Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Froggie, you’re the only one who compared it to a Yom Tov. The fact is that it’s an Israeli holiday, and Hebrew terms are used for it. What would you like the Israelis to say? Should they use English?
Ki MiTzion teitzei Torah!
Mods, no problem. You’re right, I probably should not have put that one in.
I have relatives who were in a DP camp somewhere in Germany. I don’t know if it was Munich.
My aunt was actually born in that DP camp in 1949. My grandparents came to the US a few months later, when she was a baby. My grandparents are no longer living, but my aunt is doing fine!
In Skver, I thought there only is one shul. If you daven somewhere else (an old age home, maybe?) you may be putting yourself at risk!
It’s completely assur! It might lead to owning a pet dog!
gefen:
No! It’s 60 degrees!
It will melt so very fast
It just won’t last
There’s no way it can freeze!
I think the biggest issue is that Neturei Karta align themselves with the enemies of the Jews, like Iran. I don’t think anyone looks at other anti-Zionists (like Satmar) the same way they look at NK. For someone to openly show the world that you oppose other Jews and align with their enemies is terrible. That’s why I am so against them.
The Mishnah Brurah says that talking during chazaras hashatz causes shuls to be destroyed. I don’t know where it’s brought down about diseases being caused by it, but the story from R’ Miller does make sense. If there is talking in the shul, the tefillos won’t be as good. Tefillos from a tzibbur are amplified by the tzibbur. If there is talking, it makes sense that the opposite might occur.
First seder I was a guest at someone’s house, and we finished around 12:00. The second night I was home, and finished about 1:30.
I had some matzah brei for lunch today. Delicious!
HaKatan: You’re slipping!! You didn’t mention Zionism at all! Are you feeling ok?
You talk about the “questionable” piece from R’ Broyde. R’ Broyde stresses in the article that he’s attempting to be melamed zchus for the women who don’t cover their hair. However, in the piece, he stresses that it should NOT be relied upon, nor used as a heter. He stresses that married women should cover their hair! I don’t see anything questionable about that!
MO does NOT attempt to justify what they are doing. Perhaps a few people do, but I’ve never heard a MO Rav try to justify why a married woman can uncover her hair in public. You’re making things up and attacking a large group of people. You should ask for mechilah.
benignuman: Agreed about the pants. My Rosh Yeshiva, R’ Yaakov Bender, once told me that the first women to wear pants transgressed lo yilbash. But now that pants are made specifically for women, it is no longer lo yilbash for a woman to wear pants. Instead, it’s a question of tznius – pants tend to accentuate certain parts of the body, and that is not allowed.
Another Rebbe told me that wearing very loose pants (such as culottes) might actually be allowed. They are definitely more tznius than a tight skirt.
Modern Orthodox does not allow women to wear pants, or married women to go with their hair uncovered. I highly doubt you’ll find a MO Rav anywhere who would say it’s ok.
Are there people who do it? Yes, there are. Just as there are Jews of all types who speak lashon hara and motzei shem ra (such as the OP claiming that MO allows these things), Jews who steal from people, Jews who molest children… need I go on? Just because some people do it doesn’t mean the official stance is that it’s allowed.
nishtdayngesheft: I’m not sure. I heard it from a few different Rabbonim who I trust, and I’m relying on them that it is true.
A friend of mine from Darchei Torah wrote to R’ Chaim and asked him about the story with the Beis Hamikdash. He got an envelope back. On the envelope it was written, “Shamati shezeh min hagoyim” (or something very similar to that. I clearly remember the words “min hagoyim”.)
The only person I know of who held that refraining from gebrokts was a shtus was the Vilna Gaon. He said that if you don’t eat gebrokts, you’re not fulfilling your obligation of simchas Yom Tov.
The agreement itself will usually give more protection for the landlord. Local laws, however, often protect the tenants, and are only binding when there is a lease document signed. If there’s no lease, you may not legally be considered a tenant. It pays to have a lease so that you have the protection of the city/town you live in.
While it doesn’t really matter at this point, I want to confirm the story about R’ Elya Svei zt”l. I learned in Yeshiva Darchei Torah. While speaking in Darchei, R’ Elya said, “Mashiach will come in two zero zero nine!”
Did you mean your “post”? What you write is not a blog. It’s a post on a message board. There’s a difference.
DaasYochid: I never said that was their motivation. I just recognize that it is a byproduct of the chareidim refusing to serve. It’s also the biggest sore point to non-frum Jews in Israel – why should my son put his life in danger for you, but your son refuses to do the same for me? But I don’t think that’s the motivation for the chareidim.
Feif Un posted a couple of times about the Rashi about right/left. Here’s what he posted once:
The Riva says the left/right mentioned in the pasuk refers to Rabbonim telling us not to do a mitzvah such as Shofar on Shabbos, or Arba Minim on Shabbos. It only refers to a mitzvah that they are telling us NOT to do.
The Yerushalmi says in Horios that the pasuk means only if they say right is right and left is left. If they say otherwise, you do not listen.
There are many shitos against Rashi. Indeed, both Rambam and Ramban do not pasken like Rashi in this regard. There is a Sifre which Rashi bases it on, but again, many question the Sifre, and there are Gemoros in both bavli and Yerushalmi that say otherwise. R’ Ovadia Yosef reconciles the two views as I mentioned above – you have to confront the Rav if you think he erred. Until you confront him, you do not listen. The Yad HaMelech states that if you listen when you think he erred just because you think you have to listen, you are required to bring a korbon chatas. Only after confronting the Rav with the opposing view, and he stands by what he said, are you required to listen.
pba: and what of the JP article? If you’re just going by what is the absolute truth, was it so bad?
The fact is that the atzeres was about the draft bill. The chareidim don’t want to serve in the army – so is it a lie to say “so only other Jews die in war”?
The truth is that some things are better off unsaid, or said very delicately – even if they’re 100% true. If the JP wanted to write about the atzeres, it should have been phrased very differently. The same thing with the YWN article about the study.
HaKatan: Isn’t the law that you can’t work if you didn’t serve in the IDF only until the age of 28? A study found that 65% of the … chareidi men between the ages of 35 and 54 are unemployed. If they’re allowed to work at that age, why are 65% of men not doing so?
softwords: Unfortunately, koldmamadaka had a point. Many chareidim view non-chareidim as second-class Jews. Even in the USA, many yeshiva guys view working people as second-best (until it’s time to get married, and they need a wealthy father-in-law, of course!)
You also write of “the sacrifices that Bnei Torah make to preserve Torah and Mitzvot in Klal Yisrael”. Yes, they definitely learn, but I wouldn’t say they “preserve” Torah for the Jews! There are plenty of non-chareidim (or even chareidim who don’t learn full-time) who learn Torah and do mitzvos! “Preserve” means that without them, Torah and Mitzvos would be lost. That is definitely not true!
You say these people are sacrificing their entire lives to protect the continuity of the Jewish people. How did you arrive at that conclusion?
The fact is that it’s brought down in many places that a person is supposed to support his family. Im ein kemach, ein Torah. It says that someone who only learns and relies on charity will end up becoming a thief. Unfortunately, this can be seen in Israel nowadays, where thousands of chareidim lie about being full-time learners in order to get a government check. I remember Feif Un telling me a few years ago about a story with a kollel guy who had children and no money. He got caught shoplifting.
Men are supposed to work to support their families. Claiming that learning full-time “preserves” the Jewish people is wrong. It actually distorts what is proper in Judaism.
The fact remains that before the founding of the state of Israel, there were very few yeshivos in Palestine. They were only for the small population who lived there. There were tensions between the Jews and the Arabs living there (look at the Hebron Massacre in 1929, for example.)
Since the founding of the state of Israel, there has been a huge increase in the number of yeshivos there! Hundreds of thousands of people have learned there, thanks to the founding of the state. This would never have been allowed under the rule of Muslims.
Jews once again have full access to the Kotel to daven. Before the founding of the state, the kotel was surrounded by trash, with only a small, narrow path in front of it. Now, the Kotel gets the respect it deserves, and is safely accessible to all Jews. The same goes for many other holy places.
You can dismiss the safety it provides after the horrors of the Holocaust if you like. The fact remains that if such a thing were to happen again, Israel would be ready to help all the Jews it could.
Are there things I dislike about Israel? Sure. When I went on Birthright, someone (an Israeli) told our group, “I love Israel. Israel is a place where everyone can be proud to be a Jew!”
I don’t get that. My great-grandparents were very proud to be Jews in Europe, even as they were being led to the gas chambers. It’s no big deal to be proud to be a Jew in Israel. I’m proud to be a Jew living in the US! It’s a big deal to be proud to be a Jew when living among those who look down on you for it. I don’t need Israel to be proud!
I put the CDs in my car the other day and started playing it for my kids. My favorite part has always been when Haman cast the lots to see when to carry out his plan.
“The pur isn’t working as I expected!”
“You still have the warranty!”
interjection: I’m not sure what to think about it, but I do think the signs were wrong. The Rabbonim behind the event made it very clear that it was a gathering for prayer, and nothing else. They said straight out that no political statements would be made. They purposely only had a small lectern for the person leading the tefillos so nobody would even think of making a speech. So why did people completely ignore what the Rabbonim said, and bring those signs to the atzeres? TO me, the signs were a chillul Hashem, showing that people who claim to follow Daas Torah in every aspect of their lives ignored the instructions they were given.
YehuDahTzvi, I do have a copy of the Koren siddur, but I can’t copy and paste the text here, sorry. If I have a chance one day, I can try to transliterate it.
If you look at the Wikipedia page on Yedid Nefesh, it does list some of the differences.
dveykus613: Honestly, I don’t blame the chilonim for it. Unfortunately, there have been many instances of fraud in the chareidi world, where chareidim who didn’t want to serve in the army (and wanted to keep getting a government check) would lie and say they were learning full time. Even worse, they had a Rosh Kollel who was willing to back them up, and support the lie. When the chilonim see on the news that a Rabbi is being arrested for fraud, and that there were hundreds of supposed “learners” who were faking it, how do you expect them to react?
Imagine the difference if everyone was honest about it! I believe that things would be completely different. I place the blame on those who lied and the “Rabbonim” who backed up the lies. They caused a huge chillul Hashem, and this is what it led to.
DaasYochid: I think there are 2 separate issues that the chareidim are arguing about. First, there is the issue of taking people who are in yeshiva and forcing them to stop learning to join the army. Second, there is the issue of chareidim in general joining the army, because they say the army is not appropriate for frum Jews.
It would seem the first point is included in the second, except for the point about working. If a chareidi doesn’t want to serve because he’s learning, that’s fine. Such a person wouldn’t be working anyway, and shouldn’t be complaining about not being allowed to work. His entire p’tur is based on his not working! But when a chareidi isn’t learning, there is a problem. He may want to work, but can’t.
I think the answer is that the rules which supposedly make Nachal Chareidi appropriate for frum Jews must be enforced better! We’ve all seen the stories about how they tried to force the unit to do things which weren’t right. If they made Nachal Chareidi truly proper for frum Jews, there shouldn’t be a problem. Learning boys could sit in yeshiva with their p’tur, and non-learning boys could have a frum unit to serve in.
I don’t know if a senator or congressperson would be so willing to go along with letting chareidim into the US. They already know in advance that this is a group who won’t be looking for jobs (likely won’t be working at all), so they won’t be paying taxes, and will just want to get as many benefits as they can. Honestly, if I was a senator, there’s no way I’d want them. Remember, as a senator, your job is to look out for your constituency. Would you honestly want such a drain on the local budgets?
I used to say tisaleim because that was how I heard my father sing it. Then I heard my Rav say tisalum. I looked in a bentcher and saw that it said tisalum. Every siddur/bentcher I’ve checked since says tisalum. So now I say tisalum. I actually showed one of my brothers that, and he was surprised to see it.
I usually say meheirah also.
If you want to see an interesting nussach for Yedid nefesh, look in the Koren siddur. R’ Sacks saw an original manuscript from the author of Yedid Nefesh that had different words. He put those words into the siddur.
You wrote, “The girl was dressed normally but the mothers skirt barely covered her knees!”
That means the skirt did cover the knees, correct? So I don’t see what the issue is. Are you trying to put in new standards? Now covering the knees is not enough, it needs to go down to mid-calf?
Either that, or you need a lesson in English. Your use of “anotherwords” shows that you can use one anyway.
CR10: Again, Sephardic means your ancestors lived in Spain, not Persia! Just say “We’re all Jewish!” and that should be enough!
Sephardim are originally from Spain. After the Inquisition, many of them fled to the Middle East. That’s why there are so many Sephardim from those countries. There were also some who went to Central America and South America – they are referred to as Ladino.
Why do you say we were all Sephardim once? There were plenty of Jews whose ancestors never lived in Spain.
HaKatan: I care because you make a claim about Zionism which also applies to Chassidus, yet you seem to have no issue with that.
Maybe you should apply your reasoning about Chassidus to Zionism, as you seem to know nothing about it either.
HaKatan: You did not answer my question. Do you think Chassidus has a valid mesorah or not?
HaKatan: The conditions they set shouldn’t matter – they clearly felt it wasn’t a violation of the oaths.
With your definition of mesorah, you may be correct. There was no mesorah for Zionism. Don’t forget that there’s no mesorah for electricity. There’s also no mesorah for banning the internet – how dare people rally against it when there’s no mesorah to do so! There’s no mesorah regarding pretty much anything that didn’t exist at the time of Kabbalas HaTorah! New situations arise all the time, and Rabbonim come up with a derech based on halachah. They may not always agree, and that’s where machlokes comes in. Zionism is one such case. Claiming that views held before the founding of the state of Israel are all valid and unchanged after the founding is not proper. As circumstances change, the application of halachah can change, because the psak may no longer fit the circumstances! R’ Soloveitchik clearly had reason to hold what he did, and his shoulders were sufficiently wide to carry such responsibility.
Your insults against him are pure lashon harah. I honestly can’t believe the mods let them through.
One last question – I’m honestly curious to know, what is your opinion on chassidus? There was no mesorah for that either – the Besht went against the established practice of Judaism when he started it. That’s why many were against him. What do you think about it? Does Chassidus have a valid mesorah?
I will attempt to re-word my post so it gets allowed through.
HaKatan, you say Rabbeinu Tam did not abandon his mesorah from Rashi.
As is well known, there is a difference of opinion regarding tefillin between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam. Rabbeinu Tam disagreed with the mesorah he had from his grandfather, and changed the order of the parshiyos in his tefillin.
Rashi also held that we should put our mezuzos on the doorpost in a vertical position. Rabbeinu Tam disagreed, and held it should be horizontal.
In both these cases, Rabbeinu Tam argued on the mesorah of his grandfather.
In the case of Israel and Zionism, there is more reason to allow arguments. R’ YB Soloveitchik’s father passed away before the state of Israel was founded. It’s very possible he would have changed his views after the founding. Additionally, while he may have said non-religious Zionism was wrong, he did maintain a warm relationship with religious Zionists (particularly the Mizrachi movement). It’s possible he was in favor of religious Zionism.
In any case, my Rav is a student of R’ Herschel Schachter shlita, who was a student of R’ YB Soloveitchik zt”l. R’ Soloveitchik was a member of the Moetzes of Agudas Yisroel, and was held in high regard by other Rabbonim. There is absolutely nothing wrong with following his halachic opinions.
Actually, HaKatan, there very much is a debate. We’re having a debate right now! As I wrote before, there are many Rabbonim who hold Zionism is fine. How can you say there’s no debate?
Again, Zionism may be shmad – according to some people. According to others, it’s not. Why can’t you comprehend that? Is it really so difficult?
HaKatan: The fact is that R’ Soloveitchik held it was ok. It doesn’t matter what his father held – he is still a legitimate shittah to follow! Rabbeinu Tam was Rashi’s grandson, and he often argues on Rashi. Your quote from the Gerrer Rebbe is nice – for Gerrer chassidim. Many others held R’ Kook to be a gadol. There are also many others (I’ve named some) who hold Zionism is perfectly fine. Again, why can’t you accept that people can follow a shittah other than yours?
If you’re going to argue your way, then you pasul chassidus as a whole.