Forum Replies Created
My point is hats and jackets are the cloth of the Jew. Ties are not in the same category.
Jothar: There are mekoros cited in the first 8 posts.
neatfreak: You are correct in your concerns.
COPE doesn’t offer a Political Science course as either an elective or requirement for Accounting. Do you need additional examples?
Wolfish: Have you so quickly forgotten out discussion of “lo shinu es malbushayhen”? Of course there is a concept of how Jews dress. And, yes, it is different than the Nations.
“Sammy”: The handle resulted from an undesigned circumstance, if you must know.
For one thing (and there are others) COPE doesn’t have all the unnecessary mandatory courses to graduate, that are unrelated to the trade one is seeking to learn.
truthsharer: The protocol for visiting the Melech Malchei HaMelochim is different.
Wolfish: Is a tie necessarily the cloth of the Jew? A jacket is. A hat is.
rescue: Yes about age 3. The MB doesn’t either say you need to wear a shirt by davening (AFAIK).
“and how could it be that after a few years it is ok? People can still compare even once they are married 20+ years.”
Jothar: Thanks for the Psak you issued abrogating the Chasam Sofer and Rav Shach ZT’L.
Wolfish, There is no way anyone here can advise the OP the appropriate course of action. That is something between him and his spiritual advisor.
BTW even today if you were to visit the Oval Office or the Queen of England you would wear a jacket (one would certainly hope.) So [putting hats aside for the moment] what is the heter for this missing jackets that is unfortunately so prevalent in some shuls??
My preceding comment was (mainly) directed to truthsharer.
“Does that also extend to the case where they don’t understand Yiddish at all?”
Rav Shach ZT’L indicated they should be brought up to understand Yiddish fluently. But if that wasn’t the case, I would imagine Rav Shach ZT’L would be agreeable that they learn in their local language.
It is still YOUR contention. If this Mishna Brura was no longer applicable, a Psak Din is in order. You are lacking that.
I do agree that for some special situations (i.e. kiruv, a child heading OTD – with a Rav’s guidance) sometimes we put somethings aside to maintain the more important matters.
There are (and I can’t quote them at the moment) Piskei Din dealing with that situation nowadays. So like I said, get a Psak Din and we can talk.
You are missing Rav Shach ZTL’s subtleties.
I didn’t intend to say it is necessarily different whether there are children or not. Sorry for that confusion.
Modern Hebrew is not different than Turkish or Farsi – it is the language of a secular culture complete with all those things that we want to stay away from. The fact that some of those who speak Modern Hebrew are religious Jews is not different than the language of any country Jews are in where they speak the language of the land. The point is to stay away from the language of the land and only talk the language of the Jew.
The Chasam Sofer writes that the reason Jews do not speak Loshon Hakodesh as a speaking language is because it is inappropriate to use a holy language while enveloped in Tumah, which is our current status. The Rambam writes that a love song in Hebrew is more repulsive to Hashem than the same song in Arabic, for instance, because the pollution of the Holy language is an additional crime. If someone wants to store pornography in his house, thats bad enough. But to store it in the Aron HaKodesh is unspeakably worse. So to cause Loshon HaKodesh to be used as a street language, complete with all the disgusting ways it is used today in Israel, is just more of a reason why we should make sure it never gets into the streets. For our Creator to look down at the world and see His holy language – or even elements of it – used in magazines such as are sold in Kiosks on Yaffo or Dizengoff Street, or spoken by the lowest of the low trying to make a sale, is not something that he or we are happy about.
Modern Hebrew’s origin is actually anti-Jewish. The creators of MH did so because “it is not possible to be a nation without a national language” (see Eisentein’s encyclopedia, ‘Ivrit’). And the changes that were made, both in accent and content, are unacceptable.
So to speak MH is one thing, but to say it is the “language of the Jew” is just not so. Neither is Yiddish the “language of the Jew”, any more than a black hat is the “clothing of a Jew.” But just as the purpose of the hat is “lo shinu es malbushayhen” – we want to dress differently than the seculars – the purpose of Yiddish is “lo shinu es shemom” – we want to talk differently than the seculars.
Maran Hagoen Rav Elazar Shach told American educators that Yeshiva boys should be taught Chumash in Yiddish, even if the boys speak English amongst themselves. He furtermore said that both boys and girls should learn to be comfortable in Yiddish. He also said that Yiddish is spoken by “all jews” (that is his phrase). He referred parents to send their children to Yiddish teaching yeshivos. And there is good reason why Rebbes and Rabbonim give ma’amarim in Yiddish.
There is a tznius component that must also be considered prior to young couples inviting other young couples for Shabbos.
1. The MB doesn’t say IF this condition disappears YOU can decide to do otherwise.
2. It is YOU who decided the aforementioned condition disappeared. The halachic authorities may disagree with your contention.
3. Therefore, you need a Psak Din negating what you maintain is abrogated.
Wolfish, Your drasha may be agreeable or disagreeable. But do you have a more current written Psak Din you can cite negating the aforementioned Mishna Brura? THAT is the bottom line.
Talmud Torah Kneged Kulam.
truthsharer, I do agree with your comments in practically all other situations.
It says in the Mishne Brurua to wear a hat and jacket by davening and bentching. Hilchos Tefiloh, Siman 91, sk 4, mb 12 (megulah)
Regarding the halacha requiring a Yid to wear a jacket and hat for davening and bentching, I believe it is derived from Chullin 138, from a discussion of the Kohein Gadol’s turban (the mitznefes). Also see the Shulchan Aruch OC 282:2. Mishnah Berurah 8:4, citing the Ba”ch, requires two head covering for all of davening.
(Rav Herschel Schachter cites the Pishchei Teshuvah who in turn cites the Shlah that it is necessary from the point of view of atifah, being cloaked while being aware of G-d’s presence.)
Nobody disagrees with the fact that it is better to have the mother home to raise the kids full time. But in a situation where you cant have that AND a Kollel father and husband at the same time, which of those two has to fall by the wayside? The answer is, you take whichever you think is MORE important: a mother always being home or a father who is the biggest talmid chacham he can be.
Someone in Lakewood once expressed to Rav Schenuer Kotler ZT’L about how if he stays in Kollel his children will be deprived of many things they would have otherwise. Rav Schenuer responded that providing them with a father who is a Talmid Chacham is more important than any of those things. And he should think hard before depriving them of that.
Yes, a woman’s place is at home. But also yes, the type of home you are supposed to have is a Torah home, a Torah-husband and Torah-father at its helm. The question is, if you can only have one of those two positive elements of a home, which is more important? The answer is having a husband and father who is a Talmid Chacham, or better yet, the biggest Talmid Chacham he can be, is the more important of the two.
So if you can have both, fine; if not, then we choose learning. This is not considered making a “compromise” in religion, since either way you will have to give up something – the only question is what has to give. Furthermore, there is a special concept surrounding the Mitzvah of learning that does not apply to any other Mitzvah, a concept that affects both Halachah and Hashkafa, that is, Torah learning in the world is so important that we prioritize Torah learning in a way that we would never do with other Mitzvos. For instance, normally, if you have a choice between you doing a Mitzvah or you causing someone else to do a Mitzvah, we say chayecha kodem – your Mitzvah comes first. So if you can afford one pair of Tefillin, you use it yourself as opposed to giving it away to someone else. However, with regard to Torah learning, the Halachah is that if a father can afford one Rebbi, either for him or his son, if his son has potential to be a Talmid Chacham, he should give the Rebbi to his son, and forgo his own learning. Such an idea exists nowhere except regarding Torah learning.
(Crossposting, due to relevancy of discussion.)
Who else in known by only one name?
Not available. Sorry.
Pashuteh: When have I ever denigrated Rav Soloveitchik? I have not. Additionally, I have repeatedly quoted Gedolim that you are allowed to learn secular studies for the purposes of acquiring a trade.
are you assuming that about socks as well?
noitall – You ought write a book on humor!
I say you look at his shirt…if it’s pink, drop him!
Finally, some common sense!
jewishandworking22: You are disagreeing with HALACHA which is clear you must pay the shadchan (full customary rate) regardless of what type of shadchan he is. Clear halacha.
Jothar, The first eight posts of the thread have quotes, paraphrases and Mareh Mekomos.
Jothar – Looking through this thread, you’ve claimed about various Gedolim that they’re opposition to College was a Daas “Yochid”. The Rabbim were certainly not in support of it. And COPE is no college (not even comparable to Touro.) It is pure training for a trade.
Jax – We spoke about you a lot. You were the numero uno topic of discussion.
And areivim got shikkur.
Jothar, You need to decide… are you arguing on the Chasam Sofer and Kuzari, or do you support Yinglish instead if Yiddish? You are taking two opposite positions.
In Lita they spoke Yiddish. And I’ve repeatedly quoted that it was a divrei chol, as per the Chasam Sofer and others. Reb Moshe, who spoke Yiddish himself, never opposed Yiddish just brought up the issue of names. Forget the argument over whether Yiddish is “holy”, that side point is irrelevant to the discussion.
Even though there are Yiddishistin who speak Yiddish, they took it from us, not vice-versa (as is the case of Modern Hebrew), and since we do not live in a country or society dominated by Yiddish-speaking shkotzim, there is no benefit of Lo shinu es leshonam by not speaking Yiddish. But there is such a benefit by not speaking Hebrew.
That statement about Rav Moshe ZT’L is not accurate.
“Rav Moshe was under the impression that Brooklyn is not encompassed by mechitzos.”
And to say that the mechitzos encircling Brooklyn are sufficient even
Why would anyone even start smoking today?
Is there any listing of available Gemach’s?
Jax – You missed the CR lunch earlier today led by squeak and myself, and attended by our legion of CR followers.
Who cares how goyim dressed amulege tzaytin. All we care about is how Bnei Torah dress today.
anon – That is a position the Rama’s quotes (to the point of affluence), not me.
The Gra was never advocating not supporting Torah scholars, G-d forbid.
david – Are you trying to claim Reb Moshe ZT’L was not opposed to an Eruv in Flatbush?
1) Brooklyn does not contain a population of 3 million.
How is this different than when Reb Moshe issued his Psak Din? The population wasn’t over 3 million then either. Please see the historical census data previously posted on this thread.
2) Brooklyn is encompassed by mechitzos.
How is this different than when Reb Moshe issued his Psak Din?
“How do you know when it is getting serious?”
When you start hearing “Mazal Tov!”
At the end of the day, as far as following the Psak Din is concerned what difference is it to a layman WHY Reb Moshe paskened the way he did (unless the metzius on the ground changed since the Psak Din was issued.) The fact is, Reb Moshe paskened it is assur.
Lo shinu es malbushayhen.
I’m a gang all my own.
squeak – I say we start again from square one. Let’s do it at KD.
Wolf – You can always respond in the thread to the (unknown) mod. Usually they can figure out who you are referring to.
Which is exactly what happened in this case and resulted in a editing retraction
squeak – If you prefer a one-on-one, that too can be arranged.
We are waiting for you to be included in this group lunch. You are the holdup at this point, so let us get past the kidding and on with the food!