Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
maskildoresh,
“Ok. Nuff said”
More than enough. Better to be an am haaretz than to speak lashon hara about the Jewish people.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“do we read Gemora as a strictly legal cases or as a guide of living. Strictly legal reading defines edge cases indeed.”
Why does it have to be either-or? And it seems that you weren’t seeking a guide of living, but rather taking wild guesses at how people lived 2000 years ago. I mean, I really hope you’re not advocating for 12 year old girls to marry men their father’s age?
Always_Ask_Questions,
“Still, you can look at a variety of cases and get a feeling when a case is a stretch case or reasonably a norm – in the latter case, it is discussed in many situations, with practical details. “
A category can be rare to occur in practice, but highly complicated halachically and thus require considerable discussion.
“Also, a notion that a man should not live/visit too long at his in-laws before of mother-in-law there. This hints that husband and bride’s mother are typically close to each other in age.”
No it doesn’t.
n0mesorah,
“It’s hard to be specific on this thread.”
You wrote a lot, and it seems to me that you’re trying to make a specific point, I just wish I could understand it. “The paragraph is about all religions” – what paragraph? “Religions are not for one person. They are only for people.” – I never heard of this limitation in the definition of religion. It’s not what makes religion distinct from ethics, if that’s what you’re trying to argue. “So what the people as a group think of their religion tends to make up what their religion consists of. But that is not the religion itself.” – These two sentences seem to directly contradict one another.
“I never heard of this specific label [EO] before.”
No, but it’s quite common in the non-Orthodox movements. A notable example is the Conservative Movement’s “hechsher tzedek” where they seek to “certify” food that is made according to their own ethical and social justice standards. They claim a distinction between Torah and “Jewish values”, which doesn’t exist. Orthodox Jews refute the notion that the Torah, written by Hashem, is lacking something that must be filled by a separate set of ethics. I think what really bugs the OP is that someone who keeps Shabbos, kashrus, and taharas mishpacha, but is mean, or took benefits he wasn’t entitled to, is still considered “Orthodox”, while someone who’s a nice guy and submits a squeaky clean tax return to the IRS on Jan 2, but who eats out in non-kosher restaurants or uses a smartphone on Shabbos, is not considered Orthodox. So he created his own category of “Ethical Orthdox” where he could exclude the former. The thing is, inclusion in the frum community is not necessarily an attestation that a person is good or doing the right thing.
“It was all a lead up to the statement in bold and the question. As in, does the OP feel confident about adding a clause (ethics – or whatever they think it means) into something (Judiaism – as it was Divinely given) that will eternally outlast them?”
Seems so. He’s already done it after all, right?
“Religions are not for one person. They are only for people.”
Says who?
So what the people as a group think of their religion tends to make up what their religion consists of. But that is not the religion itself. It is only how they relate to it. It doesn’t go by what people claim they think of their religion. It thrives off of how they perform as a religious group.””
As I wrote above, these seem like contradictory notions to me, and thus needs more explanation. How I’m interpreting it:
1. Religion is a collective exercise, not a personal thing. Huh? Religion is all about one’s personal beliefs in the divine. Adherents with similar beliefs may opt to form religious communities though it’s not a requirement, e.g., Protestant Christianity, or one’s religious tenants may dictate that adherents form communities, as is the case with Orthodox Judaism.
2. Religion is what this collective group thinks it is, except that it’s not. Huh? I can’t reconcile these two statements.
3. Religion is independent of the people who adhere to it, but what it is depends on what those people do. Huh? I feel like the definitions of terms are shifting rapidly.n0mesorah,
“Religion is collective thought. That thought gives it no legitimacy. It could only be useful if it is believed to be Divine. It takes it’s legitimacy from it’s own context. It can never think itself into a non-existing situation. Therefore it always entertains those with serious moral failings. It allows those failings to modify the system. Some people see this as a major threat to authenticity. But it has no strength against true religion. Because true religion is convinced that it cannot be permanently vanquished Do you feel so strongly about Ethics? “
Can you clarify this paragraph? I have no idea what you are trying to say here.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“But, the impression from various halochos related to marriage creates an impression that if by the bas mitzva the girl is still in the father’s house, it is time to say tehilim”
This is an extrapolation that is well beyond the scope of those gemaros, which is surprising coming from someone with a strong STEM background. The fact that the gemara deals with a case does not mean that case is or was culturally normative. Given that halachos define the parameters of what is or is not permitted, they often deal with edge cases.
Ctrl Alt Del,
Knowing you need a lot of dental work, it might be a good idea to pursue better dental insurance. Sometimes plans are offered with “high” options that have greater allowances. On the other front, can you discuss your insurance and payment problems openly with the dentist? Perhaps you and s/he can come up with a treatment plan that prioritizes the most critical treatments and waits on less urgent issues? Also, the dentist may offer a payment plan so you can spread the cost out over multiple months.
My advice – don’t wait on any dental issues that are causing pain, or fillings that have fallen out. I put those issues off due to dental phobia and ended up with days of excruciating pain, an extraction and a root canal in a period of less than 2 weeks.
n0mesorah,
“Also in reality, viruses are good at wiping out civilizations.”
I don’t think anyone held that Covid would wipe out civilization.
“The cost of ignoring an outbreak is much higher than any single lockdown.”
False dilemma fallacy.
“Maybe we could all be generous enough to drop the topic.”
Lol.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“your timeline sounds similar to what I recall from Bourla’s book.”
Given that Moonshot is a 240-page infomercial for Pfizer written by its CEO, I’m not surprised that you find it saying that Pfizer was awesome and all badness came from others.
“Delta started like June”
And Pfizer spent June touting that its vaccines would protect against Delta.
“Then, Pfizer announced a booster idea (probably, several weeks before official request). So, Bourla says they immediately got angry responses (I do not recall now – public or private) as this seemingly did not match official line that Biden defeated the virus.”
They announced that they would try and develop a new booster to specifically target Delta (would need clinical trials, etc.) and stated that they’d soon seek FDA authorization for a third shot of the original stuff, which they did in August. And they said people would need that booster around 12 months after the initial series, which Fauci/NIAID/NIH had been saying was likely since April 2021. The only evidence I could find of an “angry” response was a news article in July stating “Federal officials” said a booster wasn’t necessary yet. But by the time Pfizer actually submitted the application, the FDA approved it ridiculously fast.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“But, when every say third argument is totally off-the-charts, it is sad.”
Do you think the “off-the-charts” arguments are exclusive to those critical of the pandemic response?
Kuvult,
“Indefensible borders from who? Lebanon, Syria, Jordan & Egypt have neither the will nor capability to go to war with Israel. The Gulf States have no interest in war with Israel.”
Do you think it’s wise to extrapolate that the future will always be like the present? Could none of these countries opt to build their military strength, form alliances, etc? Also, I find it interesting that you didn’t mention Hezbollah in this list. In the 2006 war, they didn’t even need to invade to cause the evacuation of a million Israeli civilians from their homes. And now their capabilities may be greater, and they have years of combat experience garnered from the Syrian civil war.
“The Palestinians with some automatic rifles & crude rockets are a non threat.”
Only if you dehumanize Israel. The Palestinians are well aware of the military power differential. They have not bombed the Knesset building, or the Dimona power plant, or conducted serious raids on Israeli military assets, or tried to seize territory. Instead they bomb pizza parlors and stab Yeshiva students bent over their gemaras, or men davening shacharis. They’ve crushed commuters with bulldozers, intentionally caused crashes, and commit random stabbings. They launch crude rockets, but at civilian population centers. None of these acts are designed to damage Israel’s military or its state infrastructure, or to conquer territory. They’re designed to try and make Israel unlivable for Jews.
“The only threat is Iran 1,100 miles away giving Israel plenty of time to react before they get near Israel (& truth be told Iran really has no interest in a war with Israel.)”
You mean the only “existential” threat. Suppose Iran develops nuclear weapons, and then begins a military buildup in Syria and Lebanon, threatening retaliation for any attack on its assets. How exactly would it help for Israel to have “plenty of time” to react?
“This is what bothers people about Israel (& Jews). Israel is the undeniable Superpower in the region where this time instead of a 6 day war it’d be max a 3 day war with a total victory for Israel.”
That’s not how things played out in 2006 when Israel finally invaded Lebanon to stop the Hezbollah missile attacks. Israel’s military may have the capability to achieve a rapid victory against its present neighbors, but to do so would require scorched earth tactics that would result in considerable civilian fatalities and damage to civilian infrastructure.
“Yet we’re crying to the world like Israel is on the verge of being destroyed & people resent that.”
That’s the anti-Israel parody of Israel’s position, not what Israel is saying itself. By the Palestinians, Israel is demanding safety and security for its citizens. When Israel mentions existential threats, it’s usually referring to Iran.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“Pfizer immediately publicized that and recommended boosters, and was first met with anger from Biden’s people (including Fauci) for bad politics, but then they came around to the facts.”
Not sure that the timeline bears this narrative out. Pfizer sought approval for a single booster on August 25, 2021, as the summer Delta wave was beginning to peak in the US. The FDA convened a public meeting on September 17th and approved the booster via EUA for higher risk populations by September 22, less than a month later, which is a remarkably fast turnaround time.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“By mistake (AKA hashgaha) my finger got stuck on a radio talk show in the car, and it helped me understand where is common & other like posters getting so worked up”
This is a nice example of an ad hominem fallacy. I don’t know if you’re lumping me in with the “worked up” posters, but I don’t listen to radio talk shows.
“The explanation for this informational virus seems simple”
Simple and wrong. But I agree that it’s fun to create broad theories with preconceived notions and little actual information while accusing your opponents of doing the same!
DaasYochid,
“He’s making a simple point that we shouldn’t raise expectations unnecessarily. Not sure what you are reading into his statements that is bothering you so much.”
I think it’s the Catch-22. If a young woman is judged worthy of getting a date by her resume and picture, then of course she will do whatever she can to make the resume and picture stand out. Otherwise she might not get a date at all. But then we criticize her for raising a young man’s expectations and making him “feel cheated”? It’s a no-win situation. Demanding pictures is immodest, and one who does so is cheating himself. And if he has such picky preferences on appearance that he must see a picture before agreeing to a date, I’d consider that a huge red flag for shemiras einayim issues.
Yabia Omer,
“I am claiming to be clean from any of the issues I mentioned.”
I think you are getting a strong reaction because your OP is coming across as hypocritical. “Hallel with Bracha on YH” and “Is Arabic Holy?” are examples of threads you opened seemingly with no purpose but to start flame wars. Other threads such as “Ashkenazic trauma” seemingly have little point other than to insult swaths of Jews. On what basis do you claim to be “clean” of these issues?
“But it got me thinking about just how much time and effort people put into things that are trivial.”
Why do you appoint yourself the arbiter of what is trivial and what is not? So what if people want to discuss socks? Socks are ubiquitous and are one of the more important comfort-related aspects of what we wear. If you have a child with sensory sensitivities, you’ll find that socks can bring on the biggest meltdowns. And that thread wasn’t even really about socks. If a thread topic doesn’t interest you or the conversation doesn’t seem productive or nice, skip it!
“And as soon as someone disagrees with a point of view, the go-to reaction is to insult them. Rather than saying I disagree with you because of a, b, c, instead the go-to is “you’re Reform, you’re open orthodox, you’re liberal….””
I agree and it’s unfortunate. I personally try to avoid labeling and insulting, and stick to the points of debate, and I hope that I’m successful most of the time. But is responding with condescension towards the entire CR really the best way to improve the discourse?
jackk,
Thanks for responding, and I appreciate the tone of this discussion.
“My Merriam-webster’s definition of draconian is “cruel” or “severe.” It is usually used to describe harsh laws, rules, or regulations.”
Yes, and I think that definition is apropos to the Covid lockdowns and mandates. Many of the mandates were davka issued by local governments due to perceived “non-compliance” by the populace, which was ironic because the strictest mandates were typically made in places where compliance was already high (and politically safe to do so). The messaging on the mandates consistently had an air of punishment.
“For example, would you add the adjective ‘draconian’ to police shutting down a highway for an hour due to an accident ? Nobody likes it, but everyone understands the need for it.”
Yes there is no objective definition of draconian, so those opposed to a law are more likely to call it draconian than supporters. But I don’t think “draconian” and “necessary” are necessarily oxymoronic. So perhaps we can drop the word draconian and I can ask, do you feel that the Covid mandates were quite harsh?
“I believe that the crux of the issue is whether the people ordering the draconian measures had a good faith belief – at that time – that the measures were justified to save people’s health and lives.”
I disagree. As the expression goes, the road to gehennom is paved with good intentions. Human society is extremely complex, and we deserved more than a one-dimensional ham-handed authoritarian response dictated by an extremely small set of voices with a narrow vision and financial conflicts of interest.
“Just because there were other alternatives or mitigations in no way refutes, disputes, counters or proves that the reasoning behind the draconian measured was incorrect.”
Nope, the world does not work like that. We even expect our young children to consider alternatives and mitigations to their actions.
“The pikuach nefesh argument can be applied because the mesirah was done in order to protect lives not to harm the synagogue.”
No it wasn’t. As I wrote above, the result of the call was a fine and citation.
“I do not deny people being bullied. I was bullied myself and I know of many instances of the Mitzvah of “bein adam lachaveiro” that metaphorically was flushed down the toilet.
It was a very big nebach of the whole situation.”It was not an unfortunate side-effect – bullying was actively encouraged by government officials at all levels. The Pharmaceutical companies provided wildly incorrect assessments of the effectiveness of their vaccines, and based on this information, the Biden Administration used the July 4th holiday in 2021 to declare “independence” from Covid. When the Delta wave subsequently rolled in, instead of dragging the Pharmaceutical executives into inquiries and investigating their claims, the Administration began a campaign of scapegoating those who declined vaccination or criticized any of the pandemic response orthodoxy.
“In order for us to get through Covid, we needed one plan of action.”
I think that holds true for traditional disaster response, e.g., after a hurricane or earthquake, when the response is straightforward and what is most important is proper coordination, efficiency, and speed. But we’re talking here about a global-scale situation lasting over a period of years when the parameters of the response and metrics of success are poorly understood.
“During the pandemic, the people responsible in the government had to decide a course of action.”
Or rather, provide the resources to facilitate those most directly responding to do their jobs well.
“I probably would want the advice of the person who has been at the head of infectious diseases in the US for the past 40 years.”
I’d want a multifaceted team that could devise 4-dimensional proposals to a 4-dimensional problem.
“The people who were not responsible could criticize all that they want. It was not their responsibility to safeguard the health and lives of the nation, and nobody would be blaming them for any deaths.”
I’ll let you fight this out with Always_Ask_Questions. He holds that it was indeed everyone’s responsibility, and those who disagree with him are to be blamed for the deaths.
“There was one man who shouldered the heavy responsibility and accepted all the criticisms. He did not shirk it although he knew that he would be castigated and made into the Republican’s party scapegoat.”
I really don’t understand the deification of Anthony Fauci. I think millions of people shouldered heavy responsibilities during the pandemic and made tremendous sacrifices. And nobody is immune to questions or critiques, whether their intentions were good or not.
Shlomo2,
“When you don’t have a full-time job, you’ve got lots more time on your hands to volunteer.
When you do have a full-time job, you do not.
And when both husband and wife are working full-time, as is common in Israel, you REALLY don’t have time for volunteering.”Nah, I know lots of couples married and both working full time who have tons of free time. They leave work and eat out, perform in orchestral groups, play sports, go to movies, etc. Certainly much more free time than parents at home with multiple young children.
“Only stating my opinion that the higher rate of volunteerism in the EY haredi community relative to the EY non-haredi community is not necessarily due to their moral superiority, but to their having more time on their hands.”
Nobody even claimed that it was moral superiority. The OP brought the statistics to counter those who call Chareidim parasites, Your response is to lecture us about how full time workers are the ones whose tax money pays for the social services the Chareidim use but presumably don’t pay for. Which is a more polite way of calling them parasites. If the Israeli government is hurting so bad for tax revenue, how about removing the barriers that prevent more Chareidim from getting better jobs?
Rocky,
“We say gadol hametzuve v’ose meimee sheinono metzuve- greater is one who does when he is commanded then one who volunteers. Those who serve the other members of society by serving in the army because they are commanded to by the government (and have kavana to help their fellow Jew) should be considered greater”
This reasoning is incorrect. Your statement is referring to mitzvos. One may be “obligated” by the secular state to serve in the army, though halacha does not obligate him. On the other hand, bikur cholim is a mitzva obligation, even if the secular state calls it volunteering.
1,
“Where does it say you can’t go “Kulah shopping” Muttar is mussar assur is assur.”
That’s an oversimplification. Why keep halachos at all? To serve Hashem. Should we serve Hashem like we love Him and want to do the best we can, or like the halachos are loathsome to us and we seek every out we can get to lessen our burden of having a G-d, C”V? Sometimes the act of asking a shaila when we know the potential answers, by putting the decision outside of ourselves, is a means to better serve Hashem. Shopping for the answer we want is better than not asking a shaila at all, but does it show more of a desire to do Hashem’s will, or our own?
jackk,
“I refer to my previous post on this topic.”
Ok, I’ll get to that in a sec.
“Everyone here commenting lived through the Mageifah of Covid, which is why I am surprised that people can be so sure of themselves on either side.”
I’m expressing my own opinions based on that experience – not sure where I stated that I’m so sure of myself.
“If you are going to call the measures “draconian” or “mesirah” ,expelled, bullied, fired – you have already taken a stand on the issue .”
I think the vast majority of people who lived through the lockdowns, closures, mandates, etc. would agree the policies were draconian. Unless they liked staying at home, waiting an hour in icy wind on line to get into the grocery store, davening b’yechidus and having schools closed. The disagreement arises on whether these draconian measures were necessary, right, valid, legal, effective, harmful, and whether any consideration was given to alternatives or mitigations.
As far as mesirah – a Jew calling non-Jewish authorities on a synagogue is straight up mesirah. And given that the penalty was a citation and fine, I don’t see how even a twisted pikuach nefesh argument could be applied for making that call. Also, do you deny that people were expelled from their shuls, schools, or jobs based on Covid policies? Do you deny that people were bullied? Maybe your opinion is that the expulsions and bullying were necessary and good, but to argue on whether it actually happened or not? Lets stay in reality.
From your first post you referenced:
“I agree that there should be a auditing of what went on during covid. But because we know more about covid now, it is too easy to look back and second guess people for their errors and inactions done while the pandemic was raging. “
Much of the criticism of these policies is not being made now with the benefit of hindsight, but was made early on during the pandemic and was suppressed. And the criticism goes way beyond the aspects of the response that require knowledge of the virus itself. Knowing whether Covid is transmitted by aerosols, droplets, or from contact with surfaces doesn’t inform us on whether it’s a good idea to bully, scapegoat, deceive, or ignore the impacts of policies.
Yabia Omer,
“For example, giving a Hechsher to water that comes directly from filtered water pipes (zero chashash for grapes, etc.). Have you ever heard of “kosher” water??”
Is bottled water not heated at some point during the process? Even so, it’s true that plain bottled water does not require a hechsher. But why are you ragging on the kashrus agencies when it’s the bottling companies’ decision to get the hechsher on their products?
“Another example is a Hashgacha requiring the food manufacturer to use ingredients/coponents only with THEIR Hashgacha. In other words, Hashgacha Gimmel requiring a muffin manufacturer to use flour, sugar etc etc with Gimmel, and not from equally-reliable Daled. That is not Halacha, that is money.”
Ah yes, those Jooz and their money. Can you think of other reasons a hashgacha might limit the ingredients to products they can personally vouch for?
Yabia Omer,
“50% of the decisions, operations and Hashkafa of most hashgachas have nothing to do with Halacha. You guys know that right?”
86% of the statistics thrown out on the CR are completely made up. You guys know that right?
Always_Ask_Questions,
“see the starting post, where common demands accountability for covid protection measures. He possibly modified his position now to only blame those who “terrorize people in other communities”, which is a welcome adjustment.”
There’s no stira. When the OP called for accountability for the draconian mandates themselves it referred to governmental bodies that enacted those policies. When the OP called for accountability for those who committed mesira, expelled, bullied, etc. it was in reference to members of our community who did those things.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“So, you can’t call people names for holding by it.”
What names did he call people who held by “being careful”?
Yserbius123,
“Besides, “his” pandemic decisions were the unanimous decisions of virtually all of the several dozen Rabbonim in his community.”
Unanimous and “virtually all” are not the same thing.
Yserbius123,
“I define careless in way that [Always_Ask_Questions] described his/her shul.”
But he didn’t define it. He just stated they were careless. Would you say the shul I described in my post was careless?
Yserbius123,
“Are you saying that you don’t believe that a shul exists where the klal was careless about Corona during the height of the pandemic?”
How do you define careless? I know of a shul that closed a little while after Purim 2020, and then reopened in time for Shavuos. Seating was spread out so tables were 6ft apart, doors to the lobby and exits to outside from the beis medrash were left open for increased ventilation, attendance stayed within the government-imposed limits, hand sanitizer was placed on every table, boxes of masks were provided, and signs were posted directing people to wear masks indoors. But the shul did not actively throw anyone out who wasn’t wearing a mask, so some daveners wore, some did not. And no drastic changes to the normal manner of the davening were made (e.g., having the baal koreh take all of the aliyos) This shul was maligned intensely within the community for daring to reopen, and for being “careless” once other places started reopening. Some mosrim took it upon themselves to harass the shul with repeated calls to the health department, including one made on Shabbos intended to disrupt the davening.
smerel,
“I was being sarcastic.”
Sorry, that went completely over my head.
smerel,
“what about the destruction to the sacred belief in science”
I have to object strongly to this notion. Sacred belief? Since when is science sacred? It is a systematic method of study of the physical world around us, pursued by human beings and subject to the limitations of human beings. And what does belief have to do with science? What you are referring to as Science is a modern day avoda zara.
“those who tried to control us using the lines of “follow the science” or “pro health” policies about what turned out to be junk science with the censored and marginalized voices being correct after all? American trust in scientists plummeted like a rock after covid.”
With the astonishing amount of conflict of interest present in the profit driven corporate-governmental health apparatus, American trust should rightly plummet.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“In one shul I daven, there are people who were mostly careless. I feel sometimes that I am at a smoker’s club as every couple of minutes you hear a chronic cough, mostly young men. In another shul, where people preferred vaccines to natural immunity and this happens way less. “
Putting aside that I find it hard to believe you personally would go into such a shul, given your singular obsession with the R rate and that you once posted that you spent most of the pandemic so isolated that you didn’t even really have much experience with persistent mask wearing, I find it odd that you maintain a double standard on usage of anecdotes. When Syag Lchochma observed that the shul near her that had the least restrictive Covid policies had no Covid fatalities, you dismissed it out of hand as anecdotal. But here you happily throw out an anecdote. But it’s not even a good anecdote, as your observations could be biased in numerous ways. For example, your ears were likely more attuned to coughing in the shul you deemed to be less safe. Or perhaps both shuls had 3 coughers in attendance but at one shul they were right behind you and at the other they were across the room. Perhaps you attended one shul in the summer when coughing was less prevalent overall, and the other in the fall when coughing was more prevalent overall.
Shimon Nodel,
“No, he’s supposed to go outside and look for three more people to complete the minyan, talking freely while doing so, then come back and say yishtabach and immediately start barchu without waiting for his three captives to catch up”
1. It is permissible to interrupt pesukei d’zimra to prevent a loss, to respond to a greeting, etc. I think attempting to secure a minyan for shacharis would fall into this category of permissible interruptions.
2. Captives? That’s quite the negative outlook.
3. What about tircha d’tzibbur? I don’t think it would be permissible to wait.Always_Ask_Questions,
“At this point, he wonders – based on reading YWN – whether he is “frum” enough and wonders whether he needs to spend an extra 30 minutes of drive to pick up chalav isroel yogurt and milk, so that he will either learn less, has one less surgery, or disregard either the wife or one of the kids. What would be your advice?”
My advice would be, if a person truly believes that his derech is correct and he is following it to the best of his ability, then why wouldn’t he have enough confidence in his derech that a CR thread would rattle him so much? I seriously doubt your hypothetical accomplished and busy man would actually be rattled by anything on the CR. But if he is, he should assess why. Did he read something he never heard or considered before, and is concerned he’s missing something halachically? He should look into it and perhaps ask a shaila of a rav who knows him well. Is he really so sure that his chosen derech is correct? That’s the most likely reason he’d get rattled and think about making irrational changes to his life (the yetzer hara works on everything). But if he is indeed sure and still gets rattled, maybe he lacks the confidence or assertiveness to be able to deal with others who have different ideas in a healthy way?
Always_Ask_Questions,
“My mesorah, going back to Rambam, says that Y will only get schar if hashgaha made him unable to earn his own living. Otherwise, the whole reward goes to Z. Otherwise, it is not logical to spuriously decide that one does not want to support himself.”
If you want to invent a polemical “mesorah”, that’s your business, but maybe leave the Rambam out of it.
Yabia Omer,
“Is the strict opinion always the better opinion? Is being Meikil inherently worse?”
No, of course not, and there are numerous examples that can be brought where almost everyone here agrees. Based on the thread title, however, you seem to want a divisive discussion. So which halachos were you thinking of? AAQ has already filled in your gap with his favorite.
Participant,
“But the level of questions and skepticism aimed at candidate demanding they defend their physical health or stating they’re too old is very distasteful and extremely antithetical to Torah values. [I’m obviously not referring to someone’s mental abilities.]”
Some of the noise is political, each side throwing as much mud as they can at the other. Some of the noise is based on ageism (ok Boomer), and the lack of respect that American culture in general shows towards elders is certainly antithetical to Torah values. However, some of the concerns are due to what the electorate views as the president or other elected officials’ roles are. For example, the ability to absorb and process complex information and make good decisions is the most important role of a president, but presidents are also expected to go out and “sell” their agendas. This role typically requires high energy and endurance, and good speaking skills.
Participant,
“I reread my post several times and it is quite clear. Quite stunning and horrifying how utterly stupid these posters who can’t comprehend it is.”
I read your OP as well, and I doubt it was as clear as you think. And even if you wrote the most cogent post in the history of the Internet, does that give you the right to insult people just because they don’t respond the way you want them to?
AviraDeArah,
“from what I’ve read, there isn’t a clear understanding that bridges the gap between an abusive incident(or several) and the deep, hellish trauma that follows it, especially in non-violent circumstances.”
I’m guessing you’ve not read any accounts from victims themselves – many are quite articulate. And behavior can be violent even if it doesn’t leave a black eye.
DaMoshe,
“A baal teshuvah, whose father doesn’t want him to become frum?”
A baal teshuva should acquire a rav for himself and in that way learn a mesorah.
AviraDeArah,
“It’s not a pasuk in chumash.”
Wait, what?
Always_Ask_Questions,
“Please show me halochos that say that being direct with people is always the right thing to do.”
Oooh a two-fer of argumentative fallacies in one sentence! This is both a straw man and shifting the burden of proof. Please show me where I said that being direct with people is “always the right thing to do”, and then show me halachos that say if your fellow is sinning, you should just watch and see how it goes for him.
“But let’s say the parent tried it 3 times already and the kid just evades it … [t]hen, yes, let them have their innocent fun and monitor for the signs that something bad is happening.”
Wow, at that point it is certainly not innocent fun, no matter what they’re actually doing online.
“Are you afraid that this violate R Gershom herem on reading letters? Then, just monitor IP addresses or inform the kid electronically as businesses do: “this device (network) is subject to monitoring”. “
Maybe, but on a more simple level, children deserve respect too. Even if you tell a child that their device is subject to monitoring, if they evade a clear rule and nothing happens for a good long while, they will assume they “got away with it” and their activities are not actively monitored. And if they find out 6 months later that you’ve been reading their chats, searches, etc. and never told them, that could humiliate them.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“I am trying to analyze expected outcome. If the parents are “one trick ponies” and are continuing using same approach, then you should expect that and evaluate whether your information will do any good for anyone.”
This is simply a reiteration of the point I questioned. It is presumptuous to assume that an outsider can forecast expected outcomes with any degree of confidence. Good luck forecasting outcomes in one’s own home! It is disrespectful to the parents to declare them “one trick ponies”, and to withhold information because you personally don’t like their rules or how they’re enforced effectively disempowers them and undermines their authority. Of course this is not referring to abusive situations, but a parent locking down or confiscating a computer or phone is not abusive.
This is not to say I advocate for outsiders to just go run and tattle on children for anything they do. I agree with you that a rav should be consulted for how to proceed in this situation. An outside observer may not have all of the facts. One must be careful regarding lashon hara even in a parent/child relationship, and tochacha must be tailored to the individual receiving it, and must be done out of love. But to davka withhold information from parents because you don’t like their stance on electronics and consider them to be unthinking oafs who would just double down on the rules you don’t like is not a valid factor in this decision.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“I would ask a _competent_ Rav whether to inform the parents.”
Agreed.
“On the other hand, they are failing and it is not clear that doubling-down will help.”
So if you feel the parents aren’t perfect, it justifies disempowering them? And who then gets the responsibility for the child? The state? The child himself?
“For example, if kids break through filters on a computer and parents discover it: if they close the break or confront the kid, he will find another way and parents will never know about it. It may be a better idea to monitor the break and see whether this is benign or not.”
You think surreptitiously spying on a child’s rule-breaking online activities is a better parenting approach than direct conversation about what’s going on? I can’t say I agree.
“So, in this case, maybe a Rav and friends can help the kid using some other approach instead of encouraging parents to follow the path that is failing. For example, maybe the kid has questions that need to be answered, or he needs more warmth and understanding.”
Perhaps, but it is the role of the parents to make that decision, is it not?
Gadolhadorah,
“UJM/Syag: With respect, I would 110% support intervention with the parents or others in a life/death matter.”
Well, I’m glad you at least support not letting a kid literally die.
”
don’t touch the eitz hadas since you might come to eat from it
B’tayavon”
Explain.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“many, maybe not all, income based benefits require or at least presume that the person gets them only if/when he is not able to find work.”
Not true. Most benefits are based on income thresholds, which is not the same thing as unemployment. Many households eligible for benefits are indeed working/earning incomes, but the amounts are below the qualifying threshold. See my first response to our $12,000/year tangent above.
“2nd problem – Y’D, not just Rambam, paskening not to take non-Jewish charity with wording “not to depend on people”. See precise loshon above.”
This would seem to also apply to child tax credits, transportation benefits, etc. as well, so it does not answer why you see income based benefits as distinct from these other benefits.
“Mu inartful/exaggerated communist comparison was about people taking funds and mis-directing them to the purposes the givers did not intend.”
I’m not sure you’re applying correct reasoning here. If TANF, WIC, SNAP, Medicaid, et al. benefits are used to provide for the material and medical needs of a family, then they are being directed appropriately. Why the family qualifies for the benefits is not relevant to the purpose of the benefits – just that the family does. An example of misdirected benefits would be someone with a job collecting unemployment, which is fraud.
Your focus in on Torah learners, that they shouldn’t be learning if they collect benefits they are entitled to, but your arguments can be also used to tell janitors and cashiers that they should not marry and have children, or tell wives that they cannot stay home with the kids, etc.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“This is no different, conceptually, from the communist shitah that they know better than the property owners how to manage it. Government provide funds for English textbooks, and we should take those. They provide transportation and let’s take it, and government has no hesaron if students have Torah classes in addition to English, as cost of transportation is the same. Government gives out child credit, so we can take it. This is different from government (presumably reflecting common sentiment) provide funds to help poor people”
All of these examples are government collecting taxes and distributing funds as they see fit, whether or not the taxpayer agrees. The communist smear can be applied to each and every one of them, but you declare them “kosher.” What makes income based benefits different?
Always_Ask_Questions,
“But I looked up above and I stated at minimum thta I am OK with in-laws and gevirim supporting learning and you stam responded that you don’t believe me. “
I was basing that on a previous conversation on the CR regarding in-laws being compelled to support. It’s very possible that I was having that debate with someone else (maybe CTLAWYER or Gadolhadorah) and my memory erroneously ascribed their posts to you. I apologize.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“right, and this is why I enjoy talking with them.”
But you barely responded to them.
“Maybe, they saw this post as a polemic piece and thought that the person who asked a question is the type that gets impressed by Rambams.”
Exactly what I suggested earlier in the conversation.
“And I went to their site specifically looking for a kosher lomdishe place – a business beis din in the most famoous yeshiva. So, maybe this is just a mismatch. “
I don’t think you’re going to find much of the lomdishe learning of Lakewood on Web sites.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“Right now, unfortunately, I do not stop at that.”
“I am afraid that I would not (and most other people are probably in the same position).”
Why then would you advocate for a “shitta” that you openly acknowledge that you cannot follow, nor do you expect the vast majority of the olam to be able to follow? The end result of your advice to “Lakewood” would be a tremendous loss of Torah.
“As with everyone, I get my masorah from my Parents and Teachers. Most of them encouraged independent thinking and asking questions.”
So it’s not that your parents and teachers told you that your family/community shitta is to hold vehemently to a specific Rambam in opposition to how others pasken, but that you can be an “independent thinker” and pasken for yourself?
besalel,
“Are we ok with the state of education in our yeshivos?”
This and your subsequent questions would seem to be better answered by the parents of yeshiva students regarding their specific yeshiva than a nebulous “we” regarding nebulous “yeshivos”. Part of having an adult conversation about a topic is avoiding unhelpful generalizations. The quality of education offered in a yeshiva depends on the yeshiva, and that’s not a brand new issue that cropped up in this generation. And that’s not what the NYT article was attacking: yeshivos that opt to minimize secular studies by design.
Always_Ask_Questions,
“so you are saying that a person who expresses himself to these mitzvos is somehow an inferior person, provided he “only” learns 70% of his available time?!”
Nobody has said that as far as I have read. Do you feel as though full time learners look down on you, and that’s why you want to clap back at them? I’m not sure you realize this, but I think everybody who is arguing with you works part or full time. And your vision of Lakewood as a whole “group” full of people learning full time and mooching off the government in perpetuity, and only deigning to teach badly if their learning doesn’t go well, is fantasy. Most learners start working, many after only a few years of learning in kollel.
Here’s where I’m coming from. Torah learning is precious and vital, and there is no comparison between learning an hour a day, or half a day, to full immersion in learning. I say that even though I unfortunately didn’t learn in a yeshiva and I work a full time job. If we are truly concerned about the klal, we should do what we can to support those learning to prolong their learning as much as possible. Just as learners get a share in the mitzvos of honest weights, paying workers on time, etc. via learning those halachos and their details, we workers can get a share in their limud Torah by supporting their learning. Learners deserve our hakaras hatov, not our derision.
Re: Benefits – their intention is to foster healthy families and communities, and inasmuch as Torah learning is the backbone of a healthy Jewish community, than if the benefits help Jews learn Torah than they are fulfilling their purpose even in eyes of the government. Just like if benefits help Native Americans maintain their traditions, help students finish grad school while raising a family, etc. Yes there are those who are politically opposed to benefits for various reasons (redistribution of wealth is bad, the gap between benefits and a livable wage creates dependency, benefits buy votes, etc.), and others who oppose them due to racism or antisemitism and a perception that they disproportionately help the groups they hate. If someone doesn’t like it for political reasons, then his fight is with the laws, not with his fellow citizens, and he can express himself via voting, supporting candidates who hold like him, or running for office himself. If someone’s a racist or antisemite, than whatever, I’m not concerned about chillul Hashem in his eyes – he already hates Hashem. If the benefits go away he’ll find something else to be upset about regarding Jews.