Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Stated differently, if you took 100 quarters and flipped each one of them 10 times, you could expect that one of the times you would have either 10 heads or 10 tails. If you do it with one quarter though, it is so unlikely that it will happen, that you can still conclude that it is weighted with reasonable certainty.”
I don’t think that is correct. If the percentage of weighted quarters in circulation is less than 1% (and I would guess it is whole lot less than that) and you picked up the coin at random, then it more likely that you just got lucky with your flipping than that the coin is weighted.
This is like the urban legend of the young man that shot himself after testing positive for AIDs. Only .04% of the tests produced false positives, but that number was still much larger than the percentage of people with AIDs in society. In other words there were more false positives with this test than true positives.
Daas and Sam,
I feel a bit like a broken record. With respect to hair there are TWO dinim:
1. There is a chiyuv for married women to cover hair learnt out from a posuk in the Torah in the Gemara in Kesubos. It is doraisa according to most poskim. This chiyuv has NOTHING to do with Erva.
2. There is a separate Gemara in Berachos that says that a woman’s hair could be Erva. This is derived from a posuk in Shir Hashirim and is d’rabanan. It is also, according to the R’Moshe and the Aruch Hashulcan cited above, dependent on the norm in the frum society. Therefore if women violate the chiyuv in point 1, there won’t be any problem of saying krias shma from point 2.
According to most poskim, these two Gemaras are not connected at all.
mdd,
I cannot find the sources for what we typically think of as tznius standards (I can’t find my notes), but my recollection is that some of our tznius standards are regular takanos d’rabbanan (I think the body falls into that category) while others are “only” daas yehudis. The latter category are the customs of frum women and I don’t see why they can’t change both l’chumra and l’kula.
A minimal hair covering according to almost all poskim is not daas yehudis but d’oraisa (or at the very least d’rabbanan).
I don’t think she would say “become frum” but “learn Torah.” It sounds like she wants mandatory Torah classes in high schools (or maybe in the Army) and she wants the Chareidim to serve in the army or civil service.
DaasYochid,
This is simply incorrect. Read carefully the teshuva from R’Moshe you cited. The Rambam and the Rif hold that hair is not erva for shma and still hold there is a chiyuv to cover hair.
??????? ?????”? ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ??’ ?”? ??? ???????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ???”? ?? ??? ???? ?????, ????? ?????? ?”? ????? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ?????. ???”? ???? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ?”? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ?????”?, ????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??? ???? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ????, ??? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ????,
The standards for kriyas shma and tefillah are higher than the standards for just walking around or seeing (e.g. one can permissibly view one’s spouse in a state of undress but cannot daven in front of her).
The issur of a married woman not covering her hair at all is separate from dinei erva and is learnt out from a possuk by Sotah. It is d’oraisa. See the Kesubos 72a-b. The rest of what we normally understand as tznius is d’rabbanan.
DaasYochid,
Now I am misunderstanding you. I have been trying to say all along that when it comes to covering hair there is a separate chiyuv regardless of erva status.
Therefore, even if hair is not erva for krias sh’ma, a married woman still must cover her hair.
Recently, a new MK from the Yesh Atid party spoke in the Knesset, stating her goals as follows (she had discussed a story in the Gemara in Kesubos about Rabbi Rechumei who used to come home once a year on erev Yom Kippur, and one year he forgot. His wife shed one tear and the roof upon which Rabbi Rechumei was davening collapsed and he died):
“I learn that often, in a dispute, both sides are right, and until I understand that both my disputant and I, both the woman and Rabbi Rechumei, feel that they are doing the right thing and are responsible for the home. Sometimes we feel like the woman, waiting, serving in the army, doing all the work while others sit on the roof and study Torah; sometimes those others feel that they bear the entire weight of tradition, Torah, and our culture while we go to the beach and have a blast. Both I and my disputant feel solely responsible for the home. Until I understand this, I will not perceive the problem properly and will not be able to find a solution. I invite all of us to years of action rooted in thought and dispute rooted in mutual respect and understanding.
I aspire to bring about a situation in which Torah study is the heritage of all Israel, in which the Torah is accessible to all who wish to study it, in which all young citizens of Israel take part in Torah study as well as military and civil service. Together we will build this home and avoid disappointment.”
Translation comes from The Jewish Week.
Daas Yochid,
First of all, as R’Moshe explains in that very teshuva (although there is another one where he gives a longer explanation), the chiyuv to cover hair is not what makes hair erva. Hair only becomes erva if people actually cover it (so today, unlike when that teshuva was written, in most frum communities hair would be erva).
Second of all, R’Moshe does not say that most frum women uncover their arms, he is talking about a case where there are some frum women (or at least women going to shul) who have uncovered arms.
Finally, R’Moshe is discussing davening in front of uncovered arms, not whether or not the women themselves are allowed to walk around that way (i.e. in the market, not in shul). I don’t think R’Moshe means to argue on the mishna in Kesuvos that clearly states that covering arms is Daas Yehudis.
Daas Yochid,
The “standard of the day” I am referring to is not based on the non-Jews or the non-frum Jews.
Daas Yehudis means the the norms of frum women in a frum community. Furthermore, there are also some levels of tznius that are governed by takanos d’Rabbanan; but the covering of arms is Daas Yehudis. So if one would live in a frum community where the frum women will bare their arms it would be mutar.
A minimal hair-covering according to most poskim is d’oraisa and it certainly wouldn’t change based on the communities norms (but the more extensive hair coverings we have in our communities are Daas Yehudis).
Daas Yochid,
First of all, why do you think it is only l’chumra and not l’kula too?
Second, you are missing the point. Women don’t have to cover their hair because of erva, they have to cover their hair because of a gzeiras hakasuv which applies even if there is no chashash erva. That gzeiras hakasuv applies in all public places and regardless of societal norms.
Snowbunny,
Chas v’shalom, I did not mean that at all. I was just trying to point that marrying cousins might not cause genetic issues the way everyone is assuming.
But yes it is probably safest, percentage-wise, to marry a sefardi (or a Ger).
Reb Doniel,
I have noticed the high occurrences of developmental disabilities among frum Jews as well. However I think it is more likely an illusion of an much higher birthrate (making it more likely for a family to have a child with special needs) and less abortion.
Daas,
The standards of daas yehudis (which governs most of tznius) depend on the norms of the society a women is in. If in her society it is normal for a women to uncover her arms in front of other women, that would be mutar. On the other hand, if in her society it is normal for a women to wear a burkah, then she must wear a burkah as well.
Hair covering is different. No matter what society a married women lives in, she must cover a portion of her hair (covering all the hair is daas yehudis). Even if one lives in a society where hair is not erva (as R’Moshe held was the case in America in the 60s), there is a still a chiyuv to cover.
I am not a geneticist but I suspect that there is some confusion in this thread between the causing of genetic disorders and the propagation of genetic disorders.
Because Jews in the Diaspora were always isolated minorities who married among themselves genetic diseases were propagated down through the generations and not diluted through marriage outside the minority. That doesn’t mean that the marrying of cousins caused the disease, it means it just made it easier to stay around.
Daas,
The reason it is not a simple kal v’chomer is that there are two dinim. The chiyuv to cover hair is a separate din with a different limud than the chiyuv to cover other parts of the body (although the reason governing other parts of the body applies to hair as well).
A woman has to cover her hair in public even if that public consists entirely of other women, and even if she lives in a society where it is the norm to walk around with uncovered hair.
My knowledge of how frum women conduct themselves at pools comes entirely from reports from my wife.
Daas Yochid,
The chiyuv for a married woman to cover her hair is different than other types of tznius (it is debatable whether it even belongs under that category). Which is why chareidi married women today will cover their hair when at the swimming pool even though they are uncovering other body parts that are normally covered.
Do you have a source that the regular heter of a bathhouse applies to a married woman’s hair covering as well?
I am not sure what a “litivishe shidduch” means, but I do know that there is a very wide variety of mindsets among bochurim in the best Yeshivos. There are definitely some that would view Sheirut L’umi as a plus and something that distinguishes you from (what they perceive as) the masses.
Contact Project Inspire. That is their raison d’etre.
We might be taking Kimchis’ statement to literally. She may have only meant that walls never saw her hair outside of the times when it would be halachically necessary (i.e. preparing for mikvah).
It is less tzniusdik to have uncovered hair in a public place like a bathhouse than one’s home. Pashtus she referenced her home where m’ikkar hadin it is mutar to walk around with uncovered hair, to show that even where it was mutar she was machmir. She wasn’t saying, however, that she covered her hair when doing so would compromise on some other area of halacha.
If I remember correctly from my younger years, if you got caught you were thrown out of the dorm.
Daas,
I said it will “come off” as paranoia (to the general Jewish public), not that it is paranoia. I do think that it is reasonable to be wary of possible underlying ulterior motives. I happen to also think that precautions can be taken against this possibility without drawing a line in the sand, but I don’t think it is “illegitimate” to hold otherwise.
Veltz,
So am I.
Daas Yochid,
I don’t understand why you think my argument was close-minded.
Oomis,
For the most part, whether or not something is “erva” depends on the customs of the community. Any body part that is normally covered is erva if uncovered, therefore scalp is certainly erva in our communities. According the R’Moshe pshat in “saar b’isha erva” is that the Gemara is teaching a chidush that hair could have the status of erva even though it isn’t skin.
There is a separate chiyuv for a married woman to cover her hair (not because of erva) learnt out from the posuk by Sotah stating that the Cohanim uncover the head of the Sotah. The posuk uses the the term “rosh” not “saar” so I can hear an argument that it should apply to a bald head as well.
It doesn’t have any makor in Chazal and I don’t think anyone knows how or why historically the custom arose. There are various theories out there but they are speculation.
Golfer,
Are you normally thankful and appreciative of being sad? Happiness is a sense of a satisfaction with life the Universe and everything.
I don’t want to get into a semantic argument. What I mean (and everyone else as far as I know) by “simchas hachaim” IS being thankful and appreciative for just being alive.
Dash,
Don’t confuse terminology with concept. We express Simchas HaChaim every morning when we say Modeh Ani and Elokai Neshomo.
Torah613,
I think that any honest explanation of the Chareidi position will come off as paranoid.
Not having Simchas HaChaim is a chisaron in hakoras hatov to HKBH who gave us life.
My guess is that the R”Y Shlita either misunderstands what the Government is trying to do, or, more likely, is afraid that this is only a first step in the implementation of a long-dormant goal of eliminating the Yeshiva World.
The company is called “Servus.”
Make sure to get the ones with fabric lining. They cost about $60.
The ones who are bright but can’t sit are exactly the ones that should become doctors, lawyer, etc.
To become a serious talmid chochom you need both your top and your bottom working.
I have high overshoes (as high as any boot) that only have rubber on the outside but have material on the inside so they go on and off easily. They are more expensive than the old fashioned rubber ones but it is worth it.
I would post a link but I don’t think the mods would let it through.
Get a solid pair of overshoes instead. They protect you shoes and you don’t have to get any floors dirty.
From my experience, in general, the very brightest minds (of those who have zitzfleish) do stay in Klei Kodeish. However those a little less than the very best feel they are too smart to teach elementary school and if they aren’t going to be a rosh yeshivah or rosh kollel they may as well not take tuition breaks and become lawyers, doctors, entrepreneurs etc.
The reality is that there are very few Rosh Yeshiva/Rosh Kollel positions and fewer still where you don’t need to have a close family connection.
The normal breakdown line between Rishonim and Acharonim, as I understand it, is the Spanish Expulsion which ended the Sephardi Mesorah. The separation line for Ashkenazim is harder to pin down.
The primary difference between Rishonim and Acharonim is mesorah. Rishonim explain Gemaras and the like on the basis of mesorah, i.e. the traditional understanding of the text as they received it from their teachers. This doesn’t mean that Rishonim don’t ever try and prove one reading as better than the other but for the most part they have an approach via mesorah.
Among the Rishonim there are various lines of tradition. So Rashi is part of one line, the Rambam part of another and the Ramban another still. Occasionally Rashi will argue on his mesorah because he feels its approach untenable for some reason. The Baalei Hatosafos were even more inclined to argue (or maybe we tend to have the arguments recorded more). Similarly, while usually the Rambam’s approach will mirror the Ri Migash, there will be occasional differences.
The Achronim look back not at their personal mesorah, but at the writing of the Rishonim and then try to determine what is right on each given issue as opposed to following a general mesorah for everything.
The normal breakdown line between Rishonim and Acharonim, as I understand it, is the Spanish Expulsion which ended the Sephardi Mesorah. The separation line for Ashkenazim is harder to pin down.
The primary difference between Rishonim and Acharonim is mesorah. Rishonim explain Gemaras and the like on the basis of mesorah, i.e. the traditional understanding of the text as they received it from their teachers. This doesn’t mean that Rishonim don’t ever try and prove one reading as better than the other but for the most part they have an approach via mesorah.
Among the Rishonim there are various lines of tradition. So Rashi is part of one line, the Rambam part of another and the Ramban another still. Occasionally Rashi will argue on his mesorah because he feels its approach untenable for some reason. The Baalei Hatosafos were even more inclined to argue (or maybe we tend to have the arguments recorded more). Similarly, while usually the Rambam’s approach will mirror the Ri Migash, there will be occasional differences.
The Achronim look back not at their personal mesorah, but at the writing of the Rishonim and then try to determine what is right on each given issue as opposed to following a general mesorah for everything.
TLKY,
The Gemara in Kesubos indicates that the honor due a Kallah is one step below that of a King and a King was praised by the Chachomim for giving honor to a Kallah. It is hardly a stretch for Klal Yisroel to choose to show this honor by standing when she enters the room.
Furthermore there is an express mitzvah in Chazal to be m’sameach a Kallah. Is it not reasonable to think that a Kallah might feel a little simcha when everyone rises for her when she walks down the aisle? And shouldn’t those sitting down (and especially if everyone were to sit down) be worried that by doing so they might lessen the Kallah’s simcha?
Just as an aside, I believe the source for this idea is Rav Dessler not Rav Hirsch.
TLKY,
The word minhag means custom. I.e. what is done. Most sources that record minhagim are telling you something that is commonly done and then trying to find reasons for them after the fact.
My source for the minhag for standing for the Kallah is that it has been done at every single chuppa I have ever attended (in America, Canada and Eretz Yisroel).
Mod-42,
I don’t understand those who deliberately do not stand. As you wrote it is unclear whether Kallah domeh L’Malka, and it is certainly clear that Chazal gave a Kallah tremendous import and Kavod. It is well established that standing up is a sign of respect and kavod.
At the very least there are respectable grounds for the minhag of standing, so why would some people be porush from this minhag?
Oomis,
I think that in this case the English Calendar might be more significant because that is what lead to the correlation being noticed by the media and the world wide (which wouldn’t have happened if it was only the Hebrew dates that coincided).
That being said. They both died on Erev Shabbos Parshas Yisro. Pearl H”YD was murdered on the 19th of Shevat and Koch died on the 21st of Shevat.
Git Meshige,
3 years ago when Ed Koch erected his headstone he chose to use it as a declaration that he was a proud Jew. To do so he used the last words of Daniel Pearl H”YD. Pearl was also a non-frum Jew who chose to affirm his Jewish before he died al kiddush Hashem.
Ed Koch sought to make his lasting memory be an emulation of Daniel Pearl and Koch died on the same day as Pearl, a 1/365 chance.
Daniel Pearl is in Gan Eden and I am sure that after the necessary time Ed Koch will be there too.
Ed Koch had his headstone engraved over 3 years ago. On his headstone he has the first posuk of Shema in English and Hebrew. He also has a quote. The quote is the last words of Daniel Pearl HY”D “My Father was Jewish, My Mother was Jewish, I am Jewish.”
Daniel Pearl was murdered 11 years ago today.
That sure sounds like hashgocha pratis to me.
Please enlighten me, because I have never read anyone who had a favorable view of them. My issue with protesting is that it (1) forgets that we are golus and it isn’t our place to shout at the goyim; and (2) any gains through protesting creates losses in increasing anti-semitism.
In Quebec the government gives some funding but there is still substantial tuition coming out of parents’ pockets.
My wife and I found the book “Parenting with Love and Logic” to be very useful.
“Lummox” is the proper spelling.
Protesting serves no purpose. Nobody’s mind was ever changed by people shouting slogans, it just makes Jews look bad.
What makes you say that standing up for the Kallah is goyish?
Standing up is a standard traditional way of showing kavod. There are Talmudic sources that great kavod is given to a bride (and groom) on her wedding day.
???? ???? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???????? ????? ??? ?????. ??? [???] ??? ??. ???? ?? ??? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ??? ????? ????”? ?????? ????
???? ???? ??? ????? ? ??? ?
?”?: ??????? ?? ??? ????? ???, ??? ??? ????? ??? ?????. ???? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ???, ??????? ?????.
?????? ?? ?? ?”?
TLKY,
Yes, at least l’chumra. Imagine if Berel decides to con someone by “selling” his house. So Berel finds a Shmerel and tells him he needs money quick, “if you give me cash you can have my house for 100 grand” and the house is worth 200 grand. Shmerel, not realizing that Berel is just planning on keeping the money and not leaving the house, gives Berel 100 grand in cash and they sign a shtar. When Shmerel shows up a week later with his U-haul, Berel says “I don’t know what you are talking about.”
When Shmerel takes his shtar to Bais Din, does he get the house or does he only get his money back?