Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Mayan_Dvash:
First: I was referring to the Bach’s corrections to the text of the Talmud, which is in the margin of every Shas.
Second: IT WAS A JOKE!!
Maybe for your birthday, your family can pool their money and buy you a sense of humor.
If you are asking about the REAL world, and not some make-believe, fantasy world, then the answer is obvious: GO FOR THE BIG $$$$$$$$$$
It’s OK, because we can still listen to music by that guy Bach, you know, the one who wrote all those corrections in the margins of the Talmud.
Wait till they find you Bach wrote “Liturgical Music” for the church, then they’ll have to edit him out of all our Gemaras. 🙂
Seminary is a waste of time and money. It’s used as blackmail now because girls can’t get a “good shidduch” if they didn’t go to Seminary and it has to be in Israel. It’s a joke but don’t expect anything to be done about it. That would require the parents to act collectively and simply refuse to send their girls. If 500 or 1000 parents in one year simply refused to send their girls, then maybe something would change. But that won’t happen because we all just go along with the blackmail and have no backbone to stand up to any kind of pressure.
Mayan_Dvash: The bracha of “Yotzer Ohr” ends with “Yotzer HaMeoros” to which everybody answers “amen”
cantoresq: I read your post and was going to write that I am in agreement, until I read your last line. Why do you feel the need to engage in personal attacks?
With regard to any disrespect shown in the “Yeshivish” world towards Rav Soloveitchik, I think he brought much of that on himself. The Rav was not shy about voicing opinions HE KNEW to be unpopular in the “frum velt”. Just read some of his musings in his lectures about the “Mizrachi”. How about his endorsement of teaching Gemara to girls? How about his refusal to sign on the ban dealing with the New York Board of Rabbis?
Perhaps the “frum velt” went too far (such as calling him JB). But the fact remains that he publicly went against his own family traditions, so I don’t think we should be too shocked at the reaction.
I daven in a shul where one of the ba’alei tefilah says “Baruch Atah HaShem Ga’al” and then says the word “Yisrael” silently. So now we have a new bracha, “Baruch Atah HaShem Ga’al”.
My question is as follows. I believe the Rema states that it is Muttar to say Amen after that bracha. So what is the big deal? Also, what about other people who are in shul but are not holding in the same place. Maybe they are at a place in davening, or not davening at all, where they could answer Amen according to all opinions. Why should we deprive them of an Amen?
I have been reading the book “Off the Derech” for the past few days. It has been an “eye opening” experience. I’ve been thinking alot about what’s written there and have been discussing it with my wife.
One thing that bothers me (more than anything else) is the impression I get that according to the author, whatever we do as parents seems to be wrong. A person could come to “Yeeush” when reading page-after-page of reasons why whatever they do as parents will send their kids “off the derech”. It would have been a little more helpful if the author had given any indication that, at least sometimes, what the children/teens perceive as negative behavior on the part of the parents/teachers is really in their (the kids) minds. Our author seems to suggest that children/teenagers should never experience ANY negativity from their parents/teachers. The stories the author relates in the book seem to be one-sided in presentation. If we face facts honestly, we ought to admit that children/teens often ask questions in a “confrontational” way. Incidents should not be viewed in isolation. If a teacher, with a roomful of children to teach, who may also be stressed from his/her familial responsibilites, is confronted with hostile questioning from one or more students, perhaps that teachers less-than-patient response is a little more understandable. Our author, for example, refers to her own experiences in a school in Israel. She mentions, almost in passing, that she, at least twice, violated rules that she voluntarily accepted on herself. Her presentation of the principals response is totally from her perspective without ANY indication that the gave ANY thought to the other side of the coin.
Just as kids/teens don’t need to hear a 100% negative message from us, we don’t need a 100% negative message from them. That having been said, I continue to read this book because it has many helpful ideas. It’s just the overall tone I concerned with.
lkaufman: I AM dealing with a similar situation at home. It’s a little complicated but be assured I’m speaking from experience.
bentzy18:
First: I disagree with the attitude that lays ALL responsibility for the teen-agers actions at the door-step of the parents. Tell me, who do you know that grew up with no issues between themselves and their parents? Is there a human being alive on this planet who doesn’t have “issues” with Mom and Dad? Yet somehow, people manage to grew up and get on with their lives even in the face of “issues”. I think your perspective is a product of our “victim” oriented culture that sees everybody as a victim who is not able to take responsibility for their actions.
Second: When I write about neglecting the rest of the family, I’m not writing about skipping a chumash play or missing a bed-time story. I’m talking about dealing with the problem of different standards for each child. What do you do when you have a daughter who is, for example, dressed inappropriately, and brining her “friends” to the house and your other daughter (who is an “eidel” Bais Yaakov girl) feels that she has no place in her own home beacuse her parents are compromising on Yiddishkeit for her sister? Perhaps that “eidel” daughter will begin to act out (anorexia comes to mind) and then what do you do?
Third: I reject the notion that leaving the “derech” is always a product of emotional issues. That attitude reminds me of the old USSR where they would put political opponents in mental hospitals. A perfectly normal and well-balanced person can still choose a secular life style. To say otherwise is to reject “bechira Chofshis”.
Bentzy18:
You write that “there’s a bigger picture” however your bigger picture consists of one person, the “at risk” teen. I see a bigger picture which takes in the whole family.
Also, you paint with a pretty broad brush. I don’t agree that every “at risk” teen is a life/death situation. You may find this hard to accept, but some kids simply don’t want a spiritual perspective, be it religion or anything else. Some kids simply want to live a secular life-style and it doesn’t necessarily have to do with life-threatening crises.
As a parent with several children, I think it’s unfair to focus on one child to the exclusion of the genuine needs of the others. If a child had, Chas V’shalom, a terrible accident, the parents would certainly tend to that child but would not ignore the needs of the rest of the family.
Your advocacy for the “at risk” kid is commendable, but I think YOU are the one who is not seeing a bigger picture. Perhaps it’s time we realize that as kids grow, they have to assume responsibility for their choices. Just because a kid doesn’t feel like putting on tefilin or dressing properly, that doesn’t mean we parents have to be blackmailed by holding life/death situations over our heads. Perhaps these kids ought to “get over themselves” and just GROW UP, as the rest of us have had to.
The kids learn it from the parents.
I’d like to know who taught the adults of today that there’s no problem coming to shul 30 or 40 minutes late every single shabbos. People come in late with no sense of “bushah”. Then proceed to talk all during davening and then are the FIRST to grab a seat at the kiddush and take the largest helpings of food.
During the week, they come 15 mintues late to shul, spend the time “texting” and are the first to leave, unless there’s a yahrtzeit “tikkun”.
When the parents clean up their acts, then we can expect something from the children.
Most of these replies seem to focus entirely on the “at risk” teen, but ignore the rest of the family and the community at large. What is a parent to do if there are many children in the family and one (or more) is acting in a way that has negative influence on the other children? If your daughter is dressing in ways that make it impossible for you (as a father) and your sons to make brachos when she is in the room, what are you supposed to do?
If your daughter is having phone conversations with explicit references to certain subjects in the presence of the other family members, what are you supposed to do?
Is it possible that by trying to save one child you might sacrifice another child? How does one choose? It seems to me that an “at risk” child can cause us to focus on that child so much that the others come to feel that they have to “act out” if they want any real attention from their parents.
Also, don’t be so quick to condemn people for their reactions. As ONLY ONE other poster pointed out, at risk girls who dress like “normal teen-agers” make it assur to look in their direction. Instead of criticizing people, make a suggestion. What is a frum man supposed to do when he sees a girl coming in his direction who is barely dressed? What if that girl is his daughter and she’s coming to the Shabbos table dressed in a short sleeved tee shirt and a skirt that rides up over he knees?