Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
and that Amram did not “divorce” Yocheved but merely separated from her.
Whatever it was they did, it was something pretty open and obvious. Obvious enough that others followed their example.
We don’t call ourselves names. Perhaps future generations will call those before us, the Poskim, and us — if we’re worthy of being referred to — the Achronim.
There are two ways of looking at the border of generations. Rabbeinu Hakadosh recognized the end of an era and summed up the Torah of the Tanaim. Rabina and Rav Ashi did the same to the Amoraim. The Ge’onim ended, simply enough, with the last Gaon. The Tur did to the Rishonim what Rabbeinu Hakadosh did to the Tanaim, and Rav Ashi to the Amoraim.
We can see that the Beis Yosef doesn’t argue on the Rosh but he does disagree with the Tur at times. We live in a generation where the words of previous generations are also summed up and repackaged. We also don’t specifically argue on previous Gedolim without good company. Perhaps the dawn of the the new period begins with the Mishna Brura.
There is also the historical division — which goes hand in hand with the first approach. The Mishna ended when it got hard to continue learning in the same way that they had been doing until then. That is when we see Bavel coming into the picture. It is an obvious new era. The Amoraim ended when times changed, too. The Rishonim began with the new Yeshivos in Europe, and ended with their closing.
The Rosh escaped from Ashkenaz to Spain. After that, it is blury. The Mordcha is a Rishon, and it seems like the Maharil and his generation are also considered Roshonim. There is a continuation into the Achronim through Reb Yakov Pollak, Reb Sholom Shachna and the Maharshal. Somehow, you get the feeling that the new period begins with the Maharshal, perhaps because there is little record of anything before him.
About 150 years before the Spanish expulsion is when the situation with Anusim began in Spain. This coincides with the Tur’s generation. It came to a complete end with the expulsion. The Abrabanel, Reb Yosef Yaavetz, Ri Elbo, among other s are referred to sometimes as Kadmonim, since they don’t quite fit into either category. Perhaps, those living in this period in Europe get the same status.
In this respect, there is little doubt that the holocaust ended a period in our history. In fact, both world wars messed up the Yeshivos and the Torah situation. We started anew, and began a new era.
Gavra, I agree to that. I think that pretty much any Gadol born before 1940 fits into the earlier category. I can’t think of anyone younger than that who has that same status.
Would you want to marry someone who you know will be married to a fool?
In most cases, the greatest favor you can do to someone you don’t really want to marry, is not to marry him/her.
Bilaam, and perhaps those present, were just conditioned to accept it as normal.
Actually, what it says is that when the donkey rubbed against one side it killed one servant and when it rubbed against the other it killed the remaining servant. He was next. That’s what the Malach was referring to when he said he would have killed him, too. So, I guess they had worse things to worry about than being shocked.
Actually his point is that it physically did happen. Bilaam, and perhaps those present, were just conditioned to accept it as normal. He happens to learn that Bilaam only went with Shnei Ne’arav Imo since he was in such a hurry to get out. That was what the Malach told him off about. He listened, and went along with the rest of the guys.
I forgot to mention that the Stira in the Rambam is from the Maharam Al Ashkar, that I went through after it was mentioned here by Sam2.
I hadn’t seen or heard of this Stira anywhere else. It is just proof that we don’t really fully undertand the Rambam, and we shouldn’t be touting the Rambam as a source for denying narratives in the Torah, at least until we get to the bottom of this.
I forgot if it had a name. I think it is simply called by his own name, Chiddushei Rebbe Eliezer Ashkenazi. It wasn’t around forever. It is missing a certain part were he writes that he had to run away (or something like that).
In his Maase Hashem, I saw yesterday that he has an interesting approach in the Rambam on the topic of seeing a Malach in a Chalom. He addresses the Ramban’s Kashos on the Rambam.
He explains that the Chalom in these circumstances mean a state of blurriness, in which anything goes, so that the Navi shouldn’t be shocked when he hears a Malach speak. The same is by Bilam’s donkey. He wasn’t too shocked to answer because he was in this state.
I liked this approach, especially since it answers the apparent Stira in the Rambam. On the hand, the widely-quoted Rambam says that Bilam’s donkey speaking was part of a dream. On the other hand, and not as widely-quoted, he writes that a Malach was needed to make the donkey speak. Also in the Pirush Mishnayos on Avos, where it says that the Pi Ha’ason was created Erev Shabbos, he explains that it was a Ness.
They tried making it more real but —
Ess Iz Shver Tzu Zein A Yid.
Yekke, I don’t really want to promote something I don’t believe. Perhaps I shouldn’t even have mentioned it. You can find certain odd things in different Sefarim. Not necessarily is it a Mitzva to publicize them.
The Sefer Maase Hashem is a deep, interesting Sefer on the Torah. The style is somewhat similar to that of the Abrabanel. He discusses many topics, in great depth. His Sefer on Keddushin is also unique and refreshing. The Maharal pointed out and complained about where he wrote that since Yedia contradicts Bechira, Hashem willingly put it out of His hands, so to speak. The Maharal says that it’s better to believe there is no Bechira than to believe that.
Yes, the Mishna says Hakol Tzapoi Vehareshus Nesuna. Hashem told Moshe in advance that the Yidden will sin. Obviously, Reb Elazar Ashkenazi was well aware of this. Perhaps there is a difference between individual choices and the general direction of Klal Yisroel.
There is also an interesting Tosafos in Nida 16b, the bottom Tosafos. He discusses Chizkia being foretold about Menashe being a Rasha.
Daas, are you implying that if someone complains about being mistreated it proves his guilt?
The Maharal’s explanation of why it is that Man Dikapid Kapdinan Bahadei, only works for Zugos.
What is interesting, though, is that in the story of Rabba bar Nachmeini, the guy chasing him drank Zugos and was affected. Obviously he wasn’t Makpid. (Maybe, since Rabba was Makpid it affected the people in his vicinity. That’s why the fellow knew that Rabba must be there — since Rabba was famously the one that was Makpid!)
It means that it must be taken care of. If you leave over one apartment with them they’ll regenerate.
There are many reasons why you would want to be like them besides the fact of Ayin Hara not working.
It depends on you relationship. If he is a good boy that wants to please, you can have a heart to heart conversation. That should work, especially if it was the first time. For him it is fun and an experiment, while for you it is horrible, dangerous, and wrong. Give him the big picture.
There are other ways to react. If you don’t feel like he is in your hands, you might have to leave it. I hope he has a Rebbe that he and you trust. Speak to him.
Who cares? I think what Naysburg said was interesting, anyhow.
torah, are you saying that we are all B’nei Yosef? I wasn’t under that impression.
That is very interesting. Why would they differenciate between base-to-handset and the other way?
They don’t live in the walls. They live in the mattresses and box springs. But they wander from apartment to apartment. Chances are, if you have them smeone else does, too. They are smart. If they want to get onto a bed and can’t clime, they can climb up a nearby wall and fall onto the bed.
You will have to wash all your clothing and cover your matress in plastic. Do research in yor building to find out if anyone over you or under you has this problem.
It’s not a picknic but,
Good luck.
By the way, regarding the Baal Tosafos Reb Yaakov Yisroel, it may have been a family name much like Isserel.
Shmendrik, by being Makpid at this point you are actually breaking tradition, no matter how it started.
Baal Haturim. That’s two names, no?
It sounds like you are in an apartment building. Make sure you track the source. I have a friend who had them repeatedly because the apartment that was infested was not taken care of.
The newer (as in since 2000) phones are supposed to be digital and operate in the 900MHz frequencies, both reasons for it not to be picked up with a scanner.
kohain,
Every one always learned the Rambam. They had an issue with the Moreh Nevuchim, which they still do — although, now we treat it with Kavod. They burned the Moreh. Afterwards, in France 24 wagonloads of Sefarim were burned. On bottom they saw the Yad. This was taken as a sign that it was a retribution for burning the Rambam’s Moreh Nevuchim. From then on, although learning it was still not encouraged, it was treated properly.
I know people enjoy drawing parallels to the Rambam and any particular controversial Hashkafic person, but it is a bad comparison. The Rambam was recognized in his day, and his Sefer Yad Chazaka spread far and wide very fast.
Reish Lakish once put a Ganav in Cherem, who in turn put Reish Lakish in Cherem. Reish Lakish was told that since his Cherem was Shelo Kedin — since a Ganav doesn’t get Cherem — his Cherem is not valid and the one against him stands. This is because for putting someone in Cherem Shelo Kedin you can deserve a Cherem.
So,
What is the text of the more Halachicaly valid Cherem by the Talmidei Hamagid?
Does it still apply?
To whom did it apply?
Does it apply to learning the Sefarim of those whom it referred to?
Peleh Yoetz is probably referring to Hashem. The Meforshim disagree about Sar Shalom. Ish Boshes is one name, and so is Lo Ruchama. You couldn’t call them Ish or Lo, the name was both words; it isn’t two names.
Moshe, Tuvya and Avigdor are three names but they are alternative names. You won’t find him being called Moshe Tuvya ben Amram.
In the Gemara we find that the known names aren’t the original names. Lo Rebbe Meir Shmo Ela Rebbe Nehora’i Shmo. Abaye’s name might have really been Nachmeini, not Abaye.
benign, actually it means, great one.
nitpicker, these actually seem like titles rather than names. Nor is Shlomo Zalman a proof, it is the vernacular for Shlomo, similar to our Solomon. That is actually another possibility of how the trend started. First the nickname was added later as a title, and then it became part of the name and was given at birth. Later, the second name became more random.
Perhaps we can point to Yaakov Avinu, Moshe Rabbeinu, and Shlomo Hamalech, although we never find them being called more than one at a time.
Perhaps, like our pronunciations, we borrowed the idea from our hosts.
Health, I don’t think the Bracha comes from the Rav Hamachshir. I’ve heard of many such instances where the Rav was contacted and said that the Bracha, or some other non-Kashrus Halachik fact, was not his doing.
Yekke, | is a pipe key, the key after { and }. It is usually Shift+.
That’s a matter of style. It could have been written the way you wrote it, but the author decided to sound curt and decisive. It makes you feel like part of the decision.
If you write a lot, I’m sure the momment will come when you want it to be said just that way, for whatever reason.
Tosafos says that the Braysa can’t be the Tana Kama, according to the second Lashon. This is Rebdoniel’s great answer. I simply wanted to show that it’s true, and from where he got it.
The Ramban in his Vikuach says that the one in the Gemara is indeed him, and he lived 200 years earlier than they claim. The Raavad in his Seder Hakabala brings both sides and seems to side with the view that it is him.
Tosafos famously says that it can’t be him because Papus Ben Yehuda was in the time of Rebbe Akiva.
You have to take this Shita with a grain of salt, since they might have been saying this to save their skin.
The first Tosafos on Daf 5 points this out. In the second definition of the Machlokes — that they argue about Shaas Vestan — the Braisa can only be Reb Dosa, since it says that Shelo Beshaas Vesta she is Tamei Me’es La’es. Obviously, Beshaas Vesta we say Dayan Shaatan, which is Reb Dosa.
When the Gemara says that the Braisa is Kulei Alma, it is only in regards to Shelo Beshaas Vesta being Tamei Me’es La’es, says Tosafos.
Sam, I don’t know why you would talk like that about Gedolei Olam who instituted this? There are those who are aware of Kedusha and the opposite, with its implications.
If you are complaining about enforcing it upon those who don’t have the Minhag, you are correct. Is that your point?
An independent clause is a statement that could have been its own sentence. Funnybone is saying that you use it instead of a period when the two parts of the sentence are complete statements which you decided to make into one sentence.
A long, run-on sentence should have commas in the right places to show phrasing. However, when you will need sub-commas, as in a parenthetical statement or explanation, within and in between more important commas, you might want to use the semi-colon. Otherwise, it may confuse the reader, who will have to decipher which commas are serving what purpose.
So, it is less than a period and more than a comma; it can replace a comma and resemble a period.
When you are listing Rabbonim in a picture, you’ll say: R’ Asher, Rav of Khal Bnei Zelda; R’ Berel; Mashgiash of Yeshivas Ahavas Mussar. If you’d use commas throughout, you would think that R’ Berel is the Mashgiach of Ahavas Mussar. I know. I could have used the pipe. ;|
Thehock, the existence of Lemaala Min Hazman itself is cause for the question, even without anyone knowing it. Once you understand that your current decision transcends now, you bump into the whole problem of your choice not really being now.
Huh? Holier than who?
You managed to find depth in a funny commedy. You can’t find depth in an ancient Minhag Yisroel?
And it applies to the ‘Perushim’ as well, I guess.
Is there any special food we eat on Nittel?
Is there any Tefilla to say before you don’t learn?
Do Sefardim keep the whole ramadan?
Is it a Hiddur to play chess, or to cut t. paper?
If you started a game before Chatzos, and Chatzos chanced by, do you finish the game, go learn, go to sleep, Daven Maariv, leave the game for next year, or argue if you are supposed to learn on Nittul night?
To learn the semi-colon. Is that the secret?
FTFBOY
The semi-colon is like a heavy comma. You don’t use it as parenthesis like a comma, but it breaks a sentence in two when both parts are separate but still one sentence; when they could have been complete sentences but happen to be a single statement.
When you have a list which includes commas at certain items in the list, you’ll use a semi-colon to delimit the list. This is how dictionaries use it. In general though, if you find yourself using it too much you are probably misusing it.
I must ask, when and how do you use a pipe, other than in logic?
Could you learn from a Sefer Torah Shekasvo Min?
BTW, the name Nittul is a play on what it was obviously referred to by the christians, Nettle, which means birth in Latin.
The name Nittul suggest another reason not to learn. The Gemara says regarding Trayfos, Kol Hayesser Kinatul Dami, what is extra is as if it is missing — and renders the animal a Traifa. Now, since they added to the Torah, and thereby ruined the while concept of torah, we don’t learn that night to show that adding is taking away.
Starting new threads.
Counting numbers is not infinite because no one can get to infinity through counting numbers. In fact, no one can get to infinity from any finite point. That is what the Chovos Halevavos was getting at.
Using infinity in math is a toy, since there is no relationship between it and the finite, while there is no mathematical reason for such a concept not to exist. This is why we will find paradoxes in many levels.
This doesn’t mean we can’t understand what is meant by infinity. It simply means that there is no bridge to get there, and any attempt to define the infinite by applying finite terms will have paradoxes.
Yekke, Reb Elazar Ashkenazi, in his Maasei Hashem. The Maharal complains bitterly about it in Derech Chaim.