opposite, which amounts to being steeped in it.
____
“You cannot makeup for yourself what “ideals that we clearly do not hold” and what “we” do.”
True. At a certain point you’ll need to judge what is a sensibility that wasn’t around or stressed, and what is contrary to the Torah’s priorities. Formula cannot supersede wisdom.
Like Reb Shimon ben Shetach said, מַה אַתּוֹן סָֽבְּרִין שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח בַּרְבְּרוֹן הֲוָה.
When Chazal say that we could have learned proper behavior from animals, would we have roared and barked at people? No. We would use our minds to judge.
Just because a sensibility for a certain behavior, or Middah, didn’t exist in the past, that does not make it wrong. It the past it was not expected to return a list item, and so neither did we — unless there was a Mitzva — but today that is called being a normal person. To keep it is cheap and selfish, in the eyes of decent society.
If you need a formula, let this be it: We cannot expect less from ourself than what we expect from others.
“The Ritva on Shabbos 24b says they are the same person. Yerushalmi also. It’s night likely that the bavli too was clear on that point but removed by censor.”
You probably mean 104b (קד not כד), but it’s not there, either. That is where Tosafos says that it’s not the same person. You didn’t point to a Yerushalmi, and I would be surprised if Tosafos missed that.
Now, the Ramban in his debate, as well as Seder Hakabalah of the Raavad, do say that our counting is 100 years before theirs. This may be because they are only referring to ישו הנוצרי and not to בן סטדא at all. Or perhaps, and actually unlikely, they conflate the two since both are assumed to be referring to the Christian founder.
“Avraham Avinu wore tzitzis, so if he is Jewish, it is not carrying but if he is not Jewish, than he would be carrying.”
Yes yes. UJM already referenced this vort. The premise is questionable.
“If becoming a vegetarian, to avoid killing animals, impresses Goyim who then say בריך אלקהון דיהודאי, you think that’s a Kiddish Hashem?”
To the Red Herring Chief: If you cannot differentiate between ideals that we clearly do not hold by and sensitivities that formed over time, there is no use discussing this further. אם אין הבדלה…
“HaLeiVi: He can wear kosher tzitzis, too, since he isn’t obligated in it and therefore it is carrying for him.”
That’s a famous Yeshivish fun topic to which I do not subscribe.
Did you notice anyone here promoting smoking?
“should we not accept 100 immigrants for one Talmid chacham”
That’s a very odd take. A non-Jewish Talmid Chochom? When he converts, we’ll admire and love him. But are we missing outsiders do the degree that we should allow such mix-ups?
He is the one who will be gaining when he joins. It is also a tremendous Kidush Hashem when someone converts (אוהב ה’ שמות גרים), but for us, does it make a difference?
Now for the caveats. Personally, I believe that potential Geirim are pushed too hard and too long. Many times, they are put off even after recognizing their sincerity. That is a very big problem. The Gemara (in Yevamos, I believe) describes it as a punishable offence to have waited to join. Why is it ok for others to make him wait? Rav Belsky ztl used to complain about this.
“Let him eat Chopped Liver and Herring”
No. That’s Sakkana. He shouldn’t transgress any of the שבע מצוות, either. In truth, he shouldn’t be doing any Aveira, if he’s trying to become Jewish. But he can wear Pasul Tzitzis on Shabbos. But he’ll have to find an area without an Eiruv.
“HaLeiVi, why is it/isn’t it a Kiddish Hashem for a woman to hold open a door for a man?”
Who does that impress? Who will say בריך אלקהון דיהודאי because of that?
This male-worship really got to you, did it not. Now you’re going to equate your קדושת הזכר to Kiddush Hashem?
“It obviously cannot be referring to people who only appeared at the end of Bayis Sheni to explain why the maamados bizman habayis didn’t fast on Sunday.”
The student of Rebbe Yehoshua ben Prachya was known as Notzri, Ben Sitda is not associated with that name. Whether Christianity stems from the earlier or the latter, it is the earlier one who is referred to as Notzri. He was over 150 years before the destruction.
“The original girsa was like maharsha, “gelilim”, but later ppl changed to notzrim cuz they thought the censors changed, but didnt. thats why we have it.”
Every single manuscript, including the Munich manuscripts, all say נוצרים. To make up a story that people came and changed words to match an idea that they liked, is way of the mark.
“Racism etc…i agree with ujm; i do agree though that hating a particular race would be contrary to torah values and calling attention to that is fine”
I guess you have your own definition of racism
“I really don’t understand your example from the chofetz chaim – having a beard always was a Jewish value. ”
Not hard to find. It’s a footnote in the beginning of his pamphlet on Hadras Panim. He referring to not cutting it at all.
Who’s talking about walking in front or behind? You guys excel in monkey wrenches.
Yes, it applies to holding a door open, returning things, honoring freedom, being against racism, and according to the Chafetz Chaim growing a beard.
Avira, it is impossible for me to include every possible nuance and caveat to everything I say. And it’s usually unnecessary.
@theshadchansays, great response!
AAQ, I agree with what 100%. This approach will settle all the stories of Chazal and the present. Obviously, we aren’t supposed to be behind others in moral issues, even when they are newly adopted and developed ideas.
The Chofetz Chaim suggests this in his Kuntres on shaving.
Keep in mind that Reb Yochanan is the one who says in Shabbos, אם ברור לך כאחותו שהיא אסורה לך אמרהו, ואם לאו אל תאמרהו. He didn’t shoot suggestions.
I don’t really get the idea that to conflate ישו הנוצרי with בן סטדא. Nowhere does the Gemara put them together.
I’m every over occasion we purposefully do things to show apostates and heretics that we don’t follow their believes. What is different in this case that we buckle to the heretics?
My assumption is that there was a movement begun by ישו הנוצרי, a student at one point of רבי יהושע בן פרחיה. He was powerful and well connected to the royal family. There must have been many legends about him and he was likely very charismatic.
Then, about 150 years later, there arose this guy בן סטדא, who began a movement based on the previous one. He might be the famous Christian messiah, or perhaps he is Paul who spoke of this imaginary person and began a religion with that.
Either way, while we were not physically afraid of Ben Sitda’s movement and we composed litergical pieces to excise them, we were afraid the earlier powerful movement.
UJM, you admire a Cohen?
“BTW It should be feel good and not feel well which refers to feeling with the hand.”
Nope. Good is an adjective; well is an adverb.
Kuvult, if people hate it why would you say it?
I’m sure you’re aware that this has been spoken about and dealt with. It isn’t black and white. We’ve seen many Gedolim and Rishonim refer to those killed for being Jews, as Kedoshim.
Your statement about race is misleading and a misunderstanding. The Nazis were not worried about the long nose pool. They were worried about the Judaism gene.
Oh my. So this is what you’ve been holding in?? I’m glad you got that out. I hope you are much more relaxed now, Your Maleness.
Willing to die for the cause will sanctify His name. People will take note of your dedication. If they think lowly of a certain Mitzvah, then you do not have this benefit. In fact, there is no point of splashing currently unpopular ideas in their face. They will say the opposite of ברוך… This is why, throughout the generations, we’ve had many apologists giving contemporary reasons (or excuses) for Mitzvos.
This whole idea — that simply doing any Mitzva openly, even when it’s despised, is a Kiddush Hashem — seems to be a reaction to the opposite idea, that we should be ashamed of Mitzvos deemed inappropriate by the outsiders. However, you shouldn’t allow yourself to redefine your own ideas in order to win over someone else.
עם חכם ונבון is not about Muktzah (as of now), it’s about things that impress others, Chazal explain.
Returning money, is not a Mitzvah (and can even be an Aveira), and yet it is the prime example of Kiddush Hashem.
I find it odd that people are triggered by this Bracha, when it’s actually a recognition of the hardships of being a woman. It’s the most ‘woke’ Brachah, and likely the earliest record of such sentiment.
“In our days…”
Blah blah. This is the all-too-common cliche of how we are so different than the past in our respect of Gedolim, because, after all, the Tanach has criticism of great people.
For some reason, nobody notices that no person in Tanach or Torah Shel Bal Peh criticizes Gedolim of previous generations. So, just like today, contemporaries and colleagues will critique and criticize, while those who follow retain the respect of the greatness and superiority of knowledge.
I think that derisive terms like these about the little bit of respect that that has survived among us, sets a person apart more than hashkafic ideas on study and culture.
“Doing a mitzvah, particularly in public, and particularly when it’s not comfortable, brings glory to Hashem’s name.”
What is the difference whether it was in public or private, if it was not appreciated? Hashem sees what you do regardless. So do the angels. The benefit of the public is how it raises Hashem’s glory in their eyes.
If it doesn’t, then obviously you gotta do what you gotta do, but there is no ברוך אלקי שמעון there.
“You don’t think it’s a kiddush Hashem to do a mitzvah?”
Why would it be? Is it Shiluach Haken to light Chanukah lights?
“and if there is a conflict, following the halacha is ultimately the kiddush Hashem even if it looks strange and/or angers goyim, and violating Halacha is a chillul Hashem even if it seems to curry favor with goyim”
Why can’t it just be neither?
You want to live in a country where you’re forced to put Tefillin on the floor or get kicked off your flight. I don’t.
These flight stories keep getting worse. They feel that anything that went through their mind they have the right to bully you into obeying.
The real “Shtetl Yid” is the one with the what-are-the-goyim-gonna-say complex.
Don’t say anything. Just post the following on the wall:
I don’t think it is a big deal. You would have to discuss it with your prospective spouse. I know someone who took on his wife’s family name, since it was a brand name.
In this thread I noticed a knee-jerk reaction to a knee-jerk reaction. Just pointing out that this is what makes conversations boring. It becomes, at times, almost as if we’re replaying a scripted act.
“So there is no real halachic plusses to wearing a long jacket?”
Hardly. There is an element of Tznius, so that’s enough to make it matter in a Shaas Hashmad, being a Tzad Yehadus. I saw someplace that the Chazon Ish held it is Tznius thing.
There is a hint to this in the Gemara in Shabbos, in which Rav Yehuda illustrates how the overcoat, the Glima, is related to Golam, that you don’t see the limbs but only one solid form. The assumption is that he said this as a positive attribute.
The idea is very simple. We find in Chazal that we don’t change our attire to match the outside world. This does not mean that we create a new design for ourselves. It does mean that we do not change over.
Now, if this were held onto 100% we would still be wearing wrap-arounds. So, obviously changes and adaptations happen slowly. People who interact with the outside world on their business are the first to get a Hetter to change. Rabban Gamliel’s family, and Reuven Itztarubi (if I got that right) come to mind. Next will follow those who don’t really fall into the previous category but are connected to the world at large in some degree, or they just like to be up to date and jump onto the newest style — once some in the community already dress that way.
Eventually, it stops looking un-Jewish and so the common folk adapt, which eventually leads the Bnei Torah and Rabbonim to follow suit (yup).
This is why we all have buttoned shirts and suits when, not that long ago, anyone who put that on was an outcast.
Now, two points need to be made:
The sensibility to this is obviously not set in stone. After all, the Gemara about being Mosser Nefesh for clothing was only about Shaas Hashmad; otherwise, it wasn’t all that terrible. It is a point of identity and strongly recommended, but hardly an out-and-out Issur. Therefore, you’ll find that the adherence to this concept will vary from community to community and from one time period to another.
The other point is, that it is all relative. Those who found themselves struggling in a new world, had to adapt fast in order to make it. Even after the great influx of proudly-traditional Jews came and didn’t have to adapt, those who had already adapted had no need anymore to switch, since there is nothing inherently wrong with the way they went — the issue is with changing.
Those from the Litvish background, who had adapted somewhat faster to newer styles, even in Europe, were still Makpid not to change any faster than that.
In other words, the Chasidish and Yeshivish communities have the exact same attitude towards dress. Any difference is only historical.
At this point, once entire communities have specific styles, it is a loud statement if you suddenly switch. And so, people are reluctant to do so, although this has nothing to do with my whole topic.
I hope this sheds some light on the topic, as well as puts an end to the shallow cry of, “Moshe Rabbeinu didn’t wear a Shtreimel.”
AAQ, for its own sake means that instead of a hierarchy in which Torah study is on top, and other things fill in underneath (Parnasa, interests…), you have a system of parallel values. On the top is secular knowledge alongside Torah. That is the charge.
“Avira, you have an admirable nack for putting everything in one sentence:…”
To this, I must agree. You ruin your better points when you intertwine them with weak, or questionable, ones. Do realize that several of your complaints are not hard fact. The issues of whether there is or isn’t a place for Jewish nationalism, what its place is, or the importance of retaining Eretz Yisroel as a Mitzva or for keeping people Jewish, are debatable. Even if you feel very strongly that you are correct and you can back it up, it does still remain an opinion. You can’t lump that alongside arguments that are hard & dry facts.
Even the complaint about how they value secular study for its own sake, is after all a Hashkafa issue. You can point to that to show differences but you won’t get anyone on board who hadn’t already agreed with you.
“While Avraham was teaching, Shem and Ever had their own yeshiva where Yaakov goes to learn how to live and deal with Lavan.”
C’mon, you are going to prove something from what you made up?
“Both types of learning are legitimate.”
This entirely ignores every single one of Avira’s points. As if he complained about practical vs theoretical learning.
There’s actually no evidence of a written Mishna, and plenty of evidence for the lack thereof. Last Daf Yomi round, I jotted down some notes on this as I made my rounds.
Before Rebbe it was like I wrote above about was it was before Rav Ashi. They always studied Talmud — the reasoning and proofs of the Halachah as well as Halachic statements. Every Rebbe taught Mishnayos to his Talmidim. This is the summation of the Halachos that he received from his Rebbes or had ruled on. This led to a situation in which any two people had a completely unrelated Mesora.
Rebbe brought everyone together. This was a tremendous undertaking. As it says, only Rebbe was able to pull this off with his wealth, government connections and peaceful time period. He had everyone recite what they had received from their Rebbe. Then, he painstakingly worked everything out and formed one solid, coherent Mishnah that should be the standard. From then on, that was what every child was taught and memorized.
Two more points. It appears that the titles of Mesachtos predated Rebbe. We find in the end of Horios how Rabban Gamliel organized Uktzin overnight. This tells you that it was a topic with a title (unless the Gemara was speaking shorthand), and that there was no set Mishna yet.
The other point is that the Gemara says in several places that the Mishna is Rebbe Meir according to Rebbe Akiva. This means that Rebbe used Rebbe Meir’s Mishna as his basis. On top of that he could have rejected parts and added even large sections.
Even if you’d say that he went ahead and wrote it, that was not his monumental achievement. But he didn’t.