besalel

the little i know: my point was not that the arabs need to stay and have a vote – it is that if they stay, they get to vote – even if that means that voting will result in a state that is totally different from the one that exists now (or as you describe it, they are destroying the state).

Let us pretend for a moment that a 95% majority of Israeli Jews woke up tomorrow and decided that they wanted to change the law in Israel and they elect leaders that pass a law that effectively razes the Kotel to the ground r”l and in its place, builds a giant mosque. Would you then say that Israeli Jews no longer have the right to vote?

My point is that in a democracy, so long as you work through the legal channels, the law is supposed to reflect the will of the voters. The fact that the Arabs’ will is far different from yours cannot be the only reason they do not get to vote. At least not ethically.

So you need to either give them a vote (and let them destroy your country), give them a state of their own or figure out a way for them to vote somewhere else. And that may even be true of the Israeli Arabs.

The only solution ever seriously considered in Israel is giving them a state. That is not something I decided, that is a simple fact. So if that is your only option then best better do it on Trump’s terms before you will have to do it on Ahmad Tibi’s terms.

I am not familiar with the studies you mentioned but I would venture that systematic bias, assuming it exists, varies in degree from place to place. If one study finds systematic bias in a small town in Georgia, another may tell you it doesn’t exist in Queens.

As for Chanaya, in my professional career I have found that there is most certainly a strong anti-frum, systematic bias, most often committed by the frei jews, r”l.

Schnitzel bigot: I’m not sure everyone protesting is doing so to promote radical socialism although many are. There are vile people everywhere looking to hijack everything popular for their own cause and the vile among the socialists have best perfected the art.

I am basically referring to some of the things mentioned in this thread by some of the other posters – a system which unfairly and disproportionately exposes the black community to law enforcement. The system is rigged so that two individuals who lead the same exact lives, one a person of color and one not, the person of color will have to deal with law enforcement 10 times more than the other person.

I also love your username.

This is both about race and not about race.

The underlying problem is police brutality. The OP poo-poos its extent but it is something that happens much too often and quite frankly – we have all had enough of it. A few in the Jewish community have not been paying to this problem the same way they did not pay attention to prison/justice reform problem until it bit a few of us in the rear but the fact is, police brutality is a huge problem in America. How long are Americans going to turn a blind eye to police brutality as it gets worse and worse every year? We have become numb to the news but if you paid attention there was a story of police brutality every day. Yes, police brutality is color blind and (a small minority but still) too many cops are brutal towards everyone, equally and so we should all be protesting against it.

But this is also about race. Even though there is no reason to believe that this violent police officer was motivated by racial hatred (or that police brutality, in general is motivated by racial hatred) the facts are clear that the black community bears the overwhelming brunt of police brutality. Most of the victims of police brutality are people of color because those communities have greater exposure to police interaction. The more often a community is exposed to the police, the greater the likelihood someone in that community will fall into the hands of the minority of police officers who are not necessarily racist but violent and become a victim of police brutality.

So why does the black community have a much greater exposure to the police? There are a myriad of reasons (many of which are the fault of black communities and individuals in those communities and many which are not) BUT systematic racism, in my view, certainly plays a big, big role in many parts of this country. And so that needs to change, too.

they had their own program which included its own tefilla, tehillim, siyumim (kids and shas) dancing and some speakers. a good chunk of the speeches from metlife was simulcast into barclays.

sorry for the hijack post.

Joseph: the gemoro in perek chelek sanhedrin teach that when mashiach come all disabilities/illnesses – even the minor ones – will be removed from those who arise. It is a safe assumption that the maladies that befall all of us as we get older will also be removed. So is it really emes what you say?

to the OP, a simple piece of advice: look into your heart and be honest with yourself. If you can then state with certainty that (1) you have no ill will – at all – towards the person you are talking to and (2) the reason you are talking to that person is only to help HIM and for no other reason, at all – then you can go ahead and Hochayach Tochiyach.

joseph: you are confusing yazidi people with the city in iran called yazd. two different things.

Neville: I agree with your statement as a whole but is there really a “sfaradi” havara? Iraqis and Syrians are close to one another but not the same; Moroccans and Tunisians are very different from Iraqis and Syrians, Iranian, Bukharian and Afghani pronunciations are similar to one another but are very different from the rest, etc.

Having studied the subject for a bit, it seems to me (for the little that its worth) that Iraqi/Baghdadi is the most authentic and almost everyone else stands equal-distanced, in one form or another, from the Iraqi pronunciation (except the chassishe pronunciation which stands very distant from Iraqi).

charliehall: they were decorations and that is not denigrating to them at all. It denigrates the fools who had sages at their disposal and instead of using them for their wisdom and leadership, used them as decorations.

Neville/Hakatan: My definition of zionism is an organization formed in 1897 by Europeans and for Europeans that accepted dues and had meetings and held conferences and had a charter and a structural hierarchy and for which there are recorded minutes and whose only stated goal was to create a state. That Zionism does not actually exist any more. Once the state was created, that organization no longer served any purpose. It was replaced by the State which is made of citizens and democratically elected leaders, an overwhelming majority of which were either not invited to be zionists (because they were not european) or were invited but rejected the invitation.

The answer to op is quite simple: unlike everyone else who remains beholden to politics, Chabad (in this arena) strove for emes. They recognized that the zionists were wicked people and so they were anti. they also realized that after the creation of the state, zionism ended and was replaced by a sovereign, democratic, Jewish state that will be what WE make it and decided to work hard to make it a place of Torah and Emes. BH, they were widely successful while the pro and anti Zionist remained stuck in the past.

Why can’t you have a full time job and also finish shas?

How on Earth are you supposed to know whether or not you will be willing to marry someone without knowing what that person looks like? Seems to me that receiving a picture prevents an unnecessary waste of resources.

Here are the most egregious ones I find most often (other than the first pasuk of k”sh as stated above):

Asher Baranu Lichvodo (see midwesterner above) (changes meaning from who created us to who we created)
Lishnei Ufur (as opposed to Lisheinei Ufur) in the second bruchu (changes from sleepers in the dust to two pieces of dust)
Hodoo al Eretz Veshumayim as opposed to Hoddo al eretz veshumayim (in psukei dezimra) (changes from his glory is over the heaven and earth to praise for heaven and earth)
Ki Lo CHAlu rachamecha instead of Ki Lo chaLU rachamecha (in modim) (changes meaning from because your mercy never ends to because your mercy never takes effect)

I love all people Jews and not Jews. I also love the reformed but let’s stop pretending that they are Jewish. They are Jewish only in their own minds. I suggest everyone read the article by the reformed rabbi Clifford Librach in response to the speech by Michael chabon.

to address the OP:

Cannabis is mentioned throughout the gemara, rishonim and achronim. The gemara menachos 15b, for example:
דתנן
היתה שדהו זרועה קנבוס ולוף לא יהא זורע על גביהם שהן עושות לשלש שנים

The Shulchan Aruch says to beautify the shabbos candles use a wick made of cannabis (although he probably meant hemp).

There is also discussion in the rishonim about using cannabis for skhakh.

All of the above most probably point to hemp being used but was cannabis used the way it is today?

There are some suggestions that yes.

The late achronim debate whether it is kitniyos. The Radbaz, when describing uses of cannabis in relation to kilyaim laws says its used for hemp and also gives a person simcha.

The Rambam talks about cannabis as it relates to kilayim but in his medical writings writes extensively above using it for medicinal purposes.

Rav Moshe, of course, assured it in Yoreh Deah 3:35 for dina demalchusa and also all the reasons given in the comments above.

Yaakov: one thing i can tell, if you are dealing with a NY purchase, under NY General Construction Law § 20, the day of the purchase is not included in the computation:

“The proper method when computing time periods is to exclude the day of the event and to include the last day up to midnight of that day.” Bacalokonstantis v. Nichols, 141 A.D.2d 482, 484, 529 N.Y.S.2d 111, 113 (2d Dept. 1988) (citing New York General Construction Law § 20); accord, e.g., Austrian Lance & Stewart, P.C. v. Rockefeller Ctr., Inc., 163 A.D.2d 125, 130, 558 N.Y.S.2d 521, 525 (1st Dep’t 1990) (where period for tenant to cure default was “denoted in days rather than hours,” period ran until midnight on the last day designated for the cure) (citing New York General Construction Law § 20); Antine v. City of New York, 14 Misc. 3d 161, 172-73, 830 N.Y.S.2d 430, 439 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. 2006); Alvarez v. Warden, 178 Misc. 2d 254, 255, 680 N.Y.S.2d 153, 154 (Sup. Ct. Bronx Co. 1998) Union Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Kevie, 17 A.D.2d 109, 110, 232 N.Y.S.2d 678, 679 (1st Dep’t 1962), aff’d, 13 N.Y.2d 971, 194 N.E.2d 686, 244 N.Y.S.2d 777 (1963).

So if you had, lets say, 10 days to return, you get 10 days starting the day after the purchase. Other states have similar laws.

ubiq: you missed my point. Whether it is Muttar is almost irrelevant. There are two dozen “stretching your imagination” reasons it is muttar. What concerns me more is that we are living the curse.

Educate yourselves (this is not mine):
Idolatry consists of endless rituals associated with superstitions, magic and mythical beliefs. “Death” was always considered the most terrifying mystery, and it triggered extreme anxiety and agitation. Dead people, their invisible spirits, were often the object of fear, reverence and especially of worship. Halloween is not an exception. “All-hallow-even” celebrates the “day of all (dead) saints”.
The ancient Celts celebrated Halloween at the end of summer, because they believed that the evil spirits and the souls of the dead were visiting the world of the living at that time. The pagans considered the dead more or less as Hollywood considers the “zombies”: bad and dangerous. The dead returned to this world angry, vengeful and with the desire to recruit new members. The pumpkins, which resembled the disfigured faces of the dead, were carved to welcome them and appease their spirits. Great bonfires were also lit to illuminate and thus help the dead finding their way into the world of the living. Food, particularly sweets, was left outside the doors to feed the ghosts. All these favors for the dead were made out of self interest: people believed that those who did help the spirits of the dead would not be disturbed by them (“If I pacify them, they will not take me with them”).
Cats were especially important on Halloween because people believed that cats could smell and warn about the presence of invisible bad spirits. However, black cats were avoided (or killed) because witches or evil spirits reincarnated in black cats.
The devil appeared on Halloween night from hell itself. The Druids, the Celtic priests, wore masks to make the dead believe that they were one of them. These priests knocked on the doors to claim human sacrifices for the devil, or to satisfy the vengeful spirits. And if one did not want to become a human sacrifice, at least, had to appease the evil spirits with sweets.

When ehrlich yidden insist that you SHOULD give out candies then this is a truly a curse.

I shudder at the thought that Moshe Rabbienu imagined eirlich yidden handing out candies on Halloween when he warned:

וֶהֱפִֽיצְךָ֤ יְהוָה֙ בְּכָל־הָ֣עַמִּ֔ים מִקְצֵ֥ה הָאָ֖רֶץ וְעַד־קְצֵ֣ה הָאָ֑רֶץ וְעָבַ֨דְתָּ שָּׁ֜ם אֱלֹהִ֣ים אֲחֵרִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֧ר לֹא־יָדַ֛עְתָּ אַתָּ֥ה וַאֲבֹתֶ֖יךָ עֵ֥ץ וָאָֽבֶן׃

(See, Rashi’s question there and Alshick there and Abarbanel on Devarim 4:25:2)

I cannot judge the Jews who were forced into this but I look on with sadness that Jews are compelled to participate in a revolting practice simply because they have targets on their backs and need to “prove” that they are nice people. Maybe they should take off their head coverings to prove that they don’t have horns either. Sad.

One more point: the Kabbalists recommend against using a masculine form for a girl name or a feminine form for a boys name so Sivan for a girl is out. I am not sure how the Kabbalists explain the boy name yona {or simcha which has gained popular usage}.

Rashbijr: your implication that having more than one wife encroaches upon pritzis and znus issues is highly ignorant and biased. Titbayesh.

Joseph,

Part 2 of the teshuva you cite is a lengthy explanation why a man can wear a wedding ring (even though it is a goysih custom) and after permitting the practice, the Rov concludes, “perhaps, for a yireih shomayim, it is ugly to wear a wedding ring, it is still not prohibited.”

It is not clear at all if the Rov means it is ugly for a y”s to wear a wedding ring because it is what goyim do (which is the topic of the tshuva) and therefore non-wedding rings are not even ugly for men to wear or if he means all rings are ugly for y”s men to wear.

In any event, your blanket statement “it is forbidden for men to wear jewelry, has now been refuted by two sources.

Zsdad: I am pretty sure the challenges posed by today’s technology far out-paces the challenges we have ever faced before. I, personally, do not think a ban is a good long-term solution but I am surprised by the manner in which you minimize the very real issue that the ban speaks to.