Sam2

Burnt Steak: The winner will be ahead of Ohio State but not Oregon. Not a chance (well, maybe a slight chance that Clemson can in the BCS because the computers hate Oregon right now but definitely not in the polls).

twisted: I’m familiar with the Sugya. It’s still not so clear to me that this is anything more than a Chumra and that some cases (your Murkav Bidei Shamayim, for example) might not be worth worrying about.

frumnotyeshivish: How do you explain the Rambam Paskening against HaKadosh Baruch Hu in Yevamos 63? You need to figure out a little more about Lo BaShamayim Hi.

It’s a complicated issue, for sure. And I don’t claim to have any good all-encompassing P’shat (which I usually think I have on these Hashkafic type of Inyanim). But I think you are being a little too simplistic here, not that it matters. There’s nothing wrong with your opinion. I just think it needs a little more nuance to be entirely accurate.

Chcham is basically just saying over the Rambam. If she believes it’s Avodah Zarah, though, that’s still bad.

Oomis: Even though there is no Aveilus and no Shivah, the logic from above should still apply. Such a person probably needs more Z’chuyos anyway.

DY: I believe that R’ Schachter explains that the Torah was given to human beings with an inborn (and imperfect) sense of right and wrong. We have to learn the Torah to hone that sense. But the fact is that some things that work Al Pi Din Torah don’t work in an imperfect society. If human beings were all perfect then we could follow the letter of the Dinei HaTorah with no problem. But we aren’t. So we have concepts like Lifnim MiShuras HaDin and G’zeiros D’rabannan in general. So while Halachah might be the ultimate morality for a perfect society, the fact is that there are some cases where the Halachah does not accurately represent the morality of an imperfect world.

Akuperma: You’re still being silly. Why wouldn’t the proper pronunciation be part of the Mesorah just like vowels are?

Wolf: I believe that you yourself have pointed out the inherent paradoxes involved in phrases like, “Someone who says Ashrei 3 times every day automatically goes to Olam Haba”. So why would this be any different? Nothing in this universe (from our point of view) is absolute. Chazal made absolute statements that were true 99.99% of the time. There can always be exceptions. If this happens to be one of them, then saying Kaddish would certainly help. And even if the person has no Chelek, maybe the extra Z’chuyos would make his Din easier, whatever that means.

It’s a Machlokes Achronim. There S’vara that they can still gain some type of Z’chuyos is a stron S’vara, especially because we don’t know the Cheshbonos of the Ribbono Shel Olam.

Ginzberg’s Legends of the Jews is pretty much just an accurate translation of Midrashim. It should be fine to read.

Correct meaning what was said at Sinai? Probably close to a “th” (as in “with”; the “th” as in “the” is a Dalet). Correct according to your Mesorah? Whatever your Mesorah is. There were 12 paths through the Yam Suf, all of which were the same. So too as long as you have a legitimate Mesorah you can pronounce it any way you want. (The current Yeshivish “oy” for a Cholam, which started about 100 years ago, may not constitute a legitimate Mesorah. The Litvish “A” for a Cholam, on the other hand, certainly does.)

Christopher Columbus was not a Marrano. Or a converso. He was a Catholic from birth and a terrible human being and role model for children. He single-handedly enslaved two continents, almost wiping out one of them.

In theory, it depends. In reality, it is quite difficult to prove that a Get was Meuseh (and that he still did not give it B’lev Shalem; M’useh by itself is only a P’sul D’rabannan so we would throw every Kula in the book and more at the case to make sure the kids aren’t Mamzerim) and the burden of proof is entirely on the former husband. Therefore, while in theory it could create Mamzerim, such a case occurring L’ma’aseh would be incredibly rare.

ultimaterock: Most assume the Issur is 3D (because the Gemara explicitly states that), but some Achronim are still Machmir, if I recall correctly.

Also, many in previous generations (it’s not so Shayach nowadays) were Makpid Al Pi Kaballah to not have their picture taken. That is why there is only one picture of the Chafetz Chaim (for his passport) and he covered half his face.

R’ Moshe was Mapkid to never have his picture taken until one summer when he was learning in the mountains or a camp or something for his vacation (like most Gedolim used to do). Many guys wanted to take his picture and R’ Moshe refused. R’ Moshe asked a few people why the Bochurim wanted his picture. They said they wanted to put it on their walls. R’ Moshe was shocked and then asked what they would put up instead now that he refused. Someone told him that they would probably hang up pictures of baseball players. R’ Moshe said better him than the baseball players and from then on allowed his picture to be taken. (Told firsthand by my grandfather, who spent that summer helping take care of anything R’ Moshe needed.)

Feif: I will tell you the difference, and it is clear as day. There are/were major, major Rabbonim who strongly disagreed, even on a personal level, with R’ Tendler (heck, even major “Modern” Rabbonim think he goes too far sometimes) and R’ Soloveitchik (though there were very, very few Rabbonim of a high caliber that attacked him), among others. No one of any caliber attacked R’ Yoel on a personal level. You can critique his opinions, but not him personally.

Personal attacks against R’ Kook should not be allowed to stand though. He was the nearly-undisputed Posek HaDor. You can argue with his Shittos, but attacking him personally costs you your Chelek in Olam Haba.

As long as the scarecrow has an entirely flat face I think it’s okay, though some Poskim would be Machmir in that case.

There is an Issur D’Oraisa of Lo Sa’asun Iti, which we assume means (in very un-Maimonidean fashion) that one cannot make a Tzurah of a human face.

(BTW HaLeiVi, if you want proof of Rashi’s corporealism see what he says on Lo Sa’asun Iti, Al Tikri Iti Ela Osi on the Gemara in Avodah Zarah. It doesn’t get much more B’feirush than that.)

showjow: Yes, but this was not a case in which that Gemara applies.

Adam: That is a minority opinion. But you are right, I shouldn’t have stated so definitively. It definitely is a matter of debate among the Poskim.

I’m not going to comment on the veracity of these statements, but why on Earth would being M’kayeim a Mitzvah D’oraisa cause Tzaros?

Akuperma: There was a major study on this published less than a week ago. I’m not saying whether it’s accurate or not, but it deserves to be mentioned.

Chacham: No. They wouldn’t have a Yerusha in Eretz Yisrael. However, a recent study indicates a strong portion of Ashkenazi Jews have Indo-European matrilineal descent and are Near-eastern patrilinially, which would not be an issue of this.

Mods, can we change the title? The Minhag is to not keep the added name if the person passed away from the illness for which the name was added.

That being said, one cannot truly appreciate the Gadlus of R’ Ovadia until one has read his T’shuvos. People who base his Gadlus off his P’sakim and his political activism (he reinvigorated the Sephardic world-through Torah-in an unprecedented way since the Expulsion). Similarly, people who think he just knew every opinion and counted the majority on each issue cannot appreciate his level of learning. He was not just a computer counting opinions.

One cannot understand the depths of his learning-the way he used those thousands of sources to weave a brilliant and beautiful tapestry on each and every minute Halachic issue until one reads the T’shuvos in the Yabia Omer. (The Yechaveh Da’as and his other Seforim are easier to read through and therefore show this ability less.) These T’shuvos themselves show how beautiful Torah is more than just about anything else I’ve ever learned.

It is said in the name of R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach that had R’ Ovadia lived 100 years earlier, he would have still been a Gadol. That was a necessary statement for R’ Shlomo Zalman to say 50 years ago, when R’ Ovadia was just beginning to build worldwide acclaim as a Gaon Olam. Nowadays, though, it is immediately obvious to anyone who learns his writings that his level of Gadlus would have been appreciated in any generation.

R’ Ovadia Yosef had the third-biggest Seforim library in the world, had extreme vision problems for many years, and yet he still knew every Sefer in his library Ba’al Peh. Nevertheless, he was an incredible Masmid, devoting every second available to learning Torah. He managed to do this even with the exhausting demands of leading a massive Tzibbur.

My Rebbe once told a story about R’ Akiva Eiger. He was once traveling and was forced to stay at an inn. The innkeeper only had one Sefer to give him. It was a Chiddushei HaRashba Al HaShas. When R’ Akiva Eiger left, the innkeeper noticed that his bed had not been slept in and that several pages missing from the Rashba had been written in by hand. What is the point of this story? That R’ Akiva Eiger knew the Rashba by heart? There have been Talmidei Chachamim throughout even recent generations that knew the Rashba by heart (including R’ Ovadia). No, the lesson is that even though R’ Akiva Eiger knew it by heart, he still stayed up all night learning it. That is a true lesson to learn from the Hasmadah of R’ Ovadia. We may never be blessed with his incredible memory. But we can strive to be as devoted to learning Torah as he was-especially because we don’t have that memory.

One story about R’ Ovadia to close this. R’ Soloveitchik was once considered to be the Chief Rabbi of Israel and, therefore, went through the country giving Shiurim in 1935. One Shiur was in a Kollel in Chaifa (maybe Tel Aviv; I’m not positive which city). The Rav wanted to make a Diyuk from a Rashba at the beginning of Bava Kama (Bava Metzia?) but, unfortunately, there was no copy in the Kollel. One of the Avreichim asked the Rav which Rashba it was and that he would recite the Rashba by heart so that the Rav would make his Diyuk. Rabbi Genack did some research, found out which Kollel it was, and asked R’ David Yosef if his father happened to be in that Kollel at that time, to which R’ David Yosef responded in the affirmative. R’ Ovadia was confident that he knew the Rashba Ba’al Peh even back in 1935- when he was only 25 years old!

HaLeiVi: There is a T’shuvah in the Yaskil Avdi discussing this. I think in Chelek 4. I know R’ Schachter is very unhappy with the concept though. He thinks like you.

yytz: I think he was referring to the line, “In order to be a Meilitz between him and HKBH”.

It might be mainstream Hashkafa, but that doesn’t change the fact that the Rambam seems to have thought it’s Apikorsus. The Rambam probably would have said the Zohar was Apikorsus if he saw it.

It is better for the tribes if we assume that all of these groups aren’t Jewish, even if some might actually be.