Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
But if you say “I am Dati (using the word Dati by itself) not Chareidi”, then you are saying that you are less Frum.
If we are at the point of arguing what the colloquial usage of the term is in Israeli society, I will note the absurdity of the question and bow out.
In order to qualify as a new movement, there has to be a change that is a change from the type of changes that take place on a regular basis (that are not really changes since these changes have been taking place since Sinai, and there is no change in the type of change taking place.)
No True Scotsman.
I think that the Americans need to have a better sense of how Israelis use the term before they can start throwing it around and arguing about its meaning.
I think Israelis should also have a clearer definition of the term before they start using it for Americans, who don’t fit into any of your categories.
IITFT – As a few examples, Rav Malkiel Kotler, Rav Aaron Satmer, and the Skverer Rov.
Do you mean within Israel or Israel vs. America?
Israel vs. outside Israel.
I don’t know who made that comment, but I assume that they would differentiate between American elections and Israeli elections.
Who is “they”? This is a boich svarah from IITFT. The Gedolim certainly never said such a thing. In fact, they are on record that you should vote for whomever will give Yeshivos the most money, regardless of the Gimmel Chamuros.
“I don’t think there are any Gedolim who say to vote for Meretz.”
But there are certainly those who will tell you to vote however you feel is best. The Rema brought earlier seems to be an example.
“Having lived here for many years and spoken to many people, this is my definite impression as to how many, if not most Israelis use the term “Chareidi”.”
Can we agree that the definition changes depending on where you live?
Supporting any movement that publicly disapproves of any of the 3 chamuros makes other than a charedi or Frum ( irresepective of your garb)
Hence it is Assur to vote in any American Election.
Gavra, the Rema says (Choshen Mishpat 163,1) that whenever there is a disagreement over some public matter each person should give his opinion l’shem Shemayim. His opinion and not his rav’s opinion. L’shem Shemayim and not l’shem interests.
The Rema also says that only those who pay taxes get to vote.
The Gedolim would argue that this is not a Din in Shechenim/Shutfin, but an attempt to squeeze Great Mammon (the “Amud HaOlam”) for Yeshivos out of the Shrekliche Zionists, for which everyone is Mechuyav to join. 🙂
Gavra-at-work: “Where is the Aveirah of voting for Meretz? Does this tie into “following the Gedolim”? Wouldn’t that be an additional qualification?”
I think it would be “not following the Gedolim” which is part of being Shomer Torah and Mitzvos.
I was almost hoping you would go there.
1: Following the “Gedolim” is an absolute qualification for being a Chareidi.
2: Included in “following the Gedolim” is voting Gimmel, as the Gedolim have told us that we must vote Gimmel.
Hence
3: Anyone who did not vote Gimmel is not a Chareidi.
Or
3: One may have different Gedolim than you (ex. Satmar Rov, Rav Avital, Rav Meir Stern, Rav Fuerst, etc. etc.) and still be a Chareidi. If their Gadol doesn’t tell them for whom to vote, they may vote Meretz (or Labor, NRP, etc.).
This assumes that having the Gedolim tell people from whom to vote is not a new “movement”. Gantz Shayach it is, as ubiquitin said earlier.
lightbrite – Why do you want this bumped?
You da man.
Thanks DY.
after the State of Israel happened, people stopped opposing it since its existence must have been from Hashem.
A similar Shittah was held by many others, that once the State is in existence then protesting it would give support and comfort to Sonei Yisroel (as we have seen happen). Agudah in EY took a different approach, in which they don’t support the state, but don’t specifically go against it (for the time being) and get support (money) from the state.
DY once showed me a fascinating written version of the Agudah Shittah post ’48 from one of the Gedolim, perhaps he could find it and copy it here as well?
Zionism is a hashkafa, not a sociological detail.
I would argue that Aderaba, Zionism is the biggest “detail” to split Torah society (at least in Israel) since the Chassidic/Misnaged divide, and maybe even the Pharisee chumrah of Chulin B’Taharah.
Boruch Hashem I live in a neighborhood where “Zionists” and “Anti-Zionists” can get along, but then again there is no money on the line for supporting a side.
everything else are minor sociological details
Like Zionism. 🙂
In terms of secular education, I think that it’s very inaccurate to say that the Chareidi world is against it even as a characteristic. I believe I mentioned this in a previous post. The Chareidi world (in general) considers secular education to be valuable – it’s a question of priorities.
For example, Ner Yisroel, who LuL considers part of the “Chareidi world”, does work towards secular education for its students.
The Lvush points to a lifestyle. There is no Halacha to wear a Borsalano hat or a Streimel and its not assur to go without one.
There is nothing wrong with wearing a Rugby Shirt or khaki pants, but you wont see too many Chassidim or Yeshivish people wearing them
So in the sense that Haredism is a “lifestyle” it is a movement
Speaking Yiddish primarily or eating Hemish foods primarily are other examples of Lifestyle choices as opposed to Halacha
None of which have to do with being a “Chareidi” as per LuL’s definition. One can wear a Rugby Shirt or khaki pants and be a Chareidi. Perhaps not a Chassid, but those terms are not interchangeable. Some Chareidim are Chassidim, others not. Some Chassidim are Chareidim, others are not.
DY – Rambam Shechitah 10:12
? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ???, ???: ??? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ????????, ??????? ????? ??? ???? ?????–???? ?????. ?????? ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ???? ?????. [??] ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????–?? ?? ?? ?????? ????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ???? ??????, ????? ????? ???: ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?????, ????? “?? ?? ????? ??? ?????” (????? ??,??).
So the actual Meztius is not relevant, rather it is what Chazal decided to be the Halacha that defines the Halachic Metzius.
So when you say
“I’m saying we do know how they affect the din – it’s only muttar if and because they are ???? ??? ????. We may not know which physical characteristic is considered ???? ??? ????.”
I’m understanding the “physical characteristic” as the Halachic difference that gives the item (louse or animal) its Din.
Back 8 years ago…..
LuL – I don’t believe Meretz would be against your definition of Chareidi, if they could support themselves, be in the army (as someone living in the country, not a Zionist (they would do the same as if they lived in Canada)) and the peace process. Meretz (or Lapid) would not exist to oppose Ner Yisroel graduates who went to college (who by your current definition are “Chareidi”).
It is more of the deep sociological divide between those who vote Gimmel and others in Israel that Meretz (or Lapid, etc.) are against. Chareidim (as per your definition) can be on either side of that division.
Or: Possibility #2: One could argue that someone who votes Meretz is by definition not “shomer Torah u’Mitzvos”.
Where is the Aveirah of voting for Meretz? Does this tie into “following the Gedolim”? Wouldn’t that be an additional qualification?
Possibility #3 is saying that the definition of Chareidi can vary? Not much of a definition then.
Since #1 seems to be correct, would you mind please describing the extra qualifications that you are adding?
As for the guy who is “shomer Torah u’Mitvos but votes Meretz”, his anti-Zionism has nothing in common with the Chareidi’s anti-zionism. His anti-Zionism has more in common with Obama’s anti-zionism. No shaychis. In the ways in which Obama (or l’havdil the Meretz guy) are anti-zionist, I (and probably most or many Chareidim) are the biggest Zionists.
So what? He is still a Shomer Torah U’mitzvos (qualification #1) AND not a Zionist/Dati Leumi (Qualification #2) AND self-identifies as a Chareidi (Qualification #3). Unless you are adding additional qualifications?
Freilichin Chanuka to you as well. I prefer Rav Moshe’s term “Yeraim”, and can only hope that it is applicable.
They meant it doesn’t fit the halachic definition of parah v’ravah,
I agree fully. Hence the quotations. See my note above:
“We don’t know how ???? ??? ???? affected Chazal’s determination that killing a louse on Shabbos is Muttar, or how 12 months affected Chazal’s decision whether somthing is Halachically defined as a Treifa. All we have are the words of Chazal and their P’sak, which is final.”
Gavra, you are defining ???? ??? ???? as spontaneous generation, but that’s likely an incorrect definition. Had we defined it that way and decided to accept the disproof, we would have assered killing kinim. See P”Y.
I thought that was the accepted definition of ???? ??? ????. Do you have a different definition? I am not claiming any level of expertise on this topic.
Also, the treifos issue is not similar. Nobody is claiming that Chazal were wrong, but that the classification of treifos, and therefore the halachah, is determined by what the metzius was at the time of Chazal, and doesn’t change when the metzius changes. IOW, the definition of a treifa is a condition which in Chazal’s times would not allow an animal to live for 12 months.
I don’t know what this means. If a cow gets a disease that would have killed it within 12 months, but we give it Penicillin and it lives, is it now a treifah?
I wasn’t saying they are similar in that Chazal were “wrong” CV (Afar L’pi), but rather that the Halachic definitions don’t change even if different circumstances now apply. We don’t know how ???? ??? ???? affected Chazal’s determination that killing a louse on Shabbos is Muttar, or how 12 months affected Chazal’s decision whether somthing is Halachically defined as a Treifa. All we have are the words of Chazal and their P’sak, which is final.
Another example is how we treat lice on Shabbos. We follow Chazal, not modern scientists.
Please explain
Halachically, a louse is allowed to be killed on Shabbos, since it is “spontaneously generated”.
???? ????? ??’: ?? ????? ???? ??? ??? ?”? ????? ?”? ??? ????? ?”? ???? ????? ???? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ?? ?????
Even though we now know that lice are not “spontaneously generated”, none the less since Chazal said it was muttar we don’t have the ability to change the Halacha.
A similar concept (IIRC) exists by Treifos, where even though we now know that many Treifah can live more than 12 months, once Chazal declared a defect to be a Treifah the classification remains.
I don’t see your point. Chareidim basically means Jews who are not Zionist. It is also possible to use the term to refer to Jews who are Zionist but choose to label themselves according to the fact that they are Chareidim as opposed to labeling themselves by their zionism.
Okay. Just be aware this includes anyone who self-identifies as a Chareidi, and excludes anyone who doesn’t, whether they are Shomrei Torah U’Mitzvos, follow Gedolim, etc. It is actually very similar to the Liberal definition of “Woman” being anyone who self-identifies as such, no matter whether they are physically a woman or not.
It also means that there were no Chareidim before people started to self-identify using that term.
“Which was my original argument that “chareidi” is based on self-identification, not whether you follow the Torah or not.”
I don’t disagree with the first part of the sentence. I am not sure about the second. That’s part of a more general question of exactly what does a person have to keep in order to be considered Frum, and there is no clear-cut answer to that question. Different people will say different thngs. If someone keeps some halachos and not others, can they be considered Frum? What if they keep everything but hilchos tznius? What if someone is a murderer, lo aleinu – can they be considered Frum? Whatever your answer would be for “Frum”, I think it would probably be similar for “Chareidi”.
There are definitely people who consider themselves Chareidi who are “modern” in the sense of not dressing tzniusly, watching movies, etc. They call themselves Chareidi because they consider themselves to be Frum and they are not dati-leumi, and as Joseph put it, Chareidi is the default term for Frum people who are not dati-leumi.
So if someone in Israel does not self-identify as Charaeidi, but is a Shomer Torah U’mitzvos and follows the Pesakim of his Rebbe, is he a Chareidi or not?
To your second point, you seem to be Mesupak if self-identification is sufficient or you also need a certain level of keeping Halacha. (I try not to use the word “Frum” as it deals with the exact externals that you discuss. One can be “Frum” in public but an Oved Avodah Zara in private.) In addition, your requirement of “following Gedolim” indicates that you need to be a certain level of Shomer Torah U’Mitzvos. So what is that level?
So what level of “Keeping Halacha” is the minimum for being a “Chareidi”? Or if Zahava Gal-On decides to self identify as a Chareidi, does she become one?
“How about the Orthodox Meretz guy?”
I’m not sure what you mean – almost everyone in Israel is Orthodox. There is very little Conservative or Reform here, Boruch Hashem. What does that have to do with anything? You can be Orthodox without being Frum. Orthodox doesn’t have to do with what you do – it has to do with your beliefs and/or the type of shul you daven in when you go to shul.
I don’t know who this Orthodox Meretz guy is or what you are talking about – it needs more clarification.
Someone who is Shomer Torah U’Mitzvos, yet votes for Meretz in elections.
“Finally, what do you mean by “do not follow Daas Torah”?”
Not following Gedolim.
I am not sure about this, but I think that I may have heard that the term Chareidim originated with people who were anti-Chareidi and it was a derogatory term. The Chareidim then turned things around by deciding to use the term as a source of pride. I think the same thing happened with the term “Frum” which had a negative connotation not so long ago.
Thanks 🙂 What do you mean by “follow”?
Joseph +1. Basically, the Religious Zionists choose to identify themselves by their Zionism instead of their Chareidism.
Could say the same for Sephardim, Breslovers, Lubavitch and Telzers.
Please explain yourselves why one group’s identification removes them from being “Chareidi” and the other group’s identification does not.
Regarding the Chardalniks, it is possible to consider them Chardal – that is what Chardal stands for – Chareidi Leumi. On the other hand, some might argue that by calling themselves Chareidi Leumi, they are choosing to call themselves something other than Chareidi. So I guess it’s up to them how they choose to define themselves.
Which was my original argument that “chareidi” is based on self-identification, not whether you follow the Torah or not.
How about the Orthodox Meretz guy?
Finally, what do you mean by “do not follow Daas Torah”?
Why are Religious Zionists not “Chareidi”? After all, they also have “no particular person whose teachings they follow except Moshe Rabbeinu”?
benignuman – With the definition being proposed by Joe & LuL in this thread, all of the above (YU, Army, Chassidish, Misnaged, Breslov, Brisker, College, etc. etc. etc.) are Chareidi. What others might call “Frum”, or Rav Moshe called “Yeraim”, and the term “Chareidi” are interchangeable.
No one today holds there is a problem with not having your hair in a braid. Many do consider nail polish to be a problem.
I recently found the Rav Vonser in Shevet HaLevi (6:169, IIRC) says one should be Machmir like the Magen Avraham, and that to not do so is a Geder of Pritzus.
Of course there are things that are done differently today. But those things have nothing to do with the definition of chareidi. That’s why even today there are many Jews who do things very differently from each other but can all still be considered Chareidi (such as Sephardim and Chassidim). According to the definition of Chareidi that both Joseph and I were using, most Jews from the time of Har Sinai until relatively recently would be considered Chareidi, despite their differences, because those differences have nothing to do with the definition of Chareidi.
If you define “Chareidi” as “Religious Jews excluding Zionists”, then why would you even ask the question?
By your definition (which I reject), any Orthodox member of Meretz is now “Chareidi” because they aren’t Zionist?
So sure, everyone is now Chareidi, so the word has no meaning.
The girls going out on Tu B’A (and Yom Kippur) were presumably penuyos tohoros (because in those days even single girls were toivel), which our girls are not.
If Chazal cared enough to make the girls borrow clothing not to embarrass those who did not have, Kal V’Chomer they were careful not to embarrass the girls who were Niddos and identify them to their peers and townspeople.
It seems to me that dating by definition is non-platonic activity. The whole purpose of dating is to find someone to marry and to create a non-platonic relationship. I agree that fun does not equal ????, but playing together in the context of dating does.
The idea of dating is to create a relationship, not a “relations”ual relationship. Just because the end result will be marriage does not make the current relationship a “relations”ual relationship.
So it seems my argument is with point “B”, that a date by definition is not platonic. One can have fun and build a close relationship (as recommended by many Rabbonim) without flirting.
edited
I am understanding “???? and ???? ???” as meaning flirtatious talking or behavior (???? ???) and playing or having fun in a non-platonic manner (“????”).
I agree (YD 195:1 was my source as well, especially the Shach there). Why do you assume that playing a game is not “platonic” in nature or is flirtatious? I can play a game with Ittisa and other members of my/her family (who are certainly Ervah, even without Niddah) in a platonic fashion. Fun does not equal “???? and ???? ???”.
Or are we assuming the worst of most Bochrim?
P.S. Do you know which Shailah Rav MOshe discusses it? Thanks.
Theoretically, one could just walk around Chelsea Piers and have serious conversations without playing together. But normally the dates play together at these venues (and others) in order to have fun and laugh together; which is forbidden by Chazal.
What definition are you using for “???? and ???? ???”, and from where are you sourcing it?
You have to like kids to be a gannenet.
Some also claim you need to like children in order to become a mother, but that never stopped the ones who don’t like children.
There is no heter for ???? and ???? ???. And yet, this is what goes on on most dates after the first (assuming things are “going well”).
This is a good point. Each date should be L’Toeles, not for “???? and ???? ???”. If one gets to the point where the dates are “flirtatious”, the the couple needs to scale back.
I would hope in Yeraim communities where dating is L’Toeles, there is not ???? and ???? ???.
I agree with you about the activities. And I have davka been advised that I should do things on dates (not that it’s up to me…)
OF COURSE it is up to you. If you aren’t assertive when you are dating, how can you expect your future husband to know you as anything other than a pushover?
The result of pushing them will be a light attitude towards real halachot.
This has already happened in the realm of “Tznius”.
I really rather prefer to go there because i want to be in a frum environment?
In the middle of Harlem? I doubt it.
You should forget Traif College and be a Gannenet.
I suspect the OP question was referring to acting as a real Jew.
There are a halachic distinctions which are based on ????? ???? ???.
Which is more than just having a Jewish mother or a proper conversion.
In which case the response is not only wrong, but it is dangerous and can lead to Issurim.
The Mods have warned others about making assumptions about what others are thinking, and that certainly applies here as well.
OMG – Goyim 🙂 Angels and Ministers of grace defend us!!
The rest of the Jewish working world Lives with getting home an hour or less before Shabbos. Figure it out or quit and become a Gannenet.
P.S. I also went to a secular college and never had any of these issues.
I have to agree with everyone who is saying it is a silly question. A real Jew is defined as ZD puts it, end discussion.
You may want to re-phrase your question as an “Oved Hashem”, not a “Jew”.
In that case, I’ll agree with MA (and I’m sure the Mussar Seforim bring both ideas).
An Oved Hashem is someone who asks consistently “What does Hashem want from me now”, and is willing to defy common society to do what the RBSO wants from them.
I see your “100% person” sweating the small stuff, while the Oved Hashem is more big picture.
Just a thought.
And don’t even think about using hot dogs.
Sorry, but you obviously haven’t tried real “hot dogs” from Romanian (the 1/2 – 3/4 pound Kielbasas) in your chulent. Unfortunately, they are probably not an option for Shloimel, but they make Chulent even more awesome.
lilmod ulelamaid – To spell it out, my point was that you should first worry about “Issurim” that are actually brought down in Halacha, even if we are not “Noheg” to follow that Shittah, instead of harping on “sensitivities” that are in the eyes of the beholder and certainly not a Halachic requirement.
You seemed to be saying that it’s assur to not wear braids,
To quote the mods:
You make a lot of assumptions of other posters thoughts and motives. It might be best to allow them to speak on their own behalves.
What I actually said:
Obviously you should ask your LOR, but before worrying about the nuances of which color nail polish (where you agree there is no Issur), you should certainly be Choshesh for a significant Shittas Rishonim and Achronim, who hold there is and Issur for non-braided hair.
P.S. The Mishna Berurah does bring the Magen Avraham down. Siman 75, Sif Katan 12.
On the internet question, you redirected with a story. I’ll try again: Who created an “internet” Issur, vs. a sensible geder for the possible nichshal of using it?
Finally, if Tznius is a sensitivity, then it is necessarily not a Halacha. You are sensitive to black nail polish, “Tznius (the poster)” is not. Others are sensitive to showing their faces in public.
GAW: “P.S. You have still not answered my question above regarding your claim of “Un-Tznius” while agreeing that it is “not Assur”?”
I know. Sorry, I didn’t have a chance to yet. Basically I was differentiating between two categories:
1. Things that are clearly assur. These are things that everyone has to stay away from, and no one can claim, “I am just not on the level”. (with the possible exception of someone in the process of becoming frum). If someone else sees someone doing something in this category, he has an obligation to tell him to stop (subject to all the halachos and conditions of giving mussar).
2. Things that it is better not to do, but are not actually assur. These are things about which one claim that there are different levels and while they are striving for a higher level, they can claim not to be there yet. There are levels within tznius as there are within many areas. Internet use could be another example of something within this category. It is better not to use it, but if someone feels they need to, they are allowed to although they should strive to limit their usage.
I’ll agree with your separation of “Issur” and “Mutar”, but argue regarding they are “better not to do”. Once you start down that road, Ein La’davar Sof (i.e. you admit the Burka women of Bais Shemesh are correct, and you should strive towards that goal). Therefore, all we have is what our Poskim have told us is “Tzniusa Yesairah”, but that is not a “Chiyuv” on anyone.
P.S. – Who created an “Internet” Issur? For example, if someone would use it all day for good and learning Torah, with Rav Chaim looking over his shoulder the whole time, is there an independent reason to limit usage?
GAW – the Mishna Berurah does not say that you have to braid your hair.
I never said that it did. The Mishna Berurah also doesn’t say that you can’t wear black nail polish 🙂
tznius – So what did he say about black nail polish?
I don’t think that most Poskim today say that. I have never heard of anyone saying such a thing.
And back in Europe where no one covered their hair they would have said the same thing, that they “never heard of it”.
Obviously you should ask your LOR, but before worrying about the nuances of which color nail polish (where you agree there is no Issur), you should certainly be Choshesh for a significant Shittas Rishonim and Achronim, who hold there is and Issur for non-braided hair.
Go ahead and ask your LOR. I’m interested in what he would say.
No one today holds there is a problem with not having your hair in a braid. Many do consider nail polish to be a problem.
All the Yerushalmi girls have their hair braided. Go through Mea Shearim and you will see. There is a Halachic reason why (i.e. the Magen Avraham and Rashi), vs. the “Tznius?” problem of black vs. blue vs. pink nail polish.
P.S. You have still not answered my question above regarding your claim of “Un-Tznius” while agreeing that it is “not Assur”?
tznius – Good for you. Was that personal preference or based on discussions with your LOR? Just curious, and glad you are “on the level”. (Obviously now that you know there are Rishonim and Achronim who hold it is an Issur Mamash not to have a braid, you would continue to do so)
Flanken
Navel Pastrami
Brisket (but only if you cook it for 24 hours minimum)
Tznius:
gavra_at_work – i chopped my hair off (not literally its up to my shoulder but compared to the waist i chopped it off).
Not saying that is a bad thing to have done, but many hold (including Rashi, the Magen Avraham and possibly the Machatzis HaShekel) that girls need to have their hair braided, and going out without a braid is a real Issur (Rashi uses the Lashon of “????” – Embarrassing).
????: ???? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??????, ???? ????? ????? ????? ???? ???? ???
So I ask again, before you are concerned about nail polish, do you have your hair in a braid?