Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Avira
youre dodging a bit on JO.
Yes not everything was run by the moetzes, I said that. But future moetzes members worte for it. the Novominsker, Rav Elya Svei.“It could be the question never dawned on them to ask.”
you are probably right, I don;t think anyone had a hava amina that there was somethign wrong with picturs of Tznius women (there once was a complaint for a picture deemed non-tznius was a small picture in piece of dress from around the world ).
You discuss the growth of Torah Judaim, which is great but not the subject at hand.The subject is kedusa
“Most frum jews had a TV when the JO was at its peak; they were seeing women, and untznius women, everyday. Not to mention the mixed kiddushin, etc..”
So yes our generation has greater kedusha than theirs (less exposed to TV etc). thats fair
thanks for the replyIf you dont mind I asked a third question above
(labeled third question)Avira
“The simple answer…” But that isnt what Rav Acha said. Rav Acha said that he had no hirhurim whatsoever from it. Or put another way she didnt make a roshem it was like holding a beam, he didnt notice her
If I understand your correctly NOT having a yetzer haraah, ie viewing a kallah as a beam is LOWER than havign a yetzer harah. It means less kedusha. Im’ asking on his “beam” response not on his action. If he said “I have a huge yetzer hara for her – bigger than yours! but bmkom mitzvah its muttar” or somehting like that , I’d hear. but that wasnt his reply.Avira
Second question
you say “The holier one is, the more sensitive he is to all matters of kedushah and shmiras aynayim.”
The Jewish Observer had pictures of Women, as you must know it was published under the auspices of Agudas Yisroel. I doubt the moetzes was too involved in the month to month publishing, but it is hard to imagine they opposed the practice.
Not to mention many Rabbanim did regulalry contribute .Was Torah True Judaism tm on a lower level of kedusha then than today?
Avira
Third question
Most people have zero yetzer harah when they see pictures of men. If someone does, does that mean he is on a higher level of kedusha?
I’m guessing you’ll say “No that isn’t a normal yetzer harah” (I’m sorry if that isnt what you would say I don;t mean to put words in your mouth just seems like an obvious distinction – in which case ignore rest of post and if you could provide your own answer please )
Then though that means that a yetzer harah for 10 year old girls is normal (otherwise your story with the chofetz chai is weird)
So it really just comes down to what is and isnt considered normal
Is it normal to have yetzer harah when see pinky?
Sure if a person looks intending to get hannah of course thats assur, but stam azaoi there is no issur. So is it a higher level to be the type of person who gets hanaah from pinkys ? That seems a bit pathologic. Of course if that IS a person’s yetzer harah he needs to deal with it. but if it isnt to say he has a lower level of kedusha seems funny .So this ends up being the fellow who draws targets then shoots arrows.
Whatever you dont want to exclude is an abnormal yetzer harah and NOT a sign of kedusha if you struggle with it and whatever you want to ban anyone who doesnt struggle with it is less kadosh.
There is no objective standard men? children? babies? Old women? pinkys? you just get to decide what is and isnt normalAvira
Rav Acha would carry Kallah on his shoulders, when talmidim asked if they could do it he replied if she seemd to them “like a beam” (Kesubos 17a) Was he on a lower level of kedusha than they ?
Halevia
I’m not big on telling people what to dobut I have to say I winced at your calling tzedaka a “a money receptacle.”
And while his view is a few steps away from Communism. yours is close to “eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die”As an aside ‘v heard the OP’s idea from Rabbi Resiman many times. I’ve also heard him say that Eretz Yisroel is Artzeinu hakedosha, not a place to go on a vacation
Vyesh leyashev
I love learnig new things!
The Hellenists tried to benefit tzsedaka?
RE
Pashut Pshat is he was told “Don’t ask me such highly-invasive personal questions.”
YO
2 points
1) You open with “Why do I ask this [Most Important Issue of 2022] for many threads?”
This question is not smart, you ask it alot even though it has been pointed out to you that the question isnt smart.
IF you choose to ask it again and again you should expect put downs2) “the Loshon hora, the judging.”
You are pretty bad at this. For example on the kashrus thread you lied and claimed “50% of the decisions, operations and Hashkafa of most hashgachas have nothing to do with Halacha.”
when you were called out on your lie you backed it up with two claims, one which wasn’t against halacha, and another which isn’t true. when this was pointed out you ignored iter
for sure its terrible that many Republicans ignore Trump’s outrageous actions.
I didn’t mean to dismiss thatI’m expressing shock that 40% of Democrats support/unsure of Trumps’ meeting.
I don’t think there is ANY other thing Trump did that would have 40% of Democrats’s supportTHIS is where they say, maybe he’s right, or at least I’m unsure.
Of the 2 I find that the more shocking statistic
I had the opposite reaction on the poll
It says a bit more about Trump than antisemitism.
It is no secret Trump is a polarizing figure. As Trump said “I could shoot a person on 5th avenue and I wouldn’t lose any voters” There is no doubt that this is true (“any” is an exaggeration he wouldn’t lose many voters) Not becasue Republicans support murder, but becasue they like Trump.
The 73% of republicans who support or are unsure about the visit aren’t anti-Semitic per se, they are so blinded by the cult of Trump that they come up with excuses, he didnt know etc etc .
not that this is good, obviously a cult of personality isnt healthy, but I’m not sure it is anti-Semitic per se.What is shocking is 40% !!! of Democrats who generally oppose anything Trump says or does. on THIS they support or are unsure ?!!!??
that is wild!Avira
appreciation takes different formsI didn’t understand the question so much as referring to the being alone part (perhaps I misunderstood it). More to the self value. As you mentioned “A single man can join a learning program or get himself involved in community activities” While no doubt hard, a single man can earn a name for himself as the baal koreh, he can give a shiur, daven, get a “position” as a gabai. There are a lot of ways to “make a name for himself” of course not everybody is capable of those, these are but a few examples. my point is there are more ways readily available to contribute to the community for men than there are for women
Though the being alone part too is a little easier for men since by going to shul/shiurim they can develop a community, which of course lends itself to meals
ujm
“ubiq: What would be YOUR answer/solution to that unanswered question you quoted?”
I’m not sure that’s why its a hard question.. The rest of the questions I could have answered thats why I didnt list them as hard ones
Avira
“Why ask a question which is a pasuk? Hashem says to the serisim and the akarah that if they keep shabbos, they will have a yad veshem in My house.”
Its absolutely fantastic that you feel accomplished by keeping Shabbos. that is great and we are all very proud of you, and impressed by your tzidkus
Sadly some people arent on your high level, or they take keeping shabbos as a given, or they are content with the yad vashem they will leave, but feel like they are not appreciated NOW .“The question sounds like it’s implying that we should change hashkofa to suit singles.”
maybe that’s the answer (see why its hard). That wasn’t the way I understood it at all
I thought there was one but it was ignored.
The question was (paraphrasing) “Given that so much emphasis in our community is placed on getting married/building a family, how can older single women be given a sense of belonging”
To be clear the question was a two part question the first part was on the shidduch crises, the second part was the above the answered the first part not the second. I’m not suggesting that it was an intentional omission/bypass
Sholomd
I reread your comment
You wrote it as a reply to me, but I’m not sure where/how it relates to what I said.I never suggested every body would agree.
I never suggested that there arent those that might want to change Rashi’s postition as the peshat (that is literally whathe kol koreh says) how does saying they are yerushalmi yidden/satmar change that?In fact in one of their repleis the authors claimed the title “pershuto shel mikra” was NOT their title but the publisher changed it ….
AAQ
“Did Rashi mean to foreclose our thinking about Chumash?”
Interesting thought experiment. Though it doesn’t matter what Rashi wanted what matters, is “our mesora as handed down by our rebbeim”“Another option..”
Sure! by all means that is another option. by all means go for it. Hopefully you can acknowledge their right to hold by their option
Sholomd
“Yup, sure sounds suspicious….Glad you caught on something that their own community missed!!”I have no idea what you are saying.
It am not arguing on your notion is something/someone behind the ban that may have ulterior motives. nor am I arguing that the banners are correct.“The letter seems to be intentionally inexplicable.”
If you found it inexplicable, it may not have been meant for you.
Growing up with a similar mindset, I understood it completely.
As a kid chumash Rashi were drilled into up. In second grade we learnt Chumash Rashi till Sheini, third grade till Shlishi etcTo this day I pretty much remember most Rashis at least until Chamihsi having learnt them again year after year (excluding the “summer parshiyos”)
After getting married I lived in a small out of town community for a few years. This was my first real exposure to, “non-black hat” groups. One fellow gave a Chumash shiur before Shcharis on Shabos, that I sometimes attended. He asked a question “Why does Yaakov seemingly brag to Eisav that he has Oxen, donkeys, sheep slaves, wouldn’t that upset Eisav more (This wasnt actually the question, I’m using an example from this week’s parsha) Different people gave their own answers and interpretations.
I was a bit puzzled, when he asked me for my thoughts I said, a bit perplexed, “I don’t understand the question, Rashi explains it” he replied, “I know Rashi has a peshat, what do you say” To which I replied “It doesn’t matter what I say, Rashi already commented”now, I’m not convinced that his way is wrong per se. but the authors of the kol koreh certainly do, THAT is the community they are coming from
5782 was also Dec 4
I’m not sure why we should ignore old postnoM
“I’m not getting your differentiation.”
i’m not sure what you mean by “differentiation”
all I am saying is before commenting on something (especially before arguing with it “This ban is honestly ridiculous”) it is important to understand itjackk quoted from the kol koreh:
“And their intention is clear with the aim of replacing Rashi’s interpretation – which has always been the foundation of education and Judaism , and especially for the young people of the flock”
(I believe this is his translation but I read the original, and it is a fair translation.)What the Kol Koreh protests is “replacing Rashi’s interpretation” – particularly as peshat. NOT using other interpretations. Of course there are other Rishonim that offer different peshatim not to mention different levels of interpretation. The kol koreh says those haven’t been accepted by “our mesora” as the way to learn chumashi
Thus it is insulting to say “Rabbeinu bachya writes… Ibn ezra writes… . Ramban in last weeks parsha says …. Seforno says… Daas zekeinim mebaalei hatosfos write…”
Yes they know* they maintain that Rashi IS PESHAT and no other Rishon/pirush should supersede that as peshatNot that it shouldn’t be learnt** rather it shouldn’t be viewed as peshat. thus saying “So if that is true, then other pashtanim are not allowed to be studied?” Shows a progound lack of understanding of the issue at hand.
OF course they can be learnt but not as peshat .
Yes one hundred percent if you were to start a cheder and suggest teaching children chumash with Rambn/Ibn Ezra/ Rashbam etc instead of Rashi. Yes absolutly they would oppose that .
That is not the same as saying “other pashtanim are not allowed to be studied”You say “Rashi’s intention does not seem to have been pshat”
B’seder so you disagree with the kol koreh (I do too) and say Rashi isnt really peshat. don’t worry Rishonim say this too.
but understand the position before you disagree wit hit* I ask you do you really think they don’t know.? They never realized that Rishonim wrote differently than Rashi? That chumashim are available with other Rishonim?
** They also mention that there are some misinterpreations of rishonim, but that is debatable, and ok so correct them
“So if that is true, then other pashtanim are not allowed to be studied?”
No. nobody suggested that. Drash is great, so is remez. by all means go for it.
Just don’t confuse Derash with PEshat.
The argument is that Rashi IS peshat. Rashbam, Kli Yakar , Seforno, Rabbi Frand on the Parsha all great! but don’t call them Peshat“Did you read the kol korei??”
I did, I don’t think you did.
do you think the signatories haven’t seen a mikraos gedolos chumash, and aren’t aware that there are other pirushim available? do you think they meant they should all be thrown out.Its one thing to think they are wrong, it is quite another to think they are stupid.
They are aware that there are chumashim out there with non-Rashi explanations , they are aware that Rishonim give different explantions than Rashi at times
The Kol Koreh is against bringing other perushim, keneged Rashi AS PESHAThope that helps
red sock
I don’t understand. why are you repeating the same point over and over.
It was silly the first time it is still silly.NOBODY said all explanations other than Rashi should be “ripped out”
This is a silly strawman that you made up, as was pointed out to youYO
I don’t understand why is it better
If a shadchan asks every family the same questions and rights them all downWhere does he/she live
how hold is he/she
What do thye do
what school/yeshiva did they go to
etc etcisnt it much more efficent to just have them “pre-answer” all these standard questions?
Similarly why is it better if a person answers the same questions
Where does he/she live
how hold is he/she
What do thye do
what school/yeshiva did they go to
etc etc
to each shadchan they contact?Isnt it more efficient to just right out these answers beforehand ?
AAQ
Are the letters about English or Hebrew, or both?Neither of those as has been mentioned before
“Please read “An End to Shidduch Resumes””
spare yourself, its a silly gripe by an embittered soul looking for something to blame his troubles on
YO
By ignoring my question we gave it away that we are one and the same.Maybe answer my question to get them off track
To recap:
You said “50% of kashrus decisions are not based on shulchan aruch” (paraphrasing)
When asked to provide an example you said giving a hechsher on water.
To which I asked where in shulchan sruch does it say water isn’t kosher? Why is certifying water as kosher against shulchan aruch?Avira
It’s not too late to go back to your roots and join us.
Do teshuvaOk time to fess up I created a third profile named “common saychel” with which to call people trolls (I was too embarrassed to do it under one of my other names)
Now I accidentally outed one of my other names using my common saychel sn.
This is all getting confusing mods maybe time to deactivate my CS account lNo I didn’t
I mean um oops what are you talking about?
………………
Seriously though don’t quit your day job to go troll hunting full time, you are getting rusty
RE
Sure, my pleasure
it is a topic I find fascinatingRed sock
You added “mostly”
And again yes Rishonim argue on Rashi that is irrelevant . The argument goes that we’ve accepted Rashi as pshatOops made a big mistake in my last post
corrected here:
RE
point of clarification
you said ” why do we follow Shmuel (Sept 24) and not science (Sept 22)? Is science incorrect here?”
Those two Septembers are not the same
To be consistent The question should be
Using Gregorian dates:
” why do we follow Shmuel (Oct 7) and not science (Sept 22)? Is science incorrect here?”or
Using Julian dates
” why do we follow Shmuel (Sept 24) and not science (Sep 9)? Is science incorrect here?”(I prefer the first way since we use the Gregorian calendar thus we are more familiar with it, and in fact in my first version of this post I made a mistake with the Julian date )
“they would institute a bracha “shelo asani moderni””
Can a person born moderni but who then converts to Torah True Judaism tm still make the beracha?
What about the reverse?
” It’s a harsh but legitimate question.”
Its a foolish question
These kind of things lend themselves to supporting whatever you already held
IF you like Zionism then it was because Yidden were to slow in embracing Zinomism
If you don’t like Zionism then it is becasue many DID embrace zinosim
talking in shul, tznius, assmilation whatever you wantSo if yone wanted to argue that “Ashkenazim were so advanced in torah and mitzvos”
Then the answer to your question would be because “b’krovei ekodesh” Hashem is sanctified by those closest to him – AshkenazimThat’s why the question is foolish
RE
point of clarification
you said ” why do we follow Shmuel (Sept 24) and not science (Sept 22)? Is science incorrect here?”
Those two Septembers are not the same
To be consistent The question should be
Using Gregorian dates:
” why do we follow Shmuel (Oct 7) and not science (Sept 22)? Is science incorrect here?”or
Using Julian dates
” why do we follow Shmuel (Sept 24) and not science (Oct 5)? Is science incorrect here?”(I prefer the first way since we use the Gregorian calendar thus we are more familiar with it )
We don’t general follow “science” in halachic matters
We follow science as handed down by the Chachmei Hamesorah.Shmuel’s Tekufa isn’t Sept 24, it is Oct 7 (until 2100 when it will be Oct 8)
That said , there is a more accurate Tekufa of Rav Ada Which was shortly before midnight Sunday Sep 25 which is obviously closer to 9/22 than Oct 7 is *
The Chazon Ish explains that the reason why we don’t use it for vesein tal umatar is that it is too complicated for the massess. We all need to figure out when to say vesein tal umatar, same goes for birchas hachama. So we use a simpler albeit less accurate calculation that is “close enough” (He explains that Shmuel isnt arguing on Rav Ada, of course Shmuel new his calendar was innacurate in Berachos he says he knew the paths of stars like the roads of Neharda)
However for the calendar which is given over to chachamim we use the more complicated tekufa of Rav Ada
*
The reason why this is off by more than you might expect, is that Jewish Tekufos assume 4 equal periods
That of Shmuel assumes 365 days & 6 hrs or 365.25 days a season is 1/4 of that = 91 days 7.5 hr
That of Rav Ada assumes a year lasts 365.24682 days a season is 1/4 of that
(For comparative purposes The Gregorian Calendar assumes a year lasts 365.24250 days (Note this too is a bit too slow and will eventually need to be adjusted as the calendar is sliding forward by one day every 3323 years))
However the astronomical seasons are not of equal length. This is becasue the Earth’s trip around the sun is not a crcle it is an ellipse so the seasons are not equal I found these values online: Spring = 92 days, 19 hours; summer = 93 days, 15 hours; autumn,= 89 days, 20 hours; winter= 89 days, zero hours. Thus while the Gregorian and Astronomical YEARS are very close to that of Rav Ada. The SEASONS are off by a few days*should read chicken and milk
(and yes obviously the two are not directly comparable, was the first example that came to my mind point is just because a machlokes exists doesn’t mean all sides are always given equal weight)
RE
I don’t fully understand this minhag we have of repeating the same thing every year
“This year the Sept tekufa (Tekufas Tishri) is Sept 22 ”
This is not correct
Tekufas Tishrei according to Shmuel this year was Oct 7 at 3 PM*. 60 days later (starting with Fri Oct 7 as day #1**) gives you Monday Dec 5th as day #60. We start Vesein Tal umatar on Monday. Monday begins Sunday night Dec 4th.
* If for some reason you want to use the Julian Calendar, though I’m not sure why since it isn’t really in use today, then the Tekufa was Sep 24 (Oct 7 – 13 days = Sep 24) not Sep 22
** This mistake has been pointed out before, when counting Halachic days DAY # 1 is (almost?) always counted. A baby has his bris at eight days old. For a baby born today , if you ask some guy on the street when is he 8 days old ? They would likely say: “1 day old tomorrow Thurs, 2 day old Fri … 8 days old next Thursday” As you know they would be wrong, TODAY is day 1, tomorrow day 2 … Day 8 is next wed. Ditto for 7 days of sehva berachos, shiva, sheloshim etc day # 1 counts . Same thing here When counting 60 days the day of the tekufa is day #1
ymripat
“Could someone please clarify which are being consigned to the bonfire?”
The Leshem one.
There are two pirushim they have “Rashi kipshutio” this is explaining Rashi and not the subject at hand. And “Pishuto shel mikra” This is explaining the pesukim often differently than Rashired sock
Before calling it ridiculous you should understand it.
You say “Tosfos on that gemara as well as ALL the pashtanim on the pasuk (rashbam, ibn ezra, bchor shor, radak etc) all say that pshuto shel mikra is…”
Yes but Rashi says differently. The signatories feel Rashi IS peshuto shel mikra.
Just like you would ban a hashgacha that allows chicken and milk to be mixed together even though R’ Yosi holds that it can, as the halacha was decided not like him.
So too , they feel that pshat in chumash is decided by Rashi, not by the Ramban, and not by the author/editors of pishuto shel mikraYou can certainly argue and point to other chumashim that.
I grant the whole thing is a bit odd, since lots of chumashim have a running commentary that differs from Rashi at times, Artscroll has done this (eg their Stone commentary does not allways follow Rashi) . I’m not so sure why this one raised so much ire maybe the title “pishuto shel mikra” or maybe as N0mesorah suggested its a spinoff from something else
See
“Examining Average Age at First Marriage within Orthodox Judaism: A Large Community-Based Study”
Does that mean the Age gap tm adherents were able to close it? Or as many suspected it was a false religion
YO
“I need a hashgacha agency to tell me water is kosher?”
You don’t, who says you do?
Even for Pesach the OU says you don;t need a hashgacha (from their website “All unflavored and without the addition of minerals bottled water, seltzer and sparkling water is kosher for Passover, even without any kosher supervision”)You have blinders. You are so blinded by hate that you just spew nonsense.
You said “50% of the decisions, operations and Hashkafa of most hashgachas have nothing to do with Halacha”
to back this up you said “For example, giving a Hechsher to water” what is this an example of?
where in shulchan Aruch does it say water can’t be kosher?It is kosher the company wants it certified so they certify it what seif of Shulchan Aruch does this oppose
THE OU doesnt tell you you cant buy Water without a hashgacha. EVEN for PEsach
YO
sorry for the late reply
None of your examples are true“For example, giving a Hechsher to water that comes directly from filtered water pipes (zero chashash for grapes, etc.). Have you ever heard of “kosher” water??”
I dont understand this example, Are you saying it isnt kosher? How is this an example of them not following shulchan aruch. Water is kosher and they certify that it is. What is the problem?
Another example is a Hashgacha requiring the food manufacturer to use ingredients/components only with THEIR Hashgacha.”
This is not true. kashrus agencies regularly allow ingredients from other agencies that have similar standrads. There is an organization AKO that sets/discusses these standards.
You claim to be “an adherent of Emes. ” Yet to back up your claim
“50% of the decisions, operations and Hashkafa of most hashgachas have nothing to do with Halacha. You guys know that right?” You could only come up[ wit htwo examples one of which is not against halacha, and the other isnt true.Presumably these are your better examples of your “50% of decisions” claim
Looking forward to you becoming an adherent of emes, and acknowledging that you made that upYO
I did not know that.
Can you give an example?
YO
Huh?
why don’t you read the replies” …the minhag of pouring…” ”
“It’s a very common minhag.”
“I’ve seen many families who have this minhag …”
“This could be an old minhag…”YO
nowhere.
nobody said you should
YO
“Where is this brought down?”
where is what brought down?
YO
Who said it is?
YO
I guess I don’t really understand your question then
YO
I’m not sure where you looked
OC 473 is leil Pesach the first cup ie KiddushThe very first word is Mozgin
what does “mozgin” mean?Before you say it means to pour. See Rambam Chametz umatza 7:9
Mozgin means “we dilute”
now you could say it is lav davka, our wine doesn’t need dilution it is already diluted etc etc
but it does talk about diluting the wineNow you know!
YO
Among other places
OC 473:1“1) why do we pour water from becher into wine bottle before kiddush?”
The reason I’ve heard (I believe from R” Belsky Z “l) is that during the time of shas, wine had to be diluted as it was thick syrupy and high in alcohol content. so much so that pouring cup is often described as “mozgin” literaly – diluting.
Today in a nod to Talmudic practice we too are “mozgin” the wine before kiddush#2 sounds made up