Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I believe the Chasam Sofer said it first about parasols, but I’m not sure.
Parasols are Chukas Akum.
zogt: That Tzitz Eliezer is an absolute Pele. The Rabbeinu Yonah that he quoted was rejected by the Rishonim as a minority opinion and the Tzitz Eliezer quoted it L’ma’aseh without even mentioning the Rambam. Tzarich Iyun what the real question was there.
DY: You didn’t answer why.
Veltz: That’s funny. That was supposed to read “important”.
DY: Why? I’m not. To paraphrase R’ Aharon Lichtenstein Zatz”al, some people can see everything in Torah. I can’t, so I studied science as well. It’s the same thing. Maybe I could have found that Yesod in Torah. But I have not found it anywhere as powerfully as Uncle Ben put it.
Joseph: As I have said before (and you choose to ignore), Avi Weiss is a lot of things, but an Apikores isn’t one of them. Why are you so cavalier in playing with your Olam Haba?
It’s a superstition that’s brought down in a few (very few) Seforim as that their teeth won’t grow in, which experience tells us Pashtus isn’t true. It’s also a weird European superstition that a baby who sees its reflection before its teeth grow in will die within a year. That one isn’t true either.
Joseph: Not quite. We’re not the Machmir in Gittin. Almost all Poskim hold that a Get that is Kasher according to some is Kasher B’dieved, especially if she already got remarried.
Joseph: And what about me who won’t vote at my local polling place because it’s in a church?
mw13: True. But it’s presumably Kosher B’dieved. So the Kahon Gadol will have this one available to wear for a few days until we can Pasken what the proper way to make one is and make a better one.
akuperma: That’s not quite true. If literally no one uses the original name, many Poskim hold that it’s not necessary on a Get.
MA: Very little has enhanced my Yiddishkeit as much as Spiderman. “With great power comes great responsibility” is an import Yesod that everyone should be taught.
mdd: I’m not denying that. So we just have to figure out where R’ Tarfon’s Shittah comes from.
mdd: Well, according to the Geonim (if he’s just trying to restore what the Mesorah was to Moshe at Sinai), what you are claiming is not feasible. Within the Rambam, it could work. So we’re at a Machlokes Rishonim.
You say there’s no indication within that gemara. I might agree. But the fact is that no Gemara stands alone. The Geonim were aware of this Gemara and still have their comprehensive Shittah of Torah Sheba’al Peh, which the Chazon Ish recently ascribed to. He also knew the Gemara. So either you’ve found something with which to reject all of their opinions, or you can read the Gemara in the context of the entirety of what Torah Sheba’al Peh is.
mdd: When the Limmud is wrong, that doesn’t necessarily mean whoever said it needs Mechilah from HKBH.
mdd: My explanation is equally clear. More so, we’re not really disagreeing at all. You have left the area of Halachah Pesukah and saying it’s only Shayach when there are multiple Mehalchim. I said it’s only Shayach where the Limmud is wrong/isn’t Muchrach. Not so much different there.
DY: No. People are allowed to have hobbies. They’re allowed to have icons. And they’re allowed to have pets. There is nothing wrong with being passionate about a hobby. There’s nothing wrong with loving a pet. Loving a pet more than a person? That’s a screwed-up priority. Loving a pet in general? Nothing at all wrong with that. This lion was all three to a lot of people. It had meaning on both a national and personal level. It’s a big deal and not indicative of social problems. It was an icon.
midwesterner: I mean, I’ll disagree with that slightly. I think when an animal is beloved, it matters more. It is far more cruel (and there are more Issurim) to shoot a beloved pet than to shoot a random wild animal.
feivel: Maybe. If mdd says that that is his assumption then yes, your point makes sense.
To which I, of course, will respond that the theory that the Chachamim get to decide what Torah is, not to discover what it is, is very, very wrong. 🙂
yserbius: Makor? In theory, if everyone was dressed perfectly (which, granted, may be impossible, but let’s say it’s possible), there is no Issur of co-ed swimming.
I agree with Joseph in general on this, and akuperma is absolutely right in this case. But hanging (which is outlawed almost everywhere as cruel and unusual) or the death penalty in general is way too far.
feivel: I think I agree that’s what I think, for the most part. There are exceptions, of course. Masrah HaTorah Lechachamim and such. But I think the Shittas HaGeonim it certainly like that. According to the Rambam it’s much more nuanced.
mdd: Nope, never glanced at a Tosfos 🙂
That aside, though, I am very disturbed by your conflation of “Hashkafa” with “Derech HaPskak”.
Do not take Popa’s answer seriously. If I had to guess, he just set up that email address.
mdd: That’s absurd. Shailos often have an answer only one way or another. And “Hashkafa” doesn’t determine what that answer should be.
Joseph: Of course not every Hashkafa is acceptable. When or where have I ever claimed otherwise? I started this whole thing by saying that a poster’s Hashkafa was unacceptable.
mdd: I am not ignoring what the Gemaras are saying. I explained what the Gemaras are saying. You are trying to teach a general Torah principle that… what? Gedolim can make mistakes? I agreed with that already. All you wrote was this Gemara proves something and then have gone on to repeat that I’m not reading the Gemaras. Well, I am reading the Gemaras and my explanation basically agreed with you. I really have zero idea what you’re driving at right now.
mdd: I have no idea why you are having such trouble with what I am saying. Rava said R’ Tarfon was wrong. I gave a perfectly reasonable explanation why, which is not far from what you said in the first place.
And again, how is this relevant to this thread? Are you trying to get me to say that I think R’ Shlomo Zalman made a Hashkafic mistake? Sorry, no dice. Won’t happen.
mentsch: Why? We know the minimum Shiur for everything and there is no maximum Shiur by the majority of them. They’re not making an Aron.
mdd: I know those Gemaras. The Rambam and the Geonim knew those Gemaras. Claiming that the Drasha is invalid because of their Hahkafa is absurd. Who are you (or who is anyone) to destroy a Halachah because you don’t like the Hashkafa behind it? That thought belongs right in line with those who say to let gays marry because the Hashkafa of stopping them from doing it is wrong.
MA: It’s a Machlokes Rishonim. They’re preparing in case the Shittah that says that we have to do it is correct.
mdd: What you are saying does not make any sense. If their Limmud was right, then they got the right Halachah. According to the Geonim, that’s all there is to it. If we get into the Rambam it will be a bit different. Then I could hear the claim that the Limmud was wrong *because* it came from a wrong outlook.
And how was this relevant to this thread anyway?
mdd: Well, this will all boil down to whether you assume like the Rambam or Geonim in the Hishtalsh’lus of Torah Sheba’al Peh. You are assuming like the Rambam. If my assumption is the Geonim (which I thought Rashi usually follows so this will be interesting; I’ll have to be M’ayein more) what you are saying is untenable.
Joseph: I’m confused. How am I saying Rava is wrong? Rava presumably had the authority to say R’ Tarfon erred. I don’t have the authority to say anyone erred (or, at least, any Tanna or Amora; I say you’re wrong all the time 😛 ).
mdd: R’ Tarfon was wrong for two reasons, presumably. #1 is that he did not have the correct Halachah; if he did then the discussion cannot happen. #2 is that, on top of that, his special Chumra is not worth saying because the Hefsed far outweighs the gain.
R’ Akiva is another story entirely. I point out that there are lots of statements from the Tannaim that seem mean to R’ Akiva. I’ve never had a great Pshat why, though I have some theories. In this particular instance, though, I would repeat the same two-step process. R’ Yesheivav (I think) is saying R’ Akiva got the Limmud wrong to begin with. That being a given, we then say that R’ Akiva’s Shittah should be strongly decried because the outcome is so bad that it shouldn’t even be said. Meaning, usually you can just argue with a wrong Shittah and we trust that the right Shittah wins. Here, we have to strongly reject the wrong Shittos so that no one will ever think it’s correct because the outcome of those wrong Shittos are so horrible.
mdd: They held he was wrong. What’s wrong with that? You could have brought better, the Gemara in Sanhedrin about R’ Hillel. I don’t see why that’s a problem. Great people can be wrong. These other Tannaim or Amoraim held that the Tannaim or Amoraim were wrong. Again, why is that relevant?
dafyomi.org I think has download
mdd: I didn’t see your question until now. But I’m not sure I understand it. Even great people can be mistaken. That happens.
I’m wondering how this is Muttar. Also, I’m wondering if paying the money is Lifnei Iveir.
Annon: By the way, the reason that bathing is Assur isn’t in order that you feel dirty; it’s because bathing itself is enjoyable.
Ayein Shach YD 242 in where he describes how to Pasken Os 9.
DY and feivel: So I guess that is our point of disagreement. I see no difference in attempting to change Ikkar HaDin L’kula or L’chumra. I think both are perversions of the Halachic process. I think attempting to figure out “what Hashem wants” on top of the Halacha is a code for ignoring the Mesorah and using personal feelings to change “what Hashem wants”. You see, I think Hashem told us what He wants and didn’t leave it for us to change.
The concept of “Kadesh Es Atzm’cha B’mutar Lach” is a personal statement, not a public one. Because once you’ve made it public, you’ve changed the religion.
HaLeivi: I mean, the candle/light part makes sense. But I thought that on the whole we got along with Zeroastrians.
HaLeivi: What? You’re saying Rashi got the history wrong? Oh, DY’s not gonna be happy with you.
Aside from that, though, it actually makes sense.
Joseph: I believe so. I’ll have to look it up again to be sure, but being sold is not in lieu of payment, it’s just a way to get the money. So if the money is still not there, he still owes a debt.
Artscroll translates them as “Chaldeans”, I believe. However, that doesn’t match up with the history. As far as I could find (I once researched this because I was curious when I learned the Gemara in Shabbos), there was no real major upheaval in Babylonia during the Tannaitic or Amoraic eras. I am no expert, but I would guess that it refers to small pagan Assyrian tribes that probably took over small locales that had most of the Jewish population and these pagan tribes would not have been sympathetic towards Judaism in the slightest.
DY: I feel that this quote “Of course there are poskim to rely on to take a shower. But is that really what Hashem wants of us? ” crosses a theological line where one has now removed themselves from the confines of Halacha. Can you imagine if the line was reversed? “Of course there are poskim to rely on to keep Shabbos. But is that really what Hashem wants of us? “
Joseph: Being an Eved Ivri may come from theft (sometimes), but it has nothing *directly* to do with the repayment. You still have to repay the debt, even after Shmitah. V’heishiv Es Hagezeilah isn’t a Milveh.
DY: Attempting to make someone feel bad for asking an honest Shailah (“How can you even think to ask a Shailah?”) is not exhorting someone to go Lifnim MiShuras HaDin. It’s a perversion of the Halachic process. I’m fine with attempting to explain why something might be more important than we may have otherwise realized. I’m fine with trying to stress how much something matters. That’s being honest. Disrupting a Halachic conversation is not and is what I called “OO”.
annon: Notice how going beyond the norm is now considered “every other day”. If we’re talking relative terms, the average American not showering for 10 days is probably someone in the time of the Shulchan Aruch not bathing for 10 weeks or more. Our circumstances are different and, in this very particular case, it has an impact on the Din. No one would dream of going all of Shloshim without showering, even though that’s Ikkar HaDin in a straight reading of Shulchan Aruch. Why don’t you use the same argument towards people in Shloshim? See how far that gets you.
DY: I mean that you are no longer talking about being Lifnim MiShuras HaDin, which is by definition a personal choice to go above and beyond. If you are endorsing/shaming others into also going Lifnim MiShuras HaDin, you are changing the Ikkar HaDin, which is what I called OO.
New theory: He wants Hilary to win and is working to split the Republicans to guarantee that.