Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 757 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: k-9 filter #1337694

    Logician
    Participant

    Why does everyone always talk about how easy it is to uninstall K9, or access sites? That’s basically irrelevant.

    It is designed for someone other than the “filteree” to keep tabs. So if your kids uninstall or access the wrong thing, you’ll know. Will they davka try to go somewhere inappropriate knowing that you’ll know about it very soon?
    And if it’s for yourself: if its so nothing should pop up, no problem. If its to stop a nisayon, then someone else obviously controls the password/email, and should check your record occasionally.

    For most users, it works fine.

    in reply to: Are You An Apikores? #1337685

    Logician
    Participant

    1.
    “So, whats the source of bitochon according to the Rishonim?”

    I don’t know. And neither did R’ Meir Simchah!! It’s a strong point. I’ve posed his question to Talmidei Chachamim, and they admit they never thought about it. Nach is full of such Pesukim – but not in the Torah.

    2.
    Teva exists (as much as anything ‘exists’ – different topic). That’s the Maharal. Hashem created the world? Well, He created Teva as a system to run it. NOT that it has its own power, NOT that anything happens at any moment without Him – His Ratzon is Mekayem everything at every moment – but He did set up a system. It’s one of His messengers, like the malachim.
    R’ Dessler, like many others, talks how “there is no Teva”. Perhaps there “are no malachim”‘? He’s just stressing that there is no stand alone entity called Teva, and no decision is made just because of the system. Hashem decides constantly if you should work according to Teva or there should be some other intervention (neis nigla, neis nistar). That’s what he means “it’s Him every moment”.
    Same for the idea “Teva is a Neis”. It just means that everything is miraculous in the sense that Hashem could have set things up in any way he wanted, and there’s really nothing more astonishing about vinegar burning than oil. But is there a difference practically? absolutely! Extreme example: Do someone react the same if they catch a cold or are diagnosed with cancer? But to Hashem it’s all the same, there’s no Teva??? Yes – but He’s telling us 2 different things. Meaning – we understand that the fact that something is more or less dangerous according to TEVA makes a a huge practical difference according to the Torah!

    3.
    Your observation about Bitachon is absolutely true. See the Rmbn at the end of Ki Seitzei, about going to war – If you don’t have Bitachion, you just go home, the connection’s just not there, you can’t treat it like every other obligation!

    in reply to: Are You An Apikores? #1337152

    Logician
    Participant

    “I have often wondered what the source of bitochon is”

    R’ Meir Simcha argues it is the mitzva of Dveikus…fascinating piece…

    The Maharal says several times that if you don’t believe in Teva – that Hashem created predetermined rules for how the world runs – you are a מחרף ומגדף… (This is how he interprets the problem of האומר הלל הגדול בכל יום).
    In no way does this contradict the basic idea R’ Dessler and others are conveying…

    in reply to: May I Disagree With the Chofetz Chaim? #1219456

    Logician
    Participant

    “The Chofetz Chaim was the Gaon of Shmiras Halashon and Ahavas Yisrael, and he would never have said anything that was meant to make Wolf feel bad about himself.”

    Many words of Torah certainly should cause many of us to “feel bad about ourselves.” Whether this is one of those times, and whether these feelings are justified in this case, is something we don’t know.

    in reply to: May I Disagree With the Chofetz Chaim? #1219455

    Logician
    Participant

    I just want to add that there no need to classify his words as “the complete and unadulterated truth” in order not to argue. It is of course possible for there to be other, valid, differing opinions, and he can also (like every human) make a mistake. He is simply an established authority of great stature, and so one’s own view, when it differs from his, may not have valid Halachic standing, and it is logical to be cautious before ‘arguing’.

    in reply to: May I Disagree With the Chofetz Chaim? #1219448

    Logician
    Participant

    Although you obviously do not want to elaborate on the specifics, I think it very much depends on what is being discussed.

    If he states something as fact, presumably based on a source, and I’m not sure what you mean that you ‘disagree’.

    On the other hand, if its a logical point, and you disagree with his reasoning, then it’s no different than any other sefer. One can disagree with something written by an earlier authority (to a point), but must be of a certain caliber for this to have any standing.

    And of course, everyone here made the valid point that it would be very wise to think long and hard before concluding that, in your opinion, he is mistaken and you are correct.

    in reply to: Should More Mamzerim Be Created? #1118008

    Logician
    Participant

    Charlie – see my earlier post – a very real safek in the Poskim.

    in reply to: Should More Mamzerim Be Created? #1117983

    Logician
    Participant

    Safek of Pri Megadim 240, discussed in Minchas Chinuch (1).

    Why would you think this is not a clear-cut halachic question?

    And if for whatever reason you assumed he IS obligated in the mitzvah, why do you think he can get out of it? cf Chizkiyahu

    in reply to: get rid of smart phone #1072465

    Logician
    Participant

    The fact that this conversation is, as usual, focused mostly on our children and their susceptibility to this problem, shows how far we are from recognizing what is going on in our communities, and how foolishly confident we are in our ability to withstand nisyonos.

    Of course, children may be more susceptible. And there is certainly a difference in adults’ vs. teens’ practical need for such devices.

    Yet Rabbonim and therapists involved in this sugya are constantly reiterating how widespread the problems are, and how most people who ended up with problems in this area honestly thought themselves ‘above’, or relatively immune, to such nisyonos. The stories I know of, just from one friend who works in this field (no personal details, of course) are endless and horrifying. Yet so many people truly think the issue is limited to protecting our children.

    End of my point. From here, rant:

    Learn a little mussar. Turn our ability to criticize, so commonplace when it comes to others, inwards, and activate a little Yiras Shamayim. If we were truly afraid of aveiros, would we so easily convince ourselves with the type of justifications thrown about here ? Do what you want, but at least have the honesty to call a spade a spade.

    in reply to: Dr. GREENWALD'S Sefer #1061911

    Logician
    Participant

    Actually, if you’ll read your post again….

    And receiving advice on private matters is not the same as being confided to in such matters, and so hardly a confidant either…

    Meaning no disrespect, of course – the sefarim (and their author) are very chashuv and important. Just not a fan of such hyperbole

    in reply to: Rant – Doing a chesed in return for tzeddokah #1061781

    Logician
    Participant

    Chesed does not come with expectations in return

    When you do chesed you are actually owed the hakaras hatov of the recipient. This, in fact, is the only heter to give tzedaka openly, not secretly – because you are not obligated to be moichel the hakaras hatov.

    Above is per R’ Hutner.

    Similarly, R’ Chatzkel Levenstein, I believe, used to try to ask someone for whom he did a real chesed, for some small favor in return, thereby freeing him (emotionally, at least) from his feeling beholden to him – similar to what poster wrote above.

    I think the real source of this ‘minhag’ is when there’s a monetary dispute, and the ‘pshara’ is for the money in question to be given to tzedaka – thereby allowing them both to feel like they gained. Which is of course not quite the same as the cases under discussion.

    Seems like it mostly a question of context – i’d had times when I felt like the OP, and others like DY.

    in reply to: Dr. GREENWALD'S Sefer #1061908

    Logician
    Participant

    You certainly seem to have heard of him, and yet don’t don’t know the name…

    I’ve looked thru it, meant to buy it…but no, can’t remember the name

    And receiving advice from the Steipler in his field hardly qualifies as a close talmid…

    in reply to: How and why should I respect a parent that doesn't deserve respect? #1061092

    Logician
    Participant

    DY – hmn. I don’t think so.

    My actions will affect me internally, yes. So if I’m lacking in my midah of respecting others in general, and I act the part, it will affect my midah and change me. Or perhaps if I acknowledge that someone should be respected but I have some personal feelings or bias that gets in the way, the same would apply. But if there is a particular person for whom I logically believe is not worthy of respect, simply acting with respect towards them will not change anything.

    in reply to: How and why should I respect a parent that doesn't deserve respect? #1061081

    Logician
    Participant

    I honestly don’t understand how I am expected to do that

    If we’re talking about showing respect – you can do it like any other action (although admittedly emotionally difficult at times)

    If we’re talking about actually feeling something – several posters have assumed that not to be part of the mitzva. As I quoted above, that doesn’t seem to be the case, and no one’s addressing that.

    in reply to: How and why should I respect a parent that doesn't deserve respect? #1061066

    Logician
    Participant

    Gratitude equals respect?

    Chayei Adam says that you must not only SHOW respect to your parents, but also personally view them as great people, even if they’re not… I can’t say I understand.

    in reply to: good shtark but not "greesed yeshivas #1056486

    Logician
    Participant

    And the relevance to this thread…?

    in reply to: If you could change the Shidduch System #1056307

    Logician
    Participant

    GAW – yes, perhaps partly.

    But you said one shouldn’t pass up a good shidduch due to money, and implied that this was a new phenomena. I was just pointing out thsat for better or worse, money was always a big factor in shidduchim.

    in reply to: If you could change the Shidduch System #1056298

    Logician
    Participant

    Call me old-fashioned, but I hope you would agree that one should not pass up on an appropriate shidduch just because the other (male or female) side’s parents are not giving money to the couple?

    How old ? go back a bit more, and it was always this way.

    I heard a lecture from a MO Rabbi on a related subject, in the middle of which he discussed the rationale for the (supervised) socializing between the genders in his community. Recognizing the other perspective, he related how someone (I forget who) asked the Lubavitcher Rebbe about this point – the difficulty of dating by those who’ve had no previous contact. The Rebbe answered: And perhaps that extra difficulty and awkwardness is precisely what demonstrates the beauty of our system ?!

    In other words – yes oomis, it will be less natural at first. And so ? Both parties know about this, should be prepared to expect it, should not be thrown off by it, and will get past that too. it is not a critique on the system, but a reflection of wonderful values.

    in reply to: What age should you teach your kid about Shabbos? #1048247

    Logician
    Participant

    Barlev – you don’t know halacha, yet you know what affects neshamos – hmn…

    The halacha is clearly not like you – using a young child in a permissible manner is preferable to a shabbos goy.

    in reply to: Could Chanukah happen again #1050160

    Logician
    Participant

    Very clear testimony that the Chofetz Chaim said that this should have been done in Russia, and it certainly would have weakened their effect on Klal Yisroel.

    in reply to: Lakewood Bus Drill #1019337

    Logician
    Participant

    The majority of children will not be eligible. And many of those who are will have intolerably long rides, so many of those parents would end up driving as well. Although perhaps carpooling.

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076643

    Logician
    Participant

    There is nobody, and I mean nobody who goes to a Godol for actual medical advice rather than to a doctor.

    I don’t know anyone who goes to a Gadol in place of a doctor, but gedolim are routinely asked whether they should follow medical advice, such as whether one should have a surgery – and they answer.

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076623

    Logician
    Participant

    So is the R’ Dessler I quoted, written out by DY, also from the ‘certain chasidic Rabbis’ mentioned by R’ Feldman as the only ones who invoke ruach hakodesh when discussing “da’as Torah” ?

    And he rejects the possibility that they all made “ta’us gamur”.

    And even the most ‘acceptable’ idea he says – that they were great chachamim – is much more emphatic than most here would like. We cannot assume to fathom the depth of their thinking and decisions, and it is impossible that they made a “ta’us gamur”.

    So – what would R’ Zelig say here ? This is already after the idea was ‘invented’ ? You can assume he would disagree – but lets be honest:

    the clear distaste everyone here has for the idea has not as much to do with the sources, as much as with difficulty conceding the limitation to personal autonomy sanctioned by the torah.


    Logician
    Participant

    So Ravina and Rav Ashi just had the words of the gemara they recorded

    “If they had more to say, why didn’t they?”

    I hope you’re not serious. Put aside any of the chiddushim of today that you’re not happy about. Or from the past few hundred years, for that matter. Did all of the Rishonim make up silly pilpulim too? ‘cuz there’s a heck of a lot that they put into the gemara’s words which is not at all explicit too. And don’t start with that nonsense that they weren’t medayek in their lashonos – you’re just showing that you’ve either never learned or never understood Rishonim at all.

    PAA – I assume you’re showing from your last quote that he felt you need to learn the whole mesechta to properly understand. I think the implication clearly is, though, that he’s specifically referring to learning in depth. Superficial knowledge of dafim, just to be able to reference a question from another gemara on your own, without needing to see the tosafos or rashba do so first, is in no way related to that quote.

    in reply to: What exactly did we get on Shavuos? #1018425

    Logician
    Participant

    Very interesting.

    Your point has further implications: it is a question in the meforshim there if ‘forty years’ is meant as a precise figure. If it is, it ended after Moshe’s death. So we have a passuk recording events after Moshe’s death, similar to the last 8 pesukim in the Torah – and there its a machlokes if Moshe wrote it at all…

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076570

    Logician
    Participant

    Yes Sam, bothered me too. Could be he should fast, just not a valid reason not to go on an important trip. In any event, R’ Shach used to say over the story, so (besides for the point that he knew the gemara) that gives validity to whatever you can infer from the story – which is what we’re debating.

    Other than followers of certain Chasidic Rebbes, I have never heard of anyone who understands da’as Torah to refer to metaphysical inspiration.

    A bit silly, if you ask me. I don’t know its extent or who has it, but its def. referred to in all sorts of non-chasidic seforim.

    And the story with R’ Zelig has been quoted here plenty. Take his words with a grain of salt, understand the point he was making, and move on. His words do not back up the majority of the “anti-da’as torah concept” posters here.

    in reply to: vegetarian? halacha issue? #1024097

    Logician
    Participant

    To take it a step further, I always understood the maiseh with shaul in a similar vein with what I wrote in this post. When a person doesn’t act according to the Torah, it is bad even if currently it is a “chumrah”, because once you’re out of the Torah’s morality, you’re on your own morality, and it is ??? ???? ??????.

    Which is why the gemara says that he was told “al tehi tzadik harbeh” – and then contrasts that with when he killed Nov ir hakohanim, and was told “al tirsha harbeh”.

    in reply to: How do I convert? I want an exit strategy! #1018587

    Logician
    Participant

    Logician, Rav Ovadia ztzuk”l said you can change from sfaradi to ashkenazi. That is NOT the same as what you say.

    Read PF’s post. I made a comparison, based on his last sentence. Don’t know what you want.

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076536

    Logician
    Participant

    The point was an extremely limited point that the event doesnt prove a gemara wrong.

    And people dying is not an indication that the psak to stay was wrong either.

    Obviously I’m not addressing anyone who clearly said “it will be safe”. That’s probably best understood by gavra’s last comment. (the premise of which, GAW – by the way – is that you should ALWAYS listen no matter what, because if its misguided then that too will have been whats supposed to happen).

    But there many others. R’ Elchonan knew the situation, for example, he said himself he was going back to his death (or something to that effect), and still advised (at least certain people) to stay.

    in reply to: What exactly did we get on Shavuos? #1018413

    Logician
    Participant

    Even that portion was clearly amended by Moshe at some point before his death.

    ?

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076512

    Logician
    Participant

    Of course he would save a Jew. My point was simply to illustrate that if a psak has good reason, its not proven wrong just because it had the ‘wrong’ result.

    If R’ Chaim knew the yid was in danger, he’d save him. But if he could rewind time he wouldn’t take back the pask – because al pi halacha he was not in danger (he would just happen to have the knowledge that his life happened to be in danger).

    The assumption made earlier was that since the Jews were killed in Europe, it must have been a mistake not to advise them to leave. We can debate who was told what and why, but there’s no assumption to be made based on their deaths.

    see R’ Dessler’s essay on this matter

    in reply to: What exactly did we get on Shavuos? #1018409

    Logician
    Participant

    Mishneh Brurah implies we received all mitzvos (reason for milchigs).

    Chazon Ish discusses at length (Orach chaim 128)

    Ramchal (Da’as Tevunos) explains that we did NOT receive the Torah (ilu korveinu lifnei Har Sinai vilo nusan lanu es haTorah), rather became mitzuveh v’oseh, which empowered us by giving our actions the power to affect the world on a cosmic level.

    in reply to: Mechitza at Har Sinai? #1017877

    Logician
    Participant

    Sorry Sam, somehow thought you were referencing Matan Torah.

    I thought you were going to say that, so was going to look up the quote as I remembered it… but Haleivi did it for me (thanks).


    Logician
    Participant

    Yes, I know that R’ Chaim also said that the nosei keilim still count as torah. If you could explain that line to me, I would be very happy

    Let’s see. Could it possibly be related to the idea you’ve rejected, and I’ve quoted an explicit Ohr Zarua about, that (some?) Rishonim wrote with more than just their own sechel ? [As far as nosei keilim – I’m only aware of this idea being applied to Rishonim. I doubt anyone would say it too far down the line].

    So you are saying that we should design the curriculum of the yeshivas based on the fact that rebbeim will have no job?

    No, I’m saying nothing of the sort. Simply explaining why its not part of any curriculum per se. I already said that I agree that time allocated is up for debate.

    While it is not my job to justify why people don’t follow the Roshei Hayshiva, I would venture to postulate that there is simple reason: The style of Iyun is enjoyable…

    I was not talking about the hamon am, but clearly referred to the Roshei Yeshiva setting policy. Despite the call of the gedolim you mentioned, most do not follow suit – nor are their own yeshivos so different.


    Logician
    Participant

    It worked for the baalie gemara, it works for me.

    You are seriously off your rocker, that’s all I can say. So Ravina and Rav Ashi just had the words of the gemara they recorded ?

    How should bekius (at least your understanding) be taught ? You just sit and read! And use basic skills you already have. Iyun needs training. The only question you can have is if they give enough time. That we can debate.

    To finish shas once while in yeshiva is not that impressive.

    Do we have the same Shas ? If you learn (and even chazer) the daf for and hour or two day, would you be ready to be tested on Shas ? Once again, I spend my time among many extremely smart, talented Talmidei Chachamim, and the idea that finishing Shas with decent retention is not a big deal is simply laughable.

    Which does leave us – as I agree – that everyone is capable of much more bekius knowledge, and it should be done.

    when we see what five of the leading Roshei Yeshivos of their generations actually had to say on the matter.

    And yet their lesser peers, who worship their every word, oddly enough did not change the way their yeshivos learn! And wait – in their OWN Yeshivos it’s not so much different. Hmn…

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076505

    Logician
    Participant

    zahavasdad – here we go again.

    Why do you assume that because the result was not to your liking, that the decision must have been wrong ?

    Do we need to go thru the lists again, of Gedolim who were clearly aware of the true situation in Europe and still didn’t say to leave ?

    R’ Shach would say over a story from… perhaps R’ Chaim, I don’t remember. Guy had a dream that he drowned while crossing a certain bridge. R’ Chaim told him to ignore it, as we pasken that we don’t listen to dreams [please: the psak is not the point]. He repeatedly had the dream, and he kept giving him the same pask. He traveled over that bridge… and drowned! Family came to R’ Chaim, obviously upset. He told them: My psak was correct, and I would do the same even after having this knowledge!

    in reply to: Mechitza at Har Sinai? #1017868

    Logician
    Participant

    Sam2 – we know that in mitzrayim there was only one story of znus…

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076472

    Logician
    Participant

    Why not as “Vayeida es ishto” (not quote) ? One who has real connection to Torah, not just knowledge, has “da’as” Torah.

    in reply to: How do I convert? I want an exit strategy! #1018575

    Logician
    Participant

    That’s like the litvishe tshuvos who say you can change from Nusach Sefard to Ashkenaz but not the other way around.


    Logician
    Participant

    For many years I’ve been making a point, and was recently gratified to find it in published letter by R’ Shimshon Pinkus.

    He says that it is rare for a bachur to succeed by trying to work out of the yeshiva system.

    And he says there’s really no reason to! Put aside the system of learning, its reasons and justifications. Any serious bachur can find enough time in his day for any seder he’d like – bekius, nach, halacha – without taking away from the yeshiva schedule. How long does it take to learn (and even chazer) daf yomi?!

    So no one can blame their lack of knowledge on the system.

    Certain Yeshivos encourage this, and very few discourage it.


    Logician
    Participant

    The Maharal’s positions on learning, specifically about Tosafos, definitely deserve the proper respect and consideration. But they have mostly been ignored (i.e. disagreed with) by our gedloim and educators. And so to say that you personally agree with his point is fine, as with any position a person relates to. But to bring it up in a practical discussion and criticize others based on it is just silly.


    Logician
    Participant

    Not quite sure what diyukim you’re talking about.

    Trying to understand why each rishon/acharon had to use every step that he did and say each word that he did. This is the type of iyun that I believe is WAY overdone. This style of learning is very recent, only about 200 years old, and I don’t really believe it is emes. I have a very hard time believing the underlying assumption that the Rishonim are malachim* and every word they wrote contains a chidush.

    1)Is analyzing the process by which someone reached their conclusion equal to believing that their every word contains a chiddush?

    2)Sorry, but you don’t really know what you’re talking about. The methods of analyzing and understanding may have innovations, and so you won’t find the modern terminology in older seforim. But they are very often doing the same thing, using different language. On just about every page of Rishonim, besides logical questions and discussions, you will find discussion on why the Gemara needed certain steps to reach where they did, and interpretations based on nuances. And so in sifrei achronim about the rishonim. Either I’m just not understanding your references, or you just don’t know how to learn.

    3)As there is so much iyun and understanding to be done evenwithout whatever diyukim you’re talking about, I don’t find your point relevant to your general issue with bekius and iyun. You think more bekius should be learned – that’s one thing. I happen to agree. But it’s another issue altogether.

    Maybe we live in different universes. Just as an example that I know about – have you analyzed the marks that extremely smart, dedicated talmidei chachamim get on tests, such as Dirshu ? Sorry, but your average (and even above-average) person has a problem with long-term retention of large quantities of information. And when you spend time delving into and understanding something, you certainly retain the ideas much better.

    Knowing the shakla v’tarya of a Gemara is barely even skimming a sugya. It is superficial to the extreme – as far as knowing the sugya is concerned. It is certainly worthwhile and necessary to have knowledge of many Gemaras and their shakla v’tarya. But as far as understanding goes – what you have after the rishonim and (even early) achronim are done with the sugya is often radically far from what you have after learning the daf on its own. So no, that’s not what I’d call ‘decently well’ for the point we’re discussing.

    Finding fault with someone in a debate in an irrelevant point (such as grammar) is not exactly the sign of a strong position.

    And is there any reason you are mocking the Ohr Zarua ? Perhaps because I’m actually showing you a Rishon who explicitly says that which you’d rather not believe ?

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076463

    Logician
    Participant

    Either this thread will stay this dull, or it will get exciting and then be closed.

    It’s no fun just hitting the “approve” button all day.


    Logician
    Participant

    3) What do all the quotes about improper application of iyun skills have to do with this discussion?

    4)Bekius ensures that you know at least everything decently well.

    It certainly does not. It may be something you should do, and it may give you certin tools going forward, but a cursory reading of many complicated sugyos would not qualify for ‘decently well’.

    5) Contrary to popular belief, bekius does not only have to consist of gemara and rashi. I also learn tosfos bekius as well as many other mefarshim and sefarim.

    I don’t only read through popular novels in a few days. I also skim thru textbooks on rocket science in my spare time (with not much of a background in science). I find it very illuminating.

    Yes, you can read thru a tosafos or other complicated seforim quickly, and glean the basic idea of whats being discussed. That’s not learning tosafos. For that you read kitzur piskei tosafos.

    6)The problem with iyun is that it is much harder to retain the knowledge one acquires due to the difficulty of remembering every diyuk.

    But that is hardly the point. Being medayek properly will lead to the proper understanding of the sugya – which you retain much better than randomly memorizing gemoros.


    Logician
    Participant

    1)Rishonim tend to ask logical questions and questions based on other texts, NOT questions about why the gemara/other rishonim used word X.

    So apparently you don’t learn rishonim.

    Endless discussions in Gemara and rishonim center around questions of phraseology.

    2) I have a very hard time believing the underlying assumption that the Rishonim are malachim* and every word they wrote contains a chidush. As far as I know, no rishonim thought that there predecessors wrote like this, and nor do rishonim think that the gemara writes like this.

    The Ohr Zarua writes how every word of Rashi has meaning, and if one reads carefully they can see that many questions can be resolved by a single word of Rashi. Because, he explains- he wrote with Ruach hakodesh! (or something to the effect of ‘divinely inspired’ – don’t remember exact lashon).

    And it goes without saying that regardless how we should learn the seforim, they certainly made a very big deal of diyukim.

    in reply to: vegetarian? halacha issue? #1024073

    Logician
    Participant

    When there is an intrinsic difference between the people – killing amalek, or someone chayav misah, as opposed to everyone else – then one has a sensitivity, one not. And if you feel bad about the killing, then you’re being ‘more sensitive’ than the Torah – precisely the problem by Shaul.

    As opposed to our discussion, where there is no difference between the animals. The question is just WHEN. So if we have two identically blameless animals, and we kill one foe the mitzvah of being happy on Yom-tov, i have a problem seeing a sensitivity towards killing the other (for a useful purpose). Just a svara.

    in reply to: vegetarian? halacha issue? #1024068

    Logician
    Participant

    sorry, PAA – my bad. guess I was reading too fast, and got the impression that the various halachic concerns only were being debated.

    As to the issue – you are right, we don’t generally have to eat meat. But I think that the fact that there exists a chiyuv to eat meat at all (bzman habayis for sure)- even if its only several times a year – demonstrates that there is no such sensitivity. The chiyuv as simcha, after all – so you HAVE to celebrate yom-tov by killing an animal, since it makes you happy, but other times it would very lofty of you to refrain from such an act – doesn’t make sense to me.

    in reply to: vegetarian? halacha issue? #1024067

    Logician
    Participant

    My point was similar to what PBA said – eating too much meat is a question of tayvah, and does not cause the act of killing to animal for food to become wrong.

    Sam2 – I don’t follow, sorry – don’t see at all what this has to do with chumros. Being machmir in halacha is one thing; we are talking about having ‘more’ sensitivity than the Torah.

    in reply to: Shaos Zemanios #1016571

    Logician
    Participant

    For shaos zemanios you just need to know what percentage of the day has passed (ok, that depends on when you start alos/netz and stop shkiah/tzeis), I would think that would be relatively simple.

    And its clear in the gemara that they used these zmanim, referred to events occurring at specific hours of the day etc. so…

    in reply to: vegetarian? halacha issue? #1024046

    Logician
    Participant

    No problem with the thread going halachic, but as far as the OP is concerned, octopi did say that the point is to minimize death – and its seems the consensus of all present that that is a problematic hashkafa.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 757 total)


Trending