Tomche

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 182 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879343
    Tomche
    Member

    Sounds like a plan, popa. There goes her 50/50 asset split in favor of your 100/0. (She can still take any assets she had from before marriage.)

    in reply to: Matisyahu – what are you doing with his cds? #886179
    Tomche
    Member

    A frum person who frei’s out is not a tinok shenishba; he’s a rasha.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879340
    Tomche
    Member

    Thank You

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879338
    Tomche
    Member

    popa: What magazine is kolmos?

    in reply to: Matisyahu – what are you doing with his cds? #886176
    Tomche
    Member

    Break them.

    Truth be told, no one should have been listening to his junk in the first place. Even when the faker was wearing a yarmulka.

    in reply to: Anybody know how to Avoid ''giyus'' if i live in USA #879215
    Tomche
    Member

    What can the American Embassy do regarding an internal Israeli matter regarding an Israeli citizen currently in Israel?

    in reply to: Need MacBook Pro 15" fact to return lost laptop #879153
    Tomche
    Member

    He has no reshus to turn it on to find out; so he must be dan lkaf zchus.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879332
    Tomche
    Member

    yitzyshalom: Yet for followers of poskim who rule that it isn’t kosher, they will have the halachic status of being a mamzer. Even if another posek holds he/she isn’t a mamzer. See the Gemora in Yavamos that was mentioned earlier.

    simcha613: Secular court shouldn’t be giving them anything. A Jew is prohibited from settling a dispute in secular court outside of beis din. Including in divorce matters. Going to arkayos is a tremendous sin.

    Feif Un: Not according to the terms of the BDA Prenuptial Agreement. The BDA PNA mandates he must pay her $150 per day, every day, from the day she walks out of his home for any or no reason. Period. The terms are clear in black and white, as written and signed in the prenup. As long as they are not living together he must pay up, even if he has no halachic obligation to give a Get.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879326
    Tomche
    Member

    aren’t there basic halachic rulings already in place that say when a couple can ask for a divorce or not?

    Correct.

    So shouldn’t a prenup only cover those?

    It should. But the RCA/BDA prenup does not do that. The legal provisions written and signed in the RCA/BDA prenup allow the spouse to invoke the $150.00 daily penalty payments immediately upon demand, by simply walking out of the marriage for any reason or no reason at all.

    in reply to: Facebook #890871
    Tomche
    Member

    DY: Even access from a place of business is supposed to be limited to use for business purposes only. How, then, can they offer a recreational service online (from their customers perspective), when recreational and entertainment websites are not supposed to be accessed (even from a business connection.)

    in reply to: Facebook #890866
    Tomche
    Member

    DY: He’s saying that his understanding of the psak is that the only permissible use of the internet is for business purposes, and not for any personal or recreational purposes. And the only place allowed for it be accessed from, is a place of business.

    And he is asking how then can Mostly Music have any online presence, even outside Facebook (based upon their statement you quoted above of them following the gedolim), when their customer base who accesses Mostly Music’s website and purchases their music online are doing so for non-business purposes, but rather for recreational purposes. Thus Mostly Music is still enabling and promoting non-business use of the internet by maintaining their e-commerce website.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879323
    Tomche
    Member

    You will not find anyone who holds a person is a mamzer allow a non-mamzer to marry him/her, even if the mamzer’s rov holds he/she isn’t a mamzer. At most you’ll have the exact situation in the Gemorah in Yevamos cited by Popa above, where they will each have to tell each other who the other side considers a mamzer, so they do not marry him/her.

    in reply to: Can someone with unfiltered internet be a ???? ?????? #1134142
    Tomche
    Member
    in reply to: Sidewalk Etiquette #879702
    Tomche
    Member

    hanab: For yourself, that is probably the best approach. Walk all the way on the side of the building (or property) rather than on the side of the street. This way they have to make room for you, since there is no where for them to push you off into.

    in reply to: Sidewalk Etiquette #879700
    Tomche
    Member

    Yes, I do that too; walk on the side of the building, in addition to charging ahead.

    in reply to: Can someone with unfiltered internet be a ???? ?????? #1134139
    Tomche
    Member

    The Debreciner Rov zichrono tzadik l’vrocha was not a layman. He was one of Klal Yisroel’s great poskim.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879319
    Tomche
    Member

    And the only way to not bring it back, is to not create children that will be considered mamzeirim according to any shitta. Especially according to a world class posek hador, such as Rav Elyashev shlit”a.

    in reply to: Can someone with unfiltered internet be a ???? ?????? #1134135
    Tomche
    Member

    Are you suggesting that we allow a mechallel Shabbos to be Shliach Tzibbur due to kiruv? We have rules that we need to keep. Someone who sins in public is halachicly precluded from being Shatz. The only question remaining is whether the sin is being conducted publicly.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879315
    Tomche
    Member

    That’s nice, except hundreds of thousands of Talmidim and followers of the Psak Din of Rav Elyashev shlita and others will consider those children to be mamzeirim. Its hard to imagine that child finding a shidduch, even among those who don’t consider him a mamzer, when a large portion of Klal Yisroel will consider him or her a mamzer.

    And which man would be crazy enough to marry such a woman in the first place, considering their children will be considered mamzeirim by many, even if he doesn’t hold like that?

    in reply to: Sidewalk Etiquette #879697
    Tomche
    Member

    Perhaps it isn’t and is more manlike. In any event, for the most part I usually find this problem with a bunch of over-talkative women.

    in reply to: Can someone with unfiltered internet be a ???? ?????? #1134131
    Tomche
    Member

    If it is filtered.

    in reply to: Sidewalk Etiquette #879695
    Tomche
    Member

    Personally, when I am walking alone and there is a group coming that doesn’t seem to want to make room for anyone else on the sidewalk, I simply continue walking full-speed toward them and inevitably the person on the side will quickly move aside (sometimes at the last second) as I am passing in order to avoid bumping into me.

    in reply to: Sidewalk Etiquette #879694
    Tomche
    Member

    The group needs to make room for the single. They can’t monopolize the entire width of the sidewalk.

    in reply to: Can someone with unfiltered internet be a ???? ?????? #1134126
    Tomche
    Member

    Not only is the halacha like the Debreciner, no one even argues on the Debreciner Rov. Please cite any SH’UT that disagrees with this SH’UT on what the requirements for a Shaliach Tzibbur is.

    in reply to: Can someone with unfiltered internet be a ???? ?????? #1134124
    Tomche
    Member

    Unfiltered internet has all the negatives of television and much much worse. There is no reason the Debretziner Rov’s psak teshuva on television would be different for unfiltered internet, as all the reasoning’s apply. Unless you want to somehow argue that the person with the unfiltered internet is not doing so publicly and is sinning in private.

    As far as not letting him into a shul altogether, the Debretziner doesn’t go that far. (Btw, the Debretziner was Oberlander, not Chasidish.) And television was also prohibited by the gedolim. He only says he cannot be a Shatz.

    in reply to: Can someone with unfiltered internet be a ???? ?????? #1134113
    Tomche
    Member

    Sorry, wrong link for Hebrew Books. Here is the correct:

    http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=888&st=&pgnum=501

    in reply to: OU kashrus is not reliable? #1214280
    Tomche
    Member

    I sure hope that quote would not apply to a hashgocha agency.

    Tomche
    Member

    NFN: I wouldn’t categorize different flavors of Orthodoxy as different flavors of Judaism. So I would surely state it still practices the same Judaism as its founders did. Though, you also note that it is different than the flavor your family (currently) practices. This I cannot dispute, as it appears from the timestamp that you have posted your comment from Boulder, Colorado during the Sabbath.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879307
    Tomche
    Member

    Mod-95: Thank You for allowing those two links. The EDAH article was from a 2005 issue of their journal. Rabbi Willig came out with his halachic prenup approximately circa 1999. So Rav Elyashev’s strong halachic objections certainly apply, even if there have been minor modifications of the legal terms of the current prenup. The reason given by RYSE for his objections still apply.

    Also, there have been no significant changes to the RCA/BDA prenup between 2005 and 2012. Certainly nothing substantial to change its halachic problems.

    And the JPost article from 2005 noted that the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, at that time, refused to allow prenups due to Rav Elyashev’s halachic objections.

    I’ll also just note that one of the links not approved was to the site of Gil Student, a known MO blogger rabbi who supports the prenup. He acknowledges the fact that Rav Elyashev issued a psak against the prenup.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879305
    Tomche
    Member

    Mods, please allow the links below. They are only discussing Halacha. See:

    ==>HERE<== (bottom of page 4)

    This is from the THE EDAH JOURNAL, a radical left-wing modern orthodox organization that strongly supports the prenup. Forget all that is written in it… the writer acknowledges that Rav Elyashiv holds it causes an invalid Get.

    If you want the primary source, check ???? ??????. But references to RYSE’s psak is abound over the internet. Here are another few quickly found:

    ==>HERE<==

    These two are allowed.

    I note that the edah article is from before the most recent pre-nup was suggested, and I imagine the authors were attempting to solve the previously existing problems.

    Also, the Jerusalem post article refers to a psak from the 1960’s–well before this proposal.

    -95

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879304
    Tomche
    Member

    Sam2: I got it right. Nothing you responded disputed my essential points. Read the actual terms of agreement being signed, rather than the PR writeup on the website “explaining” the prenup – that is written to fool people into signing it without clearly and closely reading the actual terms on the signature pages.

    $150 PER DAY (plus inflation) is an insane amount that is impossible for most people to even possibly meet even if they wanted to. Most people don’t even earn that much income ($1,050.00 per week, post-taxes.) It is far far away and above from “mezonos” support. The Nachlas Shivah doesn’t say 10 gold coins PER DAY.

    It also coerces a Get at-will, even if Halacha does not obligate him to give a Get. He is obligated, under the legal terms written in the actual contract of the BDA prenup, to start paying $150 a day as soon as she walks out on him for any reason (or no reason at all).

    And all the wife risks losing is the mezonos if she defies beis din. A Heter Meah is a hugely difficult, time-consuming and expensive undertaking. It can cost upwards of $50,000 to arrange a legitimate Heter Meah. Who could even afford it? You rarely hear of any cases of heter meah.

    Why isn’t the wife subject to $150 a day for illegitimately refusing a Get, just like the husband is subject to?

    in reply to: OU kashrus is not reliable? #1214272
    Tomche
    Member

    The Chasidishe Hashgachos rely on the OU very often. So, if you turn down the OU, everything else comes along.

    That is not exactly accurate. The Chasidishe hashgochos do not accept the OU hechsher for all products. They don’t accept them on certain OU foods that the OU allows certain kulos for, that they don’t accept.

    So sometimes one can not rely on the OU for certain food products while relying on the OU for certain other food products, due to different kashrus standards.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879294
    Tomche
    Member

    I just took a look at the actual text of the RCA/BDA prenup. It is quite horrid. (And that is aside from the halachic objections Rav Elyashev has to the very concept and theory of this type of prenup.)

    A. It has the husband sign that he is agreeing to forgo Halacha (Jewish Law) in the case of divorce, and accept whatever secular law at the time says for the issues of divorce, even if they are in conflict with Torah Law. (i.e. Separation of assets.)

    B. They agree to use the BDA, and no other Beis Din, for all divorce matters. The BDA is quite on the left-wing spectrum of Orthodoxy and is known to employ a feminist agenda and often eschew Jewish Law in favor of employing non-Jewish law.

    C. It obligates the husband to pay her $150 per day, from the day his wife left his home (or forced him out of his home) for any reason. As long as they are not living together, he is obligated to pay $150 per day to her. (Actually it will be higher than $150 since it is indexed to increase with inflation, from the day of marriage, per the CPI.) She could simply wake up one morning and decide to separate, even if Halacha does not allow it or entitle her to a divorce, and he is immediately obligated to pay up or give her a Get.

    Furthermore, the prenup makes no such provisions upon the wife should she refuse to accept a Get from him. She cannot be made to pay him any backbreaking daily monetary obligation should she illegitimately decide (even against the orders of the Beis Din) to refuse to accept the Get.

    in reply to: Kiddush or Chillul Hashem? #879356
    Tomche
    Member

    From the information provided in the OP, there is certainly no Kiddush Hashem.

    in reply to: PRENUPTUALS in FRUM circles??! #879292
    Tomche
    Member

    The psak of ??? ???? ???? ?????? forbidding these pre-nups is fairly well-known and cited in botei dinim cases in Eretz Yisroel. Google “parshablog on pre-nups” (without the quotes) to read a discussion on Rav Elyashev’s psak.

    in reply to: Vaad haRabbonim of America #878653
    Tomche
    Member

    Isn’t Igud run by a Lubavitcher?

    in reply to: Psak Halacha on Internet Access #878802
    Tomche
    Member

    Jbaldy: You are very mistaken. That isn’t merely DaasYochid’s view. That is the view of the entire chareidi spectrum of Daas Torah of the Gedolei Yisroel shlita.

    in reply to: Recall Election #885487
    Tomche
    Member

    I think every elected office (other than POTUS) should be recallable by the electorate. That being said, the standard to force an election should be very high (i.e. number of petitions.)

    in reply to: Constantly Losing Umbrellas #878618
    Tomche
    Member

    C’mon, fellas. You can get an umbrella for $3. They’re disposable.

    in reply to: Enough with the yiddish already #878371
    Tomche
    Member

    The Radak (Sefer HaMichlol, introduction) writes that Loshon HaKodesh is all but forgotten to us, and all we have left is what is in Tanach.

    The Chasam Sofer notes that while Chazal used many words and phrases borrowed from the Greeks and Romans, they never coined a new word, as has been done in modern Hebrew, for in their holy opinion it was preferable to use other languages rather than create even a single new word that did not have its like, its example, in the Torah, since it could not be rooted in sanctity.

    The Chasam Sofer EH 2:11 says that in ancient times Jews used to use a modified version of the non-Jewish languages for everyday (divrei chol) talk, similar to what Yiddish is.

    The Chasam Sofer writes that the reason Jews do not speak Loshon Hakodesh as a speaking language is because it is inappropriate to use a holy language while enveloped in Tumah, which is our current status. The Rambam writes that a love song in Hebrew is more repulsive to Hashem than the same song in Arabic, for instance, because the pollution of the Holy language is an additional crime. If someone wants to store pornography in his house, thats bad enough. But to store it in the Aron HaKodesh is unspeakably worse. So to cause Loshon HaKodesh to be used as a street language, complete with all the disgusting ways it is used today in Israel, is just more of a reason why we should make sure it never gets into the streets. For our Creator to look down at the world and see His holy language – or even elements of it – used in magazines such as are sold in Kiosks on Yaffo or Dizengoff Street, or spoken by the lowest of the low trying to make a sale, is not something that he or we are happy about.

    The Kuzari writes that Avrohom Avinu, therefore, spoke 2 different languages. One for holy speech – that was Loshon HaKodesh, and the other for mundane speech – that, the Kuzari says was some non-Jewish language that Avrohom Avinu took and changed around a little on his own. And thats the idea behind Yiddish. It is a non-Jewish language that we took and twisted a bit in order to make it exclusive among us.

    in reply to: Does Anyone Else Find This Short Story Disturbing? #840721
    Tomche
    Member

    Why do you think there has been a change? It always was like this.

    in reply to: Negative date! #809257
    Tomche
    Member

    What if someone recommending she break it off causes her to break it off with her zivug?

    in reply to: Havdalah – Putting Wine on Your Eyes and in Your Pocket #808282
    Tomche
    Member

    When is it recited Motzei Shabbos?

    (“Zareinu V’chaspeinu Yarbeh Kachoil, V’chakochavim Baloyloh” is part of Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L’Chol, which you say right after Havdalah.)

    in reply to: Havdalah – Putting Wine on Your Eyes and in Your Pocket #808280
    Tomche
    Member

    bein_hasdorim:

    “Zareinu V’chaspeinu Yarbeh Kachoil, V’chakochavim Baloyloh” appears twice (once in begging and once at the end) in Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L’Chol. You put it in your pocket by both? And do you repeat “Hamavdil Bein Kodesh L’Chol” a third time, to repeat Zareinu V’chaspeinu Yarbeh Kachoil?

    Also, you only put it in your pants pockets or your jacket pockets a well? And what do you mean by “side by side”?

    And where does it say Mitzvahs Hashem Borah Me’iras Eynoyim?

    in reply to: Honesty #813483
    Tomche
    Member

    Perhaps your information about him having quit is mistaken.

    in reply to: Atilla the Hun #808208
    Tomche
    Member

    Was he called the Hun because he was such a sweet guy that everyone called hun? Or because he was forerunner of the Hungarians and they were called the Huns back then?

    in reply to: "Wearing Perfume" #814272
    Tomche
    Member

    bein_hasdorim:

    The Rambam does not restrict the prohibition to a place where people are suspected of mishkav zachar.

    in reply to: "Wearing Perfume" #814270
    Tomche
    Member

    Gemara in Brachos 43b states that a Talmud Chacham should not venture out to the street while anointed with perfume. The Gemara reads:

    ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??????? ???????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ????? ??? ????? ?? ????? ???.

    ?? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ??? ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ????

    Kesef Mishnah:

    in reply to: YOEL ZEV The Boy From Japan- What A Lesson!!! #807450
    Tomche
    Member

    Courts generally don’t declare innocence, Ron. So how do you get there?

    in reply to: YOEL ZEV The Boy From Japan- What A Lesson!!! #807447
    Tomche
    Member

    IOW, he can never be innocent. How Jewish.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 182 total)