☕ DaasYochid ☕

there are many highly regarded Ortho Rabbi’s who do not hold that view point….

So far not one has been named here. What you consider “highly regarded” might very well differ from what I do (at least for this discussion).

I use the word “posek” intentionally. Someone may hold a very important pulpit or other rabbinical position, and may indeed do excellent work for Klal Yisroel, but is unqualified to render halachic decisions.

there are many prominent Rabbi’s who clearly ban the internet, no exception

I don’t know of any (although there are probably some, especially in Eretz Yisroel). I know of many who don’t ban it outright, although do ban it if there is no need for it.

Yet, despite this you don’t seem to have a problem going on line…and the coffee room is not “work”

Once it’s available, why should using it for other “kosher” purposes be a problem?

I find some of your arguments to be ad hominem, and not related to the actual discussion. Even if I were a hypocrite for having a discussion on the internet taking a negative view of television viewing, it wouldn’t change whether or not my position is correct. (It would make my position more difficult to accept, human nature being what it is, which is why I’ve felt the need to explain how I’m absolutely not being hypocritical.)

I personally know of a well-known yeshivish posek who gave a psak regarding a specific case to get one.

Since the reason it’s asur is based on the content and not the actual medium, it’s entirely possible that in a specific case where there is a need and the content can be carefully monitored, a legitimate rov might allow it. But that would not change the fact that it is generally asur. (This is based on the ????? which I alluded to earlier.)

MindOverChatter,

Thanks for the compliment, and for answering for me. I would have answered about the same as you did.

I would probably not have used the analogy of the conservative rabbis, because there’s a big difference between them and the rabbis being discussed here who supposedly are matir TV (although I haven’t seen any names mentioned), but the point is still well taken.

mikehall12382,

As for the filter and password, the filter is for the whole family, including me, and the password is for the kids (who I wouldn’t even want on YWN without a parent present). No, the filter is not perfect, I’m told, but to find sites which slip by, one would have to really know what he’s doing (it’s impossible, AFAIK, to access the forbidden sites without use a wifi card and an unlocked signal from a neighbor,and there is none near me).

Didn’t happen. Humor.

I know. (I thought it was funny, actually.) 🙂

I tried to reciprocate, I guess you didn’t think it was so funny. 🙁

I agree that some had to know, but they were likely either highly paid or ideologues. If regular citizens knew, wouldn’t someone have been tempted by the reward money? (Who knows, maybe someone did tip off the U.S….)

I’m going to assume that with your sarcasm you understood my point.

I thought I did, but from your latest post, I’m not sure. I’ll explain.

I frankly am quite skeptical about anyone owning a television and being able to control it’s use to the extent that nothing is ever viewed which, for example, I wouldn’t let in my house in the form of a book.

That’s why I assumed that your earlier post referred to a compromise in content.

In your more recent post, however, you seem to be making the point that the only content allowed in your home would be consistent with what I would allow in mine, only through a different medium.

To this, I respond that there’s so little of this type of programming available on television (to my second-hand current knowledge) that, certainly as a child grows a little older, there would not be any benefit, regarding preventing unmonitored viewing, to allowing the child to watch TV at home. (You would also have to lock up the TV when you’re not home to monitor, which is impractical and has other negatives as well.

It is also forbidden to allow oneself exposure to temptation (chaza”l make statements such as “??? ????????? ??????”, and “?? ????? ????? ?? ??? ????”) unless given no option (“???? ???? ??????”). (There are ????? about this, based on ????? in several places.)

So to my understanding, owning a television was declared forbidden by the ?????? for these reasons, despite the theoretical possibility that anything viewed on it in a particular home is “kosher”.

Another member of the “matched by God” club here.

I wish to disagree with the implication that a match facilitated by a shadchan is not “matched by God”. I’m sure you didn’t mean that, I’m referring to the choice of words.

DY,

In general, in Chinuch you have to strike a balance.

I would never feed them outright treif foods, only “non-kosher” foods (no hechsher).

?? ??? sarcasm.

What the balance is depends on your values. if one considers the trash put out today as “treif”, which I do, it wouldn’t figure into the balance. I would never allow secular entertainment in my home (with the exception of a few pre-screened children’s books). because 99.9% reflect non-Torah values. As a balance, I might allow some frum produced videos, although my kids’ time would be spent more productively learning, reading gedolim biographies and similar productive literature, playing sports or other games, or other healthy recreation.

Anyone who compromises what impure and unhealthy (spiritually and emotionally) media their children are exposed to is making a tragic mistake. (Not to excuse adults exposing themselves to spiritual trash; we’re discussing chinuch.)

Anyone agree with my angle?(Scroll up)

Common sense is very uncommon.

(That’s an agreement, BTW)

i think kids who dont have a tv think its a very big thing to watch so when they could, they watch as much as possible. a kid who is allowed to watch whenever he wants doesnt think its such a big deal, so they dont end up watching as much.

You’ve got a fascinating perspective on chinuch. You apparently feel that whatever is bad for our children, we should give them more of, so that they should get less of it.

and so, when they do, u could monitor it.

To follow up on your logic, you probably mean that it should be monitored to ensure that the content is inappropriate, because if they would not view some inappropriate material at home, they would end up watching even more of it away from home.

The Goq,

Is there anyone who knows your family who you could ask advice from, such as a rov or rosh yeshiva? I feel that it’s not for we in the CR to advise in such a case, since the proper course of action depends very much on knowing you, your niece, your brother, and, very possibly, your sister-in-law and other family members.

It would seem safer to remain quiet about it, and certainly not to put anything into writing, unless someone wise, who is familiar with the situation, advises you to.

Good luck, and just keep in mind that your “virtual friends” are feeling for you.

It means that it is a machloket. I was aware of R’Ovadiah’s tshuvah on the matter; not everyone agrees with him on this.

Do you have a source for anyone near R’ Ovadiah’s stature (or the gedolim he mentions) who say it’s mutar?

DY, you have television capability but have it disabled. Like Ned Flanders 🙂

I’m not sure how I have television capability if it’s disabled. Also, since my capable TV doesn’t work, I don’t know who Ned Flanders is. 🙂

(I actually didn’t, until I looked him up online.)

chocandpatience_,

I don’t know how to delete history.

What do you think?

Probably less dangerous this way.

From the OP: If we have a TV, we’ll be able to overlook what, if at all our kids our watching. However, if we dont have one, there’s always situations where children ‘sneak’ and watch at a friends house.

There’s something which you are now overlooking; a parent has a say in who his child visits. As the child gets older, the values instilled in the child will play a major role in the decisions he or she makes.

As far as the comment regarding the computer and Avoda Zara. The OP did not ask for anyone’s opinion on TV. She asked for help in deciding whether she should start off her marriage with a TV in her home or not since she is NOT opposed to TV. How are you helping her with your comments?

Do you really expect someone to post a question about television on Yeshiva World and not get negative responses?

I was saying that if he saw someplace that Noshim are indeed Patur, the only context he would have seen it would be that it is usually not her Chiyuv, unless she’s living alone.

I guess I misunderstood your point; sorry.

As for the Gemara, as you said, it was not a Hava Amina, only a question as to why it is not the case.

Yes, that’s what I meant when I wrote “I know, I … realized as I was going along that the ???? probably never meant it as a real ??? ????? (based on the ???? in ?????). “

The Gemara in Kedushin, though, is talking before we established that Zman Grama is a Ptur.

Actually, I think your previous point is valid for the ???? in ?????? as well (which also knew ???? in ?????).

Thanks, Mr. 80.

I wasn’t born yet.

I wasn’t born yesterday either.

Why is the title of this room baruch dayan haemes?!

I didn’t start this thread, but I understood the title to be tongue-in-cheek.

most yeshiva bochurim show up on a date and just stutter and stammer their way through making for a lot of uncomfortable moments.

I can’t argue the point; I haven’t seen most yeshiva bochurim on a date. I’m curious, though, how you managed to.

You can try and see if this works (I haven’t) if the link is allowed through.

http://www.freescripteditor.org/download.php

It was because the Steipler didn’t want to sit on the seats in the train since he thought there might be shatnez and stood the whole night instead of sleeping

IIRC, there was still more to the story; the Steipler had a unique schedule, staying awake for a full day, then sleeping for a long time, then staying awake for a full day. Before traveling on the train, he adjusted his schedule, stayed awake even more than usual, figuring to sleep on the train. When the chashash shaatnez kept him from sleeping, he ended up having gone days without sleep.

It was worth it, if nothing else, for the discussion, and research we did!

95,

I know, I also looked (in ??????), and realized as I was going along that the ???? probably never meant it as a real ??? ????? (based on the ???? in ?????).