lavdavka

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 29 posts - 1 through 29 (of 29 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Giloy Arayos (Movies, etc.) #703283

    lavdavka
    Member

    -WellInformedYid

    why do we need names it sounds prety reasonable

    in reply to: Broken Telephone #5 #706133

    lavdavka
    Member

    give the guy a brake hes probably starving!!

    in reply to: Debate via Email with Rabbi A. Kraus of Neturei Karta #693746

    lavdavka
    Member

    i eagerly await part three

    in reply to: Al Tarbe Sicha Im Haisha #695522

    lavdavka
    Member

    1/2 moderater-80 said:

    to expand on what mw said about chumros. it pains me no end to hear people here speak about them in such a disparaging tone.

    _____________________

    Well dont you think maybe if it pains you so much, perhaps you shouldnt post it heh? im assuming it pains you because it is so wrong and anti yiddishkyte. is that what cr is? a forum for every looser to burp up their garbage thoughts with out having to be embarrassed?

    in reply to: Debate via Email with Rabbi A. Kraus of Neturei Karta #693732

    lavdavka
    Member

    CAN NWE GET THE FOLLOW UP OR DO YOU NOT HAVE ANSWERS YOSR

    ________________________________________________________

    Below was posted by the OP, yosr, as a new thread. It is instead being posted here:

    ________________________________________________________

    In “Part 2” I have included my second email to Rabbi Kraus of Neturei Karat and his response. There were 3 such back and forth. I shall post one series a day.


    Letter 2: Me

    I would first like to thank you for your detailed, meticulous and lengthy response. However there are some issues I would like to raise.

    The Rav Wrote: “The nations in the U.N. who voted in favor of a Jewish state did not include the nations ruling over the land”

    While this is technically true, Britain and the Arab Nations were members of the UN and thus agreed to the rules. It is irrelevant that they were out voted, or that they decided to abstain. Secondly the Gemara in Ketubot speaks of “The Nations”, the UN is and was the greatest representation of the world community.

    The Rav Wrote: In the end, the Zionists did have to fight for their land, first against the local Arabs (Palestinians) and then against the surrounding nations. That is definitely “with a strong hand” and a rebellion against the nations.

    Am Yisrael only fought because the Arab League decided to launch a full force invasion, and had at that point they not fought it would have resulted in a massacre of the 600,000 Jews living in Eretz Yisrael. The Arab League at that time proudly stated that they would commit a massacre on the scale of the Mongol massacres. So at that point, there was a Milchemet Mitzvah according to at least the Rambam. If one looks at the definitions that the Rambam gives to a Milchemet Mitzvah is, “To save Israel from the hand of the enemy”(Rambam, Mishna Torah, Hilchot Milachim, 5:1).

    The Rav Wrote: Imagine that all the countries in the UN except America voted to give the Jews the state of New York for a country of their own.

    The British had only received control of Eretz Yisrael in 1917 and had no real sovereignty, second the Arabs living in the Land also never had sovereignty as even you pointed out latter in your letter the Land passed hands over and over again.

    The Rav wrote: Furthermore, not everyone agrees that going up “as a wall” means by military means. The Avnei Nezer is the only one who says that.

    The Avnei Nezer actually seems to reject the oaths completely. Avnei Nezer comments, “Moreover, with regard to this oath, we do not know what its nature is… For an oath has force only when the person swears…Moreover, the oath that he administered to the nations, that they should not enslave Israel too much, what could its nature really be, if they didn’t know about this oath at all?” Here it appears that the Avnei Nezer does not consider the oaths to have Halachic ramifications. He also writes “Upon you (the leaders) is this great Mitzvah and there is no end to the reward of those who help in this matter, whether by attempting to obtain visas, or in the essential matter of purchasing land in Israel.” Furthermore there are others who do not hold by the Shvuos and hold it to be on a metaphorical level at most. For instance the Maharal of Praug see Sefer Netzasch Yisrael Ch. 24. In addition in light of Ramban who writes “Behold we were commanded with conquest in ever generation” (Supplement to the Rambam, Sefer HaMitzvot, positive commandment #4), how can we take the questionably Halachic shvuot over a clear Halachic decision of the Ramban.

    I feel it relevant to mention a few more modern day authorities as well, who supported the efforts of mass return.

    The Ohr Sameyach, Rav Meir Simcha wrote in a letter of support for Keren Hayesod fund: “Since the fear of the oaths has been removed with the permission of the nations, the mitzvah of settling the land arises, a mitzvah equal to all other mitzvos in the Torah, and this mitzvah returns to its place”.

    The Netziv, Rav Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin, wrote the following: “It is the will of Hashem that the land of Israel be settled slowly, slowly by the outcast of Israel. Hashem altered the heart of the czar, to allow us to form a committee and company to gather money to support our brethren (Zionists) working the land…it is a sign that it is G-ds will to make a settlement in His holy Land”(Shivat Tzion pg 17).

    Reb Areh Leb Hackohen, Av Beit Din of Radin and son of the famed Chofetz Chaim (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagen). In Reb Areh biography of his fathers life he writes remarkably the following:

    “I remember that in the years 5650-5651, when our Jewish brothers were expelled from Moscow, a great movement of Aliyah arose…At this time I received a letter from my father of blessed memory in which he pointed out to me the great surge amongst all facets of our nation to make Aliyah to Israel. He assumes that these are now the days of the footsteps of the Mashiach, thatHashem has redeemed His nation and that this is the beginning of the in gathering of the exiles which precedes the coming of Mashiach. If we had the capability, it would be proper to buy land and make Aliyah to Israel”.(Letters of the Chofetz Chaim to his son, Reb Aryeh Leb HaCohen, pg 43-44) It should be noted that the Chofetz Chaim was very much against the secular nature of the Zionists, but encouraged G-d fearing people to go up to the land en-mass.

    Rabbi Shlomo Hackohen of Vilna, Av Beit Din of Vilna and author of Binyamin Shlomo. When Herzel came to Vilna, Rav Shlomo greeted him with a sefer Torah.

    The Admor of Hosiatin was qouted by Rav Kook as saying, I was truly leaning towards Mizrachi, but I had to think of the Hassidim.

    The Admor of Ostrovtza, he stated “What is going on here?! Hashem sent his holy children to build the holy land and here people condemn them?” (L’Ntivot Yisrael part 1 pg 197)

    To recap, we have seen from the sources above 4 important points.

    1 Perhaps the “3 Oaths” were never meant to be understood in a Halachic conext.

    2. We were right to take a hands on approach to the Geulah and that was needed in order to activate it.

    3. The Geulah will be a slow process not a quick simultaneous experience.

    4 Secular and even anti-religious Jews can play a role in bringing Geulah.

    Praying for the complete redemption and humbly awaiting your response.

    Shabbat Shalom Mivorach,

    Yosef

    Letter 2: Rabbi Kraus

    Dear Mr. Rabin,

    As an analogy, think of the Gemara in Eiruvin 43a that moshiach cannot come on Shabbos or Yom Tov because of the prohibition of techumin. That means that even if the Jewish people have done complete teshuva and the time is ripe for moshiach, and even if Hashem knows that after Shabbos they will sin again and moshiach will not be able to come, still moshiach will not come in violation of the halacha.

    I once heard the story of a rabbi who claimed that if he blew shofar at the Kosel on a certain Rosh Hashanah that fell on Shabbos, moshiach would immediately arrive. The other rabbanim told him: Even if that were true, you would have no right to violate halacha in order to bring moshiach.

    If they had been given the land on a silver platter without a fight, then perhaps the Avnei Nezer would have agreed to it. This is also the context for the statement of the Ohr Somayach you quoted. How can you expect those two gedolim, who passed away long before 1948, to have foreseen the bloody war that was to take place?

    then the body distanced itself from the soul. And since the connection has been ruptured, G-d’s supervision has been removed from him and he is left as ownerless as the wild animals that have no soul. That is why G-d’s supervision does not apply to the particulars of each animal but only to the preservation of the species, as the Ramban, the Rambam and the Chinuch wrote. So too with the human being if the soul is not within him that brings him close to G-d. This is the reason why Scripture chooses the language, “by deer or by the hinds,” for it teaches about detachment from holiness that is G-d’s supervision. For it is written regarding a sacrificial animal that is redeemed after being found to have a disqualifying blemish: “However, just as the deer and the hind are eaten…” For in the first-born or tithed animal, or other sacrificial animals, through a blemish and by redemption, the holiness of the sacrifice is removed from it.

    The statements by the Netziv and the Chofetz Chaim do not even say that they are referring to mass aliyah. They contain no reference to the oaths, so I would not consider them relevant to our discussion of exactly what the oaths prohibit.

    Sincerely,

    Rabbi A Kraus

    in reply to: Whats wrong with chumros? #692883

    lavdavka
    Member

    I have another question if ones rav tells him he may do something that most, or even just some big gedilim say not to do. and the person dose it .If when the person goes to heaven after 120 and they say his rabbi is wrong is it considered that the person did the rite thing and he goes scot free or should he have been more careful

    in reply to: Societal Changes & Halacha #697132

    lavdavka
    Member

    Volf gezugt:

    Why? Do you feel that rabbis are the only ones who are qualified to talk about halacha?

    __________________

    If one can bring sources it is fine to.

    “Talking about halachah” and “talking halachah” are not the same thingS. we can say what we’ve heard and know to be true but we can not decide things on our own anyone who thinks they can needs some basic Jew lessons, from ANY rabbi (obviously real orthodox not some one who ALSO makes things up on their own with no source)

    in reply to: Societal Changes & Halacha #697129

    lavdavka
    Member

    I wrote in a different topic about Al tarbeh:

    ____________________

    Also I wish people would post on this topic only things they can back up with a rabbi or source,( and please provide it to).Who do we think we are talking like a bunch of Rabbis? Obviously commen sense is ok but all these “facts” that are being thrown around, come on guys we know better than to think were a bunch of Rabbis

    Please do not call me “rav” or “rabbi” or anything of the sort. I am not a rav or a rabbi and I feel that granting the title on one who has not earned it demeans and cheapens it.

    The Wolf

    _________________

    Well, I thank you for the kind words, but it really changes nothing. I am still not a rav, rabbi or anything else in that department. Please save the honorific for one who has actually earned it.

    The Wolf

    in reply to: Societal Changes & Halacha #697116

    lavdavka
    Member

    Well said rt

    in reply to: Not Feeling Welcome #693192

    lavdavka
    Member

    Please do not call me “rav” or “rabbi” or anything of the sort. I am not a rav or a rabbi and I feel that granting the title on one who has not earned it demeans and cheapens it.

    ______________

    Well i write it because im impressed with you even though i NEVER agree with you, You think like a Gemara kup and im impresed.

    in reply to: Societal Changes & Halacha #697114

    lavdavka
    Member

    One can definitely kill a Mosser and a Rodef if they know the Halachos properly. I.e. they know what a Rodef is and what a Mosser is.

    in reply to: Not Feeling Welcome #693186

    lavdavka
    Member

    Here’s a hint: how many tana’im or amoraim can you think of in the Mishna/Gemara that are mentioned as having more than one wife at a time? Very few, if any.

    _________________________

    I will not claim to be answering your whole question but the Torah/Nevi’m only mention people that were relevant to the story as we know the Medrashim say that Yaakov had many more children

    in reply to: Not Feeling Welcome #693183

    lavdavka
    Member

    Rav Wolfmussings said:

    Heh. Whenever *I* bring up the suggestion that societal changes must be taken into account when determining halacha, I get blasted by some members of these boards. 🙂

    __________________

    Wolf said:

    I would be willing to bet that even when allowed, polygyny was the exception, not the rule. Most people probably had no more than one wife at a time.

    ___________________

    You must remember that there is a mitzvah to have children and many people probably had many wives to have many children.

    I would be interested to know which of us is historically correct about this if anyone has a source please supply it.

    thank you in advance

    in reply to: Not Feeling Welcome #693163

    lavdavka
    Member

    -msseeker

    I am married, and i believe that mosherose is teitching it correct

    but hes a bit out of touch with reality. this that he is saying is probably what it meant at a time and was supposed to mean always. but today things are very different. remember that in the days of the mishna men had many wives and they probably did not talk nearly as much together like today.

    what we have as the family unit did not exist then. men were not with the same wife every night for they had many and were only able to be with one at a time as we see in the story of yaakov and ruvein. they all had different tents. so mosherose is right but hes not up to date with the times when spending time shmoozing about every thing under the sun with one’s wife is absolutely essential and not tar’beh .

    EDITED

    in reply to: Not Feeling Welcome #693058

    lavdavka
    Member

    MAYBE ITS B/C I KNOW THAT ITS PROBABLY B/C I LOOK DIFFERANT THEN THEM

    in reply to: Not Feeling Welcome #693055

    lavdavka
    Member

    I FEEL WELLCOME IN ANY SHUL AS LONG AS THE PEOPLE DONT MAKE ME FEEL LIKE A STRANGER

    in reply to: Beard #1206689

    lavdavka
    Member

    I LEARNT (RECENTLY) IN A prominent yeshiva in the tri state area well known and very yeshivish my rosh yeshiva is very makpid that bochrim may not grow beards

    in reply to: Mothers Day: Yes, Or No? #684543

    lavdavka
    Member

    Reb volvie:

    Your extensive knowledge and bekies give off the impression of you being a grate Talmud chachom and I hope that many readers will use what you say to teach them the true yiddisheh way of thinking.

    May you continue to enlighten all of us with your deep and Torahdikeh explanations of timely issues.

    Sincerely yours: Rabbi A. Reiets

    in reply to: Plan To Change The Way We Give Tzedaka #682170

    lavdavka
    Member

    its very sad that someone could even think this way.

    volvie keep it up your from the only ones tzum zach in the coffe room!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    in reply to: Drinking On Purim #675424

    lavdavka
    Member

    JOTHER-LETS NOT GO THERE

    in reply to: To Drink or Not to Drink? #674725

    lavdavka
    Member

    HOW COME ALL YOU NAY SAYERS THINK YOU KNOW BETTER THAN THE CHACHAMIM IN THE GEMARA ANd dont tell me todays differant. thats what the reform say. ask your rav what to do and if he thinks your at risk of over doing maybe he will tell you not to. but as of now lets keep it status quoe and follow what were told

    in reply to: Fish Shailos #673881

    lavdavka
    Member

    kashrus council of lakewood i.e. rabbi weisner

    in reply to: Fish Shailos #673879

    lavdavka
    Member

    it seems like a new shailo b/c its posted all over from the kcl who are not a bunch of idiots they are very reliable

    in reply to: Fish Shailos #673877

    lavdavka
    Member

    IN LAKEWOOD there was chain call about checking your fruits for tu’beshvat it seems that there’s a problem with fruit to

    in reply to: What Is a Tuna Bagel? #703797

    lavdavka
    Member

    it seams every one is scaared to say what itis so ill say it its a chassidisha guy trying to be cool but b/c of the chassidisha way of sheltering there children. they (the tuna beigel) have no idea how to do it. and its prety funny watching them b/c they way over do things

    in reply to: Sefardi Recipes #826809

    lavdavka
    Member

    SORRY WASNT FOLLOWING THE conversation well now i see you wrote what it was

    in reply to: Sefardi Recipes #826808

    lavdavka
    Member

    WHAT IS HAMOUD, AND WHAT IS THE THING WITH GRAPE LEEVES

    in reply to: Sefardi Recipes #826802

    lavdavka
    Member

    thank you lakewood wife for the lahmagine recipe it came out delicious do you have any thing for this shabbos

    in reply to: Sefardi Recipes #826793

    lavdavka
    Member

    sorry about the caps lock my work is in caps lock only.i was looking for a genuine sefardi recipe for lahmagine and any other good sefeardi recipes.my husband loves sefardi foods or as my husband just corrected me,my husband loves all food

Viewing 29 posts - 1 through 29 (of 29 total)