Forum Replies Created
Its funny you mention that regarding Chaim Berlin. Chaim Berlin has its “chasidishe” minhugim (Rav Hutner wore a Spudik, and came from Ger chasidis heritage); and Torah V’daas of course is technically “chasidish” (Nusach Sfard, Reb Shraga Feivel…) So at least two of the most “litvish” associated major Yeshivos have strong “chasidish” affiliations!
cherrybim, l’maise the a shtarke Ger will go the full length of the law and minimize all contact with his goyish ex-family. A shvache Ger may do so to a lesser extent. And a poisek may not sanction him for that.
cherrybim, You may have legitimate sources for your position, but what Zalman said certainly has a factual basis in poiskim (even if you know of a different psak.)
jphone asked “Zalman, which posek says a jacket is necessary, with or without a tallis.”
jphone – Mishna Berura. Read the mare mekomos mentioned earlier in this thread.August 6, 2008 4:13 pm at 4:13 pm in reply to: The greatest financial supporter of Torah Jewry in the world #634058
As is typical, you failed to address the points that were raised. But that is entirely understandable, since you have no logical factual response so you revert to your unreadable run-on hogwash.
YOU referred to the aforementioned Tzadikim as “Zionists.” Of course that is a lie. If anyone asked them if they were Zionists, they would’ve become sick at the thought someone could even ask such a question. And you know that.
And of course you brought no sources, as requested, that the aforementioned Tzadikim supported CONTROLLING (governmentally) Eretz Yisroel, as opposed to the age-old yearning by all Jews (non-zionists) to SETTLE in Eretz Yisroel. The reason you brought no sources, is because you have no sources. And the reason you have no sources, is because there are no such sources. And the reason there are no such sources, is because (as you are intuitively aware) IT IS SHEKER.August 5, 2008 11:09 pm at 11:09 pm in reply to: The greatest financial supporter of Torah Jewry in the world #634055
Your discussion of what amounted to mass murder by the zionists during the holocaust, is effectively a whitewash that you decline to discuss.
Be that as it may, the Netziv, R’ Zvi Hirsh Kalisher, the Talmidei Besht, etc. that you mention desired to SETTLE in Eretz Yisroel. This is a high madreiga that anyone, from Brisk to Satmar to Agudah completely agrees with. That is not zionism. Zionism is CONTROLLING (i.e. governmentally) Eretz Yisroel. This is something the aforementioned Tzadikim expressed no desire and indeed would not contemplate taking control of the land from the Ottomons, the British, or whoever else controlled it. Provide me any source you have indicating that these Gedolim proposed CONTROLLING (governmentally) Eretz Yisroel.
THAT IS THE QUESTION.
Your Yeshiva may have the speakers giving frequent anti-zionism shmoozen for the same reason that in America we get many shmoozen how bad secular American culture is.
Bowzer, I understand the takano is that you should not have access except if you need it for parnasa. If you have it, it should be filtered. Once you have filtered access I don’t know of any takanos from accessing general kosher sites. If you are aware of a takano otherwise, please advise me what exactly the takano is and who issued it. Additionally, if we are to assume you are correct, then it would be assur to (for example) send an e-mail to your brother (wishing him mazal tov, or whatever), since it is not for parnasa. Furthermore, your taina then would be with YW and you should contact YW Editor and advise him to kindly shut down this site since its entire targeted audience is prohibited from utilizing it. Am I understanding you correctly?
Why button hole Yidden into sub-groups, each with their own name?
A Yid is a Yid. I don’t believe in all these silly names and sub-groups like Ultra-Orthodox, Modern-Orthodox, Chareidi, Chiloni, etc. (Even “Orthodox” is silly.)
I can only try:
Thank You! Looking forward…
Capital punishment is not carried out by Yidden (in America.) So I don’t see why it would even be a question if dina dmalchusa would apply to it or not. (They secular courts will carry out such a sentence.)
Here is re: the men’s Asifa:
Here is re: the women’s Asifa:
And yes, like you said “Tznius is very much a mens issue as well.” Men must be tznius themselves, as well as insure that heir wives and daughters are tznius.
Think BIG said “The entire litvish/yeshivish world does not hold hands.”
Think BIG: I’m not sure if you are referring only to the Mitzvah Tantz or not, but many Litvaks do hold hands (including according to Rav Aaron Schecter) between the Chupa and Yichud room. So I don’t see how that would be any more or less a tzinius problem than holding hands at the end of the Mitzvah Tantz. (In fact there are many more non-family members witnessing the hand holding after the Chupa.)
Bottom line is, if done properly there is no tzinius problems in either cases.
For those claiming a tzinius problem with the Mitzvah Tantz, you should be aware that many Litvishe Rabbonim (including, as mentioned above, Rav Aaron Schechter, RY Yeshivas Chaim Berlin) hold that the Choson/Kalla hold hands beween the Chupa and the Yichud room. So if it isn’t a problem there, you can’t say (when there are far less people — usually family — than at the Chupa) theres a tzinius problem at the Mitzvah Tantz.
jphone – I believe there were 2 Asifas – one for men and one for women.
Bowzer – I think many if not most of us here have filtered net access. Additionally, I have seen situations where Rabbonim have authorized (nothing I’m involved with) the posting of content in order to counteract anti-Torah information online.
“I plead the fifth”
I must rule you out of order! In Europe you enjoy no 5th Amendment constitutional protections. This is a right enjoyed by Americans, per our Constitution. (You are always welcome to return to your native homeland if you so desire such rights…)August 4, 2008 2:40 pm at 2:40 pm in reply to: The greatest financial supporter of Torah Jewry in the world #634043
Pashuteh, There has been no acrimonious splits in Brisk. Please get your facts straight before spewing any vitriol loshon hora. As far as factions that have had splits, all of Klal Yisroel has experienced acrimonious splits since galus started. (Beis Hillel/Beis Shammai as well as less noble splits with Tzidukim, Karaites, Reform, etc.) Its a tzara we have unfortunately always have had to deal with. (And btw, how many multiple times have your zionists buddies split. Count them. They’ve been splitting one faction with another throughout their history.)
Pashuteh Yid said “I am willing to bet that the Vaad Hatznius will lead to less tznius on the whole”:
Well guess what Reb Yid, the Gedolim disagree with you! And if having to choose between Rav Shmuel Kamenetzky, Rav Ephraim Wachsman, Rav Malkiel Kotler, Rav Mattisyahu Solomon, et al on one side of the equation, and Mr. Pashuteh Yid on the other, my choice is clear. Now if you have questions regarding something the Gedolim were mesakin then you have every right to have it addressed – WITH THE GEDOLIM THEMSELVES, not complain or yenta about it on an anonymous blog.
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 O”Ch 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.)
I can only try:
Please report back your Rav’s comments on this, as I’d (and I’m sure others) would be interested.
Also, if you think about it, if your original assumption would have been correct, it would essentially have meant that secular law would override halacha anytime they were in conflict, due to dina dmalchusa dina. That would obviously be wrong.
Bowzer – Absolutely, we all have much to work on ourselves. I presume, many if not most of us have filtered net access as prescribed by the Rabbonim. (What doesn’t hold water, is when that argument is advanced in order to silence Bnei Torah when responding to anti-Chareidi and/or anti-Torah posts, so they can monopolize the argument without having to concern themselves with having the truth splashed on them.)
You have demonstrated a repeated tendency to look for (and find) some extreme fringe anecdote involving someone who identifies as a Chareidi and using that to extrapolate and smear all Chareidim.
Think BIG: If giving tochacha has a chance of making an impact, it should be given to a man ow a woman. Regardless of which halachic issue is at hand (tzinius, Shabbos, Kashrus, etc.)
I can only try:
Your story of the guy blocking your driveway brings up some very interesting halachic points. One point I wish to address is that since the other party was a Yid, by dinei mamanos between two yidden, halacha applies as to who owes who money (or does not owe.) Dina dmalchusa dina is irrelevant in this regard.
In fact Maran Hagoen HaRav Eliyashev Shlita paskened that dina dmalchusa dina never applies between ben adom lchaveiroi (even non-dinei mamanos situations.) Others disagree with this, but regarding mamanos matters I don’t know of anyone who paskens dina dmalchusa dina applies.
Regarding your other halachic inquries, I can’t accurately respond.
A convert no longer is a child of his biological parents.
It is inappropriate for a Jew to be close to a non-Jew. That is the reason a Jew can’t drink wine a non-Jew
Wearing a hat and jacket is a sign of Kavod.
jphone – The Chasidim are notably unpicky oon who they accept into their Yeshivos, and are particularly makpid in making sure every child is in a Yeshiva (even if they can’t pay a dime in tuition.)
Yes, we should leave it to “lesschumras” so he can matir whatever anyone doesn’t like.
There Pashuteh Yid goes again on a tirade against the “Chareidim.”
A Ger breaks off his previous relationship with his old family. He is no longer related to them. His ex-parents are no longer his parents. There can be no socializing with them. This is halacha.
Some look at the cup as half full. Others see it half empty.
bugnot – You answered your own question!
Same with open chest shirts, shorts, etc.
Lets ask of you, what you asked of others. What is YOUR source as to what is the longest known coma in medical history, as you claimed above?
The best Nation.
The best People.
The most holy people.
The chosen nation.
Why did Hashem choose us?
Because we were and are the best!
Pashuteh Yid –
Have Emunas Chachomim. If the Gedolim feel their is indeed a problem in any of the areas you think their is a problem, have emuna that they will address it. Just because you think Issue X is a problem, does not necessarily imply that the Gedolim agree with your personal assessment.
I think you’ll agree that their assessment is wiser than your assessment.
nameless, you make some very nice sentimental value judgments that sounds very correct. But the takanos were made by the Rabbonim, who certainly you will concede are far wiser than you. So how do you bring yourself to question the wisdom of the Gedolim who established the takanos?
The glass house bit, you are alluding to, is a non-Jewish concept. You are trying to deduce that it is improper for ANYONE to correct anyone else, “since no one is perfect.” In Torah Judaism, a Yid is OBLIGATED to give tochacha. You, like so many other mitzvos, would like that repealed and reformed.
If Judaism ever finished reforming itself to your specifications, there would be nothing left of it. In fact, the “Reform” and “Conservative” movements are just that.
Yes, yes, I know, how dare you be corrected. How “kanaish.”
Perhaps you hadn’t intended to make choizek of the aforementioned Gedolim, but indeed you have done so. When you make pathetic jokes about how wrong they are, that is making choizek of the Gedolim. THEY, the Gedolim, stated loud and clear THERE IS A TZINIUS PROBLEM, and you compared their ideas to the Taliban, Nuns, and said NO, THERE IS NO PROBLEM.
The Hocker, You put it quite well.
Which shul do you daven at?
“nobody here bashes the gedolim”? You just did in the other thread about tzinius! (And you are hardly the only one.) You made choizek of Rav Shmuel Kamenetzky, Rav Ephraim Wachsman, Rav Mattisyahu Solomon et. al. by making pathetic jokes about what they said regarding the tzinius crisis. They said there is one, YOU (in you great wisdom, greater than theirs obviously in your personal evaluation) said they are wrong.
Pashuteh Yid –
Your examples are “compromises” of hiddurs, that if you can’t do (i.e. afford the nicest Esrog) you have no such obligation. THERE IS NO COMPROMISING OF HALACHA.
Your comment is so far beyond the pale of Torah Judaism, it is hardly worthy of a response. Nevertheless anyone that claims, as you did, that you can EVER “take the Torah with a grain of salt” is, I’m sorry to have to tell you, a Koifer gomer. The Torah is 100% EMES. EVERY LETTER IN THE TORAH IS 100% TRUTH.
There is no “acid crisis.” A lunatic fringe is just that, and no more. If you had an asifa after every lunatic incident, you’d never be done finding different lunacies someone somewhere did. An asifa is for something that is prevalent and should not be. As much as you’d like to find fault with Bnei Torah, acid throwing is not an activity, thank G-d, that often happens.
At least you admit you are in denial about the tzinius crisis. Once you open your eyes it will not be difficult to see. Eating in McDonalds and driving on Shabbos, if it even exists in frum communities, is another fringe lunacy. Yes there is a tzinius crisis in Lakewood, Boro Park, Faltbush, and many other frum communities in town (i.e. NY) and out of town.
The choizek you make, is of Rav Shmuel Kamenetzky, Rav Ephraim Wachsman, Rav Mattisyahu Solomon et. al. all of whom found there to be a tzinius crisis, called the asifa and determined to take action regarding the tzinius crisis with a vaad hatzinius, etc.
And then you wonder why some people refer to you as being “pro-freikeit”? When you make choizek of Rav Shmuel Kamenetzky, Rav Ephraim Wachsman, Rav Mattisyahu Solomon et. al. with your pathetic jokes about them being wrong and there is no tzinius crisis, that is the road it leads you to.
Feif Un, They were general examples (in response to cantoresq) and not specific quotes. My point was theoretical.
BTW, a serial mechallel shabbos could be forced by beis din to keep Shabbos. The same with any halacha.
cantoresq et al,
Do you take the position that someone making a comment that “the Rabbonim are crooks”, “the Torah is a nice Sefer, but must be taken with a grain of salt”, or “we must be flexible in Shabbos [or whatever Taryag of your preference] and not insist on keeping every nook and cranny to the tee” should be tolerated and posted?
You bring up some good points. One idea is that the correct “family day” should be Shabbos Kodesh. The Shabbos Seudas is an important time for family interaction.
To your credit, you are the first responder in this thread to substantively address the point the poster made.
But I think the area that you missed is that his point was not that you are not entitled to make any halachic point or counterpoint as in a Beis Medrash setting. That is surely a given. The point was that comments that are heresy, sacrilegious, kefira or attack elements of the Torah, are beyond the pale in the Beis Medrash or outside, and thus unacceptable.
That is the theoretical discussion (or as a barrister, the point of law not the factual findings.) Now whether you indeed made such heretical comments is a factual matter.
Any halacha not to your liking is deemed “Talibanization” and “dressing like Nuns” by you.
For the record, a Beis Din may “impose” compliance with halacha on a consistent refuser.
The only “Yeshivisha slogan” (as you put it) that the “originator of the thread” used, is “Yidden.” Apparently that is too “Yeshivish” for you. If “Yidden” rankles you so, I must wonder if the originator of the other thread regarding you and pro-freikeit may not be too far off the mark.
One crucial detail I omitted from the maaise, was the reason the son refrained from responding at the timeof the incident was in order to maintain Kibud Av. But taking the father to Beis Din, is not in contradiction with Kibud Av.
Do you believe you can impose Shmiras Shabbos or eating Kosher?