Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
MT: I’m not sure what your point is. That means we can force everyone to have to hold by things that aren’t necessarily Halachah in any category related to Arayos? Why aren’t all women wearing Burkas then? Saying “There’s no such thing as a Chumra by Tznius” doesn’t mean that we have to Assur everything we can possibly think of. (But yes, I hold that recorded women is Kol Ishah and Assur.)
Wolf: I think he just wants names that people post as a response to that poster.
MT: I don’t claim to be an expert, but I do know Dikduk well. And I explained the Gemara according to the proper translation of the words. Do you have an issue with my approach to the Gemara there?
Chacham: I’m not sure how you’re reading the Tzitz Eliezer. He clearly Assurs music all year in Os Beis.
Chacham: You left out the Igros Moshe and the Shevet Haleive as well (I don’t know the Simanim offhand, but the IG”M might be O.C. 1:157).
However, there is a difference between the Shevet Haleivi’s Shittah and the others (well, I’m not familiar with the Ashrei Ha’ish so I can’t say anything on that). Those other Poskim all hold that there is a qualitative difference between a capella and instrumental music. They just happen to hold that both are Assur during Sefira. (Of course, both the TZ”E and the IG”M hold that as an outcome of the fact that they hold instrumental music is Assur all year round, so you need to raise it a level for Sefirah. If your Minhag is to not Assur music during the year, then it would make sense that a capella is allowed during Sefirah.) The Shevet Haleivi, on the other hand, holds that a capella should be Muttar during Sefirah, but he holds that any a capella made professionally should be treated like instrumental music.
Loyal Jew: See Orach Chayim 301:2 and then try and tell me that sports are Assur.
MT: And what’s your answer to the Dagesh? Also, I checked the Artscroll Siddur for Barchi Nafshi over Yom Tov. They translate it as sinners.
Different Minhagim. Almost everyone (maybe even everyone) agrees that if it’s for exercise it’s fine.
See the Sh’arim Metzuyanim B’halachah on the Siman on Zecher L’churban for Mekoros on this, if I recall correctly.
MT: What’s your source that we assume someone will live for a year? The Poskim barely hold a Chazakah that one will live for more than a few days. See the discussion of one who is only given one day to get out of jail/the army. Also, see the long Nishmas Adam about this Chazakah. (I forget where; maybe Hilchos Rosh Hashanah?)
MT: I can’t answer for how Artscroll or Metzudah translated, but I did give you the explanation as to how to properly translate the word. This should be obvious to anyone who knows Hebrew grammar. And the Gemara in Brachos still works. B’ruriah’s point was that this person was not one who sinned constantly, hence it was still possible to Daven for him to do T’shuvah.
The plural of sins would be Chata’os, in the feminine, as any other similar noun that ends in an Alef (think Kisei). And even if this would be an irregular Chata’im (should such a word exist), for it to be the plural of the word Cheit it would need a Kamatz under the Ches, not a Patach under the Ches with a Dagesh in the Tes, which is how it appears.
Thank you for bringing this up to me though. Artscroll is usually good about these sorts of things. I think I’ll write them a letter, or send them an email, or however one contacts Artscroll.
Sam4: I’d guess that he thinks that the Aruch Hashulchan you are quoting quoted the Drishah I referred to earlier. Apparently one of the Gedolei Haposkim is now an “un-orthodox feminist manifesto”. I don’t know how one can continue to respond to someone who thinks like this.
Sam4: I think the Sh’arim Metzuyanim B’halacha brings down a list of Poskim that agree with that Aruch Hashulchan, but I don’t have it with me now to check. I thought I saw R’ Ovadiah bring down a list too, but that I’m not positive about. I learned this a very long time ago.
MT: Nice try, but no. Here’s a tip, by the way: Next time you want to come across as pedantic, make sure that you are actually correct. The word Chata’im is not the plural of the word Cheit, meaning sin. That would be Chata’os. Chata’im is the plural of the word Chata (note the Dagesh in the Tes), which means someone who sins habitually. (In Hebrew, almost all jobs are a verb with a Patach under the first letter of the Shoresh and a Dagesh in the second letter with a Kamatz under that, as is the case here.) Thus, a Chata is someone who sins by profession-i.e. does it all the time. Thus, we prat for those who sin sometimes, but not those who sin habitually.
This “remedy” doesn’t make any sense. I’ll repeat, what happens to Bechirah Chofshis? Either a Chassan or Kallah’s Bechirah Chofshis for their entire lives is removed if one of them does this at the wedding? Come on. It defies logic and basic principles of belief.
Chacham: Doesn’t the Mishnah say Al Tarbeh Sichah Im Ha’ishah Bashuk? Am I imagining that?
Nothing in this case is beyond a reasonable doubt.
MT: Saying that Chataim V’lo Chot’im means “sins and not sinners” is a mistranslation.
MT: That’s explicitly wrong. The Poskim say that you put a Gemara on top of a Nach.
Sam4: That’s an interesting Tzitz Eliezer. I hadn’t seen it before. I guarantee you that if anyone here said that S’vara we would immediately be branded as Apikorsim or, worse, “MO”. 🙂
Also, see the parallel Bavli of that Yerushalmi (around Yoma 67, I think) which gives a different reason why R’ Elazar wouldn’t answer her. (Interestingly, the Yerushalmi is the Tanna R’ Eliezer but the Bavli is the Amora R’ Elazar, if I recall correctly. The stories are very similar though. I don’t know what the overall P’shat is.)
MT: I am far from a genius, yet when I do Chazara I fly through the pages pretty quickly and I think that I get every step the Gemara goes through.
Chacham: Didn’t you leave a word out of the Mishnah?
Yaff: Some of us used to lean like that, but we can’t now because our family is too big and we wouldn’t all fit in the room.
MT: Maybe he knows that Masechta very, very well and was just doing Chazara? Or maybe he has a photographic memory is and is trying to memorize all of Shas so that he will be able to understand everything perfectly?
MT: First of all, you left a word out of the Shulchan Aruch. Second of all, source that Rambam please. Also, see the Prishah (Drishah?) on that Siman in the Tur.
There is no way on Earth that putting up pictures of a Rabbi to ward of cockroaches and mice is Muttar. It is, at best, Issurei D’Oraisa of Nichush and Darchei Ha’emori.
Shmoel: Being a sports fan is not inherently a negative. In fact, if one watches sports so that he can recharge and return to Avodas Hashem even better then his sports fandom is also Avodas Hashem.
Haifagirl: Is that really true? Most of the Frum people I know have at the very least a decent, if not good, command of the English language. Hebrew, on the other hand, is another story entirely.
A picture of a Rabbi keeps roaches away? That feels a bit like Christianity to me…
And I suppose this “remedy” overrides the woman’s Bechirah Chofshis?
Gefen: Mother/daughter is a B’feirush Heter for touching. Presumably seeing and hearing is the same too. Sister… is an interesting issue.
Announcement: I hold, at the very least, that the trinity is Avodah Zarah Mamash and that the word should be Assur to say in the referring to Christianity, for whatever that’s worth.
And just a question on this whole Ma’aseh. If you had picked it up, you wouldn’t have done anything wrong (unless you knew of this key thing beforehand). Why does it matter whatever Shtus this person had in mind?
Chacham: Interesting. I must have forgotten that. I always found it weird that he brought the Rambam so much into his piece on Kabbalah. It’s also interesting that he mentions 40 but is pre-Shabtai Tzvi. Maybe the Minhag became like that minority opinion after Shabsai Tzvi?
Chacham: What am I misreading? That Gemara assumes that Kol Isha applies to a talking voice. We Pasken that it only applies to a singing voice. We have to either not Pasken by that statement of Shmuel or we have to hold that the Hemshech is a rejection of that statement. Either way, that Gemara is not a source for our Issur of Kol Isha.
Shmoel: There are academics who are not Apikorsim who also question it. And, while we may not care for what they say, they do sometimes bring good Ra’ayos and we have to answer them.
Shmoel: While we assume today that the Zohar was authored by the Tanna R’ Shimon (though there are clearly pieces that are later additions as they quote people post-R’ Shimon Bar Yochai), the actual authorship of the Zohar was a controversy from the time R’ Moshe De Leon revealed it until today. (It was a very big controversy among the Gedolim in his time; then it died down for several hundred years as everyone assumed that it was really R’ Shimon. Now the academics call the authorship into question again, though very few Gedolim agree with them.)
Chacham: The Shach doesn’t say 40. The Shach says that one should wait until he is old enough and that many who learned too early died very early (a clear hint to the Ariza”l, I think). I have heard that not learning Zohar until 40 is a Cherem of the Ya’avetz in response to Sabbateanism.
The source in Shir Hashirim is not the source. We don’t hold like the Shittah of the Rabbeinu Yonah that everything mentioned L’shevach in Shir Hashirim is an Ervah. If we did, then eyes, lips, and I think teeth would be an Ervah as well.
Neither is Kiddushin 70a the source, as we hold that Kol Isha only applies to a singing voice and not normal speaking.
The source is Brachos 24a and SH”A O.C. 75.
Happiest: A lot of people say it’s not and their reasons are pretty strong. But the Minhag is very strongly not to be Makpid on it.
Yungerman: That’s what I was thinking.
Yserbius: The story I heard said the 2009 World Series. When I spoke to Rav Sheinberg I don’t think I mentioned the year. I just said that I heard there was a story about him making a Se’udas Hoda’ah when the Yankees won the World Series and wanted to know if it was true and if it was what he had in mind when making the Se’udah. He didn’t want to talk about it.
Isn’t Ka’eileh only on Pesach?
Shmoel: That’s a misrepresentation of what happened. What actually happened was in 2009, R’ Sheinberg ZTZ”L made a Se’udas Hoda’ah when the Yankees won the World Series. His son explained that it must be that he was happy that he finally felt nothing when the Yankees won. However, Rav Scheinberg himself never explained why and, when I personally asked him if the story was true and what the real reason was, he didn’t answer.
Some Poskim do mention that it should be avoided. There is a difference between having them dragging on the floor Derech Bizayon and just touching Derech Kavod because you are displaying your Tzitzis.
Also, I feel like it’s a Mefurash Gemara in Brachos that it’s Muttar.
Right Path: I don’t know if he published it. He told this a major Posek personally who I spoke to about this. When he mentioned to him that this would make Bar Ilan a huge problem, Rav Elyashiv said, “Tzrich Lefarsem”. And it doesn’t matter how the Shem is created scientifically. The fact is that there is a visible Shem Hashem and closing the computer window causes that to be erased. There’s no visible Shem Hashem on a cassette. (But I can’t speak for R’ Elyashiv; maybe he’d hold that that’s a problem too.)
Yitay: We rarely give reasons for Mitzvos. At least, certainly not Muchrach ones.
YW Fan: Check out the Moreh Nevuchim and the Sefer Hachinuch. See what ideas they give.
CL: Sometimes that doesn’t matter. The Magen David (which predates Zionism as a religious Jewish symbol) is also originally a pagan symbol.
Toi’s S’vara is perfect. Hence, since Rav Elyashiv Assers writing Shem Hashem (or any Divrei Torah-goodbye Bar Ilan) on a computer screen, you can’t type of Chol Hamo’ed either.
Hershi: I can’t say L’chol Hadei’os for sure. I don’t know every single opinion out there. But the general opinion (especially if you live in America since Rav Moshe said that grape juice is basically the same as wine) is that there is a separate Hiddur of wine on the Seder night because it’s more Derech Cheirus if there is alcohol. Obviously, an alcohol content closest to that of a normal wine makes the most sense. But seeing as you can’t do that, then a low-alcohol wine or a wine diluted with grape juice wouldn’t be the most Derech Cheirus possible, and it probably Yotzei this Hiddur of having wine (unless your LOR tells you otherwise).
Logician: Nothing. The point wasn’t that he carried, the point was showing that he actually believed that you could.
Hershi: If you can tolerate it, add a drop of wine to your grape juice. That’s pretty close to Lechatchilah L’chol Hadei’os. (By the way, I saw the Mishnah Brurah yesterday who points out that if wine gives one a headache then one is Mechuyav to drink anyway but if it will make you sick enough to have to lie down then you don’t need to try to have wine.)