Always_Ask_Questions,
“Not eating kitniyos is a minhag, but wearing a hat?! This just got out of hand.”
Lol, black hats are really a stick in your craw, aren’t they? Anyway it was amiricanyeshivish who brought the hats up, and I suspect he feels like you do and was going for irony.
“So, would a person born into a black hat wearing community need a hatara nedarim if he decides to wear his grandfather’s white or gray hat?”
No more than he’d need to if he wanted to wear a blue Union Civil War era jacket instead of a black suit jacket, or a hat with a big feather, or a Napoleon hat, or anything else that differs from the common sartorial choices of the community. If he’s always davened with a hat, however, it may be more of a shaila if he wants to forego a hat completely.
“As to confusion between midrabanan and Torah, isn’t it how we read the story of Adam and Hava making a takono not to _touch_ the grape?”
Off topic – I notice that your transliterated ח’s go from ch to h when you’re in a more trollish mood, I wonder what it means.
On topic – yes and no. Chava’s addition of “we cannot touch it” gave the snake the opportunity to increase the confusion that he started when he initially opened the conversation with the incorrect, “so Hashem said you cannot eat from any of the trees in the garden?” And that’s not the only inaccuracy/addition she had. She also added the term “fruit” to the command, and she said the tree of knowledge was in the center of the garden, whereas we were told previously only that the tree of life was in the center. She desired the fruit both physically and intellectually, and her changes to the description of the tree and the command seem to reflect that desire. When the snake pushed her against the tree and she did not instantly die, she could have thought many things. Hashem didn’t punish me because my touching it was unintentional. Maybe the punishment isn’t instantaneous. Whatever. But instead, she used the confusion as a means to rationalize, and she ate the fruit. Just like someone stealing from a store may rationalize that it’s a victimless crime, they have insurance, whatever. Maybe she was “confused” about some things, but she wasn’t confused about the eating being forbidden. She knew Hashem did not want that.