- This topic has 88 replies, 46 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Joseph: In this case, it’s really easy. This is no Din D’Oraisa or D’Rabannan. The Shulchan Aruch brought down a Minhag Chassidus which, certainly nowadays, Rov HaOlam is not Makpid on.
Oh, and as I’ve pointed out in different threads, you’re misreading the Shulchan Aruch here.
Sam: Since when has the Shulchan Aruch become a book of Minhag Chassidus? Can you cite other good ideas that the Shulchan Aruch brings down that are not halacha? Is the Rambam also a “Minhag Chasidus” in your eyes? This is a novel idea considering the Gedolim in the days of the Shulchan Aruch and shortly thereafter have agreed to accept the psakim of the mechaber and the Rema as authoritative. The Shach writes that one cannot even claim “kim li” against a psak of the Shulchan Aruch. This is akin to accepting someone as your “Rebbi”, where you follow his psakim. The same thing applies to accepting the Shulchan Aruch and Rema.
You keep telling people they’re misreading S”A and other poskim that you don’t like, but when asked for your “real” meaning you disappear without even trying to offer your alternative interpretation. Please tell us what the Mechaber “really” meant when he wrote in S”A that “A woman should not go outside much. The beauty of a woman is to stay inside – “Kol Kevudah Bas Melech Penima…”
DaMoshe: that was a really cheap shot. Chasidish Rebbes are very makpid on Zman Krias shma and demand their followers to do likewise. Ask any Chasidish bochur what’s stressed before bein hazmanim.
If you would have mentioned davening shacharis late or mincha after Shkia, maybe you would have come across as sincere. The reason some very great Rebbes used to daven shacharis late is because they didn’t feel spiritually ready and had many hachnosos before facing Hashem in prayer. It was never a blank check for the klal.
Just to clarify, shma can be said privately at first to make the zman. Not ideal, but not changing halacha.
Can you please post where in the S”A it brings down the pasuk of kol kevudah and explains a meaning for it?
Joseph: The Shulchan Aruch quotes lots of Dinim. Some are D’Oraisa. Some are D’Rabannan. Some are Minhagim. And some are just Minhagei Chassidus. For example, it is quoted B’sheim R’ Moshe that most of the things in the first 4 SImanim of OC are Minhagei Chassidus. Washing one’s hands immediately after scratching one’s head or touching one’s upper arm, for example. It’s a generally accepted Klal in Achronim that when the Mechaber starts a phrase with “Lo” (instead of “Assur”) it’s just a Lechatchilah or Minhag Chassidus.
And I thought I explained this in another thread. The Rambam is referring to just Stam being outside. That should be only once a month. He explicitly excludes from that going to Simchos and similar activities (I don’t recall of visiting friends was also excluded but I think so; I’ll have to look it up again).
DM: I already did.
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/kol-kevuda-bas-melech-penima#post-568554
Shulchan Aruch EH 73:1 (also Rambam Hilchos Ishus 13:11)
You had left out which chelek it was in.
Joseph: There’s a halacha in the SH”A that a man is required to walk in the street with his head bent so low that he can see at the most, 4 amos in front of him. Do you know anyone nowadays who doesn’t think of that as minhag chassidus?
I think the Rambam must be seen in as written in a society where women barely ever left home, so if a woman were to so more that twice a month it would be inappropriate.
An example of a Midat Hassidut in the Sh”A is not going 4 amot without a head covering. In the Beit Yosef, he says that it’s a Midat Hasidut.
“There’s a halacha in the SH”A that a man is required to walk in the street with his head bent so low that he can see at the most, 4 amos in front of him.”
It says not to walk with a straight back, not necessarily bent over. The Kaf Hachaim says that it means to not be too upright as not to see the ground in front of you. He also says that one should not be bent over so as not to see what’s ahead. In short, a medium stance.
Mammele, totally agree with your response to DaM. Cheap shot, indeed. Misguided, as well as cheap. However, you were typing too quickly, and I’m sure you meant to say HACHANOS when you said hachnasos. Just trying to keep your excellent post clear…
And speaking of cheap shots and other nastiness, I did not much care for Joseph’s response to DaM. At all.
How about a little respect to a fellow Yid and fellow human?
After all, we’re still in middle of sefiras ha’omer…
“There’s a halacha in the SH”A that a man is required to walk in the street with his head bent so low that he can see at the most, 4 amos in front of him.”
That’s not how I’d translate “lo yeileich b’komah z’kufah.”
There is an idea brought down, not necessarily in the Shulchan Aruch, not to look outside of one’s “daled amos,” but I’ve never heard that one’s posture should make it impossible to do so.
wait a minute, im going to try to be dan lkaf zchus joe (i can’t believe im saying this)
is it possible that joe is chassidish and took damoshe’s comment as a low blow (unknowingly)
This is in Even HaEzer and Hilchos Ishus. What gives you the right to suggest this S”A and Rambam is merely Minhagei Chasidus? If you do this here you could throw out the entire S”A and Rambam by dismissing it as only Minhagei Chasidus. If you’re going to make this novel claim about a section of S”A and Rambam the least you’ll have to do it bring a halachic source claiming that rather than state it on your own authority.
Matan: Should we throw out Rambam because he lived in a different society? Rambam is bringing halachas (it’s called Hilchos Ishus), not societal customs of his era.
We are getting off topic.
Kol Kevuda Bas Melech Penima is falling by the wayside because we men are not doing our responsibilities.
Supporting our families is not just Minhagei Chassidus.
I want to hear that each Joseph in this thread is supporting his wife fully as proper for a true Bas Melech.
Joseph: The Lashon of “Lo” instead of “Assur” usually implies a Lechatchilah or Middas Chassidus in the Shulchan Aruch.
Joseph, chas v’shalom! I am saying that many halachos of tznius are relative to the society that one lives in.
Thanks Golfer for the compliment and for the sensitive correction. Honestly, even after rereading I didn’t notice that it’s spelled wrong. Something about the brain processing corrections automatically (and my keyboard finishing words for me that I used prior despite not being versed in “Yinglish” usage at all)…
And you’re right, cheap shots should have no place here towards anybody.
I rarely post but once in a while when a controversial topic is being discussed, it is fun to add to the controversy. The ???? in ??????? on 100b lists the 10 ????? women got because ??? ate from the ?? ????. One of them is ?????? ???? ??????? and ??”? comments and says only one thing ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. That is listed according to ??”? as one of the ?????. Now what where all those explanations?
Here is a link to the ???? (we”re allowed to quote hebrew books right?) http://hebrewbooks.org/shas.aspx?mesechta=3&daf=100b&format=pdf
Matan1, why suddenly the hilchos tznius are dependent on the societal norms? If they are halochos, they are halochos. About the chumros and minhagim you can say what you said. Plus, the Rambam says what ideally should be in this inyan. If it were mamash a halochah, the Rabbonim should have been moche on this already for centuries.
mdd: Because of the main elements of tznius is to not wear things which can draw attention to yourself. Doing things differently than the societal norms can draw attention.
Josh31 you seem to be very busy with supporting wives:
1) Do you?
2) FYI, you can get your wife a computer with a good filter and she can shop on walmart.com
3) For women/girls clothing you have to go to Jewish stores anyway, because once the girls are 10 it gets harder to find skirts and tops that fit properly.
4) Nothing wrong if you help out with the grocery shopping
DaMoshe, the chief element of tznius is to be properly “hidden”.
mdd, because Jewish woman should not do something that is not done by non Jewish women. It would be inappropriate
aaym, most of us with a STEM (science, technology, engineering, or mathematics) degree have not had great difficulties supporting a family. Parnasa (making a living) is in the hands of G-d, but we have to make the effort.
I’ve never heard of any rov approve of mixed swimming, mo or otherwise. Thats just a phony argument.
But you have heard of a rov approving ignoring zman krias shema?
Yes, Joseph. In Chassidishe sforim.
Joseph: Yes, I have. My Rosh Yeshiva, R’ Bender, once told me he even asked a chassidish Rav about zman krias Shema. The Rav responded, “In Europe, do you think they were so makpid? Did they sit with watches to see when it was zman krias Shema? No!”
What about davening Mincha long after shekiah?
I haven’t heard of that shitta, but what’s worse? A shitta that you can say krias shma after the zman or a non-shitta but widespread open practice of having mixed swimming and calling it “family swimming” hours and when asked how is it permissible them responding that it’s okay because “we’re a mo bungalow colony and this is what we hold”. Look through the bungalow ads in the Jewish Press and you will find this fairly common when calling. If it were rare what can I say, but it isn’t.
Joseph: I’d say the shittah is worse, because then people think it’s ok to do.
I’ve never seen the ads you are talking about. Then again, I don’t read the Jewish Press.
Joseph: As I said years ago, that’s an absurd argument. If I find a group of Reshaim who get up and start being Mattir Issurim in the name of being “Yeshivish”, that doesn’t mean that Yeshivish people all accept these Issurim. Yes I’m making a “no true Scotsman” argument, but it’s a true one. You will not find any major (or minor) Frum “MO” Rabbi who allows this.
“Kol kevudah bas melech penima”
Pshat – it is saying that the glory/worth of a woman is in her internal characteristics, not her external beauty. Meaning, don’t get too caught up with a woman’s externals, it’s within her character that her essence is. It’s the same for men, but generally, externals count more in how women are viewed.
Why does the most simple explanation escape people?
You don’t seem to realize that you answered your own question.
Question the answer.
Just saw this old thread. The King is wearing His corona crown. While we are paying attention to the covid(kevudah). . Guess that why we can’t leave our house.
Cute!
It says שקר החן והבל היופי grace is a lie and vanity is fleeting being temporary. Grace might be flattery and beauty is in eyes of the beholder. אשה יראת ה’ היא תתהלל a G-d fearing woman is really praiseworthy, as mentioned above by the bais yakov maidel. The importance is her inner character. If you are there, you don’t have to shout. Someone who feels really beautiful from the inside does not have to show off. There is usually an inferiority complex.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.