Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“You asked a shaila…”
Did you?
I’ve never heard of any one assuring other than on the
The actual day Dec 25 (when there’s no mail anyway). Is there any source that says there’s an issur during the “holiday season”?Where do you pick up these strange ideas? And more importantly why? Is it to show us how drum you are, is it to save a few bucks on a holiday gift?
I’ve lived in both.
What do you want to know?The biggest differences size
A Sheepdog tells his herder “Here are your 40 sheep”
The herder asks “but I only own 37?”
The sheepdog replies “I rounded them up”thank you joseph. that was great! (people in the house joke)
best thing youve ever postedAOn the way to the store, logician’s wife tells him “,by a gallon of milk if they have eggs get a dozen”
He returns with a dozen Gallons of milk
His wife asks: “Whats with all the milk”
he replies: “they had eggs”(Usually told with a computer programmer, this way it fits in the math jokes thread)
“Please explain what a” one-time rosh yeshiva” is?”
Wasnt directed to me. But I hope I can help
“One-time” = Former
“rosh yeshiva” = Head of the academyThus ” one-time rosh yeshiva” = His former Head of Academy
(Could also mean The head of his former academy or the Former head of his academy was that your source of confusion? The former is the most likelyto Gadolhadroah
I have to ask why are you such a stickler for what should or shouldn’t be discussed. there are several threads which you dismiss as the most pressing issue?Do you think YWN is only for pressing issues?
not all threads have to be as earth shattering asa “yetzer harah defense”Meno finds in interesting. nu nu. You dont, thats fine to there is no law that requires your comment why does it bother you?
DY
Lol!“I feel that if we would cherish the mitzvah, we would “upgrade” them more often….You may disagree, its just my opinion.”
I dod disagree. Here is another perspective: People become attached to their Tefillin we wear them day in and day out, when going on a trip it is the one thing we always make sure we have there is a certain chavivus that develops (or should develop). Dito for a tallis tha is worn day in and day out as we serve the Ribbon shelo olam. This is why it is the generally the weekday talis (worn more often and usually for longer time) that is used to wrap a nifter which he “wears” in the olam haemes after having worn it for years in this world.
They should not be merely upgraded and discarded (obviously in a proper manner) for no good reason.
OBviously if they are no longer kosher, or only kosher bedieved that is another story. But I think there is something beautiful about a well worn tallis, and there is no reason to “upgrade” it.Joseph
“Does this bracha mean that a person should never again have family members pass away?”
Possibly, as the Navi says בִּלַּ֤ע הַמָּ֙וֶת֙ לָנֶ֔צַח וּמָחָ֨ה ד’ ה’ דִּמְעָ֖ה מֵעַ֣ל כָּל־פָּנִ֑ים (Yeshaya 25:8)
Reg Question 1
I would put the Hebrew name (As on the Ketuba)Particularly with your example “Sarah Rivkah vs Sorel Rivil” where it isnt really a “yiddish name” but rather a dimunitive name. much like Somone known all her life as “Leahleh” would likely have “Leah” on the tombstone. Leahleh much like Sorel, Rivil arent realy Yiddish names
If it is a translation eg Tziporah and she was known as Faige/faigy all her life. Then I would probably write both “Tziporah Faygel”
NOYB
1. “according to the supreme court in DC vs. heller, the militia clause has no bearing on the keep and bear arms clause.”
well they (ie 5 ) of the justices got it wrong Its not like they have some kabal ish mipi ish.. Heller was a landmark decision as it was the first time the Supreme court interpreted it that way. See for eg US v Miller (1939):
“In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.”2. “a nutritious breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day; the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed”
Absolute best argument I ever heard. thank you.
I dont see how a reasonable person can use your amendment as a right to eat lunch or junk food.
The introductory clause was intentionally written. Its not like they found a scrap of paper that already said some stuff about militia so they figured lets just stick this in.
Much like your amendment preemptively defines what it is discussing a. nutritious not junk food and b. breakfast not lunch.
So to the second amendment it discusses a. well regulated (we can quible what that means, I would argue background checks and registering of guns would keep things ” well regulated” and b. militia.
This is the introductiry clause abotu which it says “the right of the people…”3. “…a militia is by definition a loosely organized group of private citizens.”
Yes, so we keep track who is in the milita and they can keep guns its not some hefker wild west. See “well regulated”“the founding fathers also knew technology would advance,”
where they neviim?AYLOR
Joseph
“That point is statistically incorrect. ”Thanks you are of course correct
. tShould read, Given enough cows it is more likely than not that you ate a treifa2qwerty
Thats funny. I thought the 4th answer was the best. I heard it from Rabbi Reisman, he maintains that there is less than 10% chance that this is the correct techeiles so no reason to be chosehsh for itTom
“This is a major cause, in my opinion, for people to so quickly and easily dismiss it and make arguments which aren’t well thought through. ”I havent encountered that. I think people dismiss it either becasue they arent convinced or becasue the yrely on their Rabbonim. (Yes I know you maintain anyone wh oisnt convinced hasnt done enough research this too is circular)
” because if true techailes is available, it’s a chiyuv gamur. That’s the intention of the point that’s being made.”
Yes I understand the point. But lets follow through If true techeiles is not available (for whatever reason) then their is no chiyuv. Thus the argument that it is a chiyuv isnt an argument to wear questionable techeiles.
“but that it is an issur of being mevatel a mitzva, namely the mitzva of techailes, which is a chiyuv gamur.”
forgive my ignorance but who counts techeiles as a separate mitzva? I dont beleive the Chinuch does.“But let me ask you. If you would know something as clear as the day, …”
It is childish to say anyone who disagrees hasnt researched i enough. There is machlokes on almost everything we do Are Crocs shoes for Yom kippur? does the government supervision count as Jew watching milk? Is a video camera kesiva on Shabbos etc etc etc
on all these there are MAchlokism on both sides and we allow people to follow their Rabbonim. all of a sudden Techeiles that has been lost for a thousand years or more with conflicting descriptions left behind over the centuries, You uare SO SURE that there is absolutely no room for argument.
Even when many Gedolei Olam diasagree?! I find that mind boggling and I dont think its healthy. It is almost cultlike. Next someone might compare not supporting techeiles to supporting terrorists. I know it is hard to believe anyone would make such a strange claim, but with this cultlike mentality, that is where your arguments are headed. (I skipped the next paragraph, forgive me it sounded like you were saying something really crazy)“I don’t like saying that all who argue against me are wrong.”
So dont. Say that you are convinced this is techeiles, you are convinced that no mesora is needed to reintroduce it and so you wear it , and you respect those who disagreeIt isnt vague
It clearly refers to a well regulated militia.
I suppose they could have put the initial clause in bold/highlights/underline and all caps. Though Idont think it would help. People read what they want to read.
Maybe changing “The people” to “those people” ?A WELL REGULATED MILITIA being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of those people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
2qwerty
“Ok so if this blue ink happens to be the real techailes are we fine with being mevatel a mitzvah?”
I wouldnt say “fine” We daven multple times daily for the return of many mitzvos that we dont fullfil lfor one reason or other.
“And if its just ink what did you lose by wearing it just for 10 mins a day in the privacy of your home?”
A few things.
1. Who says I dont
2 I have no problem with putting it on privately, my concern is the mass communal efforts. Many Rabbonim as pointed out did put it on, though they did not advocate for others to put it on. (I dont fully understand the reasoing of these Rabbonim, the ones of asked told me a combination of yehura and breach in mesora that they felt they avoided by doing it privatly liek you suggest as opposed to mass communal effort)
3. there may be an issue of different color tzitzis than beged.
4. that isnt how halacha works. Say there is a treifa that has a 10% prevalence in cows. The Halcah is thsi is a miut sheino matzi and we dont check. That means (statistically) if you eat meat from 10 different cows you ate meat that had a treifa. What is the harm in just avoiding meat or checking?
That isnt how halacha works. There are rules, and if you can eat meat without checking then you can eat it.
If Techeiles requires a MEsora, or if there are sufficient questions on it we dont need to do it just in case, (especially given the cost)” I am going thru a tough time now ”
I am not sure how chalav stam fits in.
If it is a tough time religiously and you want to “scale back” I agree with rebyid, since the issue isnt the chalav Stam
If it is a tough time avoiding Chalav Stam since you feel it is tastier, then go for it (though discuss with YLOR regarding possible need for hataras Nedarim)
If it is a tough time in other areas and Chalav Stam will help you feel better then also go for it (though again discuss with YLOR regarding possible need for Hatars Nedarim, this is easier than the previous scenario)Regardless, hatzlacha with your tough time
youdint say
“Who was speaking to you? ”
whoever cares to read. and to flush out my own ideas. As mentioned I learnt a lot from this thread.“Most of what I wrote was not addressed to you.”
It is still wrong. and wrong comments are worthy of response“More likely you are an obstinate person.”
could be. But what is motivating you?“No, Rabbi Kaganhoff is entitled to his opinion. However, I am entitled to call him out when he errs.”
Beseder. So it is a machlokes (and he isnt the only one who disagrees as you correctly point out “In any case, most of his arguments are not new” Though I’m not sure why that would make them wrong.).“You simply miss my point regarding Teshuvos V’Hanhagos. You don’t get the politics surrounding it. I stand by my argument, ”
I didn’t miss it. I understood that you were being dismissive of R’ Moshe Shternbuch’s ability/right to pasken .
“it is a krankeit to cite Brisker Torah l’halacha.”
See I was right. You are arguing that R’ Moshe Shternbuch suffers from a krankeit and cant be cited as a halachic source.“You don’t understand mesorah, and halacha psuka. Its not your fault, its a Brisker thing.”
I am not a brisker. and So now Brisker’s dont understnad halacha? Seriously do you beleive these kind of arguments are motivated by the Yetzer Tov?
BTW another excelent example occured to me When Dr. Yehuda Felix brougt proof that sheboles shula isnt Oats. R’ Moshe replied that even with another thousand proofs we wont change a tradition in klal yisreol (yep not exactly analagous, but the point is there)
” There is no chance that you are not yotze.”
Agreed completely. was this a typo?Tom (continued)
“By the way, as you admit to not having done much research besides reading some flyers etc, why are you so bold to argue so strongly against the techailes. ”
Im not being bold at all. I acknoweldged that talmidei chachomim disagree. There is room for machlokes in klal yisroel. This isnt the first time ive encountered machlokes.
However, as the discussion progressed it has become clear to me that Given the strange arguments coming from your side. Besmirching anyone who disagrees and intimating that they are more motivated to perform mitzvos and have a better grasp due to their “Very thorough Research” this isnt coming from a good place. That isnt how the Yetzer Tov operates. Im not sure what is driving it. Money? Mesianic fervor? Yehura? but it is not coming from a good place.People often ask what is the point in engaging in these conversations, minds arent changed. Here is another example of where my mind has changed. before this conversation I had thought most of those who advocate for the techeiles are out of genuine desire to perform ratzon Hashem (even if mistaken, for whatever reason) I see that for many this isnt the case.
“Do you often engage in the practice of making arguments in subjects in which you aren’t well learned, against people who may very well know far far much more that you, and may actually be experts?”
Of course! that is the best way to learn. And besides, any experts here are doing a great job at hiding their expertise and/or their honesty.
Tom
“you have not, as is apparent from the constant inaccuracies in your statements. ”Its clear from my say so. I am not pretending to have done thorough research let alone “very thorough ”
Although I would question how good your research has been given that you are having trouble with a simple halacha
A few posters here have said that not wearing techeiles is being mevate lthe mitzva of tzitizis.
This is incorrect. If you were to say that not wearing shel rosh means you werent yotzeh tefilin you would likewise be incorrect.“and the same is true for techailes.”
Arguably. What isnt arguable though is that it is circular reasoning to say “there is a chiyuv to wear this debated techelies and otherwise yo uarent yotzeh tzitzis sincedebated techeiles is available, and therefore there is nothing further to debate” (this isnt an actual quote from anybosdy here but it is a summary of the argument using the fact that we are being mevatel a mizvah.
Put another way, the only way you can possibly say it is being mevatel a mitzvah is if we are sure it is techeiles. And one of the arguments being made to accept it is that not doing so would be mevatel a mitzvah.
Ditto for my argument based on mesora. If it requires a mesora (and I grant not all agree) then not wearing it because there is no mesora is not being mevatel a mitzvah.“Had you attended the asifa, you would have heard this being explained clearly and thoroughly. ”
do you believe 100% of the audience will now wear techeiles?“During the Cuban missile crisis when we were close to nuclear war , do you think it was hishtadlus to protest nuclear war and if not why not?”
What? OF course.
Question for you:
During the Holocaust when European Jewry was close to anhilation , do you think it was hishtadlus to protest and march in Washington? and if not why not?
(I cant beleive I am unsure as to what your answer will be)and even accepting what you attribute To Rabbi Resiman, who decides where that line is drawn. voting for President doesnt affect yo upersonally it is obviously more related to public policy so I take it you oppose voting.
Those who lobbyed against (or for) the IRan deal were wrong as well. This position makes no sense
you dont say
You replied “You have that exactly backwards” when I pointed out then when you said “and making use of scientific inquiry to buttress an halachic argument.” you had it backwards
You also correctly pointed out:
“mesorah in halacha means a derech in p’sak — how to go about paskning”Allow me to elaborate.
If yo uare looking for chilazon you woudl start with MEnachos 44a
חלזון זהו גופו דומה לים וברייתו דומה לדג ועולה אחד לשבעים שנה ובדמו צובעין תכלת לפיכך דמיו יקרים
Youd look for a fish wih the body comparable to the ocean that rises once in 70 years and whose blood is used to dye. you would never find the murex since it meets none of those criteria (though it is expensive 😉 )now I grant if you find the murex through other means and are convinced it is techeiles the question that it isnt a fish isnt much of a question (perhaps all sea creatures are called “fish” not sure why the Gemara couldnt say sheretz hamayim, but ok not the biggest question) ditto for it not being the blood that is used.
However this isnt usually how halacha works.For example take the argument over brain death those who accept it dont argue that it is death based on a scientific definition or modern research. The argument si that a patient who is brain dead is dead based on the Gemara in Yoma and/or mishna in Ohalaos. (This isnt the thread to debate brain death, I deliberately wrote the above in a (hopefully) non-controversial manner).
This just isnt the case with murex. the arguments are primarily scientific/academic in nature with the Gemaras treated as secondary (at best) and many Rishonim (like Rashi) ignored. This isnt how halachic pesak is generally determinedTomdickndharry
“But for those of us who have done full research,”
What is the full research youve done? attended a few shiurim and read some flyers on Techeilet.comBecause that “resarch” IVe done several times.
youdont say
“This is not a matter of being machmir, only of being mevatel a mitzvah”you must be one of these people: “I believe most people on this tread are not oseik in halacha, ”
Since otherwise you would know that techeiles isnt meakev (Yes I know some hold even today if techeiles is available then it is meakev but to use that as an argument to require questionable techeiles is circular reasoning)youdontsay
“OK I will play the game too. ”Game? I guess Tomdickand harry was referring to you “I think you and others don’t realize the seriousness of this.”
Also, have you realy stooped to I know you are but what am I arguments?
Seriously, what is your agenda, money? is it some messianic view?
Why cant it just be an argument? Rabbi Kaganhoff is a talmid chacham he holds x others hold z. why does it bother you so much to leave it at that? Is this the first machlokes youve encountered?” it is no raayah what is mentioned in Teshuvos V’Hanhagos, since the Brisker don’t consider him one of them.”
This is the silliest thing youve written. who cares what the Brisker consider, that isnt the point. Yekke is proving to you that R’ Chaim’s idea is used halacha lemaaseh by a posek.“Pronunciation is mesorah.”
Exactly
A krias Shema is a deoraysa. Yet we follow our MEsora even though there is a chance we arent being yotze the deoraysa.“mesorah in halacha means a derech in p’sak — how to go about paskning”
Exactly!!! ding ding ding. And Scientific inquiry isnt one of them (nor are manuscripts) (Im not talking about veryfying a metzius BEFORE paskenig a sheila like with technological shaylas)
With Murex it was found primarily based on linguistic/archaeological evidence and then Some halachic sources were forced to fit (some better than others), as yo umay know R’ Herzog wasnt even zoche to see the blue from his discovery.” Besides, one does not need a mesorah on metzious only on oifes (as the Maharil says we can find techeles). ”
I am not saying my view is universally held“and making use of scientific inquiry to buttress an halachic argument.”
You have that exactly backwards.
“The founding fathers revolted because they didn’t like taxes”
Yes and then a few years later they put down the whiskey rebellion
mentch1
“Because John Smith is about to meet an inevitable end at the proper time …”I dont understand, he is an individual. why is that different than Jane smith who wants to protect herself from an intruder?
“I know many people who are extremely health conscious who still end up with cancer etc, how come their histadlus didn’t help?”
Wait so they souldnt do hishtadlus?
“You are arguing that gun control is personal hishtadlus,”
not realy. Im arguing either apply hishtadlus or dont. To only use it as an argument to bolster your claims is dishonest.“That said, the founding fathers created the system …Do I agree with it? no. But it’s there.,”
IF you think it is wrong, it can be repealed. Its silly to argue that you think its a bad idea, but oh well we are stuck with it so everybody has to oppose gun control now. So do you support repeal?” very least to be honest about what they are trying to accomplish.”
Less death. whether that reuires conifscating all guns or arming everybody. The status quo cannot continue. and arguing after every mass shooting that we cant even discuss it is unacceptable and I believe the NRA is complicit in the deaths of any victim whose lfe can be saved by sensible control that they oppose.“It is clear that the founding fathers wanted the second amendment to counter an authoritative govt.”
It isnt clear at all.
And more importantly it isnt effective. Unless you are advocating to arm citizenry with Tanks etc..Furthermore, The country is 241 years old. which armed uprising do you support? Who gets to decide? Say we decide we dont want to pay taxes. do you support our draweing up arms agaisnt the governemnt? what about those who oppose alleged systmeic racism. Do you support their right to rise up in arms against the government? WACO? bundy Coumpound? the south? Which armed rebbeliion do you beleive the founding fathers would support.
More importantly as mentioned they all failed. Because they arent armed enough to stand up to the Federla govt.
so this idea that we need guns to “counter an authoritative govt. ” falls apart quicklyThe fakemaven
“we must do ALL the mitzvohs, but a mitzvah…”
Great so not ALL Mitzvos! I’m glad we settled that. that is what IVe been saying all along.“As for mesorah, THINK for a second, …”
I thought about it. now your turn.
what percentage of certainty would it take for you to abandon tthe Esrog in pklace of say the apple. (Yes it isnt 100% identicla , but roll with it.)
If you were 90% convinced that Pri Eitz hadar was the apple? 99%? 100% convinced?Hi mencth
IVe missed you how was your Yom TOv“Actually, I have repeatedly drawn a distinction between personal behavior and death in the broader sense ”
Here is my question again:
John Smith is one of the victims of the next inevitable mass shooting (if current trends continue) he will will be shot by a person with schizophrenia who has a warrant out for is arrest due to past violent crime. This person is on his way to buy a gun at a gun show in a state which doesn’t require background checks. John so desperately wants to live so today he is lobbying his congressman to close the “gun show loophole”
why isnt this personal behavior to protect himself, any less than Jane Doe buying a gun to protect herself from the much less likely event of an intruder
you dontsay
Im sorry I dont follow
“I think that this just demonstrates that you are a moving target.”
There are severla problems with techeiles. I am focusing on one. Namely uprooting mesora.you said “You simply miss the point. This issue is not innovation”
I dont understand what you mean by this. There are several issues the one I am most concerned with tis the innovation. Though there are others.(I concede that the issues are linked, if we were 100% certain MAYBE we can uproot mesora, but this is an impossibility as ad biasgoel few maintain we are 10% certain (R’ Shachter told me 99%)
” In any case, this issue has nothing to do with manuscripts.”
I disagree. IT is about academic research to decide a halacha. You cna say the CI was wrong, you can say here he’d agree. but they are certainly related.
Thefakemaven
“It is well known that Rav Chaim only writes a sefer on an ibbur yair since otherwise he has no time. The Techeilis is no different.”
Too bad there hasnt been an ibbur yahr since the techeiles was rediscovered I guess.
“first I’m glad to see you have finally realised your error, as you have not answered anything.”
What?Thefakemaven
Look Im not trying to convince you of anythingI realize that not all agree with me.
(Except for your strange acceptance and rejection of the distinction between mitzvah kiyumis and chiyuvis This part I dont understand why you are giving me a hard time. you acknowledge that there isnt am imyan to perfrom every mitzvah “only a foolish man…” Yet you also argue within it. note: I never said what category techeiles is in. )”you say “think about this for some time, it is not too difficult”
I agree it isnt difficult. Your ” premise A) all Jews must do every mitzvah possible” Isnt absolute. It doesnt apply to all mitzvos “Only a foolish person…”) period.“You have obviously not understood why I capitalized HALACHA.”
The very halachic process is built on mesora. Who do we foollw in machlokes Shach and Taz. MEchaber Tur etc etc. Am I free to choose. What If I find anew Rishon can I follow that. There isa mesora that guides the HALACHIC process. It isnt a free for all.
you want to argue that some things are more important than mesora. Fine. But to argue that there is no mesora in halacha is patently absurd.“First off we don not paskn like aggadah,”
I agree, though why wont you answer the question, about Esrog.“Actually you are contardicting yourself, since in such a case we are not uprooting a halacha, there is no halacha not wear techeilies”
Not super clear, as there may be a concern with techeiles is it isnt real. (not universally held I know)
And I said “uproot practice”“
“Why does anyone think this is so? ”
Ive asked this question a few times.
“Surely nobody believes it is laziness or that they are “busy”.”
I wouldnt be so sure. Here are the responses IVe gotten:
“rav chaim has sedorim back to back, so no, he never went through this topic which is תלוי in a lot of things that are not בין כותלי הביהמ”ד]”
and
“simply because since he from the Gedoei Hador and has real limited time…..”
and
“he is not going to spend his time on it.”youdontsay
“Of course the CI allowed the use of manuscripts. The CI did not allow for the uprooting of halacha pesuka with a manuscript.”Yes obviously. Do you think I meant the chazon Ish would have held if a munuscript says not to do avodah zarah, we should all start? I meant the Chazon Ish didnt support uprooting existing practice based on manuscripts.
“This should never be said over in his name. This statement reflects extremely poor on him.”
you are without question entitled o your opinion. I (and r’ Yoshe ber) disagreeThefakemaven
You are hocking a cheinek.
you say”Premise A is that one has to do all mitzvos possible, that means every mitzvah.”
then continue.
” But let’s think for a moment, must one get married so he can divorce?”
No. so it isnt every mitzvah. you go on to list some more excellent examples“these are not a mitzvah”
Um, that may be kefira. Repaying a loan, giving a Get are absolutly mitzvos. As yo ucorrectly pointed out they are a different cateory than mitzva chiyuvis. Yet tehy are mitzvos nonetheless. I am not sure why this isgiving you a hard time.“I think it self understood that you have nothing to say on this topic ”
which topic? The PAssuk and Mishna? Do you think Shlomo hamelech held one should steal so he can repay get married so he can divorce? (did I relaly not mention this before?)“you can stop with your excuse of mesorah, the only place in HALACHA that we find the concept of mesorah is with birds,”
No. It is with everything we do. From the very names of the aleph beis to the type of shoe we use for Chalitzah o what we use for r chalipin. eliyahu Hanavi himself wouldnt be able to get us to abandon mesora.
“Why Rav Chaim is not meverer is simply because since he from the Gedoei Hador and has real limited time…..”
too bad he never learnt mishlei חכם לב יקח מצוות, nor the mishna לעולם הוה רץ לדבר משנה. wince
“as for the Esrog, it’s a moot point, there has never and would never be such a thing,.”
you do realize there are midrashim that say tat about techelies as well
youdont say
“You simply miss the point. This issue is not innovation”That is one issue. there are others.
“thinker123
“If you really are interested I already told you were to look. ”
thanks. I found it.“You have another explanation?”
Sure take your pick
1) He has questions on the murex
2) He feels techeiles wont be found before moshiach as the medrashi say (Ive heard this quoted in his name)
3) He doesnt want to change mesora based on academic research.Feel free to add your own.
He doesnt have time, is less logical than any of mine” Regarding what you are quoting, [realy sorry but a know it already”
Then it was abit dishonest for you to leave it out” I usually try not to waste time on all the brisker bubeh maises,”
Even if a bubeh maisah I still have R’ yoshe Ber on my side.
“By the way, I don’t know if I’ll be wasting more of my time debating someone who never went thru the topic.”
nu nu. At least youve learnt something. Glad I can help
I dont think i am saying anything that crazy.
Here it is in short.
We practice the way our parents practiced we dont introduce new innovations even if they seem correct.Thinker123
you quoted the Beis halevei earlier. I found the source I was looking for
R’ yoshe Ber quotes from his Grandfather (The beis Halevi) in Shiurim Lezeicher Aba Mari, chelek 1 page 228 that we dont prove based on research, when a specific item is required for a Mitzvah. This is why the Beis Halevi rejected the Radziner’s techeiles and the principle holds true with the murex as well.Dont feel bad if you havent come across this in your research, it in no way proves you never went thru the topic at all. It is a vast topic. With many dimensions. there is always more to share. and now you know.
thinker 123
“What?? Anyone who learnt a little about this topic would know it. So no, I’m not going to help you find it. Just learn about the topic before you write.”Foolishness. This may surprise you. Bu YWN coffee room isnt realy where I produce final ideas after researching Evrything. I am always eager to hear more. IF you dont want to help me find it . no problem there is always google. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction.
“Pardon me, I think that the maharil is bigger then rav chaim. Do you realize that the Mahril is usually the mesorah of Ashknaz?”
Yes. though again that sint how halacha gets decided.
” But its irrelevant, rav chaim told a lot of people, if you hold this is techeiles, you MUST go with it. So how could you bring as proof to your point. [as is known rav chaim has sedorim back to back, so no, he never went through this topic which is תלוי in a lot of things that are not בין כותלי הביהמ”ד]”
Cmon that is the weakest excuse. You cant possibly beleive that.
” [“as I am” ??? who says you were??]”
We may be going in circles. But over a thousand years of mesora says so. and the again of course there is the inconvenient fact that most Gedolim today do not wear it. (including Rav Chaim)“If you would learn the topic you would see that it has nothing to do with it. There are clear gemaras that we see the חוייב to go with techeiles if its obtainable. Besides I quoted clear sources who say what I mentioned. So “its not mine” either.”
“Plus there are no sources that disagree. So who can?!!”
Ruba deruba of Gedolim can disagree both past and present
Very well, find me one who [went through the topic and] argues with them.
Gedolim? OR Rabbonim. Among Rabbonim are Rabbi Resiman who delivered a shiur a few years back. among Gedolim I dont know who was mevarer what. I do know that they dont wear it. Again an inconvenient fact you cannot just wish away. You say it is so easy to be mevarer just go to the website. They can be mevarer and choose not to. Care to explain why?
Also feel free to answer my apple question posed to thefakemavinThe fake maven
We are getting sidetracked by what I assume is amisunderstanding.
you wrote “premise A) all Jews must do every mitzvah possible. ”
I pointed out that this wasnt 100% accurate, but that reworded your point could still stand with merely that flaw.I wrote “Your premise simply isnt accuate, as you admit …” The punctuation was poor on my part, and Im sorry about that. I meant that Your premise A “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible.” Isnt 100% you now correctly differentiate between mitzvah kiyumis and chiyuvis.
You agreed that that premise wasnt 100% accurate. for example you conceded ““… only if a divorce is needed. …Every circumstantial mitzvah is a mitzvah if and only if the circumstances call for it.””
This is alomst verbatim what I corrected your premise to namely ” all Jews must do every mitzvah possible if circumstances call for it”what follows is ” there is no race to fulfill mitzvos” Though you havent admitted this point. It is of course accurate. Again there is no race to perform every mitzvah, as there is no race to perfrom a Get.
Yes there are tirutzim why we dont do yibum, I didnt mention korbon Pesach as Ive heard many peshetlach explaining why we don’t do that either. Im surprised nobody mentioned the reason we arent mekayem showing nega to Kohanim is becasue they arent meyuchos which is the classic answer. These are peshetlach explaining existing practice. (As we should do Im not being Motzei Laz on whomever it is that woke up one day with what looked like a nega and said, forget this Im not going to the Kohein, see if I care)
“And Rav Chaim Kenievzky said that one is entitled to disagree with him and should wear techilis.”
He must not know the mishna “עולם הוה רץ לדבר מצוה” Why isnt he mevarer it
“I know that you have not seen it, which is what I meant that before you write any comment do the research before”
disagree completely! Im here to learn. and if I’m mistaken or you have new knowledge to share Im eager to learn.
This isnt off the cuff, this is after years of discussing with My Rebbeim, Mesora to me is paramount. when New things are introduced Even with good intentions, it can have a devastating affect on everything.Out of curiosity say I proved to you that the Pri eitz Hadar mentioned by the Torah is actualy an Apple.(dont worry its not) We find archaeological evidence it turns out unlike Esrogim Apple bark tastes like Apples (again, not really) would you abandon the Esrog in place of the apple?
thinker123
“I read your comments and I can’t make any sense of it.”
hope I can help, though dont hold your breath.” What שייכות does יבום וכדומהhave regarding this topic??!!Tzitzits is a mitzvah for everyone to do”
And yibum is a mitzvah for a person whose brother dies childless to do. Yet he doesnt do it.
(Im not saying it is a perfect comparison, it of course isnt. But it does demonstrate that this line “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible.” isnt 100% true.“but once you are wearing a pair of tzitzis and you don’t put on techeles you are being מבטל מצות עשה בידים בכל רגע as though you are wearing ד כנפות without tzitzis!!”
chas vesholam to be motzi laz on gnerations of kala Yisroel. They were yotzi the mitzva as am I. The halacha is techeiles eino meakev as halavan.
“So its obvious that your whole pshetle makes no sense.”
It isnt mine.“Plus there are no sources that disagree. So who can?!!”
Ruba deruba of Gedolim can disagree both past and present.“R`chaim says to anyone who asks him that if they are sure thag this is techeles they MUST go with it.
Anyone’s who is interested to study the topic should go to techeiles. org and see for himself”Yet Rav Chaim doesnt wear it himself, too bad R’ Chaim doesn’t have access to techeiles.org. Maybe you can print it out and persuade him.
Also see DY’s excellent source. thank you DY for supplying it..
whoa lots of comments from many people I shall go i order.
thinker123
“The premise that a mesorah is needed to be מקיים the mitzvah of techeiles is contrary to the das torah of the Maharil and more who say that its possible to find the chilozon”Im not familiar with the Mahril you mention, Even if it exists. halcha isnt decided based on what the Mahril held. R’ Chaim Kanievsky said it wont be found until Moshiach comes, R’ Elyashiv essentially said what said (that should be reversed obviously)
Thefakemaven
“You’re under the impression that a when a person gets married he has a mitzvah of giving a get…”
I m under no such impression. Your premise simply isnt accuate, as you admit as there is no race to fullfil mitzvos. If you need to give a get you give a get if you have abeged with daled kanfos you wear tzizis if you come across a nest and want the eggs yo udo shiluach hakein etc etc. There are soem mitzvos that are incumbent no matter waht. not all are.” the same is with yibbum or any other circumstantial mitzvah.”
My point with yibum, is that even i a situation where there is a mitzvah of yibum (brother dies without children r”l) as you may or may not know, we STILL do not perfrom the mitzvah of yibum, instead chalitza is done. Even when the circumstance DOES call for yibum, we still forgo it.As for accepting testimony (I dont have immediate access to your sources) . Even of a Yid isnt neccesarily accepted. For example R’ Elazar reports how he saw the tzitz in rome yet we dont pasken like him.
Takes2ttango
Im sorry Im not sure if our comment is addressed to me. I dont understand it or its relevance.Gingerkale
“or will that change with the coming of Mashiach? and if that latter, please explain how.”I dont know. Im excited to find out though.
“we have a Torah, and that DOES include Techeiles.”
As mentioned it also includes Yibum. Last time you had a spot that you didint know what it was, did you go to a kohein (Mitzvah 169 in chinuch)? We dont practice wah tthe Torah says that was the Tzedoki approach. We practice the Torah as interpreted by torah shebal peh and as handed down ish mipi rabbo, and as codified by Rishonim/acronim
The fake maven
You are contradicting yourself You disagree with my rewording of your faulty premise “all Jews must do all mitzvohs” Yet concede “… only if a divorce is needed. …Every circumstantial mitzvah is a mitzvah if and only if the circumstances call for it.”which is almost verbatim my rewording “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible if circumstances call for it”
So Im not sure what your disagreement is there.You then go on “Premise A in regards to Gitten …”
But my example was yibum“As to archaeology…”
I was using that as a generalization meaning modern research. and lol at “testimony of the gentiles”Of course I may be wrong. Though I am not alone, my rebeim felt that way. Rav Elyashiv felt that way. The Chazon ish was opposed to paskening based on manuscripts. R’ Yoshe Ber said we dont pasken from Genizahs (what he called the garbage can). while Admitedly the evidence for the murex is stronger than the cases made based on manuscrits and it isnt exactly the same. The principle holds
Thefakemavin
Premise A isnt true (eg there is a mitzva to grant a get, not every Jew must grant a get)
Granted techeiles isnt analagous to get. Yet even if your reword your premise a to something along the lines of “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible that if circumstances call for r”
your conclusion STILL isnt true
namely: “It therefore follows, if B and C then A.”Example:
premise A) (reworded) all Jews must do every mitzvah possible if circumstances call for it
. Premise B) Yibum is a mitzvah.
Premise C) (not relevant)Yet it doesn’t follow that if B then A
Here is a better and more analogous example. Suppose we dig up Moshe Rabbeinu’s Tefillin, We recognize his handwriting, all archaeologists recognize it as real etc etc. then Eliyahu Hanavi comes along and says these are Moshe Rabbeinu’s tefilin. and lo and behold they are Rabbeinu Tam’s. While certainly a fascinating find, this has exactly zero bearign on halacha lemaisah. halcah isnt decided by Archaeology nor by Eliyahu hanavi. We have a mesora and that doesnt include Techeiles.
so while it is intersting, I dont think we should revise halachic practice based on archaeology. That is a ver y dangerous game
ZD
“I have seen Shayraim with Fruits..”Yu should go to a tish more often.
You’d see shyrayim with wine followed by fish followed by soup followed by kugel etc etc…The shyrayim is eaten (some might be brought home for family members (though the soup is tricky to bring home).
I have never seen a teshuvah related to keeping bread over Pesach, thougg I do not doubt they exist. But that doesnt mean that that is the point of sherayim, and it certainly doesn mean you are not supposed to eat shyrayim
” leads to the conclusion that it is the real thing, and it should be worn by everybody”
even if a is true, that doesn’t mean b is true.
ZD
Of course you eat sherayim that is the point.I’m less familiar with the apples thing. Though I do know that there is no issur to throw apples as Gales correctly points out.
Takes2
“Food in wrappers or bags is not a problem to throw”and why not?
Also note: you havent answered my question.