Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I was bored tonight so I picked my Rivash off the shelf. I opened up to a random page and his T’shuvah (1:118) is about this precise issue. His answer was that Hashem’s knows our possible options and how we will use our Bechira in those options. I’m not sure how it answered the question.
I’m fairly liberal on a lot of things myself, but it really bothers me when people think being “fundamentalist” is a bad thing (in all contexts). All religions are dogmatic and fundamentalist. Judaism is a religion. When you remove the dogma and fundamentalism, you have killed the religion. Deal with it.
And, of course, the great rebdoniel has the authority to Pasken by whatever Rishon he wants on whatever issue, even if that opinion has been roundly rejected by all the Poskim between then and now. It makes sense, after all. That is the Halachic process at Machon Hadar. Find a Shittah that says what you like (or something close to it) and say that that’s the Halachah. That’s how Ethan Tucker justified counting women for a Minyan. He had 1 Mareh Makom supporting him (he dug up a Mor Uktziah) and ignored everyone else. So rd is just doing the same as his Rebbe.
LAB: Sefardi, meaning Spanish, generally only refers to Iberian/North African Jews and their descendants (including those who left Spain after the Expulsion). Many Persian, Syrian, Yemenite, Bucharian, Romaniot, and more are very insulted when they are categorically stereotyped as Sefardim. They have their own Minhagim on many things and, while they are closer to each other than they are to Ashkenazim, deserve to be recognized as such.
Torah: It’s really hard to get Kareis. For almost everyone Frum, Kareis isn’t really a worry.
Gamanit: We know from Persian history that names similar to Mordechai and Ester were relatively common long before the Megillah story.
LAB: You do know that Syrian, Moroccan, and Yemenite Jews don’t refer to themselves as Sefardim, right?
LAB: That’s a Remez. It’s telling us where we can find his part of the story hinted in the Torah. The Gemara is not asking for a Chumash Makor for his name.
We know that the name “Mordoch” was a popular Persian name from before that time. We know that a chief Persian god had a similar name (same with Ester). Mordechai is a Judaicization of the name. Which is what Jews have done for thousands of years (think of the name Isadore for Isaac). They have taken names similar to the surrounding nations so that they could relate when need be-but they altered it slightly to keep themselves distinct.
Ester is even clearer. Once again, we know it was a common Persian name and the name of a leading god. The Megillah even tells us she had a Hebrew name (Haddasah). This was her name that she used when involved with the Goyish neighbors.
I always find that this is so Pashut and simple. I don’t know why people get offended by this. (And then there was the one guy I met who claimed that Persians retroactively changed their histories to include these names of people and gods after Mordechai and Ester were popular.)
TrueBT: Bimchilas K’vodcha, that’s why it’s an awful analogy. Because it’s not true. Some Rishonim do say like that; that Hashem’s knowledge is limited/Hashem limits his own knowledge in order to preserve out Bechira. That would be what makes the most sense to me. Unfortunately, most of the Rabbonim I have asked have said that it is absolute K’fira. So it’s not right.
Giving an analogy that settles people’s minds but it Apikorsus is a bad idea on so many levels. Your analogy hurts more than it helps.
HaLeiVi: I thought the Midrash says explicitly that Toviah is what his mother named him at birth.
LF: I thought it’s a clear Midrash that Moshe is Egyptian (or maybe a Hebraicized version of an Egyptian word). His Hebrew name is Toviah. Mordechai and Ester are also Persian names (or Hebraicized versions thereof).
DY: In a previous life I was a troll-slayer as well.
DY: Right. So that’s stupid, but I don’t know if it’s Apikorsus. He can rely on the Rambam for that.
PBA: I guess you could say this also is, but I actually think it’s the reverse of Poe’s Law. (Poe’s Law is that a troll looks real; the reverse is that a sincere post can look like a troll if the opinion is extreme enough.)
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/vaccinations-are-bad#post-302546
DY: Which implication? I find several. (I don’t know if any are actually Apikorsus, but they are certainly not Jewish ways of thinking.)
LAB: I once met someone named Yedidyah. The nurse wrote Jedidiah on the birth certificate. His parents changed it legally at age 5 or 6 before he started school because they realized it could be quite embarrassing for him.
HaLeiVi: Was that directed at me? I don’t like sticking to Negaim.
DY: That was not the Rambam’s answer. That was how the Ra’avad understood the Rambam. But that’s not what the Rambam meant. Which is why I said that this is the most misunderstood Rambam ever.
PBA: I’m not sure of that. Chazal said 60 days after the T’kufa. Presumably if they were around nowadays they would adjust the Tekufa once every 100 years to stay accurate. We just don’t because we’re worried that we don’t have that Koach.
LF: They can hit you. It was only the big one that made it worse.
DY: Really? How do you read it? He starts by saying that it’s not the way of Chachamim to ask questions [in Ikkarei Emunah] and then not answer them. He clearly thought the Rambam said he didn’t (can’t) know the answer.
LAB: The Ra’avad wouldn’t have brought it up because he did not have a satisfactory answer. However, it is very clear from the first line of that Ra’avad that the Ra’avad thought the Rambam was saying that we can’t know the answer. That’s not what the Rambam said.
Tzaddik: If you want a shocking opinion, look at the Abarbanel on “Som Tasim Alecha Melech”.
Wolf: That’s different, though. There it’s an Iglai Milsa L’mafrea that you never earned it. By Smicha or a “permit”, we are saying that you can have it revoked post-facto, even if it was completely legitimately earned.
HaLeiVi: Re-read your last paragraph. I think you didn’t mean to say what you said. An is should be an isn’t, or something.
LAB: It’s Yadua that the Ra’avad did not understand what the Rambam meant. The Ra’avad’s response to the Rambam shows that the Ra’avad thought the Rambam didn’t answer the question. Really, the Rambam did (and it’s even clearer in the Moreh.)
DY: Because it’s a dangerous Mareh Makom to point out without a proper explanation of what it means alongside it.
Syag: How are they not comparable?
Syag: You missed his point. The point is that it should be impossible to know someone so well as to know exactly what he will do, every single time. If someone did, the person would be no different than the basketball. And if you’re saying that HKBH knows us really, really well, but not perfectly, that’s not tenable either.
HaLeiVi: Doesn’t the Gemara say about Yochanan that it had to be that “Tina Haya B’libo” because otherwise it’s not possible?
HaLeiVi: Inspired as in the beauty of a song makes someone want to better themself. And, for a Frum Jew, bettering oneself means learning more and doing more Mitzvos, etc.
LAB: No. Ask someone to explain the Rambam at the end of the 5th Perek. That is one of the most misunderstood Rambam’s out there. Even the Ra’avad didn’t understand what he was saying.
Oomis: That is basically what R’ Saadia and the Ra’avad say. Poshut P’shat is that the Rambam would think it’s Apikorsus.
DY: That’s a Machlokes between the Abudraham and the Noda Bihuda.
HaLeiVi: Of course not. I was giving an example to prove my point.
DY: Maybe it’s not entirely subjective, but there are levels of subjectivity. Some of the most inspiring songs from my childhood are probably not things that others would be inspired by (I still draw inspiration from singing a song from the Little Mermaid to myself). There might be some objectivity, sure. But there’s a lot of subjectivity in there as well.
DY: Right. That makes perfect sense. That’s what I thought. It’s not what WIY was saying though. He was saying that it’s inherent–music written by a bad person is inherently spiritually harmful.
WIY: I just remembered, I’m pretty sure that R’ Matisyahu Salomon says explicitly not like you in the Matnas Chaim on Purim.
DY: No. Have you? What don’t I know here?
WIY: I think that’s patently ridiculous. Does eating a recipe made by a spiritually negative person have a negative impact on you?
And even if you’re right (which I’m not agreeing to in the slightest), you need to prove that it’s the composer that matters. Maybe it’s just the person playing it. Which isn’t Shayach to a recording. You need to bring a Makor for your general concept and that this spiritual P’gam stays in the composition forever.
PBA: I believe R’ Moshe has a T’shuvah like that, where he says Kol Isha of a P’nuya is Muttar. Or maybe that’s a Hava Amina and he backs out of it out of respect for the Mishnah B’rurah? I don’t remember. (I think we assume the earliest age we need to worry about there being a Mi’ut Hamatzui of girls hitting puberty is 9 or 10.)
WIY: That’s ridiculous. People come up with similar musical compositions all the time.
HaLeiVi: Please elaborate the Rambam’s Shittah on Hashgacha Pratis then. He’s pretty Mefurash. And just because it’s not Shagur B’fi Kol doesn’t mean it was abandoned. Presumably people know the Rambam’s Hashkafas on everything because people always learned all of the Rambam’s Sefarim.
WIY: The Rambam is generally considered the basis for our Shittos (even Ashkenazims’) on Ikkarei Emunah. So it bothers me when he’s thrown out the window.
jbaldy: See the Nitei Gavriel on this (I think it’s in his Halachos of the 3 weeks).
WIY: I’ve still yet to see an actual Makor for you “music entering the soul” bit. Do you honestly believe that I could listen to 2 identical songs–with the exact same notes, lyrics, etc.–and yet be positively affected by one but negatively by another because they were written contemporaneously by different people?
I thought that was funny but fear the poster may not 🙂
DY: I just read a very interesting Seforim Blog article where he quotes two of R’ Ovadia’s sons on the Ashkenazi becoming Sefardi issue. The title is R’ Shlomo Zeven, Kitniyot, R’ Judah Mintz, and More. (You might not enjoy the first half of the article, but I found that intriguing as well.)
It doesn’t bother me when people believe these stories. Presumably some happened and some didn’t. Whether or not they actually happened is irrelevant as hopefully the message gets through. (And yes, when the only message of a story is “look at how great this Rabbi is/was” then I tend to ignore it; I don’t need apocryphal stories to tell me the greatness of Gedolim-their Torah does that.)
What does bother me is when people think that someone who doesn’t believe these stories has a P’gam in their Emunah.
It also bothers me that someone who would say the Rambam’s definition of Hashgacha Pratis would probably be shouted down as an Apikores nowadays.
LAB: You don’t at all hear a S’vara that being courteous to him may help him become religious in the future? Also, he’s doing the same Chillul Shabbos no matter what. I’m not helping him by giving directions. I believe the Tzitz Eliezer mentions interjections point that if you know the shortest way you should tell him so as to be M’ma’eit his Chillul Shabbos because now he’ll drive less.
Oh, and I think your definition of Dan L’chaf Z’chus is a Gemara in Shabbos (117bish).
DY: “Spiritually uplifting” is entirely subjective. I’m sure there are many people who find secular songs more inspiring than any Jewish song.
business: There is no Issur if the song is entirely clean (assuming there are no Kol Isha issues). That being said, losing internal struggles with oneself never bodes well for one’s future internal struggles. If you are going to hold that clean non-Jewish music is okay, you need to do so because you have honestly researched and determined it’s okay (in addition to having a P’sak from a Rav that it’s okay), and not just because it’s a way for you to get what you want.
EDIT: What I meant to say is that a clean non-Jewish song is just as Muttar as any Jewish song is.
DY: We could argue on M’tzius all day. I do not deny that there are people who do as you say (though it’s probably combined with a belief that Sefardi Havara is more legitimate), but I don’t know if they’re the majority in the “Modern Orthodox” community.
The P’sak doesn’t make sense to me either, but I’m pretty sure it’s in the Yabia Omer. It was well-known that R’ Ovadia thought that all Ashkenazim should switch to being S’fardim anyway, so I’m not sure why it would be surprising.
DY: There were many Poskim (I believe R’ Ovadia included) that felt that Ashkenazim in E”Y should switch over the the S’fardi pronunciation because that’s the Minhag in Eretz Yisrael. I think the “Modern Orthodox” who say Taf isn’t a show of solidarity with E”Y. It’s because many members of the community became Frum in or because of a connection to E”Y and therefore spoke like E”Y. I think you’ll find that those “Modern Orthodox” people who have been Frum for 4 or more generations all say “Saf”. (Even the majority of Talmidim in “Modern” American Yeshivos in E”Y like Gush, KBY, etc. say Saf.)
Oh, and Krias Sh’ma is Ne’emeres B’kol Lashon so that’s not a ra’ayah.
DY: Neither. When relevant issues come up in Chumash or Gemara, say “The Rishonim disagree about this, but the generally accepted answer is…”. When someone is old enough to understand Machloksim in Ikkarei Emunah (Achar Shemilei K’reiso Shas UPoskim) he can start learning the actual Shittos and they’re Ra’ayos.
LAB: That’s a statement by the Rambam (R’ Avraham Ben HaRambam?) about Midrashim. It might be stupid to believe none (or all) of them, but it certainly isn’t K’firah to believe none.
DY: Megillah isn’t a problem because at worst we’re Loazim B’la’az. The interesting question I’ve always had is Birchas Kohanim.