☕ DaasYochid ☕

Perhaps it still warrants behind nice.

You have nothing better to do during the Nine Days than troll an old thread last updated six years ago, in the hope of getting people upset? What a shame since you seem to have been behaving yourself for the past few weeks.

Perhaps, if you think it was necessary to give mussar, you could have done it in a nicer way, especially during the nine days.

Just to clarify, its not a contradiction.

Yes it is. You even know it is, so you have to twist the words משׁנכנס אב ממעטין בּשׂמחה to mean the opposite of their meaning.

NCB is right. Only modern day chabad reads things upside down like this.

To address a number of posters who pointed out that there’s chillul Hashem in front of non frum Jews or non Jews, yes, that’s true but it’s not the definition and probably not the ikkar inyan either.

To be more specific, this thread is about what kiddush Hashem means, not about some possible ways of causing a kiddush Hashem.

A Kiddush Hashem means acting like a Yid is Suppose to act

There’s a very strong association, but where do you get that that is what it means?

Sometimes it does, fyi

They frequently overlap, but it’s not the definition, and sometimes, a kiddush Hashem could be caused by doing something the goyim don’t like, or vice versa.

I know of a few cases where the wife was falling religiously and brought her husband down with her.

As far as it not being a religious issue,. if the Vilna Goan & the Bal Shem Tov both testified that a piece of meat was kosher and Zev said that that piece was HAM. The Talmud states that for everyone the meat is kosher but for Zev the meat is HAM. So even though for everyone else it is permissible to vaccinate but for those who hold it’s prohibited it is the same as making them eat pork.

That is totally incorrect.

You’re misrepresenting the gemara of שויא אנפשיה. It doesn’t apply where it’s blatantly and obviously wrong, so although if someone said a piece of meat was not slaughtered, or that a woman was married, the piece of meat would be assur and he wouldn’t be allowed to marry her. However, if he said it was ham, that would be blatantly false and he would still be allowed to eat the meat.

That’s probably true here as well.

Antivaxxer meshugas isn’t based on the antivaxxers claiming to have witnessed something, as the cases in the gemara are, it’s just that they’ve accepted the false narrative of a bunch of quacks instead of mainstream medicine.

Any posek would tell an antivaxxer that it’s a chiyuv to vaccinate, and that their meshugene dayos don’t change that.

The state can’t force them to vaccinate if they claim they are not doing it for religious purposes.

If I claim carrying a loaded weapon is my religious belief, can the state refuse to allow my kids into school?

How will they be educated?

Hopefully, their parents will stop acting stupidly and irresponsibly, and get them vaccinated.

The mod is 100% right. These scoundrels were abusing the religious exemption, aside from putting the public and their own children at risk.

It’s extremely silly to be offended by a website glitch.

Joseph, if you follow R’ Moshe’s psak that it’s assur to walk into a Conservative establishment, you also have to shave and eat cholov stam.

I think he’s disagreeing that it’s interesting.

The OP is actually a misunderstanding of R’ Chaim’s position on the internet, I believe. He doesn’t asser it under all circumstances. Raising funds for a yeshiva, if the internet is used in a responsible manner, would be an example where he doesn’t asser. Since there are many people using the internet in ways and for purposes which are okay, there’s nothing wrong with raising money on the internet.

Why do you assume that R’ Chaim Kanievsky is a posek?

Whatever his disclaimer that he’s not a posek means, in fact, he does tell people what the halacha is, so I’m not sure what your issue is with calling something he instructs someone to do or not to do a psak.

Does that mean wearing Shatnes was okay? Same with shaving.

That’s an affront to the talmidei chachomim who shaved.

Maybe you’re correct about the hamon am, but I can guarantee you that the roshei yeshivos in Europe and even their talmidim (who didn’t have beards) were aware of the lav.

There are actually two separate points here; what the best response is, and whether or not the OP’s response was acceptable.

The easier one is the second. It clearly wasn’t. You may not like Joseph’s analogy, and you may choose to ignore him, but that doesn’t make his point wrong. He, and DaMoshe, and apushatayid, and 5ish, and CA are correct.

As far as the correct response, I don’t see how you can ignore the affront to the Torah. How to show disagreement with the sentiment expressed is hard to say, especially not knowing the co-worker or the relationship.

when I heard the story from R’ Shurkin, he implied quite strongly that it was Hadras Panim Zaken.

So very likely, this lowlife is putting down R Moshe because of a personal vendetta.

Mah inyan shmita eitzel har Sinai?
Is there some sort of heikish between shaving and timers?

Wolfson/Miriamson/Wiener and Joseph are living in an alternative universe where everyone only follows the psakim of one posek.

Of course, in reality, it’s not nearly that simple. For various reasons, certain psakim become widely accepted, and some don’t.

Those who adopt the leniencies of the Igros Moshe often do so without halachic sanction.

That’s the disgusting comment I was referring to. Shameful.

I am concerned because I see some people trying to minimize the Kavod and Gadlus of Rav Moshe Feinstein ztsal because they have an agenda to disallow shavers.

I agree. The author of הדרת פנים זקן had the audacity to write that his psak is not one which can legitimately be followed. He should go to R’ Moshe zt”l’s kever and beg mechilah.

Frummest or Phrummest?

What then is the halachic reason it is done by those who hold it must be done?

You’ll have to ask them. I’m not sure what “must be done” means. Are those who didn’t do it not married l’halacha?

DrYidd, yes they are, see רמ”א posted above.

If they are hourly wages, they’ll get paid more for more hours.

Even a pay cut isn’t slavery. I don’t know if it’s a good idea to treat staff that way, but how is this a government issue?