Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
tvor: Ma’aser K’safim, B’pashtus, is an Chiyuv D’rabannan.
Yitzchokm: I’m not denying Dina D’malchusa nor the fact that it applies more widely than some people think (I think we’ve had this discussion before). I’m just saying that American tax law is not the same as the Chiyuv of Ma’aser Kesafim.
HaKatan: Interesting. I know many people who would call it Kefirah to say that life and death exists at all Al Pi Derech Hateva and that it’s not all B’yad Hashem. (I think that B’pashtus it’s a Machlokes Rishonim.)
Oh, and pretty strong correlations can be drawn to the success of the Kiruv movement (in both America and Israel) to the Nissim G’luyim that we saw in the 6-day war.
PBA: Because Halachah isn’t dictated by American tax law?
jbaldy: We clearly don’t hold that way. See our Nusach Hatefillah.
Fink’s blog is interesting in its uniqueness. It’s not anti-Chareidi (not really, at least) or against any type of Frumkeit other than his own. It just seems that way sometimes because of how stupid it is.
DH: The simple answer is that the high schooler doesn’t know what he’s going to do for a Parnassah with his life and therefore we should teach the minimum (math and English, and maybe biology too) that will give him a wide enough array of options for when he needs to actually earn that Parnassah.
Daniel Rosen: You misread the case (I think; it’s slightly ambiguous but neither is the way you read it). The person is supported by their parents and got presents for their wedding. Of course they have to give Ma’aser on those presents. If they received money from Tzedaka Davka for the wedding then there might be what to discuss.
By wedding money do you mean money received to help pay for the wedding or do you mean wedding presents?
147: … The Kosel isn’t part of the Beis Hamikdash. It’s part of the retaining wall of Har HaBayis, which survives in its entirety.
Popa: In general, castigations get spread a lot more quickly and easily then retractions, especially on the internet. Even among the more Yeshivish, the internet loves rabble-rousing. Quieting the inflamed rabble isn’t fun. So any retraction by definition wouldn’t get nearly as much publicity as an attack. And, as such, assuming that we would hear of any retraction is a bad assumption.
DY: I don’t remember if he used the word “Apikorsus” or “Kefirah”. He did hold that saying a Rishon could be wrong, about anything, was actual “Kefirah”. Needless to say, he was quite wrong. That was meant to be an amusing anecdote, not to prove any point.
DY: Yes, but “inherently” anything is always subjective. If the Amazons actually existed (they didn’t, but the point is that they or a society like them could have) they would have thought that weapons were inherently feminine. In parts of ancient Egypt, women shaved themselves bald. Hair on the head was “inherently masculine”. There has to be something that’s Kovea what is inherently masculine and what is inherently feminine. Because common sense, like male and female accoutrements, can change with the times.
DY: I think contemporary people (especially Chassidim) apply Sod Hashem Lireiav to Gedolim today. But that’s not relevant. I think you need to prove that Sod Hashem Lireiav means they know everything. As far as I know, the Gemara only brings it up in applications where it’s relevant Halachah L’ma’aseh. In those cases they knew advanced sciences. And even then we still sometimes have to say Nishtaneh Hateva. Once again, it’s arrogant and idiotic to search out places or try to attempt to prove Chazal wrong. But I don’t think there’s any harm in acknowledging that at times they listened to the scientists of their day, who could be wrong (see the Machloksim between the Chachamim and the scientists in Pesachim 93ish, I think).
Derech Agav, I had a Rebbe in 8th grade who said it’s Apikorsus to say that Rishonim made a mistake. He did not remain my Rebbe very long after I forced him to admit that he held that the Earth was flat in the times of Rashi, round when the Ba’al Hama’or said it’s round, and flat again in the times of the Rashba.
Also, I have always thought that the Machlokes in the Gemara Megillah 7a, as to whether Hodu and Kush were on opposite ends of the earth or next to each other was a Machlokes as to whether the earth is flat or round.
Just my hapence: He seems to be assuming that that action was either done by women Mimei Kedem or that somehow Stimas Hatalmud was Kovea what is considered men’s and women’s actions (the Chazon Ish has a similar Shittah about a lot of things, so it’s not as strange as it might sound at first blush).
DY: I don’t think that’s the minority view. I think that, to some extent (especially where it’s not relevant L’ma’aseh) it’s a majority view, and certainly by Refuos where everyone holds like R’ Avraham Ben HaRambam quoting his father.
Rational: It’s funny you mention Taharas Hamishpachah. Dr. Elman holds that most of the Minhagim of Niddah are taken from the Zeroastrians. (He may not be wrong on that entirely and it’s hinted in the Gemara, but he takes his opinion way, way too far.)
Charlie: I have spoken to Dr. Elman personally on several occasions and have an extreme respect for his Torah knowledge. That is the only reason I don’t speak against him in sharper terms than “he probably crosses the line”. If anyone less knowledgeable than him would say the same things as he does I would call them an Apikores and walk away, no questions asked.
Just my hapence: With all due respect, you read the Rashba wrong. He explicitly rejected the possibility that it changes with the times. He brings that as the likely P’shat then said “V’eino Mechuvar”.
Rational: Read Yaakov Elman’s works. Then realize that you’re saying just like him. And realize that he has almost definitely crossed the border into Apikorsus.
It is not an Ikkar Emunah to say that Chazal knew all of science. It is, however, an Ikkar Emunah that all Dinim remain the same L’olam Va’ed (until we have a Sanhedrin that can argue on Chazal). Because, among other things, you just pragmatically no longer have a Halachic system when anything or even everything can be disregarded as “no longer relevant”.
Charlie: The Rav did not put that in writing and it is a big Machlokes between Marc Shapiro and everyone else whether he actually held that. The vast majority of his Talmidim say that he didn’t.
Charliehall: Because these contemporary Rabbonim assumed that pants were solely a man’s clothing Mimei Kedem. I think one of them was quoted in an old thread on here, actually.
DY: Look in his T’shuvah on looking in mirrors, I think he mentions it there.
42: Aw, was that in respect for Yom Yerushalayim? 😛 A very 147-like post indeed!
DY: The Nosie Keilim (either there or in other random places) as well as several contemporary SHU”Tim (I think R’ Moshe has one on this) point out that even that can change with the times.
DY: Once again, I’m not disagreeing with that. But I think that saying that Chazal made Dinim based on the value system of their times and that those value systems have changed isn’t K’firah. Stupid, yes. But probably not K’firah.
DY: I have heard it used by 3 contemporary Rabbis as a source that pants stay Begged Ish L’olam Va’ed.
DY: No, because there are still Shittos like the Rashba out there. They were rejected from normative P’sak, but they exist. Thus, to protect from Pritzas Geder, they can elevate the rejected Shittos to the accepted Shittos (the Gemara even does this sometimes).
Ben: There’s two De’os in Tosfos on that.
DY: I don’t know that it would be a wholly illegitimate opinion to say that things like Kavod Hatzibur are of the same status as psychological Umd’nos that are inherently subjective (e.g. Ein Adam Me’iz Panav Bifnei Ba’al Chovo) which we Pasken can change, at least in some cases. I agree that it’s a very foolish and arrogant thing to say that we can know for sure the precise psychological reasons for certain Takanos and to say that today is completely different so much to the point that it completely doesn’t apply. But I don’t think the thought process is inherently entirely illegitimate.
DY: Rav Soloveitchik was famous for his Shittah that anything that another branch of Judaism tries to change and make a tenet of their religion becomes Yeihareg V’al Ya’avor. He has Gemaras and Rishonim to prove this.
There is actually a massive legal issue as Jewish women cannot receive tax exemptions for parsonage because, by definition, they cannot be clergy.
DY: I agree it’s shaky ground. But it’s Shver when major Poskim start working around a pretty clear and B’feirush Shulchan Aruch. I think this is the most sensible explanation, and not that that changes the Halachic authority given by those decisions in the slightest.
(The Chassam Sofer has a T’shuvah where he says that one is allowed to exaggerate an Issur Derech M’litzah if he sees that it is being trampled upon.)
DY: I did retract immediately. I have heard other reasons why boxer shorts are not preferable, actually, and it’s a good reason.
WIY: I think they have. They can turn a stem cell from a woman’s lymph nodes and turn it into a sperm cell, which they can then impregnate her (or any other woman, really) with.
ROB: Niddah 13b 4 lines from the bottom and A”H 23:7.
ROB: Fine. I’ll actually look it up. It’s a random Mareh Makom. I’ll find them both again, I guess. Sorry. All the Mareh Mekomos I give here are guestimates anyway.
WIY: You’re clearly not up on the latest sceince. Women can have children without men now.
PBA: I don’t like YCT in the slightest either, but I think you’re greatly exaggerating what they say. I don’t think they’re that bad-yet. The near future will tell if they stay in the fold or move the way JTS did. I personally expect a JTS-type move, but I still hope that it doesn’t happen.
WIY: Without being specific about the topic, I believe the Gemara is Niddah 13a. It says B’feirush that “Michnasayim” are Assur for a man to wear. See the Aruch Hashulchan (in Even Ha’ezer 21, I think, maybe S”K 13) who defines “Michnasayim” based on earlier Poskim in a way that makes a lot more sense than saying that “pants are Assur”.
DY: Without being really Ma’amik into this Inyan, suffice it to say that the Mechaber is pretty B’feirush like Yitay said. These Poskim were clearly adding “Tznifim Lehachmir” because they were trying to fix a Geder that was being trampled upon. Also, even if pants stayed a Kli Gever back then it’s nearly impossible to say they are one now.
(See SHU”T HaRashba 4:90, by the way, where anyone who studies history can tell you should hold that pants are an Issur D’oraisa of Beged Isha for men to wear and dresses (which are very similar to tunics) could be an Issur D’oraisa of Begged Ish for a woman to wear.)
The Gemara says B’feirush that it’s Assur for men to wear pants.
Everyone agrees that baggy pants are better than a short, tight skirt. But being the lesser of two evils doesn’t make something good or okay.
For the record, I commend Vogue on her incredible pun. Also, take a look in the Ishei HaTanach and the Mekoros it quotes.
PBA: YCT still gets to point to Machon Hadar as being to the left of them.
Awww, the guys only thread only for girls was deleted. I wanted to comment that apparently according to thegra I belonged there. Or here. Or wherever my confused mind is trying to take this joke…
DY: I disagree. Before the war, when the average Baal Habayis was much more learned (well, he was in the pre-war years until recently), the Aruch Hashulchan was much more popular as a Halachah Sefer because it spoke to the average Baal Habayis much more. In post-war years, they went with the M”B which is overall simpler.
DY: I don’t know if the Shulchan Aruch HaRav mentions a Shiur. But, as far as I recall, the Mechaber says 4 Beitzim.
One slice of New York pizza is more than the Shiur mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch that is required for Kvias Seduah for Pas Haba’ah B’kisnin (then again, so are most decently large slices of a heavy cake).
DY: The Rambam said it. Many Achronim go out of their way to prove we don’t hold like him. But he very clearly said it. Also, if you read his letters, you see that he explains that he didn’t do that.
And the Mishnah B’rurah is clearly accepted on many things, mostly due to being the most convenient resource. There are many places with many Minhagim otherwise. My father told me he has seen with his own eyes where Shuls and communities have changed their Minhagim because the Rav didn’t know their Minhag so just went with the Mishnah B’rurah when anyone in the community would have told you that the Minhag is otherwise (e.g. who Davens for the Amud when there’s a Yahrtzeit and a Shloshim in the Shul). I won’t say that you’re doing wrong if you’re going with the M”B, Chas V’shalom. But I think it is quite a stretch to say that all of K’lal Yisrael has accepted all of the Mishnah B’rurah. If that were true, no one would ever learn any other Halachah Seforim anymore. Also, the vast majority of people don’t know how to properly read the Mishnah B’rurah or what to do when they find a Stirah.
We were given Sh’loshah Y’mei Hagbalah in order for the women to be Tahor at Mattan Torah.
recipes: Klal Yisrael has accepted his P’sak? He is certainly the most widely-learned Sefer as an introduction to Halachah. I didn’t know that that means that we’ve all accepted his P’sak. R’ Moshe, of whom I think we can also say Klal Yisrael in America has accepted his P’sak, only learned a Mishnah B’rurah when a Shoel was M’tzayin it. Don’t just make assumptions into how the Olam Paskens based on what you see in one Sefer, no matter what that Sefer is. Halachah is much more than just finding a major Posek to quote. (See, however, the Rambam’s introduction to the Mishnah Torah, though I think that the Pashtus of it is a misreading based off of the Moreh.)
It really depends. Tiny pizza roll type things or the small triangles that I’ve seen in Israel are probably Mezonos. But it’s very difficult to say that regular pizza is Mezonos. Those who claim “I’m only eating it as a snack” are most likely giving a cop out. A slice of pizza is a meal. Just because we are spoiled and make ourselves fat and want 1000 calories as a meal doesn’t change the fact that a single slice is a meal.
And recipes, don’t just say “the Halachah is…”. This is a major Machlokes Achronim which has tremendous Nafka Minos. Look at the Ma’amar Mordechai there where he explains the Shittah of the Mechaber.