Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
PBA: That solution to the Agunah problem was proposed by Frum Rabbonim in the past as well.
And Rabbi Linzer (my Rav says that he is still Frum and worthy of the title) admits that it doesn’t mean anything. The whole point of the double-ring ceremony is to make the woman feel good about herself. He even says that you have to explain this because he points out some problems in the Kiddushin if they think that she needs to give a ring as well.
Mdd: How many times do I have to remind you that I’ve never once claimed to go to YU. And yes, Rav Teitz was a respected and major Posek for many years. He even has several T’shuvos in the Igros Moshe addressed to him.
Rational: It is incredibly, incredibly difficult to ever even advise anyone to Pasken against Rav Moshe in America. I once mentioned to my Rabbi (and he said that what I said makes a lot of sense) that the only time where it would be okay to use a 10 Tefach Mechitzah would be if the Shul had had a MInhag to use such a Mechitzah from before the time when Rav Moshe was the Posek HaDor. But I can’t see a reason that a new Shul nowadays would be allowed to go against Rav Moshe unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances. (e.g. I know of an old age home that relies on a 10 Tefach Mechitzah because the vast majority of women there are in wheelchairs and they want the Mechitzah low enough that the women don’t feel completely boxed in.)
Torah: There is a certain level of respect that we must have for our connection to HKBH. Just like you wouldn’t send a maimed person as a messenger to a human king (even if that king himself had caused the blemish) so too is it inappropriate for a blemished person to represent us before Hashem. It is a lack of respect for Hashem and His Avodah.
Daniel: Let me ask you something. That Rambam says that a Talmid Chacham shouldn’t make it appear as if he is a member of the wealthy class. Where does he say that a Member of the wealthy class shouldn’t look that way?
Torah: I once heard a very Choshuv Talmid Chacham say that he thinks that the obsession that some have with how much to cover and skirt lengths and stocking thickness is itself a lack of Tznius.
WIY: Rav Teitz was famous for his Tefach Heter.
It was 1:39, my bad. And ROB, while R’ Moshe’s fact that it is a Din D’Oraisa is a big Chiddush, it makes a lot of sense and R’ Moshe is certainly capable of having Chiddushim. You can ask questions on it, but you cannot dismiss it out of hand. Also, if you want to hold that you need 10 Tefachim and a real Havdalas Reshus for Mechitzah, then you are Chayav Misah for making a Mechitzah of any type on Shabbos. If you want to hold that way, Takanascha Zo Hi Kalkalascha.
HaLeiVi: Interesting. The other Girsa (the correct one, most likely) is Eruvei T’chumin. Which still means he kept Shabbos. Good point.
R’ Moshe’s proof that it’s D’Oraisa is quite interesting. Take a look at OC 1:26, I believe. That being said, there are major Poskim that held 10 Tefachim. It’s difficult to tell a Shul they are doing something wrong by relying on those Poskim. Whether or not you should personally Daven there is another matter entirely.
Daniel: Interesting. First of all, that Rambam is talking Davka about a Talmid Chacham because the Torah will be Bezuyah if he acts improperly. Thus, for an average person there isn’t the same problem. Second of all, these aren’t quite Issurim. If the Rambam had meant them as Issurim, he would use the word Assur. He doesn’t. Third of all, you should read that entire Halachah that you quoted. He says that just like a Talmid Chacham should not look as if he is overly rich, so too he should not look as if he is overly poor.
In my experience with many, many people, it is much more often that unhappiness leads to a lack of Emunah than the other way around.
Daniel: When you give me a Halachic work Assering buying expensive things, I’ll start listening to you (citing the Rambam you just quoted would help). Until then, you found a line in a Mussar Sefer (albeit the most prominent of Mussar Seforim) and decided to create a new Issur out of it. Something tells me that you missed the point of Mussar.
HaLeiVi: I expected better from you. I thought about explicitly stating it in my last post but I was hoping people knew it on their own. The Mitzvah to eat Matzos has nothing to do with the story of Yetziyas Mitzrayim. The Issur Chametz has nothing to do with any historical fact about leaving Egypt. (And, unless you assume it was Leil Haseder, the reason they had Matzos was because bread was Assur, not because the Matzah itself was a Mitzvah.) This is clear in the Pesukim as the Mitzvos of Chametz and Matzah were given before they had to flee Egypt.
Also, the Achronim (there’s a T’shuvah in the 21st or 22nd Chelek of the Tzitz Eliezer that quotes these) bring down a few Mitzvos that require a special Kavanah because they Torah requires something more than just doing them, including Tzitzis (Urisem Uzchartem) and Sukkah (L’ma’an Yeid’u Doroseichem). Matzah does not have an additional level of Kavanah necessary for remembering the bread when we left Egypt. That part of Matzah, the Vayofu Es Habatzek, is part of the Mitzvah of Sippur Yetzias Mitzrayim at the Seder, not part of the Mitzvah of Matzah.
Daniel: Do you know what Mesilas Yesharim is? Have you ever opened it up? It is a level-by-level guide to growing. So tell me, in which level is the statement you quoted? Because not every step in there is for everyone immediately.
Daniel: Mesilas Yesharim is not Halachah. It is a very good outlook on life and is (if you even read the entire Sefer) meant to be done in steps. So who are you to tell others where they’re holding by? Maybe they aren’t at Prishus yet?
Also, not one Orthodox Rabbi?? I guarantee you I can find you many, many Orthodox Rabbonim who think it’s ridiculous to tell others how to spend their money from an anonymous message board.
Mitzvos based on historical precedent (such as Sukkah) don’t make sense for the Avos to have kept. Lulav, on the other hand, there is no reason to think that they didn’t. The Midrash tells us that the Avos kept all of the Mitzvos (D’Oraisos or D’rabannans, depending on your Girsa). Obviously Avraham didn’t have a Bris until Hashem told him to. Thus, there are exceptions where it’s clear from Chumash that the Avos couldn’t have kept it. (Shabbos, for example, they probably didn’t keep because Hashem told B’nei Yisrael in the Midbar that it was an Os between Him and them; thus it probably wasn’t kept before then.) Sukkos, which is L’ma’an Yeid’u Doroseichem about the Midbar doesn’t make sense for them to have kept. They obviously weren’t Mekayim appointing a Melech or building a Beis Hamikdash either, etc.
Grois: Ummm, yes you can. That’s basically how P’sak Halachah works for Ashkenazim. As long as the Achronim don’t all team up and disagree, you’re always safe L’ma’aseh with the Rema. And the Mishnah B’rurah would bring down if this was such a scenario. It’s not.
PBA: Well, if you really hold like the Levush then the Heter has nothing to do with Kavod Shabbos. And there is fairly strong reason to believe that the Levush knew the Rema’s reasons better than the later Achronim did. Still, it’s hard to go like a Levush against a majority like this.
There’s no Issur here. This is ridiculous. I’ll go stand at a street corner and start giving Tochachah about how people breathe too often. This is just silly. Read the introduction to Mesilas Yesharim. Nothing in there is an obligation or a Halachic statement.
Yekke: In Israel, Teimanim who made Aliyah with more than one wife are allowed to remain married to both/all of them.
HaLeiVi: What about the other 11 Aronos?
Daniel: Um, that says stay away from your neighbors’ worldly goods, not tell them to get rid of theirs. Also, Prishus isn’t for everyone. Nor is there an obligation of it. Not do you have a right to enforce it on anyone else.
Popa: I believe the Levush quotes the Rema’s reason as being that in his area it was illegal to cut hair on Sundays (those Blue Laws still exist in some states, actually) and thus he allowed them to be Makdim to Friday for Kavod Shabbos. If you are an a place where you can get a haircut on Sunday, I guess that’s a Tzad Lehachmir. Once again, though, it’s not that yuo need it. There’s no Chiyuv to shave. If you don’t want to shave, don’t shave. (Unless you actually look bad, which may be a lack of Kavod Shabbos and then this “Chumra” is obviously Meivi Lidei Kula anyway.)
Daniel: Show me where Mesilas Yesharim says it’s your business how others spend their money.
Oh. It’s still Assur for a Sefardi, I guess.
Daniel: Care to source your assertion that you can apply it to “Hashkafa” issues and therefore tell people whatever you want? I find it incredibly arrogant of you to say, “Well God said that technically this is allowed but I think it looks bad so I’m going to publicly say it’s wrong because I know better than G-d.”
Daniel: Is there any Lav being violated or Issur being Mevutal here? No. So your use of Kol Yisrael Areivim is a misapplication.
I mean, there are Deyos Al Pi Kaballah that no one should ever shave ever. What are you asking for? Normative Halachah says it’s okay to shave. That doesn’t mean you have to. Feel free to not shave if you want. I’m not sure why you’re looking for a random other source.
147: There’s no Mitzvah to eat Matzah then anyway. Some are Noheg to do it as a Zecher for when we had the Beis Hamikdash, but there is no Mitzvah whatsoever.
Vogue: Maybe that was his point. There’s no Mitzvah to eat Matzah on Pesach Sheni.
Ben: He quoted an article by his son who quoted someone (it might have been Rabbi Bleich) who said that an obscenely high number of dairy cows (upwards of 80 or 90%, I don’t remember which) are Treifos by the time they die.
Ben: Actually, Rav Schachter holds that Rov dairy cows are Treifos Bizman Hazeh. (Or, he quotes those who did research and found that they are.) However, that fact is not relevant to his Shittah on mixed milk, which he would hold is Assur even without Rov Treifos.
OOM: Hey, they said the same about me…
Dotnetter: Do you mean See Spot Run, the classic kid’s book?
PBA: That is precisely what Rav Schachter’s issue is and why he no longer drinks milk. All the milk is mixed so you can’t say Rov anymore, and there’s not enough for Shishim. The mixing meat isn’t an issue, though, because we check for Treifos that could have occurred and have a right to assume that the rest don’t exist.
etzhar: 29:14. Also, see other places in Chapter 29 there where he seems to be Meramez to the Heter that it’s okay to walk in front of them if the person Davening’s eyes are closed. He is only Meikel if they are blocking an aisle (and not in an established seat) but he also quotes those in the footnotes who are even more Meikel.
Torah: Hooves, horns, and bones aren’t food and as thus aren’t Treif if you want to attempt to shred your esophagus, stomach, and/or intestines open by eating them. Skin isn’t Treif either (a pig’s might be, actually, I’m not sure) unless you fry/prepare it in some way to make it edible, in which case it becomes Treif retroactively. (At least, I seem to recall a random Rashi implying that if you prepare it it becomes Treif but I don’t quite remember where.)
WIY: In such a case it is perfectly permissible to end your Shmoneh Esrei and answer all Amens and Kedushahs and such without taking the 3 steps. In fact, the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch even holds that you can answer Amen in Elokai Netzor. It’s probably even okay to take the 3 steps if the person’s Dalet Amos is blocking a legitimate Davening space in the Shul. And while I rarely rely on this Heter myself, it is impossible to tell anyone that any Halachah brought down in Ishei Yisrael isn’t enough to rely upon.
Pointing with the left pinky is brought down by the Ben Ish Chai, I believe.
Ishei Yisrael gives reasons to be Meikel in most cases.
Also, R’ Shlomo Zalman was famous for saying that if someone is in the way of the Tzibbur while Davening then you can physically move him out of the way. He is Ba Bigvul of the Tzibbur.
Was that entire gender discrimination section you?
WIY: I don’t think that’s correct. If the bones have marrow in them, then the marrow is Assur Min Hatorah. So pig hooves would be Kosher to eat (of course, they’re not really edible, but that’s a technical issue). Do they source this Issur?
Daniela: Absolutely not. That’s Ein Mevatlin Issur Lechatchilah. If it was mixed already and was Battul B’shishim, then it’s okay.
Brony: No. The Gemara in Pesachim says that if you see two women standing across from each other in the street, you shouldn’t walk between them because you have to worry that they are engaged in sorcery. (Apparently, in the Gemara’s times sorcery was so prevalent and/or it was so rare for even non-Jewish women to be on the street that the vast majority of women across the street from each other were doing sorcery.) The Gemara in Horiyos 13b gives a list of 10 things that cause one to forget their learning. One of those 10 is walking between two women.
PBA: Actually, pig hooves are Muttar to eat.
Daniela: 1/6th is a strange Heter that is brought down in a small minority of Rishonim and is only relevant to being Mevatel Stam Yeinam. (Well, it has a few others Halachos having to do with wine but that’s not Bittul, it’s something else entirely.)
yytz: It is a Gemara in Horiyos. I do not know if it is brought down in the Mechaber but I do know that the Aruch Hashulchan mentions it and I think the Mishnah B’rurah also brings down the list of 10 things that are Kasheh L’shich’chah. It’s not an Issur per se, but good advice if you don’t want spiritual/Kabbalistic impediments towards remembering your learning.
Vogue: No. No difference. If you keep Chalav Stam, you should keep it for everything. Maybe there’s a difference between using Chalav Stam powdered milk, but any product that uses actual Chalav Stam milk is the exact same Halachically as a glass of Chalav Stam milk.
Guilt? I can’t see any reason that there would be a physical reaction to Chalav Stam as opposed to CY unless it’s psychological. Halachically, don’t do anything that makes you sick.
WIY: I know of several people (I’ve asked around) who would be reprimanded immediately for appearing unkempt. But yes, that “several” would have been nearly everyone 50 years ago. Maybe in another 5-10 years there will be no Heter to shave for work during Sefirah. Then again, maybe workplaces will become much more strict and professional in the future. Each case needs to be judged. But most office jobs at serious firms or corporations will still “strongly recommend” you to be clean-shaven.
WIY: If you give someone a real explanation (which means explaining more than just once or twice) and then they refuse to acknowledge something because it doesn’t seem “fair” to them, then you know that they are either arrogant enough to think they know better than God or they don’t really care what the Torah has to say. But we can’t let our defensiveness about those type of people turn off those who want to just honestly understand the Torah and their place in this world.
WIY: I can’t answer for him because I don’t know his actual outlook. But there is nothing anti-Halachah about shaving during Sefirah to help keep a job. (Then again, if a person doesn’t know that it’s actually Muttar and does it anyway then it might be anti-Halachah. One of the Tannaim, maybe R’ Akiva, would cry for people like that.) And people with beards making money isn’t a proof of anything. A person is judged by his situation. If he has a job and shaving would endanger it, then it is a Davar Ha’aveid to shave and therefore it’s Muttar. Plain and simple.