simcha613

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 351 through 400 (of 680 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • simcha613
    Participant

    To argue the other side, and I don’t mean to discount emunas chachamim in non-halachic/reshus situations, but I think it needs to be combined with an expertise in that area of “non-halacha/reshus.” A talmid chacham should not be dispensing medical advice if he’s a non expert.

    Everything is in Torah, but only the greatest of the great are actually able to understand everything from the Torah. 99.999999% of Klal Yisroel, including the great talmidei chachamim, will not do well on calculus exam simply by knowing Shas, Poskim, Tanach, and Kabbalah.

    A talmid chacham may be a talmid chacham, but if he is not an expert in medicine, business, politics, or even psychology, than his advice in those areas may not be the best advice… and not listening to them wouldn’t necessarily be a lack of emunas chachamim.

    in reply to: Is seeing a doctor dangerous #1074454
    simcha613
    Participant

    Isn’t there a Mishnah in Berachos that lists examples of tefilos shav? If I’m not mistaken, one of the examples is davening for a specific gender of a child when a woman is pregnant. The implication is, is that once a woman is pregnant, even though no one knows the gender of the baby, it’s still a tefilos shav to daven for a gender that has already been determined, and it would be a neis to change it. By extension, I would say that seeing a doctor does not change the teva. If a physical reality exists, it exists, whether you know about it or not, and it would be a neis to change it, whether it is recognized or not.

    in reply to: Some zionist thoughts for yom haatzmaut #1074222
    simcha613
    Participant

    Hakatan-

    I also find it insulting how you say “your faith” with regard to Zionism. The differences between a religious Zionist and a Chareidi are so small. They disagree on how to view the state. That’s it. It’s not one of the 13 ikkarim of the Rambam. Honestly, the haskafaic differences between religious Zionist and Chareidi are far smaller than the differences between a misnaged and a chosid. Are they two different religions too?

    Stop calling a machlokes in hashkafah a different religion. The inability to recognize legitimate machlokes is disturbing and a source for unnecessary sinas chinam.

    in reply to: Some zionist thoughts for yom haatzmaut #1074221
    simcha613
    Participant

    Hakantan- “But since you mention it, and with all due respect, since your faith claims that the Zionist enterprise is “aschalta diGeulah” the RZ, liChaOrah, aren’t praying for the true geulah, but rather that it should be “completed” after its decades-long “start”. “

    It seems that two signs of the geulah are the return of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (kibbutz galuyos) and the physical restoration of the Land. Unless you think that all of the Jews in Israel will have to leave, and that Israel will have to become desolate again before Mashiach comes, it’s hard to argue that the geulah has not started.

    in reply to: Some zionist thoughts for yom haatzmaut #1074122
    simcha613
    Participant

    Joseph-

    The Rambam is clear that sheivet Leivi is exempt from the army and that anyone who wants to “join” sheivet leivi can by learning full time. But, the Rambam is also clear that no one is allowed to take money for learning. So if we’re going to use the Rambam as the basis that anyone learning in kollel is exempt from military service, than we should also discontinue the kollel stipend as per the shitah of the Rambam.

    in reply to: Some zionist thoughts for yom haatzmaut #1074111
    simcha613
    Participant

    Little Froggie- you misinterpret lesschumras. He wasn’t saying scholars don’t cause benefit. And he wasn’t ridiculing them either. He was pointing out that there is no source that says Torah provides ABSOLUTE protection, and clearly, historically, it has not provided absolute protection… and he was explaining that to those who claim otherwise.

    in reply to: Some zionist thoughts for yom haatzmaut #1074103
    simcha613
    Participant

    I don’t know if there is any religious significance to the State of Israel. I don’t even know if it’s really a “Jewish state” (I mean, an organization has to be halachic to be Jewish… I wouldn’t consider a reform temple a Jewish institution simply because they call themselves Jewish, are by Jews, and claim to represent Jews).

    I celebrate Yom Haatzmaut and say Hallel beleiv malei, not because of the State, but because the government of the Land of Israel (in this case it happens to be the State of Israel) has allowed us to return to our land en masse… and through this government there is more Torah in Eretz Yisroel since the fall of Beitar.

    Hodu LaShem ki tov. Me’eis HaShem hayso zos, hi niflas be’eineinu.

    in reply to: Practicality on the Palestinians #1094199
    simcha613
    Participant

    Israel cannot keep the Palestinians as permanent second class citizens. They really only have two choices, make them citizens of Israel or give them a Palestinian state. No one wants them to be citizens so there should be a Palestinian state.

    However, Israel is under no obligation to give them the entire West Bank. Palestine has no historical borders so there is no land to “return” to them. What should be done, and I think what sort of has been done in the past, is Israel needs to offer them a state which comprises say about half of the West Bank carved out in such a way that most if not all of the Jewish communities remain part of Israel. Any Palestinians “stuck” in Israel would become full citizens of Israel and any Jews “stuck” in the new Palestinian state would become full equal citizens in the new state. And if the new Palestinian state would commit act of terrorism against Israel, that would be an act of war by a sovereign nation and Israel should blow them out of the water.

    As long as the Palestinian leadership won’t take anything less than the entire West Bank, then the Palestinians won’t get a state, and the only ones to blame are their own leadership.

    in reply to: New Indiana Law #1070201
    simcha613
    Participant

    Divri- I don’t think we paskin halachah from Midrash. The fact is, two women “marrying” each other is only an issur d’rabanan (I’m pretty sure that’s how the Rambam paskins- I have to look it up), which would certainly not apply to goyim.

    in reply to: New Indiana Law #1070184
    simcha613
    Participant

    zdad- I agree with you. If there is “religiously mandated discrimination”, then I can understand the need for a law to protect the rights of the religious to discriminate as their religion demands (though, it still may be considered unconstitutional).

    However, in our case, the law shouldn’t even get off the ground (at least from a halachic perspective- I don’t know what the Christian laws are on this topic). There shouldn’t be a law to allow you to discriminate against people that make you feel uncomfortable. That is certainly unconstitutional.

    in reply to: New Indiana Law #1070179
    simcha613
    Participant

    zdad- so in that case, there may be what to talk about. But I don’t think halacha forbids one from doing business with someone who is gay. If the only issue is that they make you uncomfortable, why should you be allowed to deny them business on those grounds?

    edited

    It wasnt too long ago that there were sign No Dogs or jews Allowed “

    But I don’t think that’s allowed anymore. I don’t think a store can say “no Jews allowed.” So why should a store be allowed to say no gays allowed?

    in reply to: New Indiana Law #1070174
    simcha613
    Participant

    Zahavasdad- there might be a difference between a religious requirement and not. I don’t think halacha allows for a Jewish person to have avodah zara on his property. And if it did allow it, then maybe a store owner shouldn’t have the right to kick him out just because it makes him uncomfortable.

    Would it be ok if Jews weren’t allowed in certain stores? Again, where do you draw the line?

    in reply to: New Indiana Law #1070173
    simcha613
    Participant

    Torah and nolonger- I understand that those are quite awkward and uncomfortable. It would freak me out as well. But if there is no religious prohibition, if there’s no conflict between religious law and American law, how could you support that constitutionally? What if black people annoyed me? Can I deny them business? Where do you draw the line?

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070715
    simcha613
    Participant

    simcha613- not to mention that what Sam says is correct. There isn’t that much of a difference between the frum Modern Orthodox and the Yeshivish.

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070714
    simcha613
    Participant

    Joseph- no one is denying that there are Gedolim who were/are opposed to YU. But that’s not a reason to write off the whole Modern Orthodox movement. There were many Gedolim who were against the Chassidus movement and we haven’t written them off.

    And many gedolim also said better to die in Europe than go to America and face that spiritual danger. I’m not here to debate whether they were right or wrong, but it’s clear that we don’t paskin like that.

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070701
    simcha613
    Participant

    EretzHaK- You answered your own question. They protested it because it dealt with it publicly. BUT, it was not trying to legitimize homosexuality as a way of life. They were trying to legitimize homosexuals as people and make people understand the struggles they go through.

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070696
    simcha613
    Participant

    DY- I think the reason why Sam makes that assumption is because most of the YU Yeshiva learn the Torah and the hashkafah of the yeshivish velt, something that isn’t true the other way around. It is more likely that a YU Rosh Yeshiva knows about both worlds, because they respect and learn from both worlds… something that can’t necessarily be said about the roshei yeshiva and the rabbonim in the yeshiva world.

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070669
    simcha613
    Participant

    Didn’t R’ Shach oppose Chabad very strongly? Didn’t the Gra oppose Chassiudus? When do we write off entire sects of Judaism because some Gedolim oppose them?

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070668
    simcha613
    Participant

    Hakatan- mixed events at yu with marrigable agreed singles is not the same situation of pritzus that you describe

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070647
    simcha613
    Participant

    HaKatan- I am no expert in R’ Lamm’s writings, but if he did indicate that, it was not meant halachah lema’aseh. He did not make birchas haTorah upon enetering a science lab. If he indicated that, he meant as a hyperbole to demonstrate how valuable science is, but it is not equitable. Even according to R’ Lamm.

    in reply to: OU = MO? #1070643
    simcha613
    Participant

    Even R’ Lamm would not equate Torah with secular studies. He wouldn’t make Birchos HaTorah on Aristotle.

    in reply to: My issue with the Israeli Chareidi parties #1066395
    simcha613
    Participant

    mw13- Is that true that they simply represent the religious needs of the nation as a whole? I heard rumors (and I hope they aren’t true) that when they are in charge of funding for yeshivos, it is disproportionately in favor of the Chareidi yeshivos as opposed to the Religious Zionist yeshivos?

    Not to mention, that they are also involved in dealing with the poverty in Charedi communities (other than career services), but it doesn’t seem like they are involved in dealing with poverty as a whole.

    Maybe I’m wrong, but that is the impression that I get.

    in reply to: My issue with the Israeli Chareidi parties #1066389
    simcha613
    Participant

    Akuperma- I’m not sure who you are referring to when you say Zionists want to give all sorts of benefits to the Palestians. My understanding is that most Israelis either want them to leave the West Bank, stay where they are as second class citizens, or have their own state. Very few, if any, want them to be full citizens and have full benefits.

    And even if those people do exists, there is a difference between Palestinians and Chareidim in the eyes of the Israeli. Chareidim are Jews and Palestinians are not. Your average Israeli has higher standards for Jews, even Chareidim. I might be willing to give money to both a stranger and a relative or a friend, but I have higher expectations for the relative or the friend to reciprocate. I will be more insulted if a friend or relative takes without giving then if a stranger does it. And I would be more likely to give money to a stranger who doesn’t reciprocate than a friend or relative who doesn’t reciprocate.

    It’s not bigotry. Your average Israeli is not offended by the intense religious nature of the Charedi. They’re insulted by the fact that the Charedim want nothing to do with them when in their eyes we’re all Jews and we all have a responsibility to the Jewish People as a whole. The average Israeli has higher standards for the Chareidi than for the Palestinian, is more insulted when the Chareidi shuns them and treats them like strangers.

    in reply to: Prime Minister-elect Isaac Herzog #1065291
    simcha613
    Participant

    Here’s how it will play out- Bayit Yehudi, Yisraal Beiteinu, and Yachad will sit with Likud. The Arab parties, and Meretz will sit with Labor. UTJ/Shas, Yeish Atid, and Kulanu will be up in the air. Whoever gets 2 of those 3 will get the coalition. Since UTJ/Shas will not sit with Yeish Atid, whoever gets Kulanu will win.

    in reply to: hamodia anti-yishai? #1065658
    simcha613
    Participant

    147- I think it’s a bit extreme to say Bennett is against religious observance, especially considering that he is religious himself. It’s just that his shitah is, as well as the shitah of many Religious Zionist gedolim, that the Israeli army is a religious requirement as defending Eretz Yisroel and Klal Yisroel from our enemies would qualify as a milchemes mitzvah. I don’t mean to start a debate on whether they’re right or wrong, whether talmud toah should be a valid ptur or not, those arguments have been rehashed many times here… my point is, Bennett is not against religious observance just because he doesn’t have the exact same hashkafah as you.

    in reply to: Satmar Rebbe #1060858
    simcha613
    Participant

    KJ Chusid- Both bad and good can be attributed to medinah, but that doesn’t mean we can ignore being makir tov for the good. You listed some of the bad things, but you cannot deny the main good that medinah has brought: there are more Jews and more Torah in Eretz Yisreol than since probably the fall of Beitar. I think that is something priceless and we owe the medinah a tremendous amount of hakaras hatov for that fact alone.

    in reply to: Is cloning allowed #1058631
    simcha613
    Participant

    Cloning is simply an extension of genetic profiling which in some cases is mutar. It’s like genetic profiling on steroids. And since steroids are probably assur, cloning is probably assur as well.

    in reply to: Superbowl Parties #1136343
    simcha613
    Participant

    yybc- “And no one said going to the Yankee game is muttar. ” Who said it was assur?

    in reply to: Superbowl Parties #1136329
    simcha613
    Participant

    Is a Super Bowl party really any more Darchei Emori than going to Yankee Stadium to watch a ball game?

    in reply to: Teaching kid shomer negiah? #1049959
    simcha613
    Participant

    Speaking of shomer negiah, I was under the impression that it is an issur d’orays (lo sikrevu legalos ervah). If so, how come Yaakov Avinu kissed Rochel Imeinu before they married? It is clearly derech chibah. I know that they didn’t necessarily keep the Torah outside of EY, but usually there was a reason.

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077377
    simcha613
    Participant

    Trust- Even our greatest gedolim had rebbeim. Is it possible for a woman to learn without a teacher? Of course. But it’s also more likely that they will misunderstand many things without a teacher. Same thing with boys. If you want to learn anything properly, you need a teacher.

    Lior- like I said before, S”A also says that they receive reward for learning it. So you have to reconcile the two. Saying she is allowed to learn but no one is allowed to teach her is illogical and certainly not what the S”A meant.

    And if I understand PAA correctly, he is saying that Chazal knew that in their time that it was bad, but since they understood that the reality can change, they refrained from making a formal prohibition. Hence, the S”A never says it is assur for them to learn or it is assur for anyone to teach them.

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077373
    simcha613
    Participant

    DY- Saying that a woman is allowed to learn but a woman is not allowed to be taught is essentially saying she’s not allowed to learn. You can’t learn anything, especially Gemara, without a teacher. If she is allowed to learn when she wants to learn, then obviously she is allowed to be taught. Saying otherwise is illogical

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077367
    simcha613
    Participant

    Dy- but the sh”a is not saying what you were saying. .. that it is assur for any man to teach Gemara to any woman

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077362
    simcha613
    Participant

    DY- I’m not sure if I understand. Why is it only assur for men to teach women certain subjects? If there’s a problem with men teaching women, it should be a problem in all subjects. If there’s a problem with the subject matter, than it should be assur whoever teaches it. I don’t get the logic that it’s assur for men to teach women only certain subjects.

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077360
    simcha613
    Participant

    Dy- so it’s like a tzniyus issue? Men can’t teach women but women can? That doesn’t seem to be what the sa seems to say.

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077357
    simcha613
    Participant

    DY- I apologize for making that assumption, but then what is the “classical” way of understanding that S”A?

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077352
    simcha613
    Participant

    DY- if the S”A truly meant that it is assur for girls to learn, why would the S”A say they get reward for doing it?

    in reply to: Can women talk about Gemara? #1077348
    simcha613
    Participant

    It’s not so clear from the S”A that women aren’t allowed to learn Torah Shebal Peh. Even though the S”A says that one who teaches his daughter Torah it’s as if he taught her “tiflus” (tiflus being something negative), the S”A also say that women receive sechar for learning it! Now if the S”A was saying that it is assur, the S”A wouldn’t have said they get a reward for doing it. The S”A just says it can’t be taught to them which I understand to mean that it is not allowed to be imposed on them, however if they learn it by choice, then they receive reward.

    One also has to factor in (based on the S”A and the Rama) that a woman does not have a chiyuv to learn Torah which has no practical application, and has a chiyuv to learn Torah that has practical application (halachah, mussar, Tanach [Gemara in Megilah says that the only nevu’os that were recorded were those who’s messages are meant for all generations, therefore Nach is practical], etc…). It’s a positive thing to learn the areas which have no practical application (the S”A says they receive reward), it’s better than wasting time, but it’s not a chiyuv.

    Based on this, I think there are 4 criteria that need to be met for women to learn Gemara:

    1) They have to want to do it.

    2) It has to be for lishmah reasons, not feminist reasons.

    3) They need a teacher to guide them in the right way to learn Gemara.

    4) It can’t come at the expense of learning those areas of Torah that are a chiyuv for them to learn, but it can only come at the expense of things that are reshus (learning secular subjects, going shopping, etc…).

    in reply to: Palestinian State #1037085
    simcha613
    Participant

    scared- I agree, there are far more Arab states. But the fact is, there are thousands of Arabs in the West Bank who aren’t Israeli citizens. What do you propose to do with them? Force them to live in one of those countries and expel them from Israel? Allow them to live in the West Bank without giving them citizenship and forcing them to be permanent second class citizens? Offer them Israeli citizenship and risk losing a Jewish majority in Israel? Or give them autonomy? You have to do one of those things with the Arabs who lived there when Israel took control of the West Bank in ’67. They are not illegal immigrants.

    in reply to: Simchas Torah and women #1035623
    simcha613
    Participant

    Ben Levi- Your premise is logical that men and women have different roles, and that we should all strive to do ratzon Hashem, but you make some conclusion that seem less, well, logical.

    While I agree that women are the backbone of their husbands learning, that doesn’t mean they can’t learn, especially women who are not married. Why can’t they celebrate their own accomplishments in learning? And even if their only Torah role is that they’re their husbands backbone in learning, why isn’t that a cause for celebration? A man works hard to learn for the sake of Torah, and a women tries to assist her husband for the sake of Torah. They both act lishmah, and they both want to celebrate that accomplishment. Why is the man’s desire to dance Ratzon Hashem and not the womens? How in the world did you come up with the question “why should a woman want to dance?” They want to dance because they love Torah and want to celebrate their accomplishment in both learning and supporting their husbands in learning. That seems lishmah to me. That doesn’t seem to be a contradiction at all to Ratzon Hashem. How does a desire to celebrate the completion of the Torah that they helped facilitate in any way imply that they want to “switch sides?”

    in reply to: Simchas Torah and women #1035622
    simcha613
    Participant

    I heard the following from my Rebbe at YU regarding a problem with the Maharat which may be able to be applied here and possibly what people mean when they talk about following the Mesorah:

    Torah Judaism is not trying to “evolve” with the times. The Torah that was given to Har Sinai was as authentic as possible, and we are trying to recreate the Torah that was given to us directly by HKB”H. The generations that are closer to ma’amad Har Sinai are probably practicing more authentic Judaism than we are, simply because they are chronologically more connected to Har Sinai. Any communal change from past practices, by this definition, is making our Judaism more different than Har Sinai, and therefore less authentic.

    That doesn’t mean change is never appropriate. The Beis Yaakov system was a change. Even gezeiros and takanos of Chazal are changes to how Judaism was practiced from Har Sinai. But those changes, in general, are instituted with the motivation of trying to save something that was at risk of being lost. It was a change to preserve Torah Judaism. Women were uneducated and falling off the derech so the Beis Yaakov system was institued. Chazal were afraid that Klal Yisorel would violate issurim so they instuited gezeiros and takanos. They were changes, but changes to protect Judaism from falling even further away from the Torah of Har Sinai.

    Any communal change that doesn’t have this motivation, as noble and legitimate as the motivation may be, by definition is changing our Judaims from a more authentic version.

    in reply to: Best Talmud Shiurim Online #1023556
    simcha613
    Participant

    I would recommend R’ Sobolofsky’s talmud shiurim on YUTorah. His iyun shiurim are very clear and comprehensive. He is one of the most popular Rebbeim at RIETS.

    in reply to: Shachris w/o minyiin??? #1070471
    simcha613
    Participant

    I have a similar question. I have class till relatively late a few nights a week near a community which has multiple minyanim for Maariv. Where I live there is only a minyan right after shkiah. I usually have a chavrusa at night, but if I wait around to daven Maariv with a minyan, I will be getting home too late for my chavrusa. Is it better to keep a consistent seder with my chavrusa and daven Maariv beyechidus? Or should I be makpid to daven with a minyan at the expense of my chavrusa?

    in reply to: Shachris w/o minyiin??? #1070440
    simcha613
    Participant

    This definitely seems strange to me. I mean, obviously we shouldn’t judge a person for not being able to daven with a minyan. He has challenges I don’t have and vice versa. But at the same time, you would think a chiyuv like minyan would be a prerequisite for someone who wants to learn (and presumably gets paid to learn) in kollel. A kollel guy who doesn’t commit to davening with a minyan seems a little off.

    in reply to: D-day and hallel #1018666
    simcha613
    Participant

    Why is there such a big tumult on what’s considered a miracle or not? Since when does something supernatural have to happen to say Hallel? Nothing supernatural happened on Purim and we would have said Hallel were it not for the reasons in the Gemara? It seems the requirement for hallel is yeshua from Hashem. In ’67, the Arabs were bragging and planning on wiping out the Jews in Israel. Supernatural or not, Hashem saved us from destruction. Isn’t that enough for Hallel?

    in reply to: Celebrating good caused by bad #1018213
    simcha613
    Participant

    Squeak- uch. This is the problem with many of the “anti-zionists” out there. They not only disagree with religious zionsim, but they are determined to take away all legitimacy. There are problems with religious zionism, but there is good as well. And the fact that you, and many like you, refuse to see it, and refuse to admit it, is very bothersome. Yom Yerushalayim, at least from the persepctive of the religious, is all about shevach and hodaah to Hashem. It is not kochi veotzem yadi at all. It doesn’t matter though, not only will nothing convince you that religious zionsim is a legitimate hashkafah, nothing will convince you that there’s anything positive about at all.

    in reply to: Yom Yerushalayim #1018036
    simcha613
    Participant

    HaKatan- just because there was nothing supernatural doesn’t make it not a neis. Nothing supernatural happened on Purim either, to the untrained eye it was all teva, but we recognized that that was a neis nistar. Mainly because Klal Yisroel were saved from the serious threat of massacre. One can argue the same thing by the Six Day War. The Jewish People (at least those that lived in Eretz Yisroel) were saved from a threat of extermination. G-d saved us through miraculous, arguably hidden, but miraculous nonetheless.

    For the record, while I don’t necessarily agree with your views on Zionism, I also don’t view Yom Yerushalayim as a Zionist holiday. I celebrate the victory from a murderous enemy, and the freedom of Yerushalayim from the hands of those who closed it off to Jews. If Yom Yerushalayim happened in the same way with a Goysih army (the UK defeated the Arabs and saved the Jews, they also took control of Jerusalem from the Arabs and gave the Jews access) I would also celebrate it.

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076534
    simcha613
    Participant

    “They clearly had better Daas even though Jabotinsky claimed to be an atheist and Schoenberg was a recent baal tshuvah from 35 years of living as a Christian.”

    Charlie- I don’t know if I would say that had better Daas (whatever daas means, wisdom?)… I think it just means that they understood the political and international ramifications of the Nazi rise to power better. That wouldn’t surprise considering that they were involved in that world a lot more than the Gedolim were. I don’t think the Gedolim’s knowledge of Torah gave them nevuah to prophetically understand how powerful the Nazis are. It just gave them more insight what to do in a given situation… once they truly understood that situation.

    in reply to: Daas Torah #1076522
    simcha613
    Participant

    Daas Torah is a talmid chacham’s/a gadol’s opinion of how the Torah and Hashem would want you to act in a non halachic situation. However, this does not necessarily mean that they understand the situation completely accurately. While many Rabbonim felt that Daas Torah was to stay in Europe, it could have been based on the fact that they misunderstood how powerful Hitler and the Nazis were. If they had a better understanding of the situation they may have felt Daas Torah would be different. (Or, on the other side, it could be that they did understand how powerful the Nazis were, they were never claiming it’s safer to stay in Europe, they were just saying better to die frum in Europe than to survive and risk assimilation by traveling to America or Israel.)

    And, there is not one Daas Torah, it’s an opinion and therefore subjective. R’ Kanievsky, R’ Shteinman, R’ Schacter, and R’ Lichtenstein’s assessment of how Hashem would want you to act in a given situation are all Daas Torah, even though they probably disagree with each other on many accounts. There could be a machlokes. Daas Torah is not objective and there is not one “posek” who determines what is Daas Torah for all of Klal Yisroel.

    in reply to: Yom Yerushalayim #1018021
    simcha613
    Participant

    In summary:

    PBA- it’s better to reject the bad even if it means ignoring some of the good.

    Sam2- it’s better to recognize the good even if it means accepting some of the bad.

Viewing 50 posts - 351 through 400 (of 680 total)