Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
JJ: “Could it be that the halachos were written at times when the goyim accepted hitting kids and that’s why it was considered acceptable?”
No. That certainly was not the reason the Halacha was set to what it is.
“Btw if that answer is no then I why would the halachah change now?”
The Halacha did not change.
ubiq: “Rabbeinu Gershom’s cherem was liekly done due to “western sensibilities” arguably “changing halacha””
1. There’s absolutely no basis to make that argument. If there was, you’d have been able to cite a legitimate or authorative source for such an assertion.
2. Even if you did make that incorrect argument, rabbonim making a gezeira prohibiting something halachicly permitted is:
a) not a new or changed Halacha but rather a gezeira or geder
b) can be done unlike permitting something that’s halachicly prohibited
c) in the example at hand, unlike Cherem R”G, the rabbonim as a factual matter have not collectively made a gezeira accepted by the Klal that prohibited corporal punishment of children
d) in fact, Halacha from Tanach through Chazal through explicitly paskened in Shulchan Aruch which no halachic authority argues against, not only permit corporal punishment but rule that it is mandatory when the circumstances warrant it.
1. I would think that not having paid the shadchan is a very rare error to occur.
2. Most shidduchim are made by friends and family who are not professional shadchanim.
BMG_Guy: If you found out your child decided not to tell an adult that the cookie he was munching on came from a treif bakery, you wouldn’t be upset?
” I agree that in shul it’s the time to talk to Hashem, but is it my business what the fellow next to me does? It’s none of my business. I go to shul to daven, Shoin!”
Baloney. It 100% most definitely is your, and every other Jew’s, business what the next Yid is up to. You are responsible for him, areivim zeh lzeh, not even mentioning the obligation of tochacha, you’re certainly responsible to care for his and every Yid’s spiritual wellbeing (ruchniyos) at least as much as his gashmius since his ruchniyos is even more important than his gashmiyus.
If you replace every instance in the Fox article of “Hasidim” and “Ultra Orthodox” with “blacks” or “Hispanics”, you’ll see how racist/anti-Semitic the article is. No media outlet would dare have written, even if 100% true, that exact same article — word for word — about blacks or Hispanics. Because they know they’d be denounced across the board as racists and would immediately be facing riots and boycotts.
But Jews are fair play regardless of racism; especially the “Jews’ Jews” (i.e. the Ultra Orthodox).
Neville: Excellent point. I would go further in pointing out that goyim don’t know the difference between Ulta Orthodox and Modern Orthodox. So those thinking this is all about UO and Hasidim are fooling only themselves as to a goy a Jew is a Jew whether he’s UO or MO.
Eisav Sonei L’Yaakov.
Fox are the same Eisav’s as the Huffington Post and the New York Times.
What if instead of a phone, the guy in the story pulled out a little portable TV and started watching a soap opera. Would your reaction be any different?
Yes.
$149.95
It is impossible for the court to be blind to the psychological damage thrust upon the child when one parent unilaterally imposes a radical change in religious environment on the child, such as going from Evangelical Christianity to Wahhabi Islam or going from Orthodox Judaism to secularism.
“What are symptoms of being a bochur who is affected by the shidduch crisis?”
Having trouble finding multiple wives.
[Ducking while DY fetches a bucket of water to dump on me.]
If you’re going at the full legal speed limit in the left lane you’re doing perfectly fine.
San Francisco
CS: On what basis are you generalizing that it hasn’t worked out well from the times of the Torah through today (including by non-Ashkenazim)?
NP, take a look at this comment from CTL and tell me if that sounds like a classical Litvak:
And that comment is hardly his most outstanding, it just happens to be a quick one to find since iiTfT pointed this out.
I think you’d agree that it wouldv’e been difficult to have 27 children with one wife.
Multiple wives, multiple wives, multiple wives.
There. Another three opportunities.
(Anything to tick you off, why not.) 🤣
Avram, ChabadShlucha’s point about “… separation and unity. We see this by marriage where harei at mekudeshes li denotes that the man is separating this woman from all the others in the world”, that she built a point upon, is only applicable by women for the reason I mentioned. That’s all I was saying.
37.4% of people hate their job.
Why, thank you, Yitzchak. I feel very blessed. I wish you the best of mazal in this inyan. (Though I obviously only advocate this for non-Ashkenazim, in deference to the Ashkenazic takana, unless the Ashkenazic Gedolim decide to start permitting it again.)
“Which you do.”
Whether I do or not, I surely haven’t expressed that in any way in this thread.
“NP, you said earlier you haven’t been on the CR long. Could it be that CTL’s posts on other threads concerning religious matters are what cause people to label him as MO rather than this thread alone? ”
Yes, that’s exactly it. It’s hardly this thread but the sum total of his comments elsewhere on this forum, as I pointed out in a previous comment. And I referred to him as MO with all due respect. In no way was that categorization used in a denigrating way (unless ones believes being MO itself is a denigration.)
Wolf: Does the President travel with a convoy of cars using lights and sirens?
NP, it is you (not I) who is repeating yourself. I’ve already refuted all your repetitive points.
Mentsch1: I don’t think you’re following my point. To simplify: For a child to have one parent tell her to be a good Evangelical Christian while her other parent is insisting she be a good Wahhabi Muslim, and they have joint custody, kills the child. It is highly detrimental to the child’s emotional health to be told to do to opposite and incompatible things by opposing parents.
The court needs to take a side in order to preserve the child’s health and prevent her health breakdown from such an impossibility from such a tug of war that the child’s in middle of as the pawn.
Mentsch1: Because Evangelical Christianity and Wahhabi Islam are fundamentally at terrible odds and contradictory with each other. And for a child to be pulled into those two extremely different directions by two differing parents is a terrible crime against the child’s well-being.
And since birth parents, in that case, effectively agreed to raise their children as evangelicals when they got married and before they had children, and in fact were raising them as such for a number of years, for one parent to unilaterally make a sudden change of the status quo is a wrong inflicted upon the children as well as upon the parental rights of the other parent and on the jointly agreed upon structure they entered into when they joined in union.
Your agreement, btw, is no different than most agreements where frum divorcing parents agree to continue raising their children frum post-divorce.
Mentsch1: He’s CTL not NYL. 😉
NP, I explained above the answer to your questions. The application of the term Classic Litvak, as defined here, is a historical revisionism. True Classic Litvaks are Rav Moshe Shternbuch, the Brisker Rov, Rav Elchonon Wasserman, the Chofetz Chaim and more contemporary (in addition to Rav Shternbuch) the talmidim of Brisk and Ponevezh in Eretz Yisroel today. Those are the real classic Litvaks.
Not the new age definition given above or the strawman answers you proposed. CTL’s hashkofos and worldviews as very often expressed on this forum clearly fall into what is today called MO.
frumtd: If two Evangelical Christian parents raise three children, if they get divorced and one of the parents (say the one with custody) suddenly decides to convert to Wahhabi Islam, you think it is okay for the newly converted Muslim to raise her previous Christian children as Muslims against their father’s wishes and against how they jointly raised their children until then? You think the courts should allow her to do that?
If not, a divorced parent going from Orthodox Judaism to something else raises the same legal concerns.
Joe’s law?
Halevai all the Gedolim got the kovod given to this godol from Eretz Yisroel during his visit to New York.
This should set an example.
NCB & TfT: I don’t think the nomenclature is all too important. If that’s what a Classic Litvak is, today the terminology/nomenclature has changed in popular usage from CL to become MO. I think CTL today clearly falls into what today is called MO.
As a second and separate point, I think that a) CTL has a similar background to how many other current MO people “shtam” from and b) what CTL was 50-55 years ago is the natural progression of what is MO today.
CTL — I say all the above in complete respect. You can comment on its accuracy. 🙂
As far as what a “true Litvak” is, I think we can fairly say that the type of Litvaks seen by the Brisker Rov and his successors and talmidim today as well as the type of Litvishness on display in the Ponevezh Yeshiva in Eretz Yisroel today, to take two contemporary exemples, is a far closer rendition of the type of Yiddishkeit lived in Lita in places like Vilna, Novardok and Kovna — than the type of Judaism that in this thread is being called “classic Litvish”.
Rav Shternbuch shlita is a classic Litvak.
CTL, what makes you not MO? Your beliefs and lifestyle falls well within the norm of that community and fits it far better than any other frum community.
Orthodoxy in America pre-WWI was horrible. Between WWI and WWII it started improving a bit but was still in der erd. Yes, despite that there were those that were mesira nefesh to stay frum, they were the exceptions by far. Even if your family was one of them. Until WWII real Torah Judaism and religious life was in Europe.
Kovod HaRav.
Neville: It is generally the modern crowd that comes up with threads and pathetic arguments like this; not the Litvaks (whose Torah world is very close to and even integrated with the Chasidim.)
Where are the complaints against the guys who have big opulent houses that everyone passing by the street sees? Or the guys with fancy cars that people see everyday? Only the weddings bother you?
The Nazis considered anyone ever a quarter Jewish to be Jewish for their categorization.
TLIK, no I certainly didn’t mean it the way you question, and I’m not being dismissive of Reb Ronnie z’l in any way. I simply intended to direct MonseyMom on whom to consult for her problem. In the abstract her Rov is the best address, and he can guide her elsewhere if need be.
Your Rov shlit”a.
Contact TAG.
Calypso Louie Farrahkan is a certified deranged lunatic. Anything he says is of no value and means anything other than what he says.
Since Hitler appreciated Truman does that fault Truman?