Forum Replies Created
July 30, 2010 12:42 pm at 12:42 pm in reply to: Breach in Tznius: Recent affliction attacking Klal Yisroel #1025967
This is a little silly. Do you think that publishing people’s names in a newspaper will actually get anything done? Sure, we can burn tires in front of their homes as well. But we will only be adding to the 97% of Khal Yisrael that is not frum. Yes, throw her out without a Kesubah. It usually is a joint effort, if not with the open then the tactile approval of the husband. And find the husband who is looking to throw out the mother of his children because she doesn’t cover her knees. Sure, it’s all true from a technical halachic standpoint, but irrelevant, because certainly we’re trying to actually get something done, not just make some noise.
Is there a problem? Certainly. I don’t know the solution, and know that we men are just as much part of the problem. Women are merely the canary in the coal mine. The priorities of our community have been dramatically warped in the last decade, and the battle lines have been redrawn totally. The infusion of Kollel, a Shidduch Crisis, internet addiction, a general destruction of any semeblance of decency in geenral secular culture have taken their horrible toll. But “for every thousand who strike at the leaves of evil, there is one striking at the root” – Thoreau.
Rumor has it – and where or not it happened is irrelevant, as it is still true – that a Bais Yakov HS asked for permission to edit their photos in their yearbook. Apparently, your HS photo is your photo for shidduch eternity. They decided to test out the hypothesis. They inserted the photo of a model, made up a name and added horrible lashon hara about her throughout the yearbook, and added that she was going into rehab instead of seminary. The Menaheles received a number of phone from shadchanim, and one from a parent. The girls got permission to photoshop their photos. Sad, really. But reality. That’s the reality we’ve gotto change. Ultimately, under the surface, in the guts of things, we worship beauty. Just not as openly as the secular world. When that worhsip really changes, then things will change. Until then, young ladies will live according to that which we teach them – really, really, teach, what we demand for our sons, not that which we preach. But how do we change? How does a community change? The delicate channel we have the secular world, taking the good and leaving the bad – has become skewed. And now what?
I wish I had the glib one line, terribly sure answer, and comfortably condemn thousands of women to the depths of hell, unless, of course they listen to me immediately. I know that I’m part of the problem, and that I’ve got to change. That’s going to be hard enough for me.
Besides, we’d have to add another supplement to the Hamodiah for such a list, and that something I certainly wouldn’t want responsiblity for.
Not paying taxes is a different issue. The question is a) The obligation of Dina D’Malchusa, which the poskim seem to apply to the United States (Israel, of course, is a different can of worms). But the question is then what is noheg. If the entire USA does not pay taxes, or at least a significant proportion don’t, then the law is not really enforced. We deal with realities. For instance, jaywalking when there is no car in sight presumably would not a violation of Dina D’Malchusa.
But, I personally think that the goverment is makpid on cash sales, certainly for large items when the sum is significant. Has there ever been real enforcement in this area? Or is it in the empty realm of unenforced laws and uncollected fines?
Unfortunately, exact Halachos about emes v’sheker are not in the Shulchan Aruch, hence the obvious confusion about lying.
There certainly is no Klal that one may lie for Shalom Bayis. Nor that one may not for shidduchim. One would be hard pressed to find a source in Rishonim that applies Midbar Sheker Tirchak to something which does not cause damage to another.
Beyond that, there is a concept of Hin Tzedek, of one getting used to being a truthly person. But that is not midbar sheker tirchak.
To lie in such which a way which causes damage – that is, to lie when the other person has a right to know – is forbidden. But the underlying concept here is right to know. A Talmid Chacham may lie about those things because the asker has no right to know them.
However, this gets extremely murky. What’s called a “right to know”? What’s called “damage”. Many Poskim have applied this to lie within reason about a girl’s age in shidduchim, because it is irrelevant (not 20 to 30, but what about 24 to 23?). Hence, the right to know evaporates. The waters are murky. Mishaneh Mifney Darkey Shalom – which most poskim apply to even outwardly lying if it so necessary – is a similar concept. Rabbenu Yonah states that one may not lie in such a way to cause damage to another person. Only, when the situation is truly a peaceful one, merely something irrelevant was said or done, and will destroy the legitimate and real peace (and hence there is no real knowledge to be gained) may lying be employed.
It really is case by case to decide what’s called irrelevant and no right to know. If a boy smoked in high school, is that relevant, and has now quit. Or if his family uses plastic? May one lie? The waters are murky, indeed. Hence the happy usage of a local orthodox Rabbi, or at the very least, Husband.
As yes. The beauty of using a random mareh mekom to express a personal gripe. And hence, of course, all those who do not adhere to it are most certainly vomit-worthy. Perhaps like R’ Leib Maalin, whom did not have have a beard. The Torah is mazhir us not to use a razor on our beards; the Chazon Ish wanted a tzuras HaYehudi, which may be true, but not Halachic. I suppose he saved his vomit for the Daled Chelekay Shulchan Aruch. I suppose I should preempt an irrelevant rant about the fifth, to give further voice to anger at your Yeshiva. No doubt it was because of the intrinsic insecurity of it’s totally beardless administration. Unless they had beards, and it was totally different issue. That may be a possibility.
Please, add a number of “I heards” . Sources are not at all necessary.