- This topic has 18 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Discuss.
I would say something negative but my 3 wives don’t want me to. Just kidding.
End of cherem, end of shidduch crisis (also just kidding)
Authored the moving piyut Zechor Bris Avrahom that we say on Erev Rosh Hashana, Tzom Gedaliah, and at Neilah on Yom Kippur.
Joseph, what exactly is the point of this thread?
Discuss.
OK. I believe he existed.
Or did you have something more specific in mind?
The Wolf
I didn’t think that stating he wrote a piyut that we say during selichos was troublesome.
Many of his teachings were written down by his students and became first a kuntres on gemara and then incorporated by Rashi in his gemara commentary.
He wrote several piyyutim.
He died in 1028.
His teacher was R Leontin.
I can do this all day…
He wrote many,many piyyutim.
He died in 1028 or was it 1040?
Abolishing the the Marriage Cherem was ,albeit with limits, alleviate many present day problems
The Cherem
1)Post talmudic
2)It was arguably a response to sociogeographical realities of the era
3)It was never accepted by all
The sites and blogs who take apart everything else in Judaism could start with this
Here the Rub:For all their sauve talk ,this one would hardly be PC?
Most importantly
4) It was originally meant to be temporary
I don’t know if you can use a Marcus Lehman story as historical proof, but according to his “Meor Hagola” story in the book “Five Novelettes”, his life was endangered by his disloyal second wife. The implication is that the cherem stemmed from his personal experience.
I believe it was meant to last 1000 years, and was only meant to obligate ashkenazim.
IITFT: I was always taught that Rashi was born on the day Rabbeinu Gershom was niftar so it would be 1040.
Marcus Lehman (a relative of mine), meant well with his novels for youth.
However,to imply a important Enactment for the Klal was due to personal tribulations is to cast aspersions on the whole Mesorah.
A Defender of Mesorah like him hardly could have had that intent.
“However,to imply a important Enactment for the Klal was due to personal tribulations is to cast aspersions on the whole Mesorah.”
Why? I understood it that his personal experience led to the realization that it was not beneficial for klal yisroel to continue this practice, not that it was a reaction to a personal problem.
Why would it be any different, say, for example, than a Rav who personally saw how exposure to the internet negatively affected his family, would not press for takanos against internet use?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.