- This topic has 192 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Joseph, I believe there’s a machlokes regarding whether Christianity is AZ. OTOH, I don’t know if anyone paskens it’s OK to enter a Christian sanctuary (as opposed to entering a Catholic school to provide services or a social hall for a meeting or to vote).
All poskim hold it is strictly prohibited to enter the sanctuary of a church, on the basis of avoda zora.
Avi K, you ignore the fact that they weren’t required to go to the festivities. Why couldn’t they have stayed home with their young kids and had a meaningful Shabbos? That would have been a real kiddush Hashem.
Avi: “Lilmod, it is prohibited as LH to go straight to a public outcry. First you have to speak to the individual privately. In this case the Committee to Find Blemishes in Others (to use Rav Aviner’s term) is second-guessing the Secret Service, who know their business (and anyone with even a modicum of intelligence who saw the videos of what went on in the streets knows that they were right) and the rav who paskened.”
Why is this comment being directed to me? I am one of the ones who keep saying it’s LH.
Yehudayona: are you in the Trump’s inner circle to know what they told as to the proper protocol for the adult children of the newly inaugurated president as to attending the festivities? You claim it is not required. You may be correct. Except we don’t know all the information that was told to them.
ZD, I asked Dayan Ehrentreu Shlit”a at the time about Chief Rabbi Sacks attending William and Kate’s wedding. Dayan Ehrentreu is the Emeritus (former) Rosh of London Beis Din and thereby head of the Chief Rabbi’s Beis Din.
His first reaction was, “Er hot mir gornisht gefrekt!” (he didn’t ask me). When I asked him what the heter was, he said (Don’t quote me, because it was 6 years ago and I may have forgotten details in the meantime) firstly, Rabbi Sacks wasn’t seated in the main area of the church, but in an area that is added for large ceremonies such as weddings, coronations etc. Secondly, it wasn’t a prayer service as such but a wedding, even though prayer was offered.
Another answer may be that an Anglican church isn’t the same as a Catholic church would be, as has been mentioned many times on this forum.
We don’t know about the requirements of attendance either. What if their home wasn’t safe at the time and splitting up the Secret Service and having them go a different route with traffic would have been dangerous. Maybe even threats were made c”v. So for their safety they needed to just move along together in front of cameras.
We can have quiet Shabbats at home Baruch Hashem. For Jared and Ivanka, who knows what would have been banging on their doors or happened had they tried to lay low for Shabbat. Maybe this atypical Shabbat heter was permitted to allow the family to observe the rest from here on out in peace. Or more peacefully.
We can be grateful that we don’t have such complicated Shabbat scenarios.
Iacisrmma and Lightbrite, that’s ridiculous. There’s no “requirement” for them to go to a post inauguration party, or the inauguration itself.
I’m sure it would have been very awkward for them not to attend, but that’s it.
DY: you may think so but the Rav of my shul brought up these points.
I disagree with him.
“It’s the frum version of celebrity gossip magazines. Some women need an outlet… and by posing it as concern for Judaism, they (think they) don’t have to worry about lashon hara.” (quote from ImaMother in a thread on the same topic)
As tenured posters know, I’m very pro-Trump. However, we shouldn’t let politics get in the way of halachah. At the very least, what they did is identical to something which is assur, which makes it definitively a chillul Hashem. What DY is saying is 100% right. I don’t think there’s any real proof the Kushners even asked anyone, much less a trustworthy Orthodox rabbi.
It reminds me of the joke where we say, how do we know Moshe Rabbeinu covered his head? Because the Torah says Moshe went out… Of course he didn’t go out with an uncovered head! I.e. How do we know the Kushners got a pikuach nefesh heter? Because we know they got driven to a Church on Shabbos… Of course they didn’t do so without a heter! Obviously, in practice, this logic does not apply.
Jared Kushner: Your contract to work at the Trump Administration is conditional upon your attendance at the inauguration balls and after parties.
The media and other nations will be watching and I refuse to have you as part of my administration if you and Ivanka fail to show up for any reason whatsoever, including your right to religious freedom.
If you want to take this position which is of great importance to our nation, be there with Ivanka.
Sincerely,
Trump
Subsequently Jared and Ivanka took this contract to their rav. The rav gave his psak. Here we are.
“I’m sure it would have been very awkward for them not to attend, but that’s it.”
It might have been a lot more than awkward. We don’t know how Trump would have reacted. Ivanka seems to have a very good relationship with him, but that might be because she makes sure to do what he wants. Maybe that’s where the pikuach nefesh issue came in.
We also don’t know what the repercussions would have been for Israel and the Yidden. The Rav issuing the Psak probably took all this into account. There are also probably many factors involved that we are unawared of both in terms of the situation and in terms of the halachos involved. I don’t think that anyone here is qualified to posken on the situation.
“It’s the frum version of celebrity gossip magazines. Some women need an outlet… and by posing it as concern for Judaism, they (think they) don’t have to worry about lashon hara.” (quote from ImaMother in a thread on the same topic)
I’m not sure how you know what my (or anyone else’s) motivation is here.
Jared Kushner: Your contract to work at the Trump Administration is conditional upon your attendance at the inauguration balls and after parties.
The media and other nations will be watching and I refuse to have you as part of my administration if you and Ivanka fail to show up for any reason whatsoever, including your right to religious freedom.
If you want to take this position which is of great importance to our nation, be there with Ivanka.
Sincerely,
Trump
Subsequently Jared and Ivanka took this contract to their rav. The rav gave his psak. Here we are.
You forgot to mention that Jared Kushner is so poor, that his family would starve to death without this job, hence, it’s pikuach nefesh.
“It’s the frum version of celebrity gossip magazines. Some women need an outlet… and by posing it as concern for Judaism, they (think they) don’t have to worry about lashon hara.” (quote from ImaMother in a thread on the same topic)
“I’m not sure how you know what my motivation is here.”
You’re missing the point.
That is so weird – DY, did you edit your post while I was copying and pasting? I had thought your post said “my motivation” and I was even going to comment “how do you know I was talking about you?” but decided not to.
Then after I wrote my post, I saw that you had in fact written “my (or anyone else’s) motivation”, so I thought that I was tired and hadn’t read it carefully the first time. But then I saw that when I copy and pasted, it came out as “my motivation”!!! And that has nothing to do with how carefully I read.
You’re missing the point.
Fine, so what pearls of of wisdom are you gleaning from Imamother?
Yes, I edited.
“Fine, so what pearls of of wisdom are you gleaning from Imamother?”
I wasn’t gleaning pearls of wisdom from Imamother. That’s also missing the point.
The point was simply that it’s Loshon Hora. Period. I just thought the way it was expressed might help people to realize that.
“Yes, I edited.”
good thing I didn’t respond to that part. Maybe I have Ruach Hakodesh and realized you were editing it as I was typing.
Since its ok to speak Lashon Harah about people who publically break shabbos (If you dont belive there was a heter)
Is it also Ok to speak Lashon Harah about people who molest? Abuse, Cheat in business or taxes or other averiahs
Even if the contract mentioned is a real thing, which we haven’t verified it is, in what other situation is a Jew allowed to take a job that will force him to work on Shabbos? Like DY said, they wouldn’t have starved to death without this. This isn’t violating a Shabbos to be able to observe many more in the future. In fact, the only aftermath I’ve seen thusfar of the Kushner’s attendance is that it’s causing frum yidden to defend the indefensible when they wouldn’t for anyone else. And since when do jobs in the public sector force Jews to violate Shabbos? If I thought Trump would change policy on that, I wouldn’t have voted for him.
Saying that reform Jews who violate Shabbos violate Shabbos isn’t Lashon Harah. It doesn’t make it magically different when Jews who violate Shabbos happen to call themselves Orthodox.
NCB – the second point would only follow from the first if:
a) the first point is in fact correct, and
b) the reason why the first is correct is also true of the second.
Before you can assume that it’s okay to say that an Orthodox Jew violated Shabbos, you would have to explain why you think it’s okay to say that a Reform Jew violated Shabbos.
The point was simply that it’s Loshon Hora.
Then you seemed to have missed the point of what you copied from Imamother. That post was saying that the intention of those objecting to what they did was to gossip.
That was a very poor way of defending your opinion that it is lashon hora.
Your opinion is wrong. If nobody knew what they did, it would be lashon hora. However, since it was plastered all over the news, it is a mitzvah l’farseim that you are not allowed to put yourself in a position of pikuach nefesh intentionally.
I think there’s a similarity between this and another famous situation which took place on Shabbos.
zdad:
Is it also Ok to speak Lashon Harah about people who molest? Abuse, Cheat in business or taxes or other averiahs
That argument cuts both ways – are you (or the others here) makpid to never criticize or talk about all those whom you just mentioned?
And BTW, isn’t saying that somebody said LH also LH?
(That was addressed to everyone here, not just zdad.)
How about this, MW? If Reuven says LH about Shimon he gets all of Shimon’s aveirot. Causing someone to say LH is “lifnei iver”. So if Shimon causes Reuven to say LH about him Reuven gets that too.
Yehudayona, who says that hey were not required as part of the First Family?
DY, do you only do things if you need the money?
Joseph, there are often differences between what poskim say in public, where the pesak is general, and in private where it is individual.
Re LB’s letter from Trump to Kushner: I guess Kushner’s not Big Gedaliah Goomber.
DY: “That was a very poor way of defending your opinion that it is lashon hora.”
I had already tried the straightforward cerebral approach (which is my derech in general) and you didn’t respond, so I decided to try copy someone else’s more emotional tactic and see if it worked better. I have noticed in general that most people seem more likely to respond to emotional arguments than to intellectual arguments.
Since I can’t come up with those types of arguments, I decided to copy someone else’s and see if it worked better and if you were more likely to respond. And apparently, I was right since you did respond and you hadn’t responded to my previous post.
“The point was simply that it’s Loshon Hora.”
“Then you seemed to have missed the point of what you copied from Imamother. That post was saying that the intention of those objecting to what they did was to gossip.”
I understood the point of what I copied from Imamother. There was a reason why I answered the way I did, and I was planning to follow up with more clarification.
My point was as follows: The quote from Imamother was not meant as proof that you were speaking LH.
I just want to clarify something before I go on. The term LH can be used in two ways – either to refer to speech that is forbidden or to any derogatory speech even when it fulfills the toeles conditions and is permitted. (In “A lesson a day” they explain that the second definition is not technically accurate, but it is used for lack of a better term, although the word “l’toeles is tacked on).
In this case, what was being said was clearly LH according to the broader meaning of the term (while this is not the accurate definition of the term and it is NOT the way I used it previously, for clarity’s sake, I am using the term that way right now). The question is whether or not it is l’toeles. In order for LH to be l’toeles, there are many conditions that must be fulfilled, it is very difficult to fulfill them, and it is very easy to convince oneself that they are being fulfilled, and one needs to ask a sheilah, especially if the LH is taking place in such a public forum. I pointed this out to you previously, and you did not respond.
Obviously, if you are speaking LH (in the broader sense of the term), you think that your intentions are l’sheim Shamayim, since I don’t think you are the type who would deliberately speak LH (in the narrower sense of the word). I know it is something you are usually very careful about, and you seem like the Yarei Shamayim type. And I’m sure that your intentions were 95% l’sheim Shamayim, but if you were nichshal, I think that means that your intentions were not 100% l’sheim Shamayim, even though I am sure that you thought that they were.
And that is how I understood the quote from ImaMother, and that is how I meant it. I think the poster realized that a lot of people don’t listen if you just say, “it’s LH” but if you present it in the type of way Imamother did, people are more likely to listen. And this is something I have noticed in general – that that type of tactic tends to be more effective, although it is something I personally find hard to do.
If I understand correctly, you thought that I was starting out assuming your intentions were to gossip and that was my proof that you were speaking LH (in the narrow sense) It was actually the other way around – I was assuming that the statements were LH (in the narrow sense), and that therefore, your intentions must not be 100% (although they might be 99.99999% l’sheim Shamayim).
The basis for my assumption that what you were saying is LH is mainly the fact that it is clearly LH in the broad sense, and therefore a sheilah should be asked to find out if it is LH in the narrow sense. This is no less a sheilah than a sheilah in Hilchos Shabbos or anything else. It is a very serious matter, and one that really requires a Psak Halacha. In addition, I really didn’t see the conditions of toeles being fulfilled here.
Since you don’t seem to want to ask the sheilah, I will bli neder, try to do so on your behalf, but I will have to wait till 5:00 or 5:30 my time when the hotline is open. I was actually planning to go to sleep tonight, but this is important, so I will try to stay up, b”n.
Mw13: “And BTW, isn’t saying that somebody said LH also LH?”
No, I don’t think so. Not if you’re talking to the same people who just heard the LH. Adraba, I think it’s a Mitzvah. They already know what the person said- now they have to know that it’s LH.
DY: “However, since it was plastered all over the news, it is a mitzvah l’farseim that you are not allowed to put yourself in a position of pikuach nefesh intentionally.”
The way you are phrasing things here is very different than the way it was phrased in the previous posts in this thread. I don’t know if it was your posts or others, since I can’t remember exactly who said what.
The way you are phrasing it now is for sure less problematic, although I would qualify the statement further.
One of the problems with the way things were phrased before is that they seemed to be a personal condemnation of Jared and Ivanka instead of a factual halachic statement as you are making here.
Another issue is that we don’t know the reasoning behind the psak. You are assuming a few things. For one thing, you are assuming that everyone who is reading this thread already knows what was reported in the news.
You are also assuming that the basis of the psak was that they will be in a pikuach nefesh situation on the way home. That may be how it was reported in the news, but: a) not everyone reads the news. b) The fact that it was reported in the news that way does NOT mean it was accurate. For one thing, you can’t believe everything that is said in the news. For another thing, there may be many factors here that were not things that the Kushners could repeat to the public (meaning situational factors that could be a reason to be more lenient).
In addition to the situational factors, there may be many halachic factors that you are not aware of.
If in fact your intention is simply to make sure that people realize that according to halacha one is not allowed to put himself in a postion of pikuach nefesh and then be mechalel Shabbos, then you should simply state that if the heter was based on …. and that is not a valid heter according to halacha. Don’t assume that: 1) everyone knows that that is what the heter was based on or: 2) that it is necessarily true.
I think that one should make sure that it is not said as a personal condemnation of those involved. One should add that they should be judged favorably that they have no way of knowing that this is incorrect since it’s what they were told. Also, perhaps one could look at the positive side that they asked the sheilah in the first place. Additionally, I think that perhaps one should be aware of and make clear that there may be other unknown factors.
Lilmod:”If I understand correctly, you thought that I was starting out assuming your intentions were to gossip and that was my proof that you were speaking LH (in the narrow sense)”
DY, I’m sorry that you took my words that way (if you really did) and that I didn’t clarify them sooner. I actually had no idea that that was you thought I meant (if I am correct in that assumption) until I wrote those words (well actually right before I wrote those words). Was that really what you thought I meant? Chas v’shalom – I never thought you were the type who likes gossiping for the sake of gossiping at all.
I hope it’s clear now what I meant.
I was thinking of the Meraglim who were big tzadikim and intended l’sheim Shamayim but must have had some hidden small unconscious aspect of non-l’sheim shamayim intentions.
Also, now that you clarified what your intentions were (which had not been clear before), it probably wasn’t true at all. So I take it back (at least in your case), BUT I still think I was right for writing it since it got you to explain what you meant. Also, it wasn’t meant for you specifically – it was meant for anyone who was speaking LH, so if you weren’t, then it doesn’t apply to you anyhow.
Also, now that you clarified what you meant, I’m not so sure a sheilah is necessary. I wrote that post before I registered the end portion of your post.
That is Loshon Hora.
Agreed. Deleted -100
“Is it also Ok to speak Lashon Harah about people who molest? Abuse, Cheat in business or taxes or other averiahs”
“That argument cuts both ways – are you (or the others here) makpid to never criticize or talk about all those whom you just mentioned?”
I think his point was the other way around. That he has been accused of speaking LH by possibly some of the same people who are claiming here that this is not LH. So he is saying that they should either acknowledge that this is LH or not accuse him of speaking LH.
However, I think the response to that would be that the two types of scenarios are not the same. The equivalent example would be someone who molests in public and claims that it is halachically permissible.
I did not use the LH argument, however to answer
There is a differnce between LH of someone who is not relgious which is between him and hashem , That is for hashem to decide. If you want to say Kol Bnei Yisroel Averim Zeh L’Zeh. fine but that is more indefinate and indirect than anything
However someone who cheats or is an absuer is a menace to society. Even I dont know the person directly. i might know of someone who does know them and they would need to know to stay away from that person
Is mentioning that Henry Kissinger married a gentile also l”h, lilmod?
ZD – what you are saying would only apply to someone who is a molestor, not to someone who cheats on his taxes or does other aveiros.
Even regarding someone who is a molestor, there are still many halachos and issues involved and you have to ask a sheilah. The fact that someone has been accused of molesting someone at some point in their life does not necessarily give everyone in the world a blanket heter to talk about it whenever and wherever they feel like it.
For example, there was a boy who went through a difficult period of time in his life and did not act appropriately with girls, although there is no reason to think that there was any “ones” involved. He went to therapy, dealt with his issues and turned around and was totally frum and not a danger to society in any way.
After he got help and had turned around, someone went and posted about him online “warning” people to stay away from him as he was a molester. If you continued reading the email carefully, according to what the person claimed he did, he wasn’t even a molester. Unless you think that girls are always victims and not responsible for their own actions, which seems to be the contemporary approach but is ridiculous. And certainly doesn’t justify speaking LH about someone.
Additionally, he was fine at that point and not a danger to society. So it was really disgusting that someone went and shmeared him publicly like that, especially after he had worked really hard to do teshuva and get back on track.
The point is if you think it’s mutter to say something because you think there’s a toeles: Ask a sheilah. It’s not so hard. There’s a Shmiras Halashon hotline you can call any night between 9:00 – 10:30 (I think). I think you can find the number online.
There are many conditions required for something to be allowed. These conditions are rarely fulfilled.
Moderator 100- Thanks so much! Shkoyach! + 1 million!
Would everyone please stop worrying about Ivanka Trump’s observation of halacha. No one is holding her up as a model of frum womanhood. It’s unfair to her, and unfair to OJ’s (orthodox Jews).
And just to be clear, I am a registered Democrat, an unregistered liberal, and I expect her father to continue to be a liar, cheater, fake phony fraud, and will be the worst president the US has ever had. I also hope I turn out to be wrong. (I was wrong once before, and I got over it.)
Not all victims of molestors are girls, many are boys.
If you wish to call a Shmiras Halashon if a known molestor attends your shul with your nieces and nephews (Or any other relatives), go right ahead. I will protect my family first and if it means I did an averiah, I will take that averiah. Better I take such an averiah than anyone become a victim
And people who cheat in their taxes (I dont mean take an illegal deduction, I mean serious cheating like not paying sales taxes or paying employees in cash) are likely to be dishonest elsewhere as well
Why does anything this family does religiously surprise anyone, one way or the other.
Would everyone please stop worrying about Ivanka Trump’s observation of halacha. No one is holding her up as a model of frum womanhood. It’s unfair to her, and unfair to OJ’s (orthodox Jews).
and
Why does anything this family does religiously surprise anyone, one way or the other.
The issue for me is not their personal level of observance; it is, first and foremost, the claimed “heter” which, even if theoretically legitimate for this situation (although it makes no sense as reported), is sure to be copycatted in other situations.
The issue for me is not their personal level of observance; it is, first and foremost, the claimed “heter” which, even if theoretically legitimate for this situation (although it makes no sense as reported), is sure to be copycatted in other situations.
there are 2 avenues for the Heter, Pikuach Nefesh and one I had never heard of before Something Malchus (Something to do with being involved with the government)
Both do make sense. It is not the same as someone wishing to get someone to drive to the beach on Shabbos
BTW the Trumps themselves never mentioned any heter, it came from other sources
“BTW the Trumps themselves never mentioned any heter, it came from other sources”
If that is true, then it really is possible that the reason for the heter is not as reported and there are more details.
It’s also possible, if not likely, there was no heter given. The only source for it is the head of the GOP-Israel, in Israel, vaguely telling a news outlet he heard second hand that there was a heter. That’s where all the reports of a heter come from.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.