Avram in MD

Lior,

If they recommend it because they assert that it is “G-d’s will” then of course I would fully encourage him to give it.

This is not the question that I asked. If the rabbis stated that it is G-d’s will, then there would be a ???? or ???? and we’ve already covered that. I asked about a case where the rabbis recommend a get be given based on their “personal experience” informed by their Torah knowledge and experience as dayanim. So assume that there isn’t a provable ???? ????? or ???? ?????, but the rabbis tell the man, “even so, we recommend that you give a get.” What should the man do?

Therefore, say the dayanim, the wife al pi Torah must forthwith move back into her husband’s home, as her having left it had been unjustified and constituted being a moredes, and she should be a good wife.

Would you support the wife in declaring, essentially, that she knows G-d’s will better than those rabbis? Or would you wholeheartedly advocate to the wife to return to her marriage?

In this hypothetical scenario you made, not only would I wholeheartedly advocate that they wife return to the marriage work towards reconciliation, I believe there is a mitzvah for her to return, and if she did not do so there would be grounds for excommunication from the community. Direct enough answer? 🙂

The problem with hypothetical situations is that some of them may never occur in real life.

Lior,

The hypothetical situation I described did not include any cruelty or vindictiveness. It was governed by love, as I stressed.

I love my bicycle, and I love my wife. I am using the same word, but the meanings are extremely different.

I “love” my bicycle because it feels good to ride it, I get exercise, and I save money on my commute. In other words, I love my bicycle because of what it does for me. My bike has no feelings, desires, or goals of its own. It is mine, and I can do with it what I please.

I love my wife because I chose and continue to choose to spend my life with her. I want to gladden her and build a home with her. In other words, I love my wife because of who she is. She is mine because she also chooses me to be hers, and I must appreciate that every day.

I cannot possibly imagine the pain that a divorce R”L would cause, but if, after three years, the husband cannot see past himself to consider his wife’s wishes, even if he disagrees with her reasons, even if he thinks her reasons are stupid, perhaps this hypothetical “love” he has is more suited for a bicycle than for marriage.

That being said, the stress in our generation must be on the salvageable not the unsalvageable.

No, the stress in our generation should be on how to be a good spouse to another, so that more marriages don’t reach the point where a decision needs to be made on whether it is salvageable or not. The problem is not that we are becoming increasingly lenient on allowing divorces, it is that the dominant culture does not foster proper marriage skills, and marriage is becoming increasingly devalued.

I made no such assumption. I described a hypothetical scenario that constitutes that fact.

It’s the hypothetical situation that I am objecting to. A hypothetical situation used in an argument is not really helpful if it’s taken from an extreme, rare case. Perhaps you intended it as a rare example from the outset, but your posts leave open the interpretation that you think it is common.

Declining to divorce for valid reasons and continuing to be ready and available to live in an ongoing marriage is not acting badly.

I think the problem I have with this statement is that you are casting a much larger net with “valid reasons” than I think is valid. And that validity shrinks even more with time. For example, should a man neglect the mitzvah to procreate because he refuses to divorce a spouse who will never return to him?

When all is said and done, I think we would both agree that if the beis din presiding over the situation does not say the man should give a get, he is certainly not obliged to give it. And if the wife cries havoc over this and lets slip the dogs of war rather than working with the beis din, she and her cohorts are in the wrong and potentially committing severe aveiros. I also think we’d agree that in a case where abuse is not alleged and one spouse wants to continue the marriage, time should be given for counseling, discussions, etc.

However, what it seems to me (and please correct me if I’m wrong) is that you are arguing that if a beis din rules ???? ????? and the husband disagrees because he really wants to stay married, he doesn’t have to listen to the beis din, because who is the beis din to tell him to divorce when the halacha doesn’t explicitly… It’s hard for me to define this behavior as acting in the interests of Torah and not personal interests or spite. If we were talking about any issue other than divorce (e.g., kashrus, tznius), I think you’d agree with me.

Lior,

It isn’t a Torah value to unwarrantedly break up a family.

Also take into consideration that she is sinning

Your assumption that a woman wanting a divorce is acting capriciously, unless she can provide you with clear-cut evidence of abuse, is fundamentally misogynistic. Sometimes valid reasons are difficult or terrifying to articulate, and some abuse can be hidden from all but the victim. There may also be other valid reasons not involving abuse, such as an irreparable loss of trust.

Also, two wrongs don’t make a right. One spouse acting badly does not validate the other spouse acting badly.

If a couple is going to beis din for divorce proceedings, the home is R”L already broken, and it would take both of them to rebuild it. This cannot be forced on one of them.

It is both callous and maleficent to unwillingly force a person out of a marriage he put his life into building and put him into a situation of being divorced when it is unreasonable and all other options have not been exhausted.

Your attempts but failures to make statements like this gender-neutral (writing spouse or person, but then exclusively using he and him) are revealing.

In a marriage, do you think it is only the husband who puts his life into building it?

Why would our Bais Yaakov & Yeshiva educated parents be unable to teach elementary school topics? Doesn’t that say something about our Mosdos?

We’re getting pretty far down into the weeds here, but no, it does not.

1.) Not all parents sending their children to Yeshivos or Bais Yaakov schools themselves went to such schools (e.g., BTs, converts). These parents might have a harder time teaching some limudei kodesh subjects to their children that they want them to learn.

2.) Even if a parent has great knowledge of the subject material, the ability to effectively impart this knowledge to children (e.g., curriculum development, teaching strategies, etc.) is another skill entirely.

Also, with terribly inflated housing costs, many families struggle with a single income even when sending no children to private school. Moving to a suburban or rural environment would possibly bring those housing costs down, but would also potentially bring the available income down as well.

I don’t mean to say with these responses that I disagree with you regarding homeschooling or other alternatives/supplements such as part-time/co-ops, on the contrary, I think it’s a great idea. I just don’t think that, given the current state of affairs, it is feasible to go on a Khmer Rouge style social re-engineering kick by forcing children whose parents cannot pay the full tuition out of the schools. A better infrastructure to support homeschooling needs to be put into place. American culture in general is not geared towards homeschooling (or parental attachment to their children in general), but hopefully as more and more parents home school, there will be some favorable cultural changes (e.g., more flexible work schedules, better part time jobs).

gavra_at_work,

It is no different than the “structural issue” that occurs when someone makes 30K a year with 12 children and can’t afford food. Does that person have the right to go into Yankel’s grocery and demand food (or start taking it from the shelves) without having to pay for it?

An invalid comparison. How about the “structural issue” of a man who has lost his job (or perhaps even the ability to work due to disability) and cannot afford food. Does he deserve to die?

Food is a necessity. That’s why the Farm Bills include agricultural subsidies that keep the price of staple foods down and encourage farms to produce large crops that otherwise may not make sense economically. That’s why WIC/food stamps exist. That’s why public schools have reduced price/free lunch and breakfast programs. That’s why we have soup kitchens and pantries.

No, a person does not have the right to go into Yankel’s grocery and demand free food because he cannot afford it. However, due to the way our nation is structured, it is unlikely that a family making $30,000 will starve to death, even with 12 kids.

At the end of the day, I think that we both would agree that, given a case of hunger, there is an obligation on the community (religious, local government, state, Federal) to provide a means to survive. I think we’d also agree that if a person cannot pay his Verizon bill, then Verizon has no obligation to provide him with free phone/internet service just because it is important for him to have phone and internet service. Where we disagree, perhaps, is how close to the former or latter the idea of a Jewish education falls.

The little I know – The solution is home schooling.

I agree strongly with you here. I think a shift towards homeschooling as an option would be ideal. Due to our current societal setup, however, with high housing costs, etc. the limiting factor is that many parents who are in a two-income situation may not be able to homeschool. Also, some parents may feel that they do not have adequate knowledge of some subjects in order to teach them effectively to their children. Perhaps a solution to this could be a co-op network, e.g., rebbes teaching a small group of students in his home, other parents with time perhaps teaching math/other subjects. This would be much less expensive for parents, while still yielding the teachers a decent income.

nishtdayngesheft,

Although I agree with you that zahavasdad is misunderstanding the concept of ruach hakodesh, I think your words are excessively harsh, and the insults are not ok.

zahavasdad,

If someone really had ruach HaKodesh today, dont you think it would be unethical of them not to tell someone they were in immediate danger from someone or to tell us where the missing are

Ruach hakodesh does not make a person an all-knowing deity. No human has the capacity to know everything in the world, all of the details and interweaving threads of billions of souls. Even to Moshe Rabbeinu, the greatest prophet who ever lived, Hashem said that His face could not be seen, but He would show him His back.

What about tomato sauce and mozzarella?

akuperma,

The customs about not telling (among Jews, and others) dates back to the time when most babies didn’t make it, and you were almost as likely to be planning on attending a funeral (for the mother) rather than a bris. That is now history, ???? ???.

I’m not sure there was ever a time in history that the majority of babies didn’t make it past a week, or that a majority of mothers died during childbirth. Certainly there have been periods where these rates were too high, due to disease, malnutrition, poor hygiene, or dangerous practices. Hashem created the human body with wisdom, it is surely capable of giving birth!

The fact that she wants me to change my Rabbi for her shows that she doesn’t value Daat Torah. Don’t you think so?

No, it doesn’t show that. There is no indication from your posts that she doesn’t respect rabbis.

Also, how is your question even relevant to the discussion? You wrote:

She said that she doesn’t mind if I stay in touch with him and ask him for his advice

and

she said again that she doesn’t mind it if I talk to him

so she’s not even asking you to change your rav; she would just prefer that her own questions be taken to a different rav.

zahavasdad,

You organize the asifa, I’ll bring the food… >:)

zahavasdad,

In my Shul Kiddushes, the Baal Simcha somestimes brings the Schmaltz Herring. It is never eaten.

I see the opposite at my shul; the herring is usually eaten up.

rebyidd23,

it baffles me that some people like disgusting things

To those who like it, it’s not disgusting. And there are probably foods you think are delicious that others with different cultural backgrounds would find disgusting.

ukguyinEY,

Thank you einov beroishoi for the only one who managed to stay on topic.

It’s the minhag hamakom of the CR to go off topic, especially when you open controversial topics like schmaltz herring. If you want threads that don’t run the gamut, you should stick to less controversial matters, like tznius, working vs. learning, etc. 🙂

The Goq,

I would do A). The dime in case B) would likely not make it back into the register. For C), it may not mean anything to the corporation, but it could potentially get the cashier into trouble at the end of the day when his/her register doesn’t balance correctly.

WolfishMusings,

How’s the larger knitted black yarmulke been treating you these past two years?

🙂

DaasYochid,

Avram, why do you think “??? ???? ?????” means created and/or modifiable?

It’s very likely that I lack the knowledge necessary to mix into this conversation meaningfully. I’ve understood the Rambam’s position to be against idolatrous religions such as Christianity, that believe their deities can be born, transformed, married, injured, or killed. Or analyzed to determine what they’re made up of, etc. Also, if the universe was created ex nihilo, it would follow that all “corporeality” was created.

Regarding images – if we were to say that Hashem had an image, we would be saying that He was on a level that we could comprehend, which is clearly false.

And if you are sure that even those who, according to the Ra”avad, didn’t mean that, why didn’t the Ramba”m realize that?

I don’t understand the question, I am sorry.

(also, R’ Hillel’s statement was regarding Moshiach)

R’ Hillel wasn’t denying the concept of the coming of Moshiach, just that Chizkiyahu was the Moshiach, right? My understanding of the Rambam is that denying the idea of Moshiach is the kefira, not perhaps mistakenly identifying who it is (although deifying a man as the Christians have done certainly falls into that category).

kedushaskohen,

There was nothing in WolfishMusings’ post indicating that he felt any hatred towards anyone at all. On the contrary, I think it is correct to feel upset or annoyed by talking in shul. It is wrong, and it harms the tefillos of everyone there.

That said, I think your point that it isn’t best to sit and stew about the talking in silence is a good one. There is a large spectrum of choices available, however, between confronting the talkers directly (which WolfishMusings has stated he does not want to do) and davening alone at home. While it doesn’t solve the problem of talking, perhaps the easiest way to solve the issue of stewing is to change where one sits in the shul. Two people’s experiences at the same minyan could be quite different, with one in the back suffering from numerous talkers and another in front hearing nothing but the tefillos.

Sam2,

Meh. PBA is baiting people and people are taking the bait.

Ha. Both 147 and DaMoshe are smart people who have been around the CR for a long time. They both know very well what type of responses are likely to certain posts. With his response, popa_bar_abba was giving them what they expected, and possibly wanted, for whatever reason.

AZOI.IS,

Glad to know that the issue turned out to not be an issue at all!

Given that your OP provided enough specific detail for the couple to potentially identify themselves, but not enough detail for us random posters to really assess the situation, is it possible that you may have been using the CR to attempt to contact this couple to find out whether they were upset by something? If so, I would be careful doing that, because it could potentially cause hurt feelings. If this wasn’t your intention, perhaps it would be a good idea to minimize or even change the specific details (e.g., location of the party, timing of the engagement, religious history of the couple, length of the shidduch, etc.) to avoid the possibility of unintentionally getting “outed.”

Sam2,

There are also many husbands who feel uncomfortable asking these Shailas because it’s already secondhand and, as much as they try to avoid it, the husband has a certain bias involved. And the least bias there is in presenting any Shaila the better.

This doesn’t make sense to me. First, how can a case where physical evidence is brought be less clear than, e.g., kitchen shailos, where the rav is simply told what happened without seeing it for himself? Second, If someone has an accident in the kitchen that requires a shaila, s/he would have a bias towards kosher rather than treif, due to the waste of food and time kashering utensils. In fact, I would argue that there is bias in the majority of shailos asked, which is part of the reason we take things to a rav in the first place. Even if we know of opinions that can be relied on, by bringing the shaila to a rav, we give ourselves the opportunity to follow Hashem’s will rather than our own.

WolfishMusings,

Your analogy is not valid.

We were commanded by God to eat matzah and marror on Pesach, while we were not commanded to do so on Shabbos.

Fine; I should have picked an analogy dealing with minhagim.

OTOH, building bonfires is not a command from God, but something that we, ourselves originated.

So should those who make bonfires do away with the practice? Should Ashkenazim stop eating latkes on Chanukah? Sefardim stop eating donuts? Should Chabad do away with Yud Tes Kislev? Fabrengens? Should we also do away with dates and pomegranates on Rosh Hashanah, wearing kittels on Seder night and Yom Kippur, making a siyum, drashos before mussaf on Shabbos, etc. because we cannot find them in Chummash?

As such, if we can do so for Lag B’Omer, I don’t see a reason why we can’t do so for Shavuous as well.

If you find a halachically acceptable way of safely making a bonfire on Shavuos, then feel free to do that, and eat cheesecake on Lag Baomer while you’re at it:)

Sam2,

For example, firefighters and EMT workers in Israel had to be organized and ready to go at a moment’s notice, which meant preparing a few hours before Shabbos ended. That couldn’t have been done on Friday.

That makes sense, thank you.

I personally do not have a minhag to light bonfires on Lag Baomer, but I find the derision of those who make bonfires rather disturbing. I think the question of whether to postpone the bonfires until Sunday afternoon to make things easier on the police and for people trying to attend is valid, but to lambaste the bonfires entirely as bittul zman and “meaningless” is an insult to large segments of Jewry.

I also don’t fully understand the accusation that motzei Shabbos bonfires cause chillul Shabbos. Are the bonfire organizers really telling Jewish police officers, “please be there by 3pm on Saturday afternoon so we can get started promptly at 9?” If the police were interested in keeping Shabbos, why can’t they make most of the preparations like barricades before Shabbos, go home and observe Shabbos, make havdalah, jump into their uniforms and ride on over to man the ship? If cv”s preparations were done on Shabbos, then it’s the police who chose to be mechallel Shabbos.

Going one step further, what’s to stop the police from starting their preparations on Shabbos even if the bonfires were held Sunday aftrernoon? Should all motzei Shabbos activities that might necessitate crowd control be postponed until Tuesday?

mw13,

why do we focus on praising the few actions of the irreligious that we support, and on deploring the few actions of the NK that condemn

The intent behind an action plays a big role in how others respond to it. If someone with their back turned towards me was gesticulating wildly in conversation and accidentally struck my face with his hand, I would be upset by his carelessness, but would probably not have my feelings hurt much. If the same person looked hatefully at me and intentionally struck me on the face, however, even though the physical impact of the act was the same as the first case, I would feel much more hurt and anger.

Most people do not presume that the typical irreligious Jew is intentionally committing aveiras in order to harm the Jewish people. When NKs are seen spitting on other Jews, however, or flying the PLO flag, visiting Ahmadinejad or paying homage to Yasir Arafat, most people do think they are exhibiting active malice towards their brethren.

I’m pretty sure they do not believe that Jews should be killed or deserve to be killed.

If someone in Wyoming displays a swastika, I think it’s reasonable to believe that he agrees with the atrocities committed by the Nazis. Likewise, if someone embraces “erased in a single storm” and “go back to Germany” Ahmadinejad and attends Iran’s conference on Holocaust denial, what are we to make of that?

although even then, when’s the last time you heard somebody call the irreligious “self-hating Jews”, etc?

It’s actually very common to hear an irreligious Jew who, for example, changes his name to make it sound less Jewish, or openly supports the Arab positions, or otherwise acts embarrassed to be associated with Jews called a “self-hating” Jew. I heard that term used long before I became frum myself or heard of the NK.

I just pointed out that to focus on the minority of good deeds of one group and the minority of bad deeds of another is rather hypocritical.

Failure to understand another’s position does not make it hypocrisy.

CR10,

You are changing around what I said.

There seemed to be a clear implication in your posts that you believe there is a correlation between increased observance (e.g., chumros or full time learning) and feeling superior to others.

I said WE shouldn’t feel superior.

I can agree with that statement regarding feelings. It is clear from our tradition that arrogance is a trait that Hashem finds particularly repugnant.

Do you think it is possible, however, for a Jew to uphold something he values when interacting with another Jew who doesn’t uphold it, yet without feeling superior? For example, a child of a non-TV household coming home and asking his parents to buy a TV because his friend gets to watch all of these great shows. What does the parent say? Or getting a meal invitation from someone who does things in the kitchen that you do not think are permissible to eat.

Also, do you think it is possible to have a disagreement on an issue of religious observance without one side feeling like the other is looking down on them (whether or not the other side is)?

According to the Ramban everyone is equal.

I do not see this from what you have quoted. Only Hashem can determine the value of a person.

When Shaul Hamelech went to war with Amalek, he allowed some of the animals, spoils, and the enemy king (Agag) to survive, in violation of the mitzvah to completely eradicate Amalek. Shmuel Hanavi’s rebuke of Shaul Hamelech had an interesting component to it – he accused the king of sinning because he was small in his own eyes. In other words, it seems that Shaul Hamelech believed that since everybody is equal, than who was he to judge what his soldiers did? This was misplaced humility. He wasn’t equal, he was king, and he had a responsibility to judge his soldiers’ behavior, rebuke them, and lift them up. Ultimately his failure to do so damaged the authority of his kingship beyond repair.

(Disclosure: I have not learned this Gemara inside, so others feel free to add/correct) In Maseches Sota, Rava says that someone who is prideful deserves to be excommunicated, and that someone who has no pride also deserves to be banned. Rashi comments that the latter is true because, without any pride, nobody would take him seriously or listen to his rebuke.

DaMoshe,

I was very bothered by the thread (now closed) about Modern Orthodox “minhagim”.

I was bothered by it as well.

I clarified there that MO does not endorse such behaviors! Yet the attacks keep on coming.

I don’t think all of the responses in the thread were as clear cut as yours in declaring the practices wrong; however I agree with you that a discussion of issues like this should be more nuanced in order to be respectful or respectable, because in reality the issues are nuanced. Imagine what a new BT who is slowly taking on Jewish practices, has starting keeping Shabbos and kosher, and has made improvements to her manner of dress, but hasn’t yet taken on covering hair or skirts, would feel reading the closed thread.

I had an urge to post a comparable thread, but I resisted it

I actually think that the mitzvah tantz thread is comparable. Unfortunately, Internet discussions seem to breed “us versus them” mentalities, where it’s difficult to debate issues without vitriol.

When I post now, I stop and think for a moment, asking myself, “Am I hoping to accomplish something positive with this?” If I think it will have a negative effect, I don’t post it.

Very nice.