Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I know one.
My assumption was that this thread was referring to the man who said the Kaddish at the Siyum Hashas. He is not the most learned of people, though I have on good testimony that he spends a fair amount of time at his community Kollel when he can. But that’s entirely irrelevant. That man has donated millions, maybe even billions, to support Torah learning. Last week, he literally made possible tens of thousands of Siyumim on Shas. Tens of thousands. He has enabled billions of lines of Gemara to be learned. There are trillions of T’fillos in Shamayim now that wouldn’t have ever been made if not for him. When the project is done, a decade or so from now, there will be thousands upon thousands of people being Mesayeim the Yerushalmi as well, once again solely because of him. There is no one on Earth more worthy of having said the Kaddish at the Siyum than him. None of us can even begin to dream what his Chelek in Gan Eden will be like.
Choppy: Yeah, I thought so too. I’m not sure what Cherrybim is referring to. That case is talking about a school though. He does have a different T’shuvah about a co-ed society meeting (“Meeting Shel Society” in his Hebrew) and says that a D’var Torah can be given and doesn’t limit it to Torah Shebiksav. So maybe he holds like the Drishah somewhere else. But correct, without seeing him explicitly state that somewhere, I would assume that Cheerybim is mistaken.
Curiosity: Well, I explained why but the mods deleted it. If they let it through this time, my point was that the timing of the thread makes it obvious that it’s referring to a specific person which is just not nice. It’s an okay concept to discuss, just not when it’s clearly referring to an individual.
M”B 2:1
Mods, why was most post asking for this thread to be deleted deleted?
Choppy: That is a nice statement, but it didn’t really address his point.
CA: There was very clearly a 🙂 in my post. It was not at all meant to be serious. It was a little humor L’kavod Shabbos.
You untie and take off the left shoe first. The left only gets a Kibbud in regards to tying. For everything else we do the right first and undo the left first. Therefore, we untie and remove our left shoe first (I believe that your question is a Machlokes Haposkim, Nechomah).
Actually, it’s a bit of a Pele that the Shulchan Aruch brings this down. Because of how the Gemara says it, all of the Rishonim (Rif, Rambam, Rosh, and Tur, if I recall correctly) leave out this Halachah. (I think it’s found on Shabbos 60a or 65a; it’s definitely an Amud a in Shabbos around there somewhere). It’s unclear why the Mechaber brought it down when those Rishonim did it. (It’s entirely possible that I’m slightly misremembering and that the Tur brought it down after all the other Rishonim were Doche that Gemara from the Halchah. But it’s still strange that the Shulchan Aruch would bring down a Da’as Yachid in the Rishonim.)
The Tzitz Eliezer has a T’shuvah (I want to say at the beginning of Chelek 22 but I’m not positive) where he discusses if shoes count as a Begged. He doesn’t specifically discuss in regards to Shabbos, but that’s definitely a place to start. If I recall correctly, he would probably agree with your husband. However, the Minhag very clearly is to be Mechabed Shabbos with special shoes-especially someone who wears sneakers/loafers etc. during the week.
Choppy: True enough. He does Asser Sheitels.
Sam4: I don’t see your point. That’s not dealing with if there’s a skirt over the pants/leggings. I don’t know anyone who clearly says that seeing the form of the knees and a bit above is a problem. In fact, the way my Rebbe explained it was that the issue is that pants show the separation of a women’s legs.
Quite simply, because each individual opening of the door does not have enough of an effect to cause a motor to go on. Same with opening a refrigerator.
R’ Ovadia also says that women are allowed to wear baggy pants.
Choppy: It’s Apikorsus to even hint that the Chafetz Chaim said anything that isn’t correct. Obviously, the War of 1812 and the Civil War did not occur on American soil. 🙂
(The Mexican-American War actually wasn’t fought on American soil if I recall correctly, because Texas had not yet been admitted to the Union.)
One the ball and Avi K: You are not correct. An Erva doesn’t mean that its form must be covered. It means the skin must be covered. That’s Mefurash. Look in Siman 75 again. Not showing the form is a much later distinction that the Poskim came up with when women started wearing pants. And no, it’s not an Erva to see a woman in pants. It’s still not allowed, but it’s not an Erva.
Square peg: I believe the source is the Minhag, but that doesn’t mean it’s just Minhag. Minhag is a very, very powerful source.
Choppy: You misunderstood her question, which is a very strong one indeed.
Kozov: We see it all the time. People are willing to take suicidal positions for their own glory. That’s stupidity, not righteousness.
That is demeaning as the Aruch Hashulchan (I think it was him) says that there is nothing more degrading than someone who walks outside barefoot.
The better question is that she was during Bayis Sheni where the Kehuna was bought and many undeserving Kohanim became Kohen Gadol. So what is the Ma’ale here?
Itche: What could the problem with that be? It’s M’fruash that you go Basar Rov to determine what the Begged is made out of.
I’ll be starting tomorrow and I’ve never completed Daf Yomi before (though I generally start every Masechta with the Daf, but I rarely complete them; other time considerations just take over).
Apparently I stand corrected. My guess was Kinnim and Middos because, while those are in the standard prints of the Vilna Shas and count Daf numbers, they are only Mishnayos and contain no Gemara (just like all of Z’raim is in the back of a standard Brachos and Taharos in the back of Niddah). But apparently that wasn’t the difference.
Goldenpupik: That’s a cute point from the order of the B’riyah, but I think that your last paragraph is borderline Apikorsus. You should be very, very careful with that P’shat.
Health: While I can’t say that that’s not Pashut P’shat in the M’chaber, it is against the Drisha, who at the very least is a strong enough support for anyone to rely upon (especially as we do have the “Ma’aseh Rav” of B’ruriah, Rashi’s daughters, and several other women throughout the generations of the Rishonim).
This could be a troll thread, but not necessarily. There are hundreds (maybe more) of women who learn Daf Yomi with their husbands, family, or by themselves.
I would guess Kinnim and Middos.
Choppy and Shlishi: The Drishah is a tremendous Amud to be Somech on, and certainly for someone who is literally teaching herself. You don’t have to let your wife do it, but to say that it is Assur is misleading.
Kozov: Now I will look. I really don’t remember.
On the ball: The Rambam disagrees with non-rationalistic concepts in the Gemara all the time, especially in the Moreh. I am not familiar with what he says about amulets, but I guarantee that it’s miles away from what R’ Yehonasan Eyebeshutz should have said.
KH: I also once told someone who had a scarf that was pretty wide on that it needed Tzitzis. He quoted that he had asked a major Posek who told him that since it’s not worn as a Begged to cover the majority of the body in that it’s not Chayav. But I really don’t think so. I think that if it meets the Shiur it’s Chayav no matter what. After all, the Shiur is not a Shiur that would cover you enough to be able to go into public with with. So obviously when the Poskim gave the Shiur they understood that it might not be worn alone.
Curiosity: Maybe, but I don’t think that makes the Tallis a Begged Meyuchad for a Davar Shebikdusha. It’s Meyuchad for their whole services, which while they may contain some residual aspects of actual T’fillos, I don’t think they can count as a Davar Shebikdusha.
Ohr Chodesh: What part of There is no Ma’ale or level here. I hold it’s Assur. Therefore I can’t do it. If I held it was Muttar then I would listen to music. And if I held it was Assur but that I “wasn’t on the level” then I wouldn’t be a Halachah-observant Jew. did you not understand? I don’t hold this as a Chumra. I hold it’s Ikar Hadin. And no, holding this Halachah has been one of the hardest things I’ve ever done in my life.
Ohr Chodesh: I am not furthering any agenda. I do not recall that being a misquote but if it is I will double-check (that will take a while as I do not have access to the Sefer at the moment nor will I anywhere soon. If anyone else has it maybe they could quote it for us.)
Curiosity: Interesting point. If I recall correctly, someone discusses a rolled Tanach and how you sometimes end up with parts of Nach being on top of parts of Chumash. I don’t at all remember what was said though. (A cover would not be a problem as that serves to protect the Sefer. Title pages and introductions etc. would be an interesting issue to deal with. I have to think about this.)
Curiosity: Not a plastic rain poncho. Like a Spanish/Mexican poncho. I’m sure it was Chayav in Tzitzis. He didn’t want to look super-weird though, so he rounded off a corner.
Curiosity: I thought precisely the same way you did, but their Davening doesn’t count as Davening. There is no Kedushah in the Tallis because there is no Kedushah in the “Davening” that it’s Meyuchad for.
SiDi: That too. The morning Leining is just the one I thought of because the Siddur I used in school as a kid had the Leining in the back (not Tehillim, if I recall correctly).
Choppy: I believe I’ve said that before. (Well, not all year. I hold it’s Muttar on Chol Hamoed.)
SiDi and TCG: There is no Ma’ale or level here. I hold it’s Assur. Therefore I can’t do it. If I held it was Muttar then I would listen to music. And if I held it was Assur but that I “wasn’t on the level” then I wouldn’t be a Halachah-observant Jew.
(Before anyone thinks I’m better than I really am, because I’m really not, I have on occasion listened to music after I came to this Maskana. The Beis Yosef says that music is Muttar if it’s to relieve depression. I don’t know how serious of a depression he is referring to, but there are times when I would listen to a select few songs when I am feeling down. However, this reason is not brought down in the Shulchan Aruch or mentioned in many of the Nosei Keilim. Thus, it is something to rely on but probably not a Heter to be used Lechatchilah. There were a few times where I felt it necessary to rely on this. (Also, the Abarbanel on Tishah B’av during the Expulsion is a tremendous Ma’aseh Rav to rely on this reason.) Similarly, the Beis Yosef mentions that L’zarez Bimlacha is a reason to be Meikil, but it’s also not brought down in most of the Halachah Sefarim. However, when I am driving for an extended time I rely on this even L’chatchilah because if I space out while driving that’s already bordering on Pikuach Nefesh.
The Mechaber does bring down that people were already Noheg to sing Shiros V’sishbachos LaHKBH. However, I cannot honestly say that when I am listening to music that I am doing it to be M’shabeach HKBH and not because I enjoy the music, so I try to avoid that as much as possible (but it is the reason why I don’t have to leave the room when a friend/relative is listening to music). That is a very strong basis to rely upon. It is also part of the reason I’m willing to be Meikil on those rare occasions when I am feeling very sad. I do not need this reason, however, for the driving part because, as I said above, it is very unsafe to lose attention while driving and having background music really does help me focus.)
So, basically, other than Chol Hamoed Pesach and Sukkos (where there really isn’t much time to relax and listen to music anyway) I listen to music about 2 or 3 times a year.
I once made someone round off the corner of a poncho they were wearing.
I would not hesitate to say that it’s Muttar to wear a reform Tallis into a bathroom, even if it’s big enough.
Ohr Chodesh: I will not go through the Mekoros point-by-point from his Sefer, but I will point out one thing. In the Sefer (or possibly his second one), he discusses the concept of a “Treif Begged”. He states that any clothing which began at a certain level of inherent untznius cannot be worn, even if it is made Tznius. For example, a sleeveless dress cannot be worn with a shirt underneath. That is fine. The problem is that such a concept has no source whatsoever in Halachah. No one before this Sefer even mentions such a concept, anywhere (if someone can find me an earlier source in Halachah for this I will retract my statement, but I searched strenuously and did not find anything). And I do not want to discuss further any more similar cases in his Sefarim (which do exist) because I do not want to C”V say anything that I will later regret against someone who without a doubt is a tremendous Talmid Chacham. But it is concepts like this (and others) that allow me to say with confidence that R’ Falk’s Sefarim need not be followed.
(This is not to say that nothing in there is correct. Obviously much of the Sefarim are true Halachah L’ma’aseh. But there are definitely parts that there is much to ask upon.)
Curiosity: Whoa, don’t use me to be Meikil. There are many M’kilim, but all of them, L’fi Aniyus Da’ati, have Pirchos (both in their S’varos and how they are brought down L’ma’aseh). I straight-up hold that music is Assur all year, though I do hear a blanket Heter for songs based on Pessukim that talk about HKBH (or for songs that are a singer’s own Shevach LaHKBH).
Choppy: Isn’t that Shittas Beis Shammai? Does the Mechaber (or anyone?) Pasken that way? By a first wife?
Choppy: That was uncalled for. I had not yet said anything even mildly critical of R’ Falk at the time you had written that post.
They have to be a Beged. So no on the towel. Barber’s thingy maybe (but it’s never worn by it’s owner so it’s probably okay). Sheet almost definitely not. Blanket probably is and many are Machmir to round a corner of their blankets because of a Safek in the Mishnah B’rurah (though that’s probably just a Chumra and there are many reasons to be Meyashev the Minhag Ha’olam not to put Tzitzis on your blanket.)
Curiosity: If I recall correctly, the Rishonim discuss how Kallah Na’eh Vachasuda is allowed. I believe it’s the Ran who says there’s no Issur in lying. The only Issur is on Dayanim or in business. And Beis Shammai doesn’t allow that because they hold that institutionalized lying is Assur, even if normally lying isn’t.
Chavrusa: The Minhag Haolam seems to be L’hakel and there are a lot of reasons and Shittos to rely upon to be Meikel.
Choppy: I don’t want to discuss details and I haven’t thoroughly studied the Sefer so I can’t comment on everything, but your last comment is (at the very least) not 100% true.
On the ball: Once again, I won’t comment on particulars here. But if there were a Sefer on Shabbos or Kashrus or anything else that presented Chumros as Halachos and sometimes straight-up invented Halachos, I would have no qualms about very specifically and publicly decrying such a Sefer.