Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Son of man: Chas V’shalom. The Ra’avad held that corporeality made one an Apikores. His argument was no on corporeality per se. He argued on the Rambam’s comment that one who is mistakenly an Apikores still has no Chelek in Olam Haba.
That aside, there will still Rishonim who held of corporeality. We don’t hold like them. Holding like them would be Apikorsus. But there were Rishonim who held of it (to some extent).
Son of man: You do know that there are Rishonim who read that Passuk and said exactly that. Several Rishonim, not hailing from the Spanish/Sephardic tradition, felt that G-d has some sort of semblance of a physical corporeality because that’s how they read the Pesukim.
mz: The Ibn Ezra has numerous places where he straight-up said Chazal were wrong in interpreting P’sukim, for starters.
Fine, I’ll be nicer this time.
RD: I strongly protest your insinuation that you (or anyone) has a right to decide who “our greatest thinkers” are. And certainly, since your view is based solely on the fact that you often agree with him, it is nothing short of arrogance and idiocy to say such a thing.
nem: 560:3. And it’s Assur even without that according to the Shulchan Aruch. The Rama mentioned the waking up/going to sleep part but presumably if you hold by that then the reason for that Chumra doesn’t apply anymore (see my posts to rob in the music during S’fira thread; it’s the same reason).
Son of Man: The Ibn Ezra is famous for saying this. He clearly didn’t hold it was K’firah.
Bruchi: Yes, but the Mishnah then lists those who have no share. This guy is included on the list. He’s an atheist.
DY: That was *not* the most egregious typo in your post. Auto-correct does funny things sometimes…
Simbin: I would assume, among others, Rav Aharon Lichtenstein, Rav Yehudah Amital ZTZ”L, Rav Aviner, Rav Ariel, Rav Yosef Tzvi Rimon, Rav Zecharya Ben-Shlomo, Rav Avigdor HaLeivi Nebanzahl (not positive what he holds on army service, but I don’t think he’s anti), Rav Zalman Nechemya Goldberg (same as with Rav Nebenzahl), and in America Rav Herchel Schachter, Rav Mordechai Willig, and more. This is just the list off the top of my head.
Brony: Sorry it took so long to respond. It’s basically what Popa said to SecularFrummy, though I obviously get more detailed and in-depth. It works with “long day”, though long day isn’t necessary. Because once you believe that G-d created the world, He could have done it however He wants. So He did it with a system of interconnectedness and a world that looked as if it had developed for billions of years. Why would He do that? Modern medicine is the answer. Hashem gave us the world that He did so that in this day and age we can have the medicine and technology that we are meant to have at this point of our historical development.
Honestly, the fact that the Torah says we were down to 9 humans less than 5000 years ago has stronger questions from science than the first few Perakim of B’reishis do (though, of course, these are answerable as well).
Brony: I can (and have) successfully defended the story of Chumash as told in B’reishis against current scientific theory. Yes, evolution happens. That is in no way a disproof of the story of B’reishis as we believe it.
I just want to point out that you’re being a bit dishonest. In the Yeshivish/Chareidi world, those Gedolim who hold of the army are marginalized and therefore not “mainstream”. You’ve created a tautology. All mainstream Gedolim are anti-army because anyone pro-army is inherently not a mainstream Gadol. I’m not here to compare the qualities of the Gedolei Haposkim in the Dati L’umi versus Chareidi camps (though I think most agree that there are more “Gedolim” in the Chareidi camp). But it is possible to be pro-army service and still be following “Daas Torah”.
I know someone who started saying OMHBH as a joke once. I don’t think it caught on though.
nitpicker: I sort of hear that. But I always assume that people in the cr are looking for discussion, not P’sak. Just like you wouldn’t Pasken based on a conversation with your Chavrusa in the Beis Medrash, so too no one Paskens here, but the discussion is the same type of discussion.
DY: No, because it means people put exorbitant bids on something without even knowing or looking into the fact that it’s worthless.
Avi K: There is so much wrong with your statement I don’t even know where to begin.
Nitpicker: And anyone who wants to Assur anything can keep asking until you find someone who forbids it. Neither one of those is the way of Halachah.
What he doesn’t know (or does know but pretends not to) is that an atheist has no Chelek in Olam Haba whatsoever.
Yaakov: We know who it is. He’s admitted to being a former Chassid who became an Apikores. He has no Chelek in Olam Haba.
Interesting. I read the article on this. The guy promised not to become a bigger Ba’al Aveirah if someone bought this. He also promised not to be Over on anything that costs his Olam Habah (he clearly didn’t know that an Apikores has no Chelek anyway). Maybe there would be a Chiyuv to “buy” it in order to save him from doing more Aveiros in life.
SL1: There are blogs out there which accurately convey the information you’re interested in (or so I’m told, I’m not holding in the whistle-blower-but-pro-Frum blogosphere). He’s not one of them.
Look at the Gemara about Dam Chimud. It’s clear there’s no Dam Chimud when she’s used to seeing him. It’s clear that Dam Chimud comes from being able to see him again after a period of not seeing him. The Minhag actually creates serious Dam Chimud issue, not solves them.
SL1: The failed Moser and Rodeph is not just anti-Chareidi, he’s anti-Frum in general.
DY: They don’t think it’s Muttar. They seem to think that it’s a Mitzvah and that it can be Doche 30+ Asehs and Lo Sa’asehs.
Thank you. When I find the article again and read over it to make sure I still agree with it I’ll give instructions on how to find it and/or paraphrase what it says.
Akuperma: There was a story in Ami about a year ago titled “My husband is an alcoholic” or something like that and I think the women in it said she was Chassidish (I don’t remember the precise details).
So what am I allowed to say? That this can’t be found anywhere in Shulchan Aruch or the Nosei Keilim? That, B’pashtus, not seeing each other when you want to for 7 days could create an issue of Dam Chimud? That there are several well-known stories of people meeting with their Kallah and R’ Moshe for a Brachah less than a week before their wedding? I’m not saying it’s a bad idea or not to do it. But we do need to realize that it’s not a Halachic necessity.
You can say all that.
My post got deleted? Can I add instructions how to Google an article that backs up what I said?
You can quote someone else as saying that. But you cannot say that.
WIY: I think that fact is in a Hanoch Teller book somewhere.
Yekke: SHU”T Binyan Tziyon 1:91 might answer this. It’s certainly related.
It’s a 3-way Machlokes Tannaim. I think we assume it’s from the Passuk in Ki Sisa, “V’hiznu Es Banecha Acharei Eloheihem”, that your kids from a Nochri male are considered yours but not from a Nochri female. (By the way, a small but significant chunk of Rishonim there hold that you need two Jewish parents for a kid to be Jewish. However, that Shittah has been completely rejected and is not even used in the Achronim for such important cases as Hataras Agunos.)
Oh Schrek: Learn the Sugya of Bal Tosif, then ask questions.
Toi: Not on an entire Tzibbor. On potentially one person out of an entire Tzibbor. I think it’s safe to say that in any group of 25000 Frum Jews you have a few people who are not the most upright of character.
DH: Rav Shach used to stand up when his grandson entered the Beis Medrash in his army uniform. I find that quote unlikely.
Ben: I think B’pashtus L’histakel means to look intently. The Gemara had a Hava Amina that even this would be Muttar for a Kallah but it’s not. You can see her though, without staring, and comment on her beauty. But maybe when there are 25,000 people around and you’re the center of attention, even just Stam seeing is too much. (Especially when a lot of people there are those that aren’t your friends or your Chassan’s friends and you have no idea who you are.)
pba: You’re being unfair. An anti-Semite is someone who is prejudiced against Jews solely for their being Jewish. Someone who is prejudiced only against those more religious than him can be called anti-Torah, anti-God, anti-religious, etc. But I think anti-Semite is unfair. Or he could just be a hardcore Misnaged 😛
rob: You’re wrong. That same Gemara says Assur L’histakel Bifnei Kallah Afilu L’chab’va Al Ba’alah, (Kesubus 17a, give or take)
DaMoshe: While you might not be inherently wrong (you are about Bal Tosif, but not about the rest), no one is trumpeting any Halachos here. The Kallah for whatever reason wanted her face covered. She didn’t say it’s a Chiyuv, her father didn’t say it’s a Chiyuv, no one said it’s a Chiyuv. All we know is she covered her face. That’s it.
Oh, and it’s a B’feirush Gemara that it’s Assur L’histakel Bifnei Kallah Afilu L’chab’va Al Baalah.
Toi: Your argument is wrong. Your conclusion might be true, but your argument is inherently flawed. You are telling a woman that she can’t be write because she can’t know what it’s like to be a man. And yet, you can’t know what it’s like to be a woman, so I’m not sure how you can honestly make your claim.
Shopping: Here’s the story. Years ago I once made a screen name and made exactly one post for a specific reason. A few years later I made this screen name and have stuck with it ever since. Am I disqualified?
DH: R’ Yoshe Ber is Rav Yosef Dov HaLeivi Soloveitchik, affectionately called The Rav by many and pejoratively called JB by many.
Toi: That’s because it’s a good story and it wouldn’t go over as well in certain Velts with the name R’ Soloveitchik as with R’ Moshe. But it happened with Rav Yoshe Ber. I have heard several firsthand testimonies to that fact.
I’ll join. Why not? Sounds like fun.
Just Emes: There’s not necessarily an oral “test”, but at the very least he Schmoozes with you in learning. And you need a letter of recommendation from a Rav.
Rebdoniel: You don’t have a monopoly on how to be inspired during Davening. And, while respecting the Shittah of the Maharil, there have always been slight changes and innovations in the Nusach,
Also, the SHU”T Masa’as Binyaim (Siman 6, I think) came way before you in complaining about the Ba’alei K’riah.
HaKatan: You are not defining terms and therefore spreading Sinas Chinam. Give us a direct definition for what you term “the Avodah Zarah of Zionism” and we can discuss it. Everyone agrees secular Zionism was bad. The Netziv was fine with Religious Zionism, and that was back in the 19th century. R’ Moshe didn’t think it was Avodah Zarah as he says a flag isn’t Assur.
Oh, and Rav Ovadia Yosef (he’s pretty universally accepted, no?) says that you should say Hallel on Yom Ha’atzma’ut. See Yabia Omer 5:35 and 6:41. Actually, he says some very nice things about the Medinah there. You might not like it.
Rebdoniel: Your last paragraph is not so wrong. However, applying those statements to Women of the Wall is dishonest. That’s not their purpose. I’ve gotten in trouble here before for saying that a woman can wear a Tallis (under certain circumstances). That’s fine. Women are allowed to do Mitzvos Asei Shehazman G’rama if they want. Ashkenazim would make a Brachah. Sefardim wouldn’t. Nothing wrong with that. That’s not what the Women of the Wall want. They want to destroy Yiddishkeit and as such are among the worst of the Mesisim Um’dichim out there. Harayah they have a space, also along the Kosel, where they can wear a Tallis without being arrested (in the past) and without being harassed. They are ignoring that because their goal is to make a scene and “liberate” the Kosel from a Mechitzah and from Yiddishkeit Bichlal. They are R’shaim Gemurim and your sympathy is wasted on them. Instead have sympathy for others who actually care about following actual Halachah.
Akuperma: Most of the Reform and Conservative Jews I’ve ever known admit that Orthodoxy is what was always done. They just think that that fact doesn’t matter.
The Women of the Wall are R’shaim because they want to cause problems and want to “liberate” the Kosel from Orthodoxy. They were given an area, also along the Kosel, where they can wear Tallis and Tefillin without problems. They’re ignoring it. They are making a political statement in order to be Meisis Umeidiach people away from Torah. If they cared about having a Davening that they feel is more meaningful to them, they would go to the area allotted them. That’s not what they are interested in. They are interested in destroying Judaism. V’al Eileh Amru Moridin V’lo Ma’alin.
Contemporary psychology is wrong on both counts. Half a person is half a person, and thus cannot be as happy as a whole person would be. Women want to be married and a man who is B’li Ishah is B’li Simcha.
Popa: Not really. The Gemara and Rishonim already say that Geirim have a high rate of leaving. That’s not a failure of just Z’man Hazeh.
DH: He is pointing out that in many Chareidi communities there are people who mistreat Geirim. It only takes one person to ruin a welcome to the community for someone who probably is already nervous about fitting in. He might exaggerate how widespread it is, but the end result is the same for the Ger trying to fit in.
Shalom: What on earth are you talking about that you’re not Yotzei with Ado…? A Cholam making an O sound is far more correct than an Oi. Where did you get that “P’sak”?