Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Your sole concern is courtesy bussing so that your kid doesn’t have to walk a couple of blocks, and you don’t care if programs for the district’s kids have to be cut to pay for it
And would rather public school programs be cut because it only affects “????????”, even if it hurts yourselves by cutting busing.
Unfortunately, Lakewood B’shittah (and they hold it is a good thing) is so closely tied to government funding (and not local that would cost them in taxes), the results of the Referendum are expected. Just don’t hold your breath for the state to bail you out when they have Camden, Atlantic City and Newark to deal with first (unless HaGaon Rosh Yeshiva BMG Aaron Kotler can pull a rabbit out of his black hat. He has done it before).
Avi K – Thought of that back when. Achitofel had Smicha, and was the recognized Daas Torah of his generation (together/after Doeg, of course).
Like Mike Tress before him, Schlomo Yehudah Rechnitz may be our next Gadol HaDor. Time will tell.
No one knows what’s right or wrong so let everyone “be” until mashiach comes.
They may not be perfect, but the Einei Haeidah know much better than we do. If someone is Somech on a Bar Samcha, then OK, but Chazal said “Aseh L’cha Rav”.
Sorry, if my kid’s first grade rebbe wants to be called Dr., I’m not doing it.
Your call for yourself. As for me, if it makes someone (especially a fellow Yid) happy and doesn’t hurt anyone, why wouldn’t I?
P.S. If the Rebbe was a Doctor of History, or Talmudic law, would your answer change?
Gavra, don’t judge a person by their title, fine, but we don’t need to stop using them.
Not saying you should. But as the title means nothing anyway, why not call a person by the honorific that they prefer. If a doctorate in Talmudic law or a first grade Rebbe wants to be called Doctor, Rabbi, Esquire or “Late for Dinner”, let them. As long as they don’t use their title for gain inappropriately, what difference does it make?
DaasYochid – Not sure where you are going. My point was they don’t need to be called a Dr. to be an expert, and calling them a Dr. doesn’t mean they actually know anything (look at first year residents). To actually practice medicine legally they may need the accreditation (like the CPA example). One does not need to be accredited to do the job of a “Rabbi”.
Obviously, titles are important to some people, otherwise there wouldn’t be titles.
In my (limited) experience in the Yeshiva, Orthodox and business worlds, the only people who care about their titles are those who need the self-esteem boost that others should know they are “qualified”. in many instances, it is because they are only qualified because of their title, not because of their knowledge or experience.
Those who know they are an expert don’t care if they are referred by or have a title. Of course there are exceptions (such as a CPA needs the title to sign an opinion), but those are the exceptions.
Daas Yochid – Is that a Daas Yochid or Daas Rabbim?
Seriously though, I find this whole discussion somewhat amusing (especially when they blamed me! “Gavra”).
The point of the OP was that the title makes the person. While true in government or union positions (where the actual work is not valued), in Klal Yisroel and the working world, it isn’t your title, but what you know (as many here have pointed out). The US Government agrees that the title is unimportant, and it is the function that matters.
If you are really concerned about the title, then ask yourself hypothetically: If Rebbetzen Kanievsky ZTL (when she was alive) had decided (which she never would) to lead a Kehillah and act as the spiritual leader and advisor (with no male in a similar or higher position), but not be a “Rabbi”, would that be acceptable?
Of course not.
From Agudas Yisroel of America:
5.
Can women receive a parsonage allowance?
There is no clear precedent whether an Orthodox Jewish female teacher who has a bona fide certification (i.e., a certificate from a seminary or other Jewish program as described below) to teach Limudei Kodesh, and who is employed by a Jewish school for that purpose, is eligible to receive a parsonage allowance. We therefore cannot state with certainty that such payments would not be challenged by the IRS, which could affect the
seminary or other qualified Jewish program designed to prepare Limudei Kodesh teachers (and not from a board of education
or other secular organization or school) and should certify that the recipient is authorized to perform those religious functions.
So call them what you want, but the Agudah has decided that there can (and should) be female “clergy”.
So you think male limudei kodesh teachers, menahelim, and magidei shiur should be called Mister?
Most aren’t chashuv enough to be called “Mister”, so they should be called “rabbi”.
The moetzes, in their psak halacha that a woman cannot be called Rabbi because there is no smicha for a woman AFFIRM that the term IS a technical, smicha related word.
The Moetzes doesn’t have the final say on the English language (of which “Rabbi” is a word). They may say that a woman can not be the leader of a community or Kehilah. But to be called “Rabbi”? “Rabbi” Sally Priesand is a “Rabbi”.
We have so many titles that we seemingly have to keep adding new ones. When I was a kid, I don’t remember a single “Adoneinu Moreinu V’Rabbeinu Harav HaGaon….”
Because the prior ones are meaningless. Each additional term has a short shelf life, and then they need to add a new one.
That seems to be the case based on the number of Yeshiva pupils in each town, based on Board of Ed busing figures.
Does this include New Square and Kaser?
The Rosh Yeshiva of Toras Moshe in Yerushalyim had (has?) the habit of calling everyone “Rabbi” (as in “My Dear Rabbi”).
“Everyone gets called Rabbi these days.
That is why Maran is used, so the editor can separate those who he/she thinks are the real rabbonim from the run of the mill “Rabbi” or “Rav”.
Now “Gavra” is a title with real Chashivus. As in “Hahu Gavra”. He is mentioned more times in the Gemorah than any other Tanna or Amorah.
Mr. and Mar (as in “Amar Mar” (second place)) are also acceptable.”
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/rabbinic-titles
On your logic the Gemara should have deleted every “hahoo gavra” because one of Ravina’s chavrusas might associate the “gavra” with someone they knew “oy lashon hora” ! NO.
HOW DID I GET INVOLVED IN THIS????
Someone told me that the most affordable Jewish community is Milwaukee because the price of housing in cheap and they have school vouchers.
So does Cleveland.
Don’t go to Cincinnati.
Why not?
St. Louis is well off in employment opportunities?
As always, it depends on what you do. There probably isn’t a large market for typewriter repair people. Look into anywhere you move before making a decision.
Gavra, did you know that the “sainted” Louis in question was the one who burned the Talmud in Paris?
Yes.
St. Louis is actually affordable, not like Brooklyn, Far Rockaway or Monsey.
Cleveland (or Cincinnati) may also be OK, but “Industry very easily relocatable” has a way of not relocating to Cleveland, so do some research first.
Always and forever, the devil Heeself, complete with pointed tail.
It agitates the Community with ill founded Jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot & insurrection.
Also from Washington’s farewell address (who was strongly against political parties as we have them today:
All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests
Many proposals that go through the House today look at nothing other than those narrow interests of budgeting and faction promotion, without looking at “mutual interests”.
Then again, block voting only works to further the interests of the minority over mutual interests.
Always and forever, the devil Heeself, complete with pointed tail.
Abba_S:
1: Lakewood is not East Ramapo!
2: So only the developers will make money.
3: Was referring to this:
Avram in MD – Sure I was over the top, but many republicans (like those who would vote for Trump) would completely agree with what I said. That perspective is alive and well in the US, even if not correct.
Halacha has the concept of the “Asarah Batlanim”, ten people in the city who are paid to sit around and do nothing (be available for minyanim, learn, etc.), so we Yidden have that concept and agree it is important.
Others consider other types of “Batlanim” as providing services to their community that you would think are wasteful (example – member of J Street, or “vulture investor” (as I saw some “rabbi” tried to write an article that being one is Assur)). The government (not looking through the lens of religion) could decide that both should not get benefits, as they are not “Osek B’Yeshuo Shel Olam” in their eyes.
Finally:
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
Attributed (perhaps incorrectly) to Alexis de Tocqueville. We see it time and time again in our own communities, where we vote against our most dear values for the sake of government funding.
I envision the social impacts as being extremely positive from the government’s perspective,
I agree that the employment rate is an extremely important metric of public wellness; however, it isn’t the only one. For example, do you think that the proliferation of two-income households has been more of a benefit or detriment to society?
Depends who you ask. From a government fiscal perspective (looking to have fewer people on programs) it would be a positive. From a democrat/socialist perspective (where they want people to be dependent so they will vote socialist) then no.
especially for entire cultures (and there are two that I’m thinking of) that shun gainful legal employment.
I’m assuming that one of these cultures you mention is the kollel culture, which constitutes a very small percentage of the US population as a whole. In that case, I wouldn’t characterize the culture as shunning gainful legal employment, but rather prioritizing employment in other gainfaul activities that don’t result in money.
As I said, from the government’s perspective, “shunning gainful legal employment”. One could say the same about philosophers, thinkers, homeless people, chess players, graffiti artists, etc. That you consider one activity “gainful” (such as being a member of the society to promote graffiti) means nothing from the government’s perspective.
I’m not certain what the point of your post is (of the following).
They probably won’t bother bringing the monitor bill to the assembly floor.
The state is not offering additional money (and they should, even though public school children won’t see it).
The public school children will suffer before special ed or busing.
Public school children and parents with any sense will move out of East Ramapo, selling their homes to Chassidish developers who will build complexes, with both making huge profits.
Other areas (such as Ocean Twp. NJ) will have a good excuse for their refusal to allow religious Jews in (with perhaps some soft “antisemitism”).
So which one?
I’m not sure about this one. While they certainly can build the Yeshiva under RLUIPA, they may not win the point about building a dorm. From “fountain gate ministries v. city of plano” (Granted, before RLUIPA was passed). Then again, it is not worth the zoning fight which the board will probably lose or settle.
Thus, the trial court properly concluded that the above enumerated activities were that of a college, and not of a church. We have found no case, and none is cited, that includes the existence or location of colleges within the purview of the first amendment. We hold that the operation of a college is not protected as an exercise of freedom of speech or freedom of religion within the first amendment.
Relocation expenses can be pretty high, as well as potential social impacts of moving, such as being far away from family/friends, adjusting to a new culture, etc. Maybe teleworking technology can help prevent the need for moving. What do you think about something like mandatory community service (I guess you could call it “make-work”)?
I envision the social impacts as being extremely positive from the government’s perspective, especially for entire cultures (and there are two that I’m thinking of) that shun gainful legal employment.
That’s fair, but I would like to know what you would propose as a better amelioration of poverty?
No welfare or other government direct payments without mandatory relocation and work (similar to “workfare”), or go all out in the other direction with unconditional basic income.
But that is for a different thread.
How does it demean the recipient?
Exactly the way Chazal explain it does. Nahamusa D’Kisufa. We say in Bentching every day “V’lo Lidai Matnas Basar V’dam”, but go ahead with taking such Matanos on purpose (not saying right or wrong, but it is demeaning).
Finally, the culture of dependency (as I’ve mentioned before) can only hurt Torah Yidden as a society.
That’s even if it is not Tzedaka :), and I guess off-topic.
For the kollel families that I know personally, the issue isn’t whether to earn a living or not, but choosing to earn less (and do with less) than is potentially possible in order to prioritize learning; e.g., the spouse works, the husband teaches on the side, etc.
Could say the same about any Yeraim Jew and any sacrifice they make for their Yiddishkeit, from Kosher food to tuition to living in a Jewish community. Sacrifices are demanded by Hashem, otherwise we wouldn’t deserve the reward.
I have yet to personally see a kollel family living the high life
Depends how you define Kollel; see above.
??? ????
?? ??,?
??????
??? ?”? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????
???????, ????????? ???????; ???????? ???????????? ?????????.
“The parents can always say “no”,…”
I would imagine there is the fear of not being allowed to see the grandchildren if they say no, among other things.
So you are talking about someone who would blackmail their own parents for money, with the threat of withholding visitation or dis-owning the parents.
Why bring learning or Kollel (vs. any other material want, such as a car, house, weed, etc.) into the picture?
Aside from government funds, another frequent source of support for kollel families is their parents.
Does asking a parent to delay retirement so he can go to kollel place him on a higher level than someone who actually helps support his elderly parents?
The parents can always say “no”, or “My learning is more important than supporting you or your husband learning”. That they don’t is their problem.
Besides, they aren’t the real learners anyway, as discussed earlier.
Very little, unless you like to pass by churches and listen in.
Kyrie (in it’s many forms, including Gregorian chant and US pop) and Bach’s “Ein Feste Burg ist Unser Gott”.
(“Ein Feste Burg ist Unser Gott” is a Lutheran hymn, not actual Avoda Zara service, so it may not be included. Any insight would be appreciated).
Was the second half of your post directed at me? I don’t think I’ve ever made the case that a tune is tamei based purely on who composed it
I thought you were explaining why non-Jewish (whatever that means) music is Assur. If you are simply saying that certain types of music (“Jewish” or “non-Jewish”) can bring someone to the wrong frame of mind, then we agree.
If it brings one to an improper frame of mind.
Perhaps also on a supernatural level. Rav Moshe says about a tune which was originally used for avodah zarah that although not technically assur to listen to (with no words, in a secular context), it is nevertheless “m’chuar” – disgusting. That might also be true for music originally set to inappropriate lyrics.
True for both non-Jewish and Jewish (such as the now infamous “Zochreini Na”, or “Yidden”, and others) music. What you claim is that an attempt to remove Pritzus (which is a good thing) has extended to include everything under the sun, including the ridiculous (such as Vivaldi). Possibly good for the Hamon Am who doesn’t know better and will listen to dictates from above, but not foe a thinking Yeraim Jew.