Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Also, even if television addiction exists, the comparison to drugs or smoking is stupid and incorrect. Anything can become addictive to certain people. For various reasons, certain people can go through withdrawal symptoms for the tiniest and most random things. There are documented cases of people going through withdrawal after staying away from tanning booths, chewing ice, getting tattoos, and there is even a case of a woman suffering withdrawal after she stopped eating the cremated remains of dead relatives. These things come from a certain predispositions and a billion-to-one confluence of circumstances. So the fact that there have been cases of someone being addicted to television does not make television addictive any more than chewing on an ice cube is addictive. Smoking and drugs have addictive qualities. They mess with the body and the brain in a way that makes the body and/or brain need to have more in the future. That is what makes them addictive. Television is not addictive. And neither are ice cubes.
Syag: Quoting DSM-IV
Addiction (termed substance dependence by the American Psychiatric Association) is
defined as a maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment
or distress, as manifested by three (or more) of the following, occurring any time in the same
12-month period:
1. Tolerance, as defined by either of the following:
(a) A need for markedly increased amounts of the substance to achieve intoxication or
the desired effect
or
(b) Markedly diminished effect with continued use of the same amount of the substance.
2. Withdrawal, as manifested by either of the following:
(a) The characteristic withdrawal syndrome for the substance
or
(b) The same (or closely related) substance is taken to relieve or avoid withdrawal
symptoms.
3. The substance is often taken in larger amounts or over a longer period than intended.
4. There is a persistent desire or unsuccessful efforts to cut down or control substance use.
5. A great deal of time is spent in activities necessary to obtain the substance (such as
visiting multiple doctors or driving long distances), use the substance (for example,
chain-smoking), or recover from its effects.
6. Important social, occupational, or recreational activities are given up or reduced because
of substance use.
7. The substance use is continued despite knowledge of having a persistent physical or
psychological problem that is likely to have been caused or exacerbated by the
substance (for example, current cocaine use despite recognition of cocaine-induced
depression or continued drinking despite recognition that an ulcer was made worse by
alcohol consumption).
DSM V no longer identifies addiction as a whole and instead subsumes it under individual dependencies, to allow for more nuances use of these criteria, depending on which are more relevant to which dependencies. However, it would be rare for a diagnosis for any three that do not include either tolerance or withdrawal (I have this on record from several leading psychiatrists).
One recent study posited that television addiction may exist, but it was not conclusive and called for further study. Television addiction is not recognized under DSM V.
shopping: That is incorrect. That is not what addiction means. First of all, your definition makes no sense. People who enjoy watching movies and such won’t die if you cut them off from movies. 99%+ smokers won’t drop dead if you take away their cigarettes. TV may be habit-forming, but that does not equal an addiction. And the pleasure centers in the brain light up for lots of things. Yes, they have found relationships in which pleasure centers between television and heroin. But those same pleasure centers light up during plenty of other things, including religious euphoria, if I recall correctly.
The definition of addiction is that someone goes through withdrawal when it’s removed. No one suffers television or movie withdrawal. It’s enjoyable, and possibly even habit-forming. But it’s not addictive. If someone wants to stop there is no physical or chemical barrier to it.
jfem: Nope. That’s a mistake. It seems to have some sources, including a Sforno in Beha’aloscha if I recall correctly, but Pashut Pshat is that it’s just a misconception. The Torah tells us that Pidyon HaBen is because Hashem didn’t kill the Jewish firstborn in Egypt, and the Mitzvah of Pidyon HaBen was given before the Egel ever happened.
Shopping: I don’t think you know what addiction means. And no, there is no such thing as a chemical or physical addiction to television or movies. No such thing has been scientifically proven. You are misinformed.
In general, this conversation is silly and pointless. OTD is not a Halachic or meaningful term. Let’s not invent pointless categories. The term is useful as a way to describe certain people. But when you start creating technical points about what it is and isn’t, it loses all meaning. Is smoking bad? Yes. Should girls marry smokers? Probably not, but that’s up to the girls in question.
Joseph: Again, excellent job ignoring my post where I pointed out that you don’t know how to read the Teshuvos V’Hanhagos or R’ Nissim Karelitz.
Joseph: R’ Nissim Karelitz says that that Rambam and SH”A shows what society was like back then and he says it’s different now. How one Earth does that support you?
R’ Moshe Shternbuch is also not quoting that Lema’aseh. He uses it to contrast the Rambam’s time to ours to emphasize a point. He did not in any way claim that it is in any way some form of Chiyuv nowdays.
Next time, try to find sources that actually read and quote the Rambam the way you’re claiming they are.
Joseph: First of all, your stress is explicitly against the Rambam where he says, “????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ????”
He says it’s a Gnai. He doesn’t say Assur. He doesn’t say it’s a D’Rabannan. He says it’s a Gnai. That implies it’s a Shevach to avoid. That means a Middas Chassidus or an Eitzah Tovah, not a Halchah.
Similarly, when recommending the husband to limit his wife’s galavanting, he says “Yesh”. He doesn’t say Chayav. He doesn’t imply obligation at all. “Yesh” is a Lashon of Lechatchilah at best. He doesn’t even say “Tzarich”, which is a stronger Lashon of Lechatchilah (well, I’m not positive about the Rambam for that; it’s true for the Shulchan Aruch). “Yesh” implies that it’s a good idea, not that there is any obligation whatsoever.
leftbrooklyn: On may not shave on Rosh Chodesh even during Sefirah, unless one’s way of counting Sefirah does not include Rosh Chodesh. But if you hold that it’s part of Sefirah, it doesn’t allow you to shave.
Joseph: Excellent job ignoring my post. Well done.
LU: For example, most people (of both genders including B’nei Torah) think that if you have a Haetz and a Haadamah, you make the bracha on the Haetz first, and this is incorrect according to the Mishna Berurah and most comtemporary Poskim.
Source please? That doesn’t seem even slightly correct. I’m pretty sure Eitz before Adamah is a Mishnah or Baraisa.
YM1: In learning so much B’iyun, you seemed to have missed the (at least) 36 Issurei D’Oraisa involved in attacking a Ger.
If he/she calls you a baby-killer, that’s probably a good sign that he/she is antisemitic.
Joseph: You intentionally misread that Rambam and Shulchan Aruch. As a base, it’s Muttar to leave for the Shuk, Simchas, visiting relatives, and doing Chessed as often as she likes, as is explicit. On top of that, it is a “Gnai” for her to “galavant” more than once or twice a month.
And calling something that is a “Gnai”, which is a Lashon of an Eitzah Tovah or a Middas Chassidus at absolute best, an actual Issur is a D’Oraisa violation of Ba’al Tosif and is quite honestly probably a violation of Megaleh Panim BaTorah Shelo KeHalachah because you know that you’re misrepresenting the Halachah. Is inventing Chumros on the internet really worth losing your Olam Haba over?
Joseph: Your comparison of driving to pants is wrong. You said R’ Chaim said it’s a Begged Ish issue, not a Tznius issue. It’s clearly not Begged Ish. Wearing pants probably isn’t either. That doesn’t make it Muttar. It’s not permitted for women to wear pants. But they’re not violating Begged Ish when they do it.
miamil: What midwesterner said.
Joseph: With all due respect to the Gadol HaDor, if that’s true, all it means is that R’ Chaim hasn’t stepped outside of Bnei Brak. Women drive. It’s obvious to anyone with eyes that women drive. It’s not Begged Ish.
No. It’s a B’feirush Tosfos.
So often Trump just doesn’t think. He said the NFL sent him a letter saying they thought the overlap of the debate and a game was ridiculous. Did he really think the NFL wouldn’t call him out on that? He just lies. He says whatever he wants and doesn’t care what actually happened. I don’t get it.
sparkly: Why is going to a Shiur not considered learning?
brisker: You are wrong. You’re against a Rama.
Sparkly: And why shouldn’t you give a woman a ride? No one’s saying to have a conversation or have any interaction with them. Why can’t a man do a very useful favor for a woman?
Health: Are you unable to make a point without stooping to an irrelevant insult? Mods, what was the point in allowing Health’s last line through?
Joseph: A woman is struggling in the water. Would you help her?
I have seen it in Seforim stores in the united states. The YU Seforim Sale has had it. I think ZBerman has had it.
No. That is Maseches Taharos. I do not believe they ever put out a volume on Ohalos, but I could be mistaken. The Artscroll Yad Avraham has diagrams and there is a large volume called Tavnis Ohalos that has lots of pictures, I believe.
Mentch and subtitle: Read my posts. That was the entire premise of my claim in the first place.
Subtitle: No poster claimed that the parade was a show of solidarity with people struggling with these issues, at least that I saw. What I (and I think others) claimed was that if such a parade existed, it would be something we could (and maybe even should) support.
Tranq them.
Joseph: No you don’t. If you did, they would be national news. There are zero recorded cases of someone being “cured” of homosexuality. There are many cases of certain types of cognitive therapy that can help someone deal with trauma which will in turn remove any psychological blocks that led to the homosexuality, but there is no case of someone biologically homosexual who was “cured”.
DY and Joseph: In abstract I agree with you. Lema’aseh, though, the facts on the ground are that there are teenagers and young adults who, for whatever societal reasons, view their “identity” as an integral part of who they are and many suffer from extreme depression and other issues because of it. So I think it was more proper and the world was better when such ideas were “in the closet”. Now that they’re not, though, I do think we have to support those people that struggle with this.
By the way, they wouldn’t need to be involved at all. People don’t need to be “out” to know that we support, in abstract, the struggle they go through. Someone doesn’t need to tell me he’s gay for him to know that the Frum community thinks that him becoming not Frum is a bad thing.
Joseph: Whether or not it should have happened or is right, Lema’aseh the world is in a place where people do identify themselves based on sexual attraction. There are people who identify as “gay” solely based on attraction, even in the Frum world. And some of those in the Frum world want to not violate it, yet still identify themselves as someone with the Taava.
Someone tried to make the claim that because of things like the murder at last year’s parade, we should show support at this year’s parade. Not support of violating Issurim CH”V, but support that people with same-sex attraction should be treated with dignity and we should find ways to accept them in the community. My response is that if that was all the parade was about, then it would be fine to go. But Lema’aseh the parade is about supporting and endorsing an Assur lifestyle and Issurim Chamurim and we need to protest that.
huju: That comment was probably meant to be nice, but can definitely be read as being exceptionally rude. Maybe you should clarify.
My answer was partly a joke, though it was entirely accurate. On Tishah B’av, however, perfume is Assur, most hold mouthwash is Assur, and deodorant is a Machlokes. On Yom Kippur all three are Assur.
Perfume is Muttar, deodorant is a Chiyuv, and mouthwash is a Machlokes.
dbrim: Clinton has been very pro-Israel her entire career. I dunno where this whole “she’s a pro-Palestinian” thing came from, but I have never understood it.
Oh, so he did. My bad. I missed the G.
I’m confused. Did MA just say that *not* having an iPhone delays Mashiach?
Joseph: That’s true. Then again, if you deny Israel’s existence, the British Mandate won’t let you in.
Joseph: R’ Falk is also a Gaon and a major Talmid Chacham. I didn’t see any personal attacks on him. I saw an attack on his Sefer. There is a claim, in much of the Yeshivish world as well, that his Sefarim on Tznius are meant for a community like Gateshead and are not Halachah L’Ma’aseh for everyone. Either way, I very much agree with the sentiment that the Sefer should not be used by a Ba’alas Teshuvah. Maybe someday someone who already understands and follows Tznius well can move towards it, but it is just not good advice practically for someone to start with it.
catch yourself: I was once at a speech in the South where a relatively well-respected Rabbi got up and said that he was so happy to speak to so many of the community members and see that they knew a lot of Torah, which was so surprising because it’s so far from a major Yeshivah. The city in question here has a well-attended community Kollel and several well-used Shul Beis Midrashes. One of the community members got up and said “Our Rabbis know more Torah than you” and walked out. Several people followed.
I’m honestly not sure if the Rabbis in that community were bigger Talmidei Chachamim than this visiting Rabbi, but the Rabbi definitely insulted the entire community.
Joseph: R’ Yehudah Hertzl is a Gaon and a major Talmid Chacham with a Haskamah from R’ Menasheh Klein (yeah, that shocked me too). We might not hold by him on a lot of things, but he is well-thought-out and explains his Shittos very well.
If every CR member donated 1 Shekel, Joseph might be out millions of dollars.
Copying a paragraph word for word just shows sheer stupidity and lack of any foresight whatsoever.
This is a silly semantics conversation. Joseph is defining Golus by a period in time. Others are defining it as a place. You probably both agree that Eretz Yisrael has some unique Halachos and that Moshiach has not yet arrived.
Because long speeches are much easier to make when you directly copy paragraphs from Michelle Obama.
LF: The Golan winery is pretty cool. And little kids might like Mini Israel. And Ein Gedi is pretty cool also.
Joseph: I would explain it to them. “Jewish law necessitates XYZ, but we want you to be involved so we will give you honor W”. Don’t pretend it’s a big deal when it isn’t.
nisht: My bad. Thanks for clarification.