Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
notasheep,
The example I read was explaining how to teach a very young child (an infant) not to touch something by placing the object near them and then telling them ‘no’ very firmly when they try to reach out for it. After a few tries they understand and no longer touch.
In my opinion, that would be a horrible way to teach an infant. G-d instilled in infants a deep curiosity about their surroundings. They have an intense desire to explore, touch, and taste everything they see. This is the only way a baby can learn so quickly about his or her surroundings. To purposely place something within reach of a baby and punish them for exploring it is not only cruel, it discourages the natural curiosity that engenders later intelligence and learning.
I know a response to this could be, what about Hashem placing the etz hadaas tov v’ra in gan eden where Adam Harishon could eat from it, but that case is completely dissimilar. The whole point of the etz hadaas was that Adam had the ability to listen to Hashem’s command and obey it. Hashem did not place that tree in the garden, wait for Adam to eat from it, and then punish him and say “NOW you know!” A baby has no ability to understand “do not touch this” before the fact. The only way you could communicate that to them is to let them do it and then punish them – and that is cruel and wrong. If there is something they should not touch, put it out of reach. When they reach an age of understanding, then you can tell them not to touch and warn them of the consequences.
DaasYochid,
Notasheep, the premise of the book seems to be that kids are little annoying brats who need to be beaten into submission. I didn’t read the book, but a lot of people who submitted reviews on Amazon seem to think so.
I believe the author of <i>To Train Up a Child</i> is Amish. Based on what I know of the book, the premise is not that kids are annoying brats, but that disciplining a child is similar to training animals – instilling habits based on fear and reward, rather than nurturing and encouraging the soul.
Sam2,
Apparently this is the sort of drivel the Post always writes, but Frum Jews are only upset now that the target of a moronic article was a Frum Jew.
Actually, it seems like most frum Jews already considered the Post to be sleazy and full of despicable articles. Your point would only make sense if frum Jews considered other articles fine up to this point – but that’s not the case.
Where was all the outrage when they called non-Jewish murder victims deserving? Are we really so insensitive to others’ pain?
That’s an unfair accusation. It’s natural to have a greater visceral reaction when your own family is under attack.
zahavasdad,
The issue of Mamzer was brought up by others not me
It was brought up by popa-bar-abba, presumably because the same “beis din” that enacts the conversions also handles divorces.
For the record, I do not live in Riverdale and have nothing to do with YCT or Avi Weiss, but I find it fascinating that some are so obessessed with him and ignore issues in their own house.
A classic double standard. Despite the fact that you are not chassidish and are not personally affected by issues in their communities, you had no problem opening a thread to hem and haw over bicycle banning hearsay; however, you wonder over this thread?
He has no affect on my life, and frankly he shouldnt have any affect on yours.
It’s wrong to assume that something happening in one area will not ultimately have an effect in other areas. Also, PBA started this thread and has stated numerous times that he is personally affected by the activities of this movement.
jbaldy22,
Whether the yeshivos were right in this case or not was not (I dont think) damoshe’s point.
I think it was his point, otherwise why would he bring up this story, declare it sad, and say that he doesn’t envy the cheshbon of the schools who threw “him” out?
DaMoshe,
Thanks for your response.
I do know, however, that the kid wasn’t just tossed out. The school found an appropriate place for him, and worked with the new school to get him settled in. That is how it should be handled.
I agree.
Are you sure that the yeshivos mentioned in your OP didn’t do anything similar?
I hope that this child you mentioned thrives in his new environment, but suppose as a thought experiment he became violent again at the new school and needed to get moved to a third school, and then a fourth, and a fifth, and a sixth, and then to a Yeshiva in a different town? And some years later, that child with a violent past, now a man managing a business, tells a frum man in a resort dining hall that he was kicked out of 7 yeshivos that couldn’t handle him, and he will never be Orthodox because of that. Should that frum man imply that your school’s hanhala will face hellfire for the way he handled the violent kid?
WIY,
Is it my problem that your joke has no punchline?
Is that like the no soap radio joke?
DaMoshe,
I think it is great that you and your wife were friendly with this gentleman and his friend, and that you invited them for Shabbos. The fact that he approached you after seeing you unwrapping kosher food indicates that he still feels a connection to Judaism, even if there is a lot of hurt.
I disagree, however, with the blanket judgement you passed on the Yeshivos after hearing his story. I do not see how you could have gleaned sufficient information from restaurant chatter to be able to pass such judgement with “after 120 years” type language.
He then named 5 or 6 well-known yeshivos in Brooklyn. He continued, “I went to all of those, and got thrown out of all of them, because they decided they couldn’t handle me, and the difficult background I came from.”
To get thrown out of 5 or 6 schools, plus an “away” yeshiva, is quite a feat. Couldn’t handle me? At what point do we move beyond your stereotype of kid victim and heartless hanhalas, and consider the possibility that sometimes a young person’s behavior can be dangerous to himself or others, and that expulsion may be a necessary, albeit highly unfortunate, course of action? When do we stop blaming our circumstances on others, and start taking personal responsibility for our actions?
But this is the result of throwing kids out of yeshiva!
Or maybe, just maybe, it was the result of his bad choices and his bad behavior.
I heard from my Rosh Yeshiva, R’ Bender, how his Rebbe, R’ Shmuel Berenbaum, reacted when someone suggested a kid should be thrown out – he yelled at the guy! He said you don’t know the harm that can be caused by doing that!
That is a nice story, and I’m sure that R’ Berenbaum’s reaction was totally appropriate given the specific situation. I’m not sure that it is appropriate to project one situation into another, however. Sometimes a rock should be struck, and sometimes it should be spoken to.
I was saddened by this guy’s story. I don’t envy the responsibility that the schools who threw him out have on their shoulders. When the hanhalah are judged after 120 years, this will be part of what is brought up.
Would you be sad if a yeshiva expelled a student who repeatedly beat up your child? What about a child who brought a gun to school? Or pressured your child to use drugs? Should he be allowed to stay and sit next to your child every day, because cv’s he might go OTD if he’s expelled?
rationalfrummie,
I am admittedly a beginner at learning gemara. From the way I have understood of bedikas chometz and bittul chometz, I personally do not see a contradiction in the Rashis you provided.
1. Nullification is sufficent to fulfill the d’oraisa requirement regarding chometz (Tosafos above)
2. If nullification is done alone, however, there is a risk that the person will later come across some chometz that he finds very difficult to consider nullified, so a bedika should be done as well as nullification derabbanan. (1st Rashi)
3. No contradiction in the 2nd Rashi if he sees the bedika as d’rabbanan.
4. On the other hand, bedika should not be done alone, because it would be very difficult to be sure you got everything (2nd Rashi).
Does this make sense, or am I not understanding something correctly?
Have a good Shabbos!
keepitcoming,
This is the way I understand it:
When we bring a korban to Hashem, we should bring an unblemished, beautiful animal – the best that we have. Now that we have no Beis Hamikdash, we follow the words of the prophet Hoshea, “let our lips substitute for bulls.” So our prayers, our words of praise, requests, and thanksgiving, are like korbonos to Hashem. In that light, the words of tehillim, pure and beautiful, represent some of the choicest offerings that we can bring.
newhusband,
I’m going to get a housecleaner for the sake of shalom bayis,
It might do better for your shalom bayis if you see this decision as an opportunity to bring pleasure to your wife (selfless), rather than to avoid arguments that you resent (selfish).
but I have a feeling it will solve the symptoms (dirty home), but not the underlying problem (caring for the home). How do I deal with that issue is what I am looking to figure out.
Why on earth do you think that you can ascertain holistic “underlying problems” with your wife’s attitudes towards the home after less than a year of marriage, where for all but one month of that time she has been pregnant? Honestly, I think it’s possible that the root of your problem is that you are blowing these “minor” disagreements way out of proportion and using them to make sweeping conclusions about your home and marriage. No wonder your wife cries when you have a disagreement – she tells you that she doesn’t like cleaning and wants household help and you imply that your marriage will be irrevocably harmed because she’s an unfit wife and mother in your eyes! Even if you didn’t say it, she can feel it with your “hints”. Stop judging what kind of mother your wife will be before your baby is even born, and what kind of wife she’ll be 1, 5, or 10 years down the road!
My advice to you:
1. Take almost nothing your wife says or does personally during pregnancy. I think you are seriously underestimating how pregnancy affects your wife. She is changing inside and out, and that can make anyone feel very insecure. She doesn’t want to clean up now, but for all you know, once the nesting instinct kicks into high gear, she may feel like you don’t care enough about the house!
2. Deal with the present issues during any discussion or disagreement, not future speculations. Whatever you decide for how to keep things clean now, make that decision considering only the current needs, and stop extrapolating what it means to your marriage years down the road – especially for issues regarding parenthood. Don’t judge things that you haven’t even seen yet.
3. From what you have written in this thread, you obviously see cleaning the house as a burden to yourself, using words like “significant” and “chores”. So why does it bother you that your wife sees it in the same light?
4. Instead of dropping “hints” (disapproval and disconnection), start cleaning and engage your wife with conversation while you do it (connection). Any chore is more fun when you have company, and you will likely end up sharing yourselves and the jobs more.
5. Notice and express appreciation for what she does.
I don’t want to fix the symptoms by throwing money at the problem today because its going to morph into a bigger problem tomorrow.
You are not a navi – stick to the present.
I feel very open-minded on trying different things to change the dynamic in the home but at the same time giving in anytime my wife wants something will only make me upset.
Stop viewing things as “me vs. her”. A happy wife is a huge win for you. Instead of keeping score and focusing on whether you or she have had your way, focus on solving the problem at hand.
I don’t want to resent her,
Then don’t. You are in complete control of your feelings.
charliehall,
Given that the fedora wasn’t invented until the late 19th century, it is really difficult to argue that it is halachically required.
Please don’t beat up the straw man, he did nothing to you:-)
I don’t think that anybody here, even the nuts (and those pretending to be nuts to discredit the positions they disagree with), are arguing that a fedora is halachically required. A lot of black hats worn by chareidim aren’t even fedoras (no pinches or crease on the crown, for example).
The arguments here seem to be:
1. Is there a halachic requirement to wear a hat when davening?
2. Are black hats somehow more special than others?
I sympathize with those making the argument that the clothes should not bespeak the man, because in reality, they do not. It is also reality, however, that human beings are not telepathic and cannot see into the depths of another’s soul in the span of a few minutes. Therefore, every human culture utilizes clothing to make statements about status, temperament, and association, to allow the wearer to transmit information about themselves to others. In other words, the clothes do not bespeak the man, but they do bespeak what the man wants others to see. If you do not believe me, go to a job interview in jeans and a t-shirt and tell the hiring manager that your choice of clothes doesn’t reflect on how well you can work.
Like it or not, there is a culture within Orthodox Judaism that identifies as Yeshivish, and wears white shirts and black jackets and hats as a part of this cultural identification. Orthodox Jews who wear kippa srugas are also making a cultural statement (e.g., modern Orthodox, Zionist, etc). There is value in identification with a culture, so it’s certainly not silly for a person to wear clothing that identifies himself with the culture he chooses. This does not mean that a person wearing the headgear of one culture is more religious than anyone else; the clothes cannot tell us that. It does tell us with whom the person identifies, however.
So to the people who are saying that clothing doesn’t matter: you have human behavior since the dawn of civilization at odds with you.
Veltz Meshugener,
I think I’m getting what you did – very clever! It does underscore that when you provide the level of detail that you did about a person, others can figure out who it was 🙂
Bar Shattya,
The main thing to keep in mind is to stay away from the people who think dieting should be done in a healthy way. Seriously. A tiny bit of logic aught to help you. People who eat healthy don’t lose weight. If they did people would just disappear into nothingness by eating healthy. But they don’t. Healthy people stay the same weight. If you want to lose weight you have to do something unhealthy.
Your statement is cute, but incorrect. If it were true, than we’d see people who ate in an unhealthy way gain wait until they exploded. A person’s weight maintenance is determined in part by how much he consumes (calories in) and how much he exercises (calories out). If either of those factors change, the person’s weight will change in response and then reach a new equilibrium.
Veltz Meshugener,
This is an example of what I mean. Suppose the OP were phrased this way (everything here came from the OP except what I have italicized):
So a fellow came by my place and sat down on a chair by himself, and it broke. The chair was not weak or broken prior to this. Should I ask him to pay for it?
I am very happy to have him as a neighbor and I don’t want him to avoid coming to my house. OTOH, I will run out of chairs if this keeps up.
WWYD?
Note that details important to the question (e.g., the state of the chair before he sat) were added, and details unimportant to the question, but could identify this neighbor, were left out.
Veltz Meshugener,
The problem with learning shmiras halashon is that it turns out everything is forbidden.
From my vantage point, the L”H problem here is not that the OP mentioned that a neighbor broke one of his chairs and asked whether he should ask the neighbor to pay for the damages since he wants to remain on good terms. That type of situation happens all of the time and the question phrased that way carries no risk of embarrassing or identifying anyone.
The problem with this OP, however, is all of the personal details supplied, such as the approximate time the person moved in, the number of children he has, his social habits, and additionally some unusual and unique features of the incident that have no bearing on the question but would render it recognizable to anyone reading this thread who was there or knows this person. None of these details were needed to ask the question, so given the fact that they carry the risk of embarrassing this neighbor, they should not have been supplied. Five details that, standing alone, couldn’t identify someone specifically may very well identify that person when taken together.
If I had a vote, it would be to edit the OP to remove the details, but keep the question.
WIY,
A few thoughts I have that I work on in my own life, and hopefully may be helpful to you:
1.) Don’t diet – the popular conception of dieting in the U.S. is taking a hatchet to our intake and suffering until some goal is reached. Like in “Garfield” comics where the cat eats everything in sight, and then for one week, Jon feeds him nothing but a carrot for supper. That’s a recipe for failure, since the underlying habits are not being changed, and the diet is unsustainable for the long term. As soon as the diet is over, the bad stuff comes right back. Realistic lifestyle changes, not dieting, is needed.
2.) Fill your space with good choices – all of us tend to take the path of least resistance and eat what is easily available to us. So remove junk food from your pantry and replace it with healthy, ready-to-eat foods such as carrot sticks, apples, grapes, celery, yogurt, whole grain crackers, bananas, etc. You can’t cheat with something that’s not there, and healthy snacks can satisfy hunger without guilt.
3.) Don’t get over-hungry – When we get really hungry, we tend to make poorer food choices. Plan ahead, have a healthy snack, and keep yourself from getting to the point of “I need a bite NOW!” before you even start making supper.
4.) If you drink soda – stop. Sodas add toxic amounts of sugar to our diets. It’s like a blitz on the pancreas. Water has no calories and is what our bodies are really after anyway when thirsty. If you did nothing but remove soda from your diet, then you have accomplished a big step. Diet sodas may not have sugar, but the artificial junk isn’t good for you either.
5.) This is my biggest challenge personally – control portion sizes and eat slowly. I am a fast eater by nature, and can finish off a third helping by the time my wife is done with her first. Fast eating results in overeating – the stomach can’t even register fullness before too much has gone down the hatch. Focus on chewing thoroughly and enjoying the food. It may help to decide in advance what and how much you plan to eat, and to arrange it on your plate so that you know when you are finished. Then get up from the table. Many times I continue eating without even thinking about what I’m doing!
6.) When you do eat something “bad”, don’t feel guilty. Nobody becomes obese from one piece of cake. If we tell ourselves that we can never eat this or that, then internal resentment and a sense that this is all too hard starts to build up. Instead of eliminating the desserts we love completely, set a realistic limit. That way, instead of thinking “Poor me, I can’t eat this”, we think “ok, I can eat this now instead of the brownie later…is it worth it?” Decide, enjoy (or enjoy something else later), and move on.
7.) Exercise is key to health. This is a big challenge for me because I have a sedentary office job. Take walks, sit on the floor, stretch your muscles, start small and slowly build up. The times I was most successful exercising have been when I was able to make it a part of the daily routine. I would walk to the next nearest subway stop – adding just 15 minutes to my commute, but 15 minutes of exercise. Park farther away, take a walk when coming or going, it doesn’t have to be an interruption.
Have a great Shabbos!
gavra_at_work,
I don’t buy the “He was not normal” argument.
I have not read much about the incident, but the details I have read seem to point towards mental instability. That steeping in the seething nastiness of the Israeli political climate may have provided a focus or justification for his actions in his mind is a good question. Where a “normal” but misguided person may vilify, an unstable person may act violently. He probably did view himself as upholding some sort of religious honor, but I don’t think his thought processes were rational as you suggest with your question.
dafyomi2711,
I think during the days when the Talmud Yerushalmi was compiled, Aramaic was the common language in Eretz Yisroel as well as in Babylon. As for why the Aramaic might be harder to understand, perhaps the dialects are different?
WolfishMusings,
there are far too many people who depend too much on me (although whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing, I suppose, is debatable)
It’s a good thing. And it goes much deeper than dependence.
Granted, I can be self-critical (perhaps to the extreme), and even further granted that I don’t particularly like myself very much,
Self criticism can be healthy and helpful, just like a baseball coach’s criticisms can help his players improve their game. Don’t let it lead to self-loathing, however. The very fact that you consider the merits of your actions at all demonstrates that you have character and sensitivity. If nothing else, trust your wife’s judgement: she picked well.
but I said I would limit my self-deprecatory comments on this site and, I believe, I’ve adhered to that.
Most of the self deprecating comments I have seen you make here come in response to the extremist blanket statements or judgements of others – not seemingly from an internal dislike for your behavior. On the contrary, you usually seemed to be comfortable with your behaviors and decisions. That’s why I have previously assumed that you were using the self deprecation as a rhetorical device to attack such blanket, extreme statements.
A simplistic example:
ExtremoBob: Pirkei Avos says al tarbe sicha im haisha, therefore anyone who says “good morning” to a woman is going to that hot place!
WolfishMusings: Well, I’d better stock up on sunscreen and fans, because I said good morning to my wife this morning, and I plan to do so tomorrow!
If, however, you are indeed internalizing some of the crazy statements that unthinking people make, please note that what you are doing is not self-criticism. Where would we be had Moshe Rabbeinu internalized the insult hurled at him by a Jew that he was at fault for worsening the Jews’ lot after speaking to Paroh?
jewishfeminist02,
I have no idea if your post is in response to what I wrote, so I apologize if it wasn’t, but here is my response if it was.
Why is it that when people ask halachic questions, everyone responds with “DON’T TRY TO PASKEN FROM THE CR!!!!” even when it’s clear that the person is not actually asking for psak…
I do not believe that I have ever made that statement. I find the halachic discussions on this forum quite thought provoking, with the full knowledge that any questions of practical application must go to my rav.
but on the other hand, we are uber comfortable with making assumptions and jumping to conclusions and offering unsolicited judgments regarding people’s personal lives?
On the contrary. I have thought about writing what I did above for a long time, and I felt unsure about whether it was wise, and I worried about whether I was rushing to judgement about the situation, misjudging things, or whether it was out of line for me to comment about another poster’s [potential] personal situation. I am certainly not “uber” comfortable. I am uncomfortable.
The fact is, unless we know a poster personally, we know nothing about them except what they post. Therefore, to try and judge a poster personally would be silly. That’s why I made as much of an attempt as possible to comment only on what has been posted – without extrapolation.
Ideally I agree with you that it’s best to comment on posts and not the posters; however, when we are talking about depression and suicide I feel there is an exception due to the risk, G-d forbid. I am not trained to handle such situations, and I have no idea whether my words were helpful or would have any impact if my fears were true (and I pray that they weren’t harmful), but I feel strongly that silence would be worse.
Once, I heard one of my children upstairs yell for help, and upon reaching her I saw that she was pretending with dolls in the midst of a game. Even if I thought she was playing, I would still go to her, because there is a possibility that she really needed help. Talking about depression and suicide can be academic, or it can be a call for help.
rebdoniel,
And wallflower, having a paternal grandmother whose parents emigrated here from Aleppo, I can make such claims with full confidence and with full knowledge of the realities at play.
Having a connection to a community does not give you the authority or the right to tar that community as a whole.
DaasYochid wrote:
Wolf, considering that you’ve started at least six threads about suicide (that’s what I found on the first page of your profile), I could understand how someone could think the topic fascinates you.
WolfishMusings responded:
Yes, but that’s over the span of what? Four years?
I don’t think six conversations over four years is a sign of obsession. Heck, I often have more than six conversations about Excel, SQL Server and photography over the course of any given week. Does that make me obsessed with them?
WolfishMusings,
Your response to DaasYochid was not logical. If a person has 100 conversations and 94 of them are normal, but 6 of them discuss assassinating a government official with quite a bit of detail, I would imagine that the secret service would take notice. Also, if a person takes 100 trips driving a car and causes crashes during 6 of those trips, would you feel safe with his driving? We are not looking for a plurality here to diagnose the fascination. Something as extreme as suicide mentioned even once should give us pause.
During the time that I have read and posted on this site, I have seen you discuss feelings of inadequacy (I am a sinner, etc.), sadness (e.g., on Shabbos), and suicide. These are serious warning signs. Unfortunately, we have no way of knowing whether these posts are intended as satire (you claimed they were not) or to make a tongue-in-cheek statement about the reality of extreme views expressed on this site (you have not closed the door on this possibility). Some of your examples, such as claiming you are a sinner for talking during laining when you serve as baal koreh, or taking “rule” type statements and denying the possibility of exceptions, seem to point towards those above interpretations of your posts, but your persistence and denials of satire make your body of posts somewhat unsettling to me.
No matter what is said by keyboard kanoim with multiple usernames on this site, Hashem loves you. Every breath that you take and every beat of your heart is proof of that love. Your family loves you and needs you. I may be way off base here, and I apologize if I cause you any pain or offense, but if you are feeling despair, you owe it to yourself and your family to reach out for assistance.
Joseph
This post discusses Joseph in the context of the CR. For other uses, see Joseph (disambiguation).
Joseph is an epithet used to describe any poster for which Poe’s Law applies. Some apply the label Joseph to any poster exhibiting troll-like behavior, especially posters who create multiple usernames or attempt to elicit personal information from other posters.
Outsider,
How does this statement:
I don’t want to appear like I’m putting anyone down
coexist with this one?
I am absolutely amazed by the lack of scientific, literary, and other academic knowledge possessed by many (most?) Yeshiva guys.
I know it’s not their way to study “worldly” things, but on the Outside, if you argue against the world’s age, you are a total religious anomaly.
If you make the claim that you are an “outsider”, meaning that you haven’t lived within the Orthodox Jewish or “Yeshiva” world, then where did you acquire the data to make the claim that most Yeshiva bochrim are ignorant of scientific, literary, or other academic knowledge? Stereotyping?
Also, why do you single out this specific group, when ignorance of basic literature, history, and science is epidemic in the U.S. as a whole?
Sam2,
Your question in the title of this thread is beyond my pay grade for sure.
I’m not sure if this is just sucking up to the Frum community because it contradicts just about everything he said before this, … Maybe.
I don’t think what you quoted above contradicts anything he said earlier. Rather, it is a very clever but disingenuous attempt to make it look like he upholds the same faith as other Orthodox Jews. Whether he actually does or not remains a mystery. I’ll elaborate below.
I believe in Torah Min Ha-Shamayim, that the Torah is from heaven, and that the entirety of the book is nevua (prophecy) and represents the encounter between God and the people of Israel
We would have to ask him what “from heaven” and “nevua” mean to him, because it is likely he defines these things in a different manner from traditional Jewish understandings. We’ll see one of these strange definitions in the very next quote.
I believe in Torah mi-Sinai, meaning the uniqueness of the Torah as being of a higher order than any other work in its level of divine encounter.
That’s a very convoluted definition of Torah mi-Sinai, since nothing about Sinai is even mentioned. Torah mi-Sinai simply means “Torah from Sinai.” He says nothing about Moshe Rabbeinu or his actual receipt of the Torah as a historical event, which is the only aspect of Torah mi-Sinai that would posit the Torah’s superiority over any other prophecy. Without Moshe Rabbeinu speaking to G-d “face to face” and receiving the Torah directly from Hashem, there can be no argument made for “the uniqueness of the Torah as being of a higher order than any other work in its level of divine encounter.” It would just be a book written by “divinely inspired men” on the shelf with all the other books written by “divinely inspired men”, G-d forbid. A strange omission indeed.
The story of the revelation at Sinai in the Torah I understand as a narrative depiction of a deeper truth
A cloaked way perhaps of saying “not to be taken literally”…
Finally a true statement, but he doesn’t arrive at this result from Torah mi-Sinai, so I honestly can’t say how he does arrive at it, or even whether his definition of “G-d’s book” is the same as mine.
This is perhaps the most disingenuous statement in the quotation you provided. Note “meant to be as it is today” is NOT the same thing as “I believe with perfect faith that the entire Torah that we now have is that which was given to Moses”, and “I believe with perfect faith that this Torah will not be changed, and that there will never be another given by G-d” (quotation of the ikkarim emunah are from the OU). In fact, by utilizing the word “meant”, the implication is very clear that he holds the Torah has changed, G-d forbid.
What on earth does he mean by “develop organically”? It certainly does not seem to equate with the traditional notions of mesora.
The only salient point I could garner from these quotations is that Farber thinks the Torah is spiritually special. We can not derive that he thinks the Torah was authored by G-d and not Man, nor can we say that he believes there was any kind of literal encounter between the Divine and Israel at Har Sinai.
OhTeeDee,
whether the calendar is fixed or not the concept that it may or may not be yuntiff *today* makes it all seem arbitrary.
I don’t see it as arbitrary at all. The date of Yom Tov was set by the Sanhedrin once the length of the previous month was determined (either 29 or 30 days). Therefore each festival had a fixed date. Whether people observed one or both possible days depending on where they lived makes no difference to the actual date and length of the festival.
Unlike Shabbos, whose dates are fixed by Hashem, the festivals were given to us to set within a framework (briefly, the first month must come in spring time, the Pesach is offered on the 14th of that month, the festival of matzos then follows from the 15th to 21st, Shavuous is 50 days after the morrow of the rest of that festival, Rosh Hashana on the 1st of the 7th month, Y”K on the 10th, Sukkos on the 15-21st, Shemini Atzeres on the 22nd. Other than that (and telling us in last week’s parsha that we should use the sun, moon, and stars to set our calendar), we have a say in how it’s done. It may seem a bit disconcerting, but Hashem bestowed our people with holiness through these festivals, and we actually have the ability to make the days holy. That’s why the Yom Tov bracha days “mikadesh Yisroel v’hazmanim” – Hashem makes Yisroel holy, and Yisroel makes the zmanim holy.
The fact specifically that today there is no safeik at all (and when there was did people really fast 2 days for yom kippur) AND no mechanism in place to acknowledge that the 2 day yuntiff “doesn’t apply” anymore.
You seem to be assuming that the reason we still observe both possible Yom Yov days in the diaspora is because there was no mechanism to overturn the previous ruling. I don’t think that is the case. The later sages chose to continue the practice because they didn’t see the problem in simply utilitarian terms. In other words, the uncertainty of when Tom Tov fell was caused because of a deficiency (living in the diaspora), so even though the calendar is fixed, at the end of the day, living in the diaspora is still a deficiency.
In terms of the moment in time when it did apply, the sages who created an “8th day” even for those in diaspora who cannot get the news of rosh chodesh – i believe were doing so in direct objection to the (perfect) Torah.
Nobody created an 8th day. We observe the last date of Pesach on 21 Nissan due to the 7 day festival that started on the 15th – we just assume that the 1st of the month could have been either 30 or 31 days after the start of the previous month. If you are considering yourself to be observing an 8th day of Pesach, then you are not looking at the halacha correctly. In Sukkos mussaf, we recite the offerings for the first day of the festival on both the first two days of observed Yom Tov, because we treat each day as if it could be Yom Tov. In the diaspora on the “3rd” day (after the two day Yom Tov), we recite the offerings for both the 2nd and 3rd days of the festival. Nothing new is being added.
In the simplest form, you cannot say that due to logistics Hashem really wants X even though he said Y! If anything it proves that the Torah, in its time wasn’t scalable to a global world.
The Torah is perfect, but it was never intended to be scalable to the globe. Hashem gave us the Torah and intended for us to live in Eretz Yisroel. Therefore, the halachos are designed for that area. Outside of Eretz Yisroel, many mitzvos lose their applicability. In Eretz Yisroel, grain harvesting is possible at Pesach time, and Jews are obligated to bring an omer offering. In Russia, however, crops are barely out of dormancy. The Torah was not written with Russia in mind. On Shemini Atzeres we daven for rain, but for Jews in Florida, the onset of the dry season begins a month or two later. The Torah was not written with Florida in mind. Hashem wants us to live in Eretz Yisroel, but due to our aveiros, we were exiled and now live in lands “out of sync” with our holy Torah. Having to observe both possible days that Yom Tov can fall out is just one manifestation of this imbalance in the system. Don’t blame the Torah, blame the exile.
The idea that “we would all be amish” is something I chuckle about, since essentially we ARE amish on shabbos and yuntiff.
Huh? I suddenly use no electricity (no lights left on, no timers, no A/C, no Shabbos alarm clock, no blech on an electric stove, no electric urn) on Shabbos, and trade my car in for a horse and buggy (which we don’t use on Shabbos either)? Your comment makes no sense to me. I think a hard-core Amish person witnessing Shabbos observance would say it looked and felt very different from his lifestyle.
There was never anything prohibiting the use of technology as the amish did
That wasn’t quite my point. You implied that halacha freeze-framed in the 19th Century. If that was the case, then there would have been no way for halacha to deal with technology on Shabbos.
but there is a certain resistance to using it, within the confines of halacha, on shabbos. For example putting a light on, which i believe falls under the av of boneh but couldnt possibly be anything close to what boneh IS (or was in the mishkan). This is the understanding and application of a halacha that let’s face it, has NO precedent in jewish history/law (how could it. times change and not everything could be covered). so has halacha “dealt” with this or just outlawed it for lack of understanding?
I think you may have it backwards. Early treatment of electric devices tended to permit them, but once greater knowledge of how those devices worked, then they became forbidden. It actually was the increased understanding that led to the restrictions, not a lack.
What’s interesting to me is that the sages forbade the use of electrical devices on Shabbos – which seems silly to you because the melachos deal with things like hammering and sewing. But Hashem tells me to not work on Shabbos, and in my job I do not hammer or sew – I use electronic devices. Through remote connectivity, I can stay home and work a full day without doing anything but interact with electronic devices – so thank G-d they are forbidden on Shabbos!
Re: fridges, I honestly do not know how it is muttar to open one on shabbos. It is 40 degrees in there and 72 degrees in the room. you open the fridge, 20 seconds later the thing kicks on. You walk into a room with central air. by definition your presence warms the air, miniscule as that may be. the AC kicks on. Is this any better than turning on a light?
Discuss this with a rabbi. It’s not like they didn’t think of any of this!
OhTeeDee,
The fact that there is no mechanism in place to change things (that seemingly no longer apply/make sense
To you?
) doesn’t seem like a problem with the system?
Observing Yom Tov over two days in the diaspora makes sense to me. So why should I believe that it should be changed?
for 2500 years there were tannaim/amoraim/rishonim tweaking halacha, most of which applies halacha li’mayseh today. Weren’t they “reforming” (i know…a very bad word 🙂 the direction of the torah.
No, not reforming. When the U.S. Supreme Court makes a ruling, in an ideal sense we do not say that they are reforming the U.S. Constitution (e.g., “hey, lets throw this clause out”). Rather, they are applying the Constitution to their case at hand. This is similar to what the sages do – they apply Torah principles to a situation in order to figure out what to do. Different sages may make different applications, but it is not reformation.
I am not saying rejecting torah she’bal peh, all i’m saying is that if halacha is a living, breathing idea why did it stop changing (except to make life HARDER) 150 years ago?
This is a false argument. Blechs on electric stovetops, hearing aids, timers, air conditioners, refrigerators, etc. did not exist 150 years ago, yet our living halacha has dealt with all of these things (mostly to make life EASIER, by the way). If halacha stopped changing 150 years ago, then we’d still be living as people did 150 years ago, like the Amish. But we don’t, because halacha does deal with changes in the world. It seems possible that your perception of a lack of halachic adaptation is not due to an actual lack of adaptation, but to your dislike of how it has adapted.
OhTeeDee,
I mean, there is no safek yom anymore, this we know.
So from this statement, it seems that your problem with 2 day Yom Tovs is that we now utilize a fixed calendar, so it follows that when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Sanhedrin, you wouldn’t have objections, right?
For example, the torah specifically says that succos is an 8 day holiday
<nitpick>Actually, by the Torah Sukkos is 7 days, as we are commanded to sit in Sukkos for 7 days. The 8th day is a new Yom Tov.</nitpick>
so next friday A. why aren’t you oiver on baal toisif?
Your argument here doesn’t make sense to me, because it would also apply to the times before our calendar was fixed, and from your initial statement, you only seem to have a problem with this after the fixed calendar. Back when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Sanhedrin, and word of the declaration may not have reached the far flung communities in time for Yom Tov, keeping “eight” days of Pesach still would have been problematic according to your argument, because the Torah commanded seven!
Pesach and Sukkos are seven day festivals. Rosh Hashana, Shavuos, and Shemini Atzeres are one day festivals. This remains true to this day, in the diaspora as well as in Eretz Yisroel. The sages who declared the months also decreed that in the diaspora, both possible days that Yom Tov could fall out based on the synodic month should be observed as Yom Tov, even though one of those days is not Yom Tov.
and B. Shouldn’t you be putting on tfillin? C. Shouldn’t you be doing hakafos (the real ones) on Thursday
The same sages who told us when to lay tefillin and to do hakafos also told us how to observe Yom Tov in the diaspora. Where’s the contradiction?
Toi,
most important thing(s) to do are to observe the 5 inuyim and not be chayiv karress.
My guess is that Rav Miller ZT”L and the OP took it as a given that the restrictions of Yom Kippur would be observed, and were addressing what ideas and thoughts of the day were the most important.
Yungerman from Lakewood,
so I can’t bring myself to do tshuva for aveiros that I do not believe in.
What do I do?
Your problem is not isolated to people with doubts – it is a universal issue. When a person sins, most of the time he is not thinking “heh heh heh, I know I’m doing wrong but I’m doing it anyway!” Usually there are two conflicting desires within a person (I should give the $5 in my pocket to that poor person, but I really want to use it to buy some french fries later), a noble desire and a base desire, and the person rationalizes a way to fulfill the base desire, sometimes even convincing himself that he’s doing the right thing (the poor person will just probably buy alcohol with it anyway). So, in a way, at the time of the commission of the aveira, the person “does not believe in the aveira” as you said.
So how should you “deal” with Yom Kippur? The same way that all Jews should. Take some time to examine your actions (and the motivations for your actions) during the past year and decide whether all of those actions reflect the type of person you would like to be. Usually when we pare down our rationalizations, the true, base motivations for a lot of our actions can make us feel embarrassed. Feel regret for these failures, but tell yourself and Hashem that they do not reflect who you are. Think of something realistic you can do during the upcoming year that will help you to come closer to being the person you truly want to be. Pray for the time, health, and ability to do this work.
Please G-d I should be able to do all of this myself as well and that we will all have a year of sweet goodness.
This name is already taken,
Assuming you have downloaded the file from the Web and saved it somewhere, perhaps you can open a blank OpenOffice spreadsheet, then choose insert -> sheet from file, then choose your CSV file? You might have to play with the formatting to get it right.
Good luck!
jewishfeminist02,
I have heard that there are people in minyanim
People are people, and I’m sure that every minyan of every stripe has its share of interesting characters!
who will correct the way others wear their tefillin, either by verbally advising them or even physically reaching over to adjust the person’s straps. Does this actually happen? And if so, what do you think– is it appropriate or not?
If my tefillin were pushed askew, I would ultimately appreciate someone quietly telling me – though I would also feel a bit embarrassed. I probably wouldn’t mind him adjusting it for me if he asked first, since it would save me the extra seconds to get my mirror. If he didn’t ask first before touching them, however, I would feel very uncomfortable (and probably wonder if he were mentally stable).
If the issue the person had was with my custom, I would just say, “thanks for the advice, but this is how I learned to put them on” and move on. If it were an issue like what LevAryehBoy described, I would hopefully just say “thank you.”
I personally wouldn’t correct somebody else. With the tallis going on and off the head, standing, sitting, etc., tefillin are likely to shift during davening. I’m sure most people periodically check to make sure they are still in their proper place. Therefore it’s very likely that the man with his tefillin askew will correct the issue himself in short order.
assurnet wrote:
Actually the Gemara in Sukkot discusses different human actions that bring about eclipses… I’m not quite sure I would describe Chazal as “arbitrary.” And as a disclaimer, just because we can now map the schedule of such astrological events in advance isn’t a stirah to the Gemara…
lakewood001,
How is it not a Stira? I’m asking sincerely.
I can think of several possible answers.
First, I think for the purposes of the Gemara, it’s not the occurrence of the eclipse that is important, but the observation of it. Just because an eclipse occurs does not mean that people in a given location will see it. Cloud cover, for example, can render a lunar eclipse and most solar eclipses invisible. A total solar eclipse would be viewed quite differently under cloud cover than on a clear day.
Second, if G-d created and controls the universe, including all of the physical laws, and He knows the future and the hearts of Man, then it would follow that the laws of physics and history would work together such that eclipses occur and are observed over regions where such behavior occurs.
The Goq,
Avram you did not address what i said about loss of individuality do you want your child to be a individual or a robot is part of the collective?
Your original parable spoke to a safety issue. Then it became about government assistance. Next personal debt. Then unfairness to older/younger siblings, and now individuality. If I respond to individuality, perhaps you will move the goalposts again and talk about living space and how unfair it is that children can’t have their own rooms, etc.
I get it. You think having too many children (which you seem to define as 10+) is bad. You have lots of reasons. My responses to your reasons are largely the same: you are describing poor parenting, poor decision making, and poor planning; factors that are not exclusive to large families.
To respond, individuality comes from within each child and can be encouraged or discouraged by parents, friends, teachers, siblings, and relatives, no matter how many children are at home, school, the park, or anywhere.
Someone can easily start a thread decrying families where both parents work, using many of your same arguments (latchkey kids are not supervised which is dangerous, older siblings must look after younger ones, or in the case of an only child, s/he has to look after her/himself, they are ignored, they frequently have to prepare their own meals which means poorer nutrition, etc. etc.). Is it fair to label all working parents’ families like that?
In my opinion, unpopular as it may be, we have an epidemic of unsupervised, unguided and inadequately parented children in this country, non-Jewish and Jewish, poor and rich, government assisted and tax paying, Borg and Starfleet, 10 kids and 1 kid. Parents are missing out on opportunities to connect with and raise their children or don’t even know how, and instead the kids are raising and learning values from each other in the streets and schools, which has resulted in a horrendously toxic youth culture. Everyone’s going to come to the table with different causes for this, and we all need to work on it.
Family problems are going to manifest themselves differently in different families, so you may see one set of problems more common in large families, and another set of problems more common in small families. But by pigeonholing the problem and stating that all ills are traced to too many children, the core issues risk being missed.
Can you really say that parents neglecting 6 kids would do better with 3? Or that parents raising a great family of 9 should not have a 10th, because that is just simply “too much”? I’m curious to hear your response.
Have a good Shabbos!
jewishfeminist02
There is no one-size-fits-all magic number of children. It depends on…
I don’t think we are significantly disagreeing here – we are just focusing on the opposite sides of the coin. We seem to agree that it is not ok for parents to become so overwhelmed that they do not properly care for their children. The Goq seems to be suggesting that there is an objective limit to the number of children a family should have before it becomes unfair to the children, however, and that I disagree with. That number is a personal decision between husband and wife.
The Goq,
You cant tell me that children part of a 12 child family get the same personal parental attention as children of a 6 child family
I can tell you that I know people who were an only child who felt neglected and ignored by their parents. I also know families of two children where one sibling is obviously favored over the other, leading to feelings of neglect. Parenting a larger number of children may be more challenging than parenting fewer (and perhaps not feasible for some families as jewishfeminist02 said), but the efforts and quality of the parents plays the crucial role. I think you certainly have the right to observe and express concern that some parents do not seem to be doing a good job, but I don’t think you have the right to tell parents that they have too many children. Which one(s) should they give back?
Also, your views on the appropriate number of children to have are deeply affected by your cultural viewpoint. In the eyes of many in secular America, having 6 children is considered grossly irresponsible.
oomis,
Many double digit families that are doing an “amazing job,” are doing so because the mother has foisted the care of the younger children on the older one. And before anyone argues with me about that, I witness that personally ALL the time.
I wouldn’t argue with your experience, but I do contend that those families are NOT doing an “amazing job.”
And a very real issue is that the children who are charged with this parenting responsibility are sometimes still in need of strong parental supervision themselves. I see six year olds watching 18 month olds by themselves.
That is irresponsible and dangerous; however, lack of supervision isn’t limited to large families, although it may be more challenging to supervise a larger number of children.
I have personally run across the street (and with my osteoarthritic knees that is no small feat, pun intended), to snap up that baby, as he was about to run into the street
Kol hakavod for not standing idly by!
I am sure there are exceptions to every rule, but on the whole, my observation is that this is what happens in many larger families.
So do you think that this phenomenon is due to the largeness of the family itself, or the ignorance/unwillingness of the parents to do what it takes to be proper parents of their children? Do you think there is an objective limit to the number of children two parents should have? Should we advocate limits on the number of children we have, or bolster parental education and support geared towards larger families?
The Goq,
i urge you to look at the tragedies from this summer alone and find out what the average amount of children are in these families I don’t know but i suspect that these types of tragedies are more prevalent in families with double digit children.
If you take a sample from the frum community alone, then yes, you will find a lot of large families, but these types of tragedies happen across all communities, not just ours. They happen to families with one child, or two or three. That is not to excuse the occurrence of even one such tragedy.
My point is that just because you have A and B does not mean that A caused B.
Parenting multiple children brings new and different challenges, and parents must grow, adapt and address these challenges. If they do not, they are being irresponsible parents, just as first time parents would be if they didn’t adapt to care adequately for their first child. This does not mean that parents of double-digit children are irresponsible simply for having so many children. Each couple has its own limits and dynamics, and parents with 10 children may do better than parents of one or two. If parents do not feel like (or realize) they can adequately care for 10 children given their current lifestyle, yet have them anyway without first addressing their issues, then that makes them irresponsible parents.
The Torah commands us to be fruitful and multiply but i feel having a family with a dozen or so children is unfair to those children,
Why would it be, if the parents are properly caring for each child?
the older girls of the family are forced to play mommy when they themselves are still kids and deserve to have a childhood, the younger children do not get the kind of attention they deserve
You are describing symptoms of bad parenting here, not something that is a bygone result of having many siblings.
A parent should never establish a situation where they rely on their children to act as surrogate parents. The older siblings are not parents, and doing so not only creates an unfair burden as you suggested, but is unsafe and increases the risk of the tragedies you alluded to in your OP.
At the same time, children should be taught responsibility. If an 8 year old child gets herself or himself a cup of water, s/he should be taught to offer water to others in the family at the same time (including the parents!). This is good chinuch and though it has the side benefit of aiding in smoothing the house workload, it is not the same thing as becoming a surrogate parent.
Also, parents should continuously assess and monitor their children’s needs and how they are relating to each child. A lot of parents (including me) trend towards being goal-oriented (get them all up and out on time, get them to bed on time, get them fed, etc.), which is good, but carries the danger of going into auto-pilot mode (no news is good news). This must be overcome. Parents must connect with each child every day. This may take more creativity and effort with a lot of children, but I believe it can be done.
again this is my opinion and I may be wrong but I am entitled to my opinion no matter how unpopular it may be.
I think you are seeing an unfortunate situation and you are grappling with it, which is a good thing. I just disagree with you about the cause, which would also affect the discussed solutions.
In the Western world, frum Jews are pretty alone in having large families. We do not have as many guides and role models for how to effectively parent these types of families. Perhaps this is a place to begin making changes.
jewishfeminist02,
You are, so to speak, “arguing with the question” … you should answer to the given premise, not substitute your own
There was no question to answer in the OP. The OP presented a parable written in the omniscient third person that allowed the OP to describe an event and the reason that the event occurred. I do not see how I failed to adequately respond by stating that the event and his reason for it do not match.
My contention is that the parable is not meaningful in the context of families and children, because it does not speak to the motivations of the parents in having children, nor the reason that a child (represented by the egg) would R”L be injured through neglect, but rather posits that lots of children = bad and unsafe, which I don’t think is a true statement.
Admittedly, the parable is a little crude
The parable is not crude at all – actually it was beautifully done. It just didn’t speak to reality in my opinion.
I’ll try to demonstrate more clearly what I am contending through a parable of my own that shows the dissonance between event and cause more clearly. I can’t promise it will be as beautiful as The Goq’s 🙂
Phil was a man who loved cats. He went to animal shelters and adopted cats. He found stray cats and adopted them too. He even bought cats from local pet stores. It was so expensive to buy all of the cat food to feed these cats, and so time consuming to clean all of those litter boxes. One day, Phil was walking through his house while texting on his phone, tripped on a cat, and died. The end.
Why did Phil die? The Goq contends that he had too many cats. I contend that he should have been watching where he was going.
The Goq,
there are so many tragedies happening to small children of large families being left in a hot car, unsupervised near a pool or body of water there are other examples.
G-d forbid, G-d forbid that this should ever happen to anyone. Unfortunately, it does happen, but I don’t see any correlation between the occurrence of these types of tragedies and the number of children a family has. A child is R”L left in a car usually due to a change in pattern, e.g., a father intending to bring his child to day care when he usually doesn’t, and not being mindful and going into autopilot. Parents must always check their cars whenever they exit, even if they know there are no kids inside. A drowning R”L happens if a location is not properly secured and supervised, which can happen whether there is one child or 20.
I know back in the 60s and 70s when it first became popular to have very large families the common reason given was to repopulate the Jewish souls we lost in the holocaust,
I think the secular American/European practice of having very few children is anomalous, not having a large number of children.
but now it seems that every couple is expected to have many children,
How many children to have is a decision that is solely between husband and wife, with a goal of serving Hashem as best as they can. It is not a decision to be taken lightly, but at the same time people outside of the marriage should not get involved unless asked.
not to mention the fact that many of these families are on public assistance is it really fair for the government to pay for someone who has more children than they can afford?
Personally I think feeding and caring for children is money well spent no matter where it is coming from, but this point really has no relation to the ones above about child safety. If you don’t like how your government’s money is being spent, then campaign for people who advocate changing the laws to something you like better.
The Goq,
First, for a parable to be meaningful, the symbolism should match the reality. When Dovid Hamelech ensured that Uriya haChiti was killed in battle so that he could marry Bas Sheva his wife, the prophet Nosson came to him with a parable that a rich man who had many sheep wanted to make a party, and took the single, beloved ewe of a poor man to use for the feast. The feelings of the rich man in this parable are a good match for the feelings of Dovid Hamelech. In your parable, however, I don’t think collecting fancy eggs is a good match for children.
First, there is no comparison between the desire for objects and a couple’s desire for children.
Second, there is no chiyuv to collect fancy eggs, wheras there is a chiyuv to have children.
Third, in the lens of Torah, fancy eggs bring no benefit to the world (unless they are used for a mitzvah), whereas a child is a new world brought into being.
Now regarding your conclusion, I disagree strongly that the egg was broken as a result of the couple having too many eggs. The egg broke because the couple was careless with their egg. They could have had one egg and broken it.
I have seen some families struggling to cope with just one child. I have seen others running smoothly with many children. The health and safety of a home has much less to do with the number of children than it does the efforts and quality of the parents.
The Goq,
I’m thinking that your post is a parable, and that collecting “Faberge” eggs represents having children. I have a response for that interpretation, but I don’t want to write it out if I am misunderstanding the parable. Am I understanding it correctly?
Git Meshige,
the Halacha is that Sefardim may eat rice on Pesach, is that the Halacha for everyone?
I am not sure what you are trying to convey with this statement. Are you arguing that some hold a choleh sh’ein bo sakana is required to fast on 17 Tammuz? Is there a source for that?
My guess is that your argument is not over the halacha, but an assertion that some place themselves into the category of a choleh sh’ein bo sakana to get out of fasting when they really aren’t that sick. Is this your argument?
popa_bar_abba,
darling
You are a wicked, wicked troll, aren’t you? 🙂
playtime,
Thank you truthsharer and jewishfeminist02 for being the only open-minded posters on this thread.
Ouch, you mean someone can only be open minded if they agree with you?
Uri Bakay,
I personally am makpid on not talking during davening, and I am bothered by talking, especially during chazaras hashatz, kaddish, and leining. I completely fail to understand why someone would do this, when not only is it a clear cut aveirah, but there is ample opportunity to talk after davening, especially on Shabbos when there is a kiddush. So I sympathize with your feelings on the issue.
That said, it is also a clear cut aveirah to speak lashon hara about the Jewish people, or a Jewish community as a whole. Drawing negative comparisons with other religions, painting all Orthodox Jews with a single brush stroke, and derisively stating “Mi Kaamch (sic) Yisrael” may just be as bad in the eyes of halacha as talking during davening.
I truly understand the frustration that you are feeling, but please don’t let another’s aveirah cause you to commit your own.
truthsharer,
The kosel is not a shul.
Actually, it is. After taking Yerushalayim in 1967, the Israelis created the Kosel plaza (there was a narrow alley there before) for the purpose of accommodating prayer. They rushed the construction of this plaza ahead of Shavuos. Furthermore, the government appointed R’ Yehuda Meir Getz and then R’ Shmuel Rabinowitz as the Kosel Rav – to oversee the proceedings that take place there. So the plaza was a space created for Jewish prayer, and a rabbi was appointed to oversee it; sounds like a shul to me. Whether you think making it into a shul was a bad idea or not is irrelevant at this point.
It’s a holy place where people daven
That’s the Orthodox perspective. The Reform movement’s theology denies the concepts of a personal Moshiach and a restoration of the Avodah of the Beis Hamikdash (G-d forbid), and furthermore they hold R”L that the Avodah itself was man-made, archaic, and even barbaric. It seems inconsistent, therefore, that they would view the Kosel or Har Habayis as holy ground. The Conservative movement severely limits mentioning the Avodah and a personal Moshiach in its prayer books.
It seems more likely to me that adherents of Reform Judaism view the Kosel as a place of nationalistic (Jewish or Israeli) significance – similar to the way Americans would view the National Mall.
My shul has existed for fewer than 100 years, but if a group of people attempted to force changes to its customs and practices in defiance of the rav, I would feel upset, even if the shul was also a national landmark.
SecularFrummy,
I think your original OP question belies a false dilemma fallacy. You are attempting to force a choice between two options: either the Rishonim were infallible (i.e., superhuman or deity) or we must find a means to determine their errors, and question their rulings. This is fundamentally not logical.
When I was in high school, I once solved a long mathematical problem and came up with a different solution than the textbook’s. I brought the problem to the teacher, who took a look and realized that there was an error in the textbook. I was praised for my work and for not being satisfied with blindly accepting the textbook’s solution as correct by default.
Looking back, I think that ultimately this incident had a more negative effect on my future learning than a positive one. For a long time afterwards, if I solved a problem and arrived at a different answer from the textbook or the teacher, I would be more inclined to stick to my guns and argue that my solution was correct. After all, textbooks are not perfect and can have errors! It turns out that errors in high school math textbooks are exceedingly rare, and errors in high school student math homework are common.
Rather than coming up with my own solution, and dismissing the textbook’s solution as wrong and ending my thoughts there, I would have been much better served by digging deeper into what I viewed as the wrong solution, working backwards and discovering my own mistakes.
Yes, the acharonim, rishonim, tannaim, amoraim, the sages of the Sanhedrin, the prophets, judges, and our forefathers were all human beings. Human beings are not infallible and can make mistakes. It is much more likely, however, for me to make a mistake in my Torah learning than our sages, so ultimately it is much more productive to look for my own mistakes than it is to look for theirs if the answers don’t line up.
It is also most likely that if there was a mistake, it has already been addressed by another sage.
charliehall,
And that is why we need institutions like Yeshivat Maharat […]
This ends justifies the means argument makes no logical sense to me. To aid in these mitzvos does not seem to be the goal of Yeshivat Maharat; at best it is a side effect. The mission statement of Yeshivat Maharat is (from their Web site):
Yeshivat Maharat is changing the communal landscape by actualizing the potential of Orthodox women as rabbinic leaders. Yeshivat Maharat represents a natural evolution towards a pluralistic community, where women and men, from every denomination, can enhance the Jewish world.
Their mission is a political one, to reform the Jewish community and its practices, not out of a stated halachic necessity, but to create a “pluralistic community”, as the Conservative and Reform movements have done.
The irony is that outside of staunch activists, if you were to ask a typical Jew of any denomination who the first female Reform rabbi was, or who the first Conservative rabbi was, s/he would probably not know the answer. If you walk into almost any large bookstore in the nation, however, you would probably find works written by Esther Jungreis and her daughter Slovie Jungreis. Other frum women, such as Tzipporah Heller and her talmida Gila Manolson also have renown within the Jewish world. They have gained their renown the way Jews – men and women – have through the centuries, not by chasing after titles and honors, but by serving Hashem, seeing needs within the Jewish community, and addressing them through writing, learning, and teaching.
charliehall,
YCT has an all male student body.
My mistake – perhaps saying “groups such as Yeshivat Maharat, Hebrew Institute of Riverdale, etc.” would have been more accurate.