Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Catch yourself, I think that slavery would be disdained by gedolim because 1) dina d’malchusa dina, and 2) the global community today would use it as an excuse to persecute the Jews. Slavery in the Torah should not be compared with the American definition of slavery. It’s a totally different thing.
The need to be distinguished during population growth svara makes sense for why middle names were introduced, but as a gabbi, I was always perplexed by those people who have four names and whose father has three. Too many names bro!
I’m not convinced Trump is a good choice for America, but his statement on immigration is spot on. “Sending over” is just a figure of speech. I am sure he doesn’t actually believe that the Mexican government is conspiring to exile all criminals to the US, and I don’t think anyone suspects that he believes that. If you want to discredit him, I would worry more about conflict of interest in saying that Trump Inc. can, in the future, rebuild American infrastructure better than anyone else.
I can’t wait to take over the world… sigh…
I’m still not sure what all the hype was about. Look up “highland cattle” for thousands of red heifers. The supposed parah adumah near Lakewood didn’t look any different than regular highland cattle specimens; though it is mixed with another breed – Angus, if I recall.
Those who fail to grasp the concept of “Lo Plug” are claiming that the Federal Government should cease to support marriage for those who cannot conceive or who plan on not having children. This would mean that they would also stop granting benefits to married couples once they reach an age at which they can no longer conceive, which would require that the government mandate physical checkups on all married individuals. First of all, just because a couple cannot conceive or chooses not to does not mean that they cannot provide a healthy household for children. Second, it is unconstitutional for the government to breach your privacy by inquiring on these matters. It is not the government’s business how your family planning or reproductive organs work.
At the end of the day, even an infertile heterosexual married couple can still adopt or foster a child and, in general, provide a physically and psychologically healthy and stable environment, which is greatly beneficial to society. Homosexual couples have shown to be far less capable of doing so. This is a fact, despite several dissenting research studies, the large majority of which have been shown to stray from accepted scientific method, have gaping holes in methodology, or have fabricated data. Please, do a little more studying than Page 1 of a Google search. Therefore, it makes absolutely no sense to redefine marriage for the sake of extending government benefits to couples which are, as a whole, destructive to society.
It is worthwhile to add that, in terms of building a stable household to produce a physically and mentally healthy future generation of citizens, homosexual couples are, statistically, way off the charts in terms of domestic violence – particularly female couples.
To Matan1 – Actually the American College for Pediatricians had THIS to say regarding the ruling:
As for the OP’s point, as others have alluded to, there are 2 reasons for Government to intervene in the matter of marriage – ANY marriage – by regulating certification and granting married citizens benefits that unmarried citizens cannot get:
1) To promote marriage because the government seeks to uphold a traditional religious/moral value system.
2) To promote marriage because the government seeks to increase the financial, health, and social welfare of its population – believing that increasing the population and cultivating an environment where the next generation can be raised under stable, monogamous parents.
At the end of the day, same-gender “marriage” does neither. It definitely does not adhere to any religious or traditional value system, nor does it contribute in the second way. These couples as a fact, are unable to increase the population, they have shown to alarmingly proliferate the spread of AIDS, HIV, and other STDs, they have been shown, as a generalization, to not be capable of establishing a stable, monogamous, healthy environment for any children which they may foster from others. See quote above as well as many, many other studies. It simply is not rational for any government to encourage this behavior, even from a strictly Utilitarian point of view.
As for “equality” and “discrimination”: Everyone in the USA is equally entitled to marry one person (at a time) of the opposite gender, without discrimination against religion, race, physical handicap, or personal belief. Everyone should be equally forbidden to marry one person of the same gender, of unlawful age, of incestuous relationship, or of non-human species. Period.
Oomis, “Hashem has a purpose for ALL of His creatures.”
YES, apparently the sole purpose of roaches is to gross us out beyond words! Yuck!
Back in my dating days I once Googled the names of potential future in-laws, and it turned up a record with a substantial and disturbing criminal history. The person was presently incarcerated. After asking the shadchan, my suspicions were confirmed that this was indeed the parent of the girl in question. I had mixed feelings about it because the girl herself was not at fault, but I wasn’t particularly interested in the shidduch to begin with, and the backdrop of having such an in-law was just too much for me to handle, so I said ‘no’. I felt really bad for the girl, but you shouldn’t get married for pity. Googling has proved very useful in avoiding such situations. I think it’s a responsible and prudent thing to do, and not at all unreasonable.
That being said, one should be careful to make sure to validate that the results they pull up indeed belong to the person they are looking into. I know that when Googling my uncommon name it pulls up some guy’s Facebook with photos of all his drinking, smoking, and clubbing activities… it’s not me.
Take this with a grain of salt because it’s been a few years, but I recall hearing from a close talmid of the Rosh Yeshiva ZTZ”L of Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yisrael Meir Hakohen (AKA Yeshivas Chofetz Chaim) in the Rosh Yeshiva’s name that R’ Kahane’s philosophy was basically correct, but his methods were not. In other words, his ideas about expelling the Arabs and the risks that foreigners in the land posed were ideal and true, but the methods he pushed were not practical. I don’t want to say more in someone else’s name if I don’t remember the details. R’ Kahane was definitely one of the good guys.
Beautiful. Yasher kochacha!
PBA,
Your post really made me think about my position and realize that I agree with you 100%, and that made me think even more, and then I realized how much that speaks about feminists’ failure to promote real feminism.
They’ve taken a philosophy that is essentially, at its root, an acceptable and good cause, and stigmatized it as something that is offensive, crude, obnoxious, outrageous, and discriminatory against men. Ironic, is it not, that we now define feminism as all which is abnormal?
Don’t clap when there is a pause between movements, or else you’ll be seen as an ignoramus. Wait until they put down their instruments and the conductor turns to face you.
HaLeiVi, black velvet is not the exception. Everything known to man, except a black hole, has some reflectiveness. The closest thing we have to an out right blackbody with zero emmisivity is Vantablack, which is made of vertically arrayed carbon nanotubes, but it still reflects 0.035% or so of light.
The reason why light appears a certain color when it strikes a certain element is because electrons have energy levels which can be segregated by something called a “band gap”. the color of light is an indication of the energy level that its photons carry (measured in electron Volts or eV) as well as being directly correlated to its wavelength. When a material has a particular band gap the electrons in it absorb a specified amount of energy from the light and the rest of it is transmitted or reflected. You can predict what color an object will be, as well as if its crystalline form will be opaque or transparent based on its band gap classification. A laser beam works off of these principles. If it were not true, we wouldn’t have lasers.
Red and blue make purple. Blue and green make turquoise.
zahavasdad, the people who made the app actually claim that you should be permitted to watch TV on Shabbat on their website. I quote their spokesperson/web moderator Yossi Goldstein in a comment section response to someone using your very argument:
“Why is your kids watching Curious George on TV on Shabbos any different than you reading them Curious George from a book? The only difference is who is providing the voice and turning the pages, Logically if you think about it, there is absolutely nothing wrong with watching TV on Shabbos, as long as what you are watching you would anyhow see on Shabbos.”
This whole thing is just another sad example of how far off people have gone without a Mesorah and without a Rov.
But to address your point directly,
“Presumably people’s roles have changed somewhat as we moved from a nomadic society to an agricultural society and from an agricultural society to an industrial society.”
True, people’s JOBS changed, but it was generally always the men that were the hunters, the ones who were plowing the field, or the ones going to the office. The women were always the ones caring for the home and the children, whether they were beating clothes on a rock down by the river, or hitting the on button on their washing machines. The jobs may have changed, but the roles have not – and that’s just the nature of humanity. The proof is anthropological and historical. It spans all racial, continental, and cultural divides, it is not simply circumstantial. The emergence of women taking on men’s roles en masse is a very new and somewhat isolated phenomenon. It is of no coincidence that the push to have women take on men’s roles in our Orthodox Jewish culture happened at the exact particular time and place in history as the former. Our culture is particularly porous to out environment these days, and this is an obvious side effect.
PAA,
To illustrate one of the issues, let’s play a little game. Would you consider something wrong with the following scenario:
A young, orthodox, high school aged Jewish male decides that instead of going to yeshiva to learn during his early years, he wants to prepare himself for a different kind of familial role in life than the one typically fostered by young, frum, Jewish men. He decides to take baking and cooking classes for the purpose of providing for his children. He takes home-ec classes 5 days a week. He volunteers as a preschool and kindergarten assistant during the day so he can learn how to better care for infants and children. He also decides to do college online twice a week because he would probably also want to marry a girl is very learned in Torah (perhaps one who wants to go for her smicha) and he wants to be able to provide financial support for he in case she decides to do that, but not permanently. He figures that because of the life choices that he has made – to be the main caretaker of his children- he probably won’t have ample time to study Torah, and since one of the parents will have to pass on the mesorah to his future children, it might as well be her. He also wishes to marry a girl who would go out to work at the office all day because he plans to be a stay at home dad who makes breakfast, lunch, and dinner for his kids, as well as take care of things around the house like laundry, dishes, and cleaning. He makes time during the day to daven, put on tfillin, and reciting tehillim (which paturs his minimum responsibility for learning Torah). He figure osek bemitzvah patur min hamitzvah, and since raising kids is a 24/7 mitzvah (which he strongly desires to do) he is therefore patur from Torah learning and making money, he just needs to find his bashert that will fit his ambitions.
Is there anything wrong with this picture?
PAA,
I don’t believe we are. Unfortunately, it seems you have gotten caught up on a single part of my statement and missed the main idea I was trying to convey. There are several reasons illustrated in my responses to your questions.
PAA,
Sorry for the delayed response.
“So what role are they violating by answering halachic questions?”
I don’t think women are violating a role by answering halachic questions (assuming they are learned enough to answer correctly). However, chazal specify that talmud Torah is a mitzvah particular to men, and women are only required to learn the Torah that is relevant for their role as mothers and wives (and nowadays for some, by necessity only, as persons of business). Just from that detail alone it is objectively apparent that dedicated Torah scholarship is a role halachically and traditionally intended for men.
Additionally, regarding the original question of, ‘Why can women not become rabbis?’: Assuming you define rabbi in the colloquial sense of one who acts as a dedicated higher level gemara teacher or one who acts as a community pulpit rabbi – you run into tznius issues. I don’t think you will disagree with the claim that it is inappropriate for a young ordained female to take the pulpit in front of a congregation of men to deliver a weekly sermon, to lead a davening (even from the other side of the mechitza), or to teach gemara to a classroom full of hormonal high school boys for several hours daily. For any other position, a smicha is not required, and then the question begs: If a smicha is not required for any position that a woman may be permitted to take, then why is it being demanded with such emotion and force? I believe the obvious answer is that it is not a totally altruistic reason as some may have you believe.
Finally, it seems to me that an easier answer to your question is available: Our gedolim and lesser Torah leaders have implicitly or explicitly come out against those who try to give smicha to women. Presumably, these Torah scholars have more da’as Torah than most (read ‘all’) on this forum, and they hold it is against da’as Torah. If an un-ordained woman thinks she has more da’as Torah than those in positions to grant ordination unto others, there is clearly something amiss.
“According to the teaching that they will teach you and according to the judgment they will say to you, shall you do; you shall not deviate from the word they will tell you, right or left.” [Devarim 17:11]
PAA,
“How so?”
Throughout Jewish history and throughout chazal’s writings women (as do men) are assigned a very clearly defined familial, social, and halachic, and even behavioral role (for one famous example, ref. Rashi on Shlomis bas Divri). To deny the existence of this is irrational, and to try to redifine how masoretic Judaism interprets these definitions is, again, a deviation from our mesorah.
Even looking at non-Jewish culture, you will find a period in American history (around the time of the Industrial Revolution) where feminists pushed for a dissolvement of what the society of their day called “the sphere of influence” of men and women – a defined role that women and men played in society. I am not saying that their definitions are correct, but I amm simply pointing out that the nullification of such a concept would be a relatively new phenomenon, heavily related to the feminist movement (which every credible Torah authority agrees is not in line with the mesorah).
“Why not?”
I am not qualified as the authoritative voice on what is or isn’t the definition of smicha, but it is well known that many reliable people who have been given the podium to preach and teach are not musmachim, and likewise many musmachim do not utilize their smicha to preach or teach. Receiving a smicha is typically not incumbant fulfilling a quota of classes given or speeches written. It stands to reason that this is not the main point of attaining smicha.
Besides that fact, it is objectively silly that there exist women who are fighting tooth and nail to become “rabbis”, when there exist many smicha programs whose hasmacha isn’t worth the paper that it is written on. To those women I would say, “mima nafshuch?” If you want to get a real, kosher, well recognized smicha from an institution such as the Mir, Lakewood BMG, Chofetz Chaim, or another recognized Torah Yeshiva – you never will because in their eyes you embody the antithesis of having a Torah mesorah. On the other hand, if you want to get a smicha at any cost, you can probably get one online at a variety of conservative or reform institutions, but it won’t be worth anything to anyone who knows anything. You can’t try to redefine Judaism and force all those who maintain a traditional view to succumb to your ideology and demand their respect. I think it’s silly.
PAA,
That is not what I’m trying to convey. The focus is not that it is against her inherent role.
The point is, rather, that a major component of smicha is about being recognized as one who is steadfast in the Jewish people’s Torah hashkafa, mesorah, and traditions, and therefore, a woman who seeks out smicha is deviating from our heirloom of Torah haskafa, mesorah and traditions, and by doing so she inherently disqualifies herself from smicha and all that it represents.
Viewing a smicha as nothing but a social license to preach/teach is not representative of what real rabbanut actually represents.
The definition of a smicha is just that one’s rav muvhak is giving the person being ordained permission to answer people’s halachic questions.
However, the prominent qualification of being a rabbi is not about knowing every halacha (many well accepted frum smicha programs traditionally never tested on the laws of kitchen kashrus and other relevant and crucial parts of halacha); it’s not about being able to practice taharas, dayanus, shechita, milah, and other community services – most people with the title “rabbi” have no first hand experience in any of those upon ordination; and it certainly has nothing to do with being able to lead a congregation. Of course knowledge in Torah is crucial, but it isn’t the only qualifier, as you can have a talmid chacham apikores who also is not eligible for smicha.
Rather, (one of) the main factors that a rav hamasmich looks for when determining whether one is ready for ordination is whether or not this person has the right daas Torah hashkafah and dedication to uphold the mesorah passed down from Moshe Rabbeinu to this day. Of course, in order to prove this the student must also display his knowledge in Torah and dedication to its study, but testing one on Torah knowledge is not the sole requisite.
These women who want to become ordained are inherently missing the proverbial boat on the meaning of being ordained. Call it unfair if you please. It is what it is. By Hashem’s mesorah that he so graciously taught us, men and women each have very specific and very different roles to play in Jewish society. Thus, by definition, to try and change the mesorah and innovate upon it is one of the most sacrilegious things one can do. It follows that, for a female, actively seeking ordination inherently disqualifies her from eligibility for ordination. Devorah, and other female Jewish sages in history were sought after by the Great Men of their generation for their wisdom and humility, they were not the ones to seek a foothold in the sphere of influence of those men, and thereby, they attained their rank by the virtue of their lofty qualities, not by their persistence in seeking a public position that is traditionally reserved for a different kind.
It is similar to the mechanism of the proof of national revelation and how the halacha of testifying to our children about ma’amad har Sinai works- it is all included, self encapsulated, self affirming, and self propagating proof to Hashem’s existence and to the truth of our mesorah. Revisionism would disqualify the proof, and that is why it has sustained to this day. Ve’hameivin yavin.
I hope the ones who are insistent in the pursuits that contradict our mesorah dedicate a few moments of deep thought to this idea.
My great grandfather was the rav and the “candy man” of the shul that he built. Even when he was in his last months of life, in pain and dying of leukemia; sitting in shul on Shabbat a little child came to my great grandfather for candy. His grandsons, my father and my uncle, would tell him to sit down – that they would go get it for the child instead. Yet, he insisted. He lifted himself up out of his seat and slowly limped to the cabinet in the back of the shul, where he had left the bag of lollipops to bring one back for this young child. He was a gadol nistar who respected even the smallest of mitzvahs, putting a smile on a young child’s face. But for a saint such as you, being mechabed a sefer torah – such an insignificant mitzvah – I think everyone can agree you’re too high and lofty for that… I don’t understand what the gabbay’s hava aminah was! It’s a bizayon to you to have to waste your precious time with such shtus. It’s poshut bitul Torah.
According to the Teimanim’s Mesorah, correct pronunciation is very much a part of the Mesorah. They are very strict on pronouncing things correctly because changing your pronunciation changes the meaning of your words and tfilla.
Oomis – It should probably read, “The clothing is not tzanua,” since it is a Hebrew word. ‘Tznius-dik’ is simply the Yiddish equivalent of saying “Tzniusy” in English to describe a quality embodied in a fully Hebrew word.
I elect to not have a CR rabbi. However, if I had no choice, it would be Sam2, for his bekiyus, only if tempered by Torah613 for her common sense and levelheadedness.
Computer777- Attracting attention to yourself is also a lack of tzniyus. Tzniyus is much more than just how much skin you are showing.
I recently found myself saying the bracha on the rainbow and overhearing a kid asking his rebbi how it could be that a rainbow is a bad siman that Hashem wants to destroy the world if it is a natural phenomenon that occurs in thousands of places on any given day. Has Hashem wanted to destroy the world every day since Noach? The rebbi answered that it’s only a siman to those who observe the siman. He explained there is a reason why YOU are seeing the rainbow, and not the guy in the next town, or the person who was indoors that day. The siman is for the observer, not for the world at large. You should take it as a personal wake up call when you see it.
haaaaaaa T613 +1
lo hivanti
YehudaYona – I don’t. I just think that even if you find an abnormally mature and life experienced 18 year old guy who actually knows what is important in a marriage, he would be financially incapable of building a family, and any attempt at beginning a marriage at 18 would severely restrict his ability to gain a proper secular and/or Torah education.
Yehudayona-ZD’s statements are very relevant as most 18 year old boys don’t not have hundreds of thousands of dollars in a fund to replace a paying career. The reality in the world today is that we live in societies where being employed right out of high school (typically at age 18) without a higher education (which takes at least until age 20 to complete-at best, age 22 is more likely- and that’s without any full time Torah learning) does not typically pay enough to establish a family. You can’t ignore that reality. Girls looking for guys who are working do not usually define “working” as an unstable job paying minimum wage, but are rather searching for a guy with an education and a career path. Likewise, girls who want learning guys wouldn’t want guys who just finished yeshiva high school and have yet to spend a couple of years doing full time learning.
There should be instated automatic death penalty (without death row) for all Arabs convicted of terrorism against civilians. No more freedom for those scum. It’s the only thing Bennett ever said right.
My demon friends would be a lot more fun if they looked like bearded midgets! 😀
I agree with Sam2. If women stopped driving there would be 50% less cars on the road and less accidents. Men drove before women did, so we have first dibs.
No but seriously, they should make a mandatory driving test every 5 years after age 65. Been nearly hit by too many older people.
Brilliant point. The whole situation boggles the mind. It’s mamash what the gemara describes as happening before mashiach comes… that common sense will disappear and things will not make sense anymore.
There is no way that we will stop them, so let’s be cordial so when we are in need; i.e., Israel, Rubashkin, etc., there is a better chance that they will of help.
This is not a proper Torah haskafa. We have not been distinguished as the chosen people to sit there and nod and smile as the moral fiber of Hashem’s world is torn apart. We have an obligation to be mocheh against perversion of emes. This doesn’t necessarily mean that you have to organise a rally against everything the goyim do wrong, but you cannot feign being in agreement so that when you need something they will be there. That’s a severe lack of bitachon and not proper hishtadlus.
Being that the United States is a country that constitutionally affords equal rights to all citizens, and certain benefits come along with being “married,” the right to those benefits should not be denied anyone.
This is a ridiculous argument because even baalei toeiva people have the right to benefits of marriage. They have the same exact rights as any other citizen: Marry the opposite gender-merit the benefits of marriage. The fact that they are sick in the head should not entitle them to benefits that normal society derives from constitutional protection. Let’s say I had a deranged fetish for trees. According to your argument, the constitution (under this definition of equality) should not exclude me from my rights, and should allow me the same benefits as normal married couples, even though I chose to marry a tree. It’s ludicrous. This is not why I am against toeiva marriage – I’m against it because God said it is by definition an abomination – but even according to an atheist, the argument makes absolutely no sense at all. I can’t redefine the institution of marriage (which is protected for all citizens [ie: Any two citizens of age and opposite gender may marry each other without descrimination against race, color, or religion.]) to fit my own depraved nature just for the sake of granting myself financial benefits.
Just to add: Krav Maga is a constantly evolving system that changes based on hard statistical results from its use in the field. Its very nature is its designation to be a self defense system. It is not even officially called a “martial art” because there is no “art” about it. It’s dirty and savage but extremely effective. It’s nothing but self defense. As a result, you basically never see Krav Maga practicioners in cage fighting because they wouldn’t be effective with all the rules.