Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hunting for fun and bull-fighting is prohibited. (Tzar balei chaim, et al.) Hunting for food and clothing is permitted.
The Rambam rules that not only the kingship, but rather every position of authority and all appointees of Israel are inherited to a son and to a son’s son, forever. The Ginas Veradim quotes an anecdote of how the rabbinate in Tzefas was passed on by inheritance to a son who was under bar mitzvah when Rav Shlomo Alkabetz ordered the community to wait for the young boy to come of age, and when the son turned thirteen he took over his father’s position! The hulchan Aruch bases a ruling on the same halachah, this time in connection with the local cantor, who retains the right to bring in his son as an assistant and groom him for taking over his position (Orach Chaim 53:25).
In Yoreh Deah (245:22), the Rema states that somebody who serves as the rabbi of a city cannot be ousted from his standing even if somebody greater than him comes to town. Even his son and his son’s son, forever, take precedence over others. In Orach Chaim 13 the Chasam Sofer writes that he upheld the ruling of Rema that the son inherits his father’s rabbinical position and another Chasam Sofer (Choshen Mishpat 21) also implies this. The Kesav Sofer (the Chasam Sofer’s son, Yoreh Deah 123) confirms that his father implemented the Rema’s ruling in all Hungarian rabbinates that the son inherits the rabbanus. The Mishna Berura (53:83) cites both opinions.
The Torah teaches that the earth has been given by Hashem to human beings, in general, and then to the Jewish people. And therefore, anyone who questions the right of mankind to use the flesh of animals, is questioning the authority of the Torah and the dignity and primacy of mankind.
If you want to eat ’em, shecht ’em. If you want to wear ’em, shoot ’em.
WB, MiddlePath. It’s been a veeeery long time!
iac: I believe one of the primary reasons Rabbeinu Gershom was motivated to enact the Cherem against a husband unilaterally divorcing his wife against her will was for situations such as you describe. Imagine a wife suddenly suffers from a huge health problem r’l. She is c’v confined to a wheelchair and needs aid to simply move or get up. And it is believed her conditional is permanent and incurable. Or she is now starts suffering from great emotional or mental health difficulties. So the husband then feels he could “do better” and marry a healthy wife after divorcing his now crippled wife. Rabbeinu Gershom made sure she can stop him from doing that and force him to remain married to her.
Similarly the Torah gives the husband the right to decide not to divorce even if his wife demands it. Imagine a husband becomes poor. Until now he was middle class or even wealthy when business went bad and the family is now living in shambles and on shoestrings. The wife is embarrassed by her new financial state. She can do better. So she demands a Get. The Torah says no. He has the legal, moral and ethical halachic grounds to deny her request and insist that the marriage continue.
And in both the above examples the wife and the husband would be correct to deny the divorce request.
JJ, Dina D’Malchusa is not all encompassing and it is inapplicable regarding many things. If the Shulchan Aruch says one thing but secular law says to do it another way on whenever subject (monetary, etc.), we follow Halacha/Shulchan Aruch and not non-Jewish laws.
Ash, you’re completely wrong. Besides, what “transaction”? The marital assets aren’t from some transaction between the husband and wife. The Halacha clearly states that any money or assets a wife comes into possession of during the course of her marriage is the full property of the husband.
Regarding yerusha, if it was a a matono mchayim then it isn’t a yerusha.
TLIK, where have I ever commented on this thread regarding particular offenses of any Beis Din or, for that matter, systematic problems of such? I haven’t; my comments have been general about Halacha that butei dinim are mandated to operate under. That being said, as a rule of thumb (that deviates in instances both ways) is that left-wing/modern beit dins are more often problematic with deviating from Halacha in favor of non-Jewish laws whereas right-wing/chareidi butei dinim are much less likely to do so.
And, yes, in things such as business transactions Halacha itself states that local customs are taken into account governing the legal effects and ramifications of such transactions. And local customs often include recognizing local secular law. Halacha specifically tells us to take that into account. But Halacha also tells us we cannot take into consideration local non-Jewish law governing personal relations and activities (including monetary) between fellow Jews. Especially so when Halacha specifically and directly provides laws governing such interactions and monetary issues that differ from what the local secular laws govern for such disputes.
Yankelle, Hashem created animals for our use in food and clothing.
There are no applicable Halachas regulating this matter.
JJ, it’s expressly prohibited for a Beis Din to use secular/non-Jewish laws instead of using Halacha/Shulchan Aruch. They can’t say even though halachicly this is your asset, since non-Jewish law says to award it to the other party, that’s what we’ll do.
Marry him (if he’s a single frum Yid), knock the wall down and live happily ever after.
I find it to be of very poor form and morals for a spouse to seek to run away from their spouse and request divorce due to their spouse suffering from health issues (physical or emotional) or their spouse experiencing a reduction in their material wealth.
Yes, I’m an alpha tester for Amazon.
Any killed to use their fur for clothing, are perfect use of the animals.
Any animals killed to be eaten, are just the right amount.
I get my Amazon deliveries via Amazon drone.
People take jobs that are not their thing all the time.
OOTY, you ought to move to a large frum community.
Tht seforim hakedoshim say that the work to bring up a child in the derech haTorah begins nine months before birth.
That was a great response, DY. (The fourth did it.)
iac: What gives anyone the right to divorce their spouse because the spouse developed a physical or mental illness during the course of the marriage?
In Judaism divorce needs to be halachicly justifiable or the spouse not desiring the divorce can veto the divorce request and insist the marriage continue.
In Monsey you can buy raw, non-pasteurized, Cholov Yisroel milk.
הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, בֶּן חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים לַמִּקְרָא, בֶּן עֶשֶׂר לַמִּשְׁנָה, בֶּן שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לַמִּצְוֹת, בֶּן חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לַתַּלְמוּד, בֶּן שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה לַחֻפָּה, בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים לִרְדֹּף, בֶּן שְׁלשִׁים לַכֹּחַ, בֶּן אַרְבָּעִים לַבִּינָה, בֶּן חֲמִשִּׁים לָעֵצָה, בֶּן שִׁשִּׁים לַזִּקְנָה, בֶּן שִׁבְעִים לַשֵּׂיבָה, בֶּן שְׁמֹנִים לַגְּבוּרָה, בֶּן תִּשְׁעִים לָשׁוּחַ, בֶּן מֵאָה כְּאִלּוּ מֵת וְעָבַר וּבָטֵל מִן הָעוֹלָם:
Essen on Coney used to be called Essex on Coney, like the old Essex kosher eatery in Manhattan.
Shelf stable requires Ultra-Pasteurization.
Destroying US currency is a crime.
Much to my surprise, the website for an LA kosher store shows they sell Fresh & Healthy and Devash!
That’s exactly it, YY. Most of America where they have Cholov Yisroel are getting it transported to them from New York, i.e. NY brands. Very few places outside of NY have their own brands of CY. Baltimore being an exception.
The number of continents and planets keep changing since the big shot scientists looking to make themselves a name keep changing the definition of what constitutes a continent, planet, etc. And the definition change means either existing ones are forthwith no longer considered one. Or ones previously considered too small (or whatever other disqualifying feature excluded it) are henceforth considered one under the new definition.
At one time in the not too distant past, many non-observant Jews (in the U.S.) identified with Orthodoxy; and when they attended shul, they attended an Orthodox shul. I’m not sure that today many non-observant Jews still identify with Orthodoxy.
YY, admittedly I do make mistakes on infrequent occasions.
Anyways, other than Baltimore (which I think uses the same color codes for milk), where are there other U.S. brands of Cholov Yisroel milk?
Christians and Conservative/Reform go to their Church or Temple once a week, if even that. Jews go three times a day. So to compare, is to miss the mark.
Somehow I don’t see a host of volunteers lining up for that.
If your true goal is to learn skills that are important for a healthy and happy marriage, why don’t you ask people blessed with healthy and happy marriages what they do?
Avram, why not start by volunteering how you maintain a healthy and happy marriage.
Although the OP is referring to Modern Orthodox shuls that have Yarmulka boxes for the non-observant Ashkenazim davening in MO shuls, I think there are still some observant Sephardim who don’t wear a Yarmulka throughout the day, but do for davening.
Certain parts of davening, i.e. Shma, Baruch Sheamar and on, etc., there are greater restrictions against speaking that almost everyone honors.
There’s a new article by a MO teenager named Eitan Gross entitled “Modern Orthodoxy from a Teenager’s Perspective” that’s definitely worth a read.
Why is the division of assets so difficult? Hilchos Gittin is clear how to go about it. Any assets either spouse brought in from before marriage remains with that spouse. Any assets generated during the course of the marriage remain with the husband.
The custody issue is more complicated. But Hilchos Gittin addresses that question as well. Some of the determining factors are the age of the children, whether they are nursing, their gender, etc. It, too, must be settled in accordance with Hilchos Gittin.
TLIK, in the modern thought process the exclusive authority of the husband in the default case, barring unusual extenuating circumstances, under Hilchos Gittin to decide whether or not to get divorced, to take one example from Hilchos Gittin, is considered discriminatory and biased by Orthodox subscribers of modern Western philosophy.
The perception that most beis dins are biased in favor of the husband was true for many years but B’h is no longer the norm, but the execption.
Hilchos Gittin is “biased” in favor of the husband (based on contemporary definitions of bias.) If the Beis Din isn’t, then the B”D isn’t following Halacha.
Korach (who by the way, was considered a great Talmid Chochom and a Gadol Hador before his desire for Kavod corrupted him)
Winnie, are you implying that, today, there’s another person who is considered a great Talmid Chochom and a Gadol Hador but his desire for Kavod corrupted him? If not, why that reference?
Are you in a rush to get back to work after shul on Shabbos?
You can use duplicative text in different threads.
Golden Flow milk freshness lasts just as long as national brand milks.
Another point both spouses need to keep in mind is that just as getting married halachicly requires the consent of both parties — one person cannot marry another against their will (except in rare circumstances) — similarly, getting divorced requires the consent of both parties. One spouse cannot impose or force a divorce against the other spouse’s will, as halachicly divorce can only be done with the consent of both parties (except in rare circumstances).
Being a prosecutor is an even far greater issur arkaos.