I learned that chazarah is something very different: it should be short. R’ Moshe Feinstein told the boys – and practised it himself – that one should not relearn the daf, rather read through it without concentrating too much. He said six minutes a daf. Only Chazer the gemarah, not rashi or tosfos (although naturally you will be learning the sugya with their perush) because you will get bogged down. Chazzar while the subject is fresh (as the gemarah says, Atiki kasha machaedta). Chazzar three blatt a day.

Chazzarah is a flow. It is enjoyable to relax and let the familiar words of the gemarah flow past. Most people who claim that chazarah is hard and that they have no taam in it are simply doing it wrong.

I’d look in the introduction to the sefer Ruach Chaim – the perush of Rabbi Chaim of Velozshon on Avos. The intro is called Meinei Yehoshua and traces the statements of Tannaim to their natures. If you don’t have a copy, search for it on Hebrewbooks.org.

There is a takanas ezrah that peddlers sell cosmetics in towns so that Jewish women look pretty. Miriam knew that Moshe separated from his wife Tzipporah because she stopped dressing up for him (Yalkut).

So Jewish women ought to look nice and presentable. They should not be seductive, at least in public. That is what Yeshaya was discussing.

I hope that frum Jewish women today dress within those lines. Its not the details – the necklace or whatever – but the general profile.

I looked carefully at the Rashi in Bereshis and the Machzor Vitri. I also examined other rishonim that talk about that pasuk in Bereshis. It seems there are two ways of reading the pasuk: 1. In G-d’s form Man was created. 2. Man was created with a form, or a mold. Some Rishonim explain the first way, others, the second (see Rashbam and Chizkuni) The Rashi can be read either way. The simple reading is like the former, the Mizrachi and Levush explain that he meant the latter.

Rashi elsewhere – in avos, as quoted, and in devarim where he explains “killilas Elokim taluy” does say pretty clearly that man is created in G-d’s actual image. The Machzor Vitry seems to me to be underscoring that and saying that the previously quoted reading of the Rashbam and Chizkuni are wrong.

Ok, so there are two readings of the text. Lets go with the one saying that man is created in G-d’s actual image. Does that mean that G-d has athlete’s foot, as man does? Of course not. All it means is that there is some correlation – physical or spiritual between man and G-d. For instance: Man is physically created in the same form as G-d takes spiritually.

I see no indication – none at all – that G-d has any physical form.

The Sefer HaIkkarim (Rishon) discusses this very question long ago, and he brings proof from Rabbi Hillel that one is not an apikorus if one erred honestly. Nebech an apikorus is not an apikorus.

Another thought that comes to mind is that on the Rambam in hilchos Tshuvah who writes that someone believing that Hashem is physical is a min, the Raavad comments that many of our greatest believed so in error, and they are not apikorsim. So the Raavad, at least, certainly holds that nebech an apikorus is not an apikorus.

Perhaps the Raavad does imply that the Rambam feels that nebech an apikorus is also an apikorus. Otherwise, what is his objection?

Its not if to grovel or not to grovel. Neither he nor anyone else that has their hands full have time to debate. So if there is a sincere asking of clarification it may be forthcoming. Usually these things come out as challenges. A challenge will be ignored.

I have had success with Rav Zalman Nechemia Goldberg, Rav Chaim Kaniefsky and Rav Moshe Mordechai Karp of Kiryat Sefer among others.

hum “vzakeni” – its not Torah! (there are many others like it, that are either a prayer or a wise saying, but not Torah)

In Israel in the Charedi communities it has become common for women to come to the selichos every day. The 12:30 ones are full of women (more girls, though) and the early morning 7 AM selichos also have a nice showing of women.

kol hakovod!

geni is very popular and has the advantage of lots of info already been filled in

I think it means that if you were there youi can easily ascertain it, and yidden and goyim is an excellent example, as are meat stores. However kvarim (underground and out of sight) or if this was used as a nachal eisan etc. cannot be ascertained by a site visit. So thats why they are not kavua. So no, no need for it to be speaking of women

“Hot” has a very cheap, pay as you go, plan. they charge 10 agurot to pretty much anywhere. Google for them. (They give you only the Sim)

Biologists believe that a giant cannot look like a human. The reason is that someone with a body 4x4x4 is not twice 2x2x2, but eight times bigger. So the legs need to be eight times the size. So even though a normal person may be 1x1x3, Og was 9×4. (See Ibn Ezra)

Do you want a job with prestige or to make a lot of money? If its parnassah you seek, become a plumber or electrician. The women at home will be thrilled with a female plumber and you will have lots of business. And a plumber easily makes more than a doctor… its incredible what they charge!

you can edit your likes and dislikes so that even the ads you do see will be for kosher things

There is a shach that permits copying (obviously by hand) a Torah manuscript because it is permitted to steal Torah. The inference is that it would be forbidden to steal other information. Like Copying a CD, for instance.

Its not clear to me what material object you are stealing, and stealing an idea is not geneiva, so far as I have ascertained. Yet the Shach does seem to forbid it.

Ask you LOR!

I think that you could go to gutenberg (dot org) site and find old Sherlock Holmes stories and Father Brown stories (Chesterton, I think) They are superb and clean. The only drawback is the slightly dated English. Another option there is the Detective Pinkerton stories, which are true stories, although not as exciting.

We have the same thing in our family. Here is my advice; don’t try to fix things. But you, the next generation, can have a wonderful relationship with everyone, both your cousins AND THIER PARENTS. As one cousin told me; “In our family there aren’t just issues – there are issues within issues!” It can be too much to unravel. And there is nothing holding you back from forging your own family relationships, as we have done.

My two cents;

The shach argues regularly on Rishonim, I can think of about ten places offhand. However, he is very reluctant to argue against the Bahag and the others of thart time, because they were Geonim, and they did not write their own thoughts, rather they were actually quoting Ravina and Rav Ashi (as the Shach puts it; “kol divreihem divrei kabalka”). So there is a difference between the rishonim and the Geonim.

The one who said the Gra was like the Rashba was Rav Chaim Velozoner in the Hakdamak to Sifra Dtzniusa, not the Gra himself.

According to the Rambam in the Hakdamah to the Yad, you can argue on anyone until the Gemarah (possibly this includes the Geonim, I don’t know), but as all of us know, you would need to be either very sure or very foolish to do so.

P.s.; the Chazon Ish with regard to sukkah is not arguing on anyone; he is rather quoting a minhag in Lita to be machmir for the shita of the ran and ramban AND RITVA that the maimod needs to be of something kosher for schach. So that was a misquote. However the Chazon Ish does argue on Rishnim, I can remeber one chazon ish in kilayim who argues head-on with a Ritva

what, when who? You did not give us any details.

Advice? Read the classics; scientific advertising (free on the internet) as well as the boron letters, and the gary halbert letter. Also David Olgivy, both his books and so on.

The real problem may be the secular community in Bet Shemesh who are forever egging on the Charedim.

Why do I bother? Lets let these clueless posters bash on…