Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sam2: I’m okay with no further response from you, though I certainly did provide examples. The “student dynamics of YU”, whatever possible explanation there could theoretically be for those dynamics, have nothing to do with co-ed MO schools and other gender mixing, and the resultant aveiros (chamuros) that result from that laxity yet the laxity is intentionally not fixed thus allowing the aveiros (Chamuros) to continue.
Quote from your previous post:
“Yes, “MO” mixes the genders more. Not because they say the modern ideal of mixing genders trumps Halacha (as you claim), but because they believe that whatever gender-mixing they participate in is Muttar.”
Again, there are numerous issurim that come up when you mix the genders. In other words, if you care at all about the Torah, you do NOT want to needlessly mix the genders. Yet, as you admit, MO (proudly) does mix the genders and you claim they believe that “they are halachic decisions”.
But they can’t be “halachic decisions” if they go against halacha (or many halachos). So either they’re using a different Shulchan Aruch than traditional Orthodox does, or else it must be that they let modernity trump the Torah. The name is MO. The halacha is not like their alleged piskei halacha. What else could it be that causes them to claim something is “muttar” when it clearly is not? MO.
Your last quote:
“No one, and I mean no one, who honestly believes they are Orthodox (“Modern” or otherwise) thinks that any considerations not provided for in Halachah ever trumps Halachah.”
While I believe this to be theoretically true, people do transgress. And people then rationalize those transgressions with anything from plausible to outright foolish reasons. And the ones who transgress biShitah (gender mixing, social kissing, women wearing pants, et al.) still consider themselves Orthodox. How? The rationale is that MO says so.
As for the other examples, like the story, et. al., that I brought: again, these are indicative of a lack of sensitivity and Torah hashkafos and a corresponding immersion in secular culture, which your own Rav JBS decried and which MO still holds by despite Rav JBS’s position.
I’ve been waiting to hear your answer to why MO ignores the Rav (and traditional orthodox poskim), but none has been forthcoming. It seems obvious that the answer is that simply the lack of proper Torah education is the cause.
Neither you nor Feif Un have offered any answers to anything I’ve posed. All you’ve done is ignore the evidence and attempt to halachicly justify that (co-ed) which is not halachicly justifiable and then attack chareidim for “chumras” when those “chumras” have far greater basis in halacha than any kula you’ve come up with.
Once again, whether you claim it’s halachicly valid or it’s like my position that MO shitos are clearly halchicly invalid, you’ve still proven my point, with the above admission, that when it comes to these matters, a traditional orthodox Jew should not ask an MO Rav as he will get an MO answer which, at least in these matters, is not in accordance with traditional orthodoxy. Like I said a number of posts back, if you ask a Satmar Chassid if you can daven mincha well past shkiah, he will say that you can; a traditional Rav will not. That’s just the facts. So, too, here. As per your own admission, MO is more tolerant of mixing of the genders than is traditional orthodoxy.
So you will get different answers to the same question depending on if you ask an MO Rav or a traditional orthodox Rav. That was and is the essential point.
Sam2 and Feif Un: In truth, it is likely the lack of an unadulterated Torah education that causes MO to take the liberties they do. Were they educated in mainstream traditional orthodox yeshivos then they would know better. Again, I am trying to not judge people and am trying to give all the benefit of the doubt.
Speaking of co-ed schools, parents with students in a co-ed school are placing them in a veritable minefield of issurim and even your Rav JBS was against it, and he himself wrote that his Maimonides in Boston was a particular exception. Yet there are plenty of MO co-ed schools. On what valid halachic basis? None, except in very limited circumstances.
While on the subject of Rav JBS, nobody has yet answered why MO ignore their Rav JBS and shun modern society to the greatest possible extent as Rav JBS advised.
So even if there were no innate issurim, being a slave to the decrepit culture around us would still be wrong, even according to Rav JBS. How do you explain the reviews of bars and other places of pritzus (yes, any bar, club, etc) in YU publications?
If you read any issue of the YU Commentator, an official publication, it is quite obvious that they must have a different Shulchan Aruch than traditional orthodoxy does. Going to a Jazz performance at a Harlem apartment? And then writing about how it mentions Yeshu HaNotzri’s birth and everyone sang along? Students writing publibly how they’re upset that your Rashei Yeshiva have too much influence on the school in that the school agreed to put in Internet filters in the dorms? And on and on and on. It is disgusting, to those not de-sensitized (presumably like yourselves) or not part of the MO world.
As I said, I am not interested in listing other people’s “liberties”. I have provided small samples over the last few posts to convey a point and it is clear from those samples that there is an underlying root cause and that is MO.
The point remains that either MO is working with a different set of rules than traditional orthodoxy is or else their Rabbis are simply uniformly ignored, which is difficult to believe. So for non-MO, ask a traditional orthodox Rabbi about Zumba rather than asking an MO Rabbi.
Feif Un:
I believe I could easily explain to you what is halachicly wrong with co-ed schooling, and even your Rav JBS was against it. So why argue with him? But you can look up Rav Moshe’s teshuva and the other responsa on the topic and you will see the multiple issurim in attending a co-ed school. “Touching between the genders” is only one problem. Histaklus, Kalus rosh and other issues are equally severe. Again, MO obviously must have a different Shulchan Aruch if it can go against all those issurim, diOraysa and otherwise, including of their own Rav JBS.
Once again, you fail to distinguish between traditional orthodox and chareidi. I spoke of the former, not the latter which is irrelevant to this discussion.
But while I am no fan of chareidi chumros, if you look up those same teshuvos and you see how separation of the genders is, essentially, the more the better, you will see that the Chareidi chumras have much more basis in halacha in fortifying those borders of separation than MO does in destroying them.
I could also argue that the standards of 50 years ago, even *if* appropriate then, does not automatically make them still appropriate now. Unlike MO which believes that Torah bends for secular culture, traditional orthodoxy does not. But it does believe that secular culture can change, and it has certainly changed for the worse in a big way, and such changes may call for new takanos. So when the culture you proudly celebrate (against your own Rav JBS and Rav SRH who is “rolling over in his grave” from the way you corrupt his teachings), has become so hyper-sexual, that calls for an appropriate measured response that was not needed 50 years ago. Quite possibly, that means separate seating, or whatever else that was not done 50 years ago. It’s not my decision, but the logic is certainly there. You certainly don’t have to worry about aveiros that way, but you sure do if you mix the genders the MO way.
Sam2:
You know very well what MO does that traditional Orthodox does not. And I did discuss (more than) enough to prove the point.
Also, take a look at the post by “QuestionForYou” one or two before yours, but I would substitute “Chareidi” for traditional orthodox.
Since you insist, however, I have indeed already provided specifics. For example, MO proudly mixes the genders (in and out of school) much more than traditional Orthodox (i.e. the Torah) allows, and much more gilui arayos of various levels results from that. A few posts back, I mentioned the “male contraceptive” story in an MO school as a small example of this.
Again, I don’t wish to list all their “liberties” and then get into a silly argument about how this particular violation of halacha is not widespread and that particular trampling of halacha is also not universal, because it’s not relevant to my original point, which still applies: an MO Rav will issue an MO psak. (I don’t know if he takes any particular liberties, but it’s very possible he does.) So for a traditional Orthodox Jew, they’re best off asking elsewhere if they want an uncompromising answer.
And no, it is certainly not “a few inconsequential Halachic decisions”, unless you consider absolute fidelity to the Torah to be inconsequential, CH”V, which is what MO seems to hold in the cases where they allow “modernity”, de facto if not de jure, to trump the Torah, CH”V.
Sam2:
But you’re not being realistic. If you hold of the outdated (and, clearly in hindsight, now known to be mistaken) belief/ideology that Rav JBS proposed that traditional orthodoxy will become a museum exhibit so you must be more “modern” to survive as Torah Jews, and therefore you now do things that you otherwise would not do and klal Yisrael never did, then that mindset and practice is guaranteed to color your halachic opinions. Again, for at least the third time, this is pashut.
Practically speaking, MO means “compromise” in certain areas. It would seem that these can only be achieved by distorting and/or ignoring established halacha. You can call it apikorsus or whatever else you want to call it, but that’s your call. I, however, am interested in the facts on the ground, not to judge anyone else. So rather than damning anyone as an apikores, ch”V, I simply call a spade a spade and say that since MO ideology allows for “compromise” that means that an MO Rav will issue an MO psak and that the psak may not be appropriate for a traditional orthodox Jew.
This is the danger of “anything-orthodox” rather than just plain “orthodox” (i.e. traditional orthodox). Once you add something to the Torah, you’re bound to mess up and cross lines that you are not allowed to when there is ever a possibility for conflict between, liahvdil, the two parts. Rav JBS felt it was necessary then. Regardless of who agreed or disagreed then, it certainly is not necessary now and, as history continues to show, it is harmful for many people’s spirituality. That’s the reality, as recently shown by the Beacon incident.
By the way, this bias-in-psak applies not only to MO. If any Rav, of any stripe, has a particular weakness in a certain area, say honesty in mamonus, then it’s likely his psakim will inadvertently be colored by this too, unfortunately. But how much more so if the weakness is not a weakness but an intentional stance.
Feif Un:
Wrong.
MO, as founded by Rav JBS, admittedly and intentionally (attempted to) change(d) the practice of orthodox Jewry. He spoke about it at length, and it is disingenuous of you to imply that MO is the “standard” when it is traditional orthodoxy that is the standard and MO is the (mistaken, in hindsight) experiment.
“Chareidi”/”Chassidic” Jewry is also a change, and I never claimed it is a positive one, but that is not the topic of this discussion. Notice, I compared MO not to Chareidi Judaism, but rather to traditional Orthodox, as in the way it was always done.
Again, I am not interested in discussing the liberties that MO takes, nor, as you point out (and I agree), the additional chumros that Chassidic Judaism has imposed. But MO is very certainly not the way things were always done; traditional orthodoxy is. That’s for sure.
In case this isn’t clear, I do not mean to imply, Ch”V, that a Rav of an MO community is any less respectable than one of a traditional orthodox community. But if that Rav agrees with MO changes to halacha then a traditional orthodox Jew should ask elsewhere if he wants psakim not colored by that ideology. Face the facts like a big boy: if you, the Rav, take halachic “liberties” nobody outside MO does then your psakim are colored by that. If you feel your liberties are at least muttar if not lichatchila then you have nothing to be ashamed of. If, however, you realize your liberties are certainly not lichatchila, then it should be understandable why traditional orthodox Jews should ask elsewhere.
Once again, the point of all this is that if an MO Rav says Zumba is muttar, then if you are traditional orthodox then you should ask your LOR and not rely on the psak as this is part of a broader area that MO and traditional orthodox do not agree on. No condemnations, et al. Just the facts.
Sam2: You were the one who called them(/yourself) apikorsim, not I. First, I was speaking of rabbanim/poskim, not the hamon am. Second, please “don’t put words in my mouth” as I did not say nor do I believe any such thing.
To be clear, any posek/Rav who identifies as MO, assuming he is not schizophrenic, will likely issue psakim in accordance with MO shitos, as this is his ideology. Otherwise, he would seem hypocritical. Are you suggesting either of the above?
This is, again, pashut.
As to the issue at hand, I guess you’ve conceded the point(s) since your only response was a wild and unfounded accusation. Also good to know.
Sam2:
Yes, I am assuming the Rav is also “MO” based on the sub-title. You can believe whatever you’d like about MO (which I believe you identify with), but the reality speaks for itself.
I happened to be in an MO school recently, and I saw something thin and light fall out of a young teenage girl’s pocketbook. Her classmate, a boy, casually joked (I hope it was a joke) to her “Was that a [male contraceptive]?” This is, of course, a crying shame on a number of levels, and this kind of thing just doesn’t happen in a traditional orthodox Yeshiva and is indicative of a larger underlying rot that occurs when Torah occasionally takes a back seat to secular culture. You can’t intelligently argue with facts. I’m really not interested in listing people’s “liberties”, so please look up the Beacon thread (I understand that’s not representative of your entire MO world, and neither is this story, but neither are they irrelevant) and others if you need further examples (you don’t).
The point I am trying to convey to a “Yeshiva World” audience is that just because someone claims his Rav said Zumba is muttar, that is to be taken completely differently if that Rav is MO because MO proudly takes liberties with halacha/hashkafa that traditional Orthodox does not. So unless you also wish to take those liberties, you are better off asking a non-MO Rav. It’s somewhat like if you ask a Satmar Chassid when the latest time for Mincha is. Your Rav will not allow you to daven that late, but his does. That’s the essential point (though I am not implying Satmar is taking liberties with Halacha, CH”V), and if you’re offended then I’m sorry but I still maintain what I’ve written as it is pashut uvarur.
Again, I respect his Torah and learning and attempted fidelity to halacha, but it is fantastical to presume his being MO will not affect his piskei halacha, as I explained above.
Gavra:
Yes to the (?), and Amein to Shalom Al Yisrael.
Gavra:
I agree that just because the goyim breathe and do lots of other things, that doesn’t forbid us from doing the same, B”H. But if something will cause someone to think of forbidden things, as I wrote in my hypothetical perfume example and as is the reality with pole dancing for many people, then we agree that it is forbidden, as you wrote.
So I feel that Zumba is problematic for a number of reasons including this one. If you don’t agree that Zumba dances will cause a person to think inappropriate thoughts, then I respectfully disagree, though I do respect your opinion. But there are other problems with Zumba as noted above, principally the music and the public sensuality, and probably, for those reasons, uvichokoseihem lo seleichu as well.
Sam2:
I would quote to you “kol haposel, bimumo posel”, but we’ll leave that issue aside, I guess.
Please explain to me how someone who identifies with an ideology, such as MO, will not issue piskei halacha in accordance with that ideology? That would be hypocritical, would it not? Are you accusing this Rav of being hypocritical?
Of course, if a Rav identifies as traditional Orthodox (of whatever stripe/faction) then if he issues a psak I disagree with, I still respect his psak as being 100% Torah-based. But not if he identifies with another ideology that de facto goes against the Torah as that ideology naturally will influence his psak. This is a dvar pashut and simple reality.
CherryBim:
And I guess you’ve now raised it too far. The Mishna Berura in chelek Beis certainly does not agree with your contention that “hakol mutar”, though I certainly agree with no “tznius police” other than one’s self. For example, “Lo Yishte Adam BiKos Zeh viYitein Ainav BiKos Acheir”.
I’m sure many people would be interested in knowing who argues with the MB and claims “hakol mutar”, though. Please let everyone know.
CherryBim:
MyTake made an excellent point, and I commend her for trying to reach out to those who are trying to be mattir issurim, and you chose to ruin its effect with an inane remark.
No, you would not be “shocked beyond words” to see your Rav playing golf in anywhere close to the same degree as you would be if she saw a rebbetzin engaged in this nivalah.
More precisely, you would not be “shocked beyond words at how terrible it is” for your Rav to play golf. But she would be if she saw a Rebbetzin engage in this nivalah.
The koach of the yetzer hara is truly awesome. She is telling you that she has the sensitivity to appreciate that it’s wrong, and she understands it is hard to stop, but you make light of the whole thing and deny it outright so that people should go on thinking it’s perfectly okay to engage in this nivalah.
It is wrong. It is inappropriate. It is assur.
Sam2:
Although you probably meant it differently that I understand it, I agree with your statement that “just because someone may or may not be “MO” (whatever that even means to you anyway), their potentially vast Halachic knowledge is inherently irrelevant.”
This is true. The greatest talmid chacham in the world is capable of doing aveiros and also of being biased. And if such a person is mattir one or more aveiros due to his ideological bias, then it’s quite understandable that he would also be mattir a different issur due to that same ideological bias. Again, I wrote this and the above with all due respect to him, as indicated. I was sincere in that respect and equally sincere in its irrelevance to the topic at hand.
I felt the need to *respectfully* but unequivocally explain away this chilul Hashem that a Torah authority allegedly permitted this nivalah. In truth, by chilul Hashem, “Ain cholkim kavod laRav”, but I tried to be cholek kavod regardless and explain that it’s likely an ideological bias that could cause one to issue such a psak, yet with all due respect to his potentially vast Torah knowledge.
So I’m sorry you feel offended. But what is truly “disgusting” and “divisive” is when some who claim to be orthodox choose to trample on our Torah in the misguided pursuit of base and decrepit secular culture. Especially since your own Rav JBS said so himself that one should *avoid* secular culture if at all possible. Yet you proudly proclaim your religious pursuit of secular culture even when such pursuit is clearly kineged halacha.
Gavra:
What about the rest of it which is not Kadosh? Sensual music could, theoretically, be used to serve Hashem, as you posit. But sensual music created in tumaah without that requisite kedusha cannot. It reminds me of “Lama li rov zivcheichem amar Hashem”.
Regarding your second point referencing my point about pole dancing and your bringing up perfume, perhaps this will help explain it.
Say there were a perfume that was heavily and solely marketed to zonas. And for years, ever since its introduction, everyone who smells that perfume knows that the wearer is a zona. Not a businesswoman nor anything other than a zona.
Say some guy decides he likes the scent and buys it for his wife. Lets grant that he doesn’t want his wife to be a zona, but is buying it lisheim mitzva. But here is the problem. The brain knows this is a zona’s perfume. So there’s no way that improper thoughts will not go through his (and her) mind if she wears that perfume, even if the overwhelmingly vast majority of those thoughts will be pure.
The only exception to this is if he (and she), personally, *never* knew that this perfume is a zona’s perfume. Then, it would serve its purpose appropriately as it is, after all, only perfume.
The same goes for pole dancing.
The problem with Zumba, however, unlike the above hypothetical perfume and pole dancing, is that no such prior knowledge is needed for the music to negatively affect you. Music, as I wrote earlier, is the language of the soul. Again, you don’t need to have prior exposure to anything to be negatively affected by impure music. Nothing can save you from being negatively affected by impure music, other than not listening to it.
And the Zumba dances, too, if they were choreographed to be sensual, then that’s certainly inappropriate in public, as written above (even *if* the ultimate purpose is to enhance one’s individual relationship between man and wife).
Feif Un, with all due respect to both your Rav and you, given your sub-title of “Proudly Modern-Orthodox” and also not knowing who your Rav is, it is safe to assume your Rav’s opinions are most likely not halachicly relevant to non-MO Torah-observant Jews.
Non-Jewish music of any sort (other than Classical, perhaps) is problematic on a number of levels, and, how much more so, music that was specifically intended to be sensual is clearly not something for a Jewish neshamah to imbibe and assimilate.
But since MO proudly attends Broadway shows, MO is not, unfortunately, in this case, working with the same baseline as Traditional Orthodoxy. So there doesn’t seem to be what to discuss with MO on this issue as this is one of the areas where they allow their misguided (according to Rav JBS, too) pursuit of secular culture to trump the Torah, CH”V.
cherrybim and ultimateskier:
1. As is well known, we are living in an increasingly decrepit and morally bankrupt society, one that in NY actually legalized toeiva marriage despite the terrible psychological risk this poses to the innocent children in these relationships, to say nothing of the toeiva itself. All of this affects everyone to at least some extent. So just because Orthodox shuls do something, that doesn’t mean it’s right.
2. Nobody said YBC dances are muttar either. And just because you don’t, personally, think of Zumba as “slutty”, doesn’t mean it’s not. And just because you think it doesn’t affect you (even if you are really correct in that notion), that doesn’t mean it won’t affect anyone else.
3. All-women’s pole-dancing is obviously (I hope) not considered muttar even though it’s all women and it’s vigorous exercise. So an exercise certainly can have something wrong with it even if it’s all women.
Feif Un:
“(provided it isn’t against halachah)”
But Zumba is against halacha; that’s the point.
“Variety is the spice of life”, goes the expression. That does not mattir wife-swapping CH”V. (It’s like wanting to be cultural and modern so – completely contrary to Rav JB’s wishes, too – we trample on the Torah and attend Broadway shows to do so.)
But that’s not the point; Zumba is anyways not uniquely “marriage-enhancing” any more than any other aveira and/or a muttar form of exercise might be.
Music is an expression of the soul. There is no way listening to that kind of music (Latin) is good for your neshama. And I’d be embarrassed if anyone I knew went to Zumba.
It sounds like a question of whether it is an issue of lo sichanem or darkei shalom. I’d imagine a small gift would fall under the latter, but ASK YOUR LOR.
Feif Un:
That might be true, except that it’s *inappropriately* sensual. Sensuality cannot contradict the Bas Melech essence. I don’t want to bring other hypothetical examples to illustrate the point, but HaMeivin Yavin.
Besides, even if Zumba were as you propose, it would be highly inappropriate to publicly engage in physical sensual marriage-enhancing activities. Marriage is private, and public Zumba, even in your perception, is therefore a gross violation of tznius to turn most anything to do with marriage into a group activity (certain types of lectures not withstanding). Again, I don’t want to bring other hypothetical examples, but HaMeivin Yavin.
Comparing smoking to a limp, CH”V? WTH? Are you serious? There is ZERO excuse to smoke. Ever. Not even a casual once in a while cigarette. It is chemically ADDICTIVE. That means that even if you think it’s only once in a while (which is anyways assur), it will become more than that.
Smoking is the only substance that, taken as directed, kills. On the ohter hand, Alcohol, which it is often compared to, does not kill, and in fact is supposed to be healthy in moderation. Like anything, it can be abused. But that’s different than smoking, which is addictive, *completely* unhealthy AND is also unhealthy for those around the smoker.
Also, a limp is noticeable on a first date. Smoking can be hidden until the first stress incident long after the marriage under false pretenses has occurred. And not every girl will ask, so that can’t be counted on.
Unless a reliable Rov says otherwise, do not withhold this information from a girl (or boy). It will just spread misery, CH”V, and is almost certainly violating lo saamod al dam reiacha as these poisons will be spread to the wife and babies (if the marriage makes it that long).
Shvartza Wolf:
Why is it so hard to believe he “called the shots” at the various Touro campuses? By the way, schools don’t get bought and sold overnight so I imagine he could easily have had some input into that new school as well. Would the YU board and President Joel not “call the shots” at YU satellites as well, like the Torah MiTzion Kollels?
I believe Rav Daniel Lander is the new Chancellor, so that should resolve that question.
I’m sure you know that Lishon HaRa is an aveirah even if true, so your post about Motzi Shem Ra was irrelevant as it’s still assur by your own implication.
Sam2, in case the prior responses have not sufficed to make the point, I humbly offer the following notes on your response.
>> My remarks should begin with these characters at the beginning of each paragraph.
HaKatan: I don’t even know where to begin with this.
>> I was sincerely hoping that you did; I’m sorry to hear that.
>> For instance, I was hoping you might start by addressing the terrible hashkafa these incidents portray and especially the point I made at the end about the objection being the attitude more so than the practice.
You are taking an article by one Overes Aveirah as an indictment on a whole community. I would hope that someone who knows what Jews have gone through throughout our history would be able to see past that.
>> I will begin by reiterating that I know many YU people who are fine Binei Torah, and I am happy to believe the kaf zechus that much of that population is likely tinokos shenishbu. So none of this was or is an attempt to besmirch any person(s), CH”V, but rather to address the ideology and its practice.
>> First, as I indicated, any serious talmid from YU that I have asked about these scandals, simply brushes it off as not nogeia to them, but not that it’s *wholly* non-indicative of the school’s hashkafa. Anecdotal comments bear this out, though that is not proof, of course.
>> As well, from reading the various intellectual pseudo- (and actual) kefirah plus azus neged HaTorah combo pieces that spring forth from various student publications, it clearly is a serious indictment of the community even if not its individuals. I’m sorry that’s too hard for you, but a pattern tends to indicate the underlying reality. When you have one “winner” after another, it *almost* gets to be predictable and, as stated, indicative of the underlying ideology.
Rav Schachter talks about when the cardinals visit and why and why YU lets them in the Beis Midrash. Before they come, someone always announces in the Beis Medrash that they should be ignored and that learning should continue as normal.
>> Seriously? And therefore? The Commentator still glowed how the Cardinals had such nachas from seeing how the talmdim “sharpen their minds” in the Talmud as the Cardinals engaged them in conversation. So maybe Rav Schachter gave some students permission to be Mevatel Torah and those did not have to follow the directive you mentioned?
>> Besides, it’s still a Bizayon HaTorah (and bittul Torah), and my understanding is that the R”Y there were not exactly BiSimcha about it. A Beis Midrash is a Makom Torah, even more so when seder is in session, and not an object of interest for curious observers, not to mention the Avodah Zarah issues. I suppose it made for some good halacha limaaseh shu”t. Hashem Yiracheim.
>> Honestly, you really expect anyone to believe that when a handful of regally attired Catholic Cardinals walk into the Beis Midrash that it will have absolutely no impact on anyone’s learning even if the Commentator hadn’t reported as it did and even with Rav Schachter’s alleged directive?
>> This is another example of modernity *trumping* CH”V the Torah. Let’s be egalitarian, regardless of what happens to seder; we’ll just have Rav Schachter issue edicts that we know won’t solve the issue. I’m sure Rav Schachter did his best so I mean no disrespect towards him, CH”V, but that doesn’t make the issue disappear.
>> As I said in my previous post, Conservative, Reform and Reconstructionists don’t claim fidelity to OUR Torah; MO does, so MO has the uniquely impossible job of reconciling our holy and pure Torah with, lihavdil, the incredible cultural morass around us. This would be extremely comical if it weren’t just as extremely sad. (At least by Rav JB’s times there might have been a hava aminah so it’s understandable why he said what he did, given the prevailing winds at that time. But clearly traditional orthodoxy is quite obviously not a “museum piece”, B”H, despite his prediction to the contrary.)
I cannot answer why Broadway shows are Muttar. I know people have been given Heterim (I also know of several people who bring iPods to listen on during Kol Isha parts), but I do not know why they would be Muttar.
>> People are given legitimate heterim for all sorts of things (within limits), but that doesn’t therefore make it generally acceptable halachic practice for anyone and everyone. I happen not to believe anyone ever received a heter to attend a typical Broadway show. But, regardless, the arguments they put forth for Broadway shows have nothing to do with heterim other than inventing ones that never did, and never will, exist.
>> Please forgive my cynicism here, but should those people be applauded for bringing an iPod for the Kol Isha parts? First of all, the whole proposition of doing so is farcical at best and I’d be embarrassed to try to rationalize such behavior to anyone, even to a school-child.
>> But even suggesting such a “solution” only underscores the point I made in my last post of secular culture de facto trumping halacha. It’s assur, but since secular culture is more important than, er, also important in addition to, Torah, let’s find some laughable pseudo-solution and fool ourselves that we’re following halacha. And we wonder why non-MO disagrees.
>> Second, what about the seviva and the visuals in the theater, even with an iPod to somehow protect against Kol Isha? I guess that’s muttar lichol HaDeios? Or do they not watch the shows and also come in a protective bubble-suit? This is absurd.
>> I assume further that “Uvikuseihem lo seileichu” is also, CH”V, moot in favor of elevating secular culture?
You seem to have a very strong complaint against a group of people and are not giving a real support for your indictment of a large group of Frum Jews, unless you think that Broadway shows are enough to Passul an entire group.
>> As I stated, the whole *attitude* of Modernity trampling the Torah (as most recently indicated in the Beacon incident where they are not even apologetic for publishing such nivalah and azus) is deplorable, even if the overwhelmingly vast majority of individuals mean well, and I would be open to that possibility.
>> By way of example, and not to open another can of worms, just because some people really believe Rabbi Schneerson Z”L is, CH”V, their “Borei” doesn’t make the opinion in any way tolerable. It’s still absolutely unacceptable. So is any intentional dilution of our Torah, large or “small” by anyone.
>> So you have a group that openly ignores their own Rav JBS (and does the same with Rav SR Hirsch – who really has nothing to do with MO – by ignoring his Austritt provision and misunderstanding his whole philosophy to begin with – on top of that convenient omission of Austritt). This group has no shame in publicly glorifying their toeivos and their worst aveiros (the editors had no problem publishing it in the name of intellectual opinion and other non-svaras, so it wasn’t just the baalas aveirah’s clear mistake in writing the piece, particularly the way it was written).
>> Incidentally, going to Broadway shows (in addition to the clubs and other mekomos hatinuf they unabashedly and proudly speak of patronizing and even review in their publications) would likely make them Prutzim BaArayos, which means, for example, that it would be assur for a woman to be miyacheid with (not only 1 man) but even 2+ men who attend these shows, as the heter of 2+ only applies to kisheirim and not to prutzim.
>> This *attitude* is obviously a big problem, though of course each individual stands in his own chezkas kashrus. Regardless, the point is that you’re playing with dinei nifashos, as in ruchnius, by ignoring all this.
I didn’t see either thread, nor do I know who’s involved here, but, to try to answer your question, I would say that when Daas Torah (or anyone) does something wrong then you are not supposed to follow nor condone that.
So I fail to see how you juxtapose his criticizing this organization for doing something wrong to either of the other points. If anyone does something that is clearly forbidden then they are not to be condoned. Which would explain why he criticized them, if you say he did.
Why should it then follow that Daas Torah is not any more reliable in any and every other case?
Shvartza Wolf, please explain your previous remarks where you wrote:
“[Responding to ‘Health’]:
B. You say “Rabbi, Dr. Lander A’H, is the one whom instituted all policies in any Touro school. These are all acc. to Halacha. The school carries on his tradition to this day.”
First, this is blatantly false. Second, as he is no longer president, I’m not sure why he’s relevant. You say that “[t]he school carries on his tradition to this day”, but I’m not sure what that means.
“
I have many friends who attended (respectively) both Touro and YU. I never heard of any violations of halacha at Touro. Yet you seem to claim this to be the case when you wrote “blatantly false”. How so? Please explain.
Also, you write that since Rabbi Dr. Lander Z”L is no longer president that you’re “not sure why he’s relevant” and, at the same time, you admit you’re not sure what “carries on his tradition” means. Might one explain the other?
His philosophy of allowing a Ben Torah (and also a Bas Melech) to acquire a college education without compromising on his (or her) Torah values seems to continue in Touro despite Rabbi Dr. Lander having passed away. That would make him relevant. And that is probably what it means.
As for YU/MO:
The typical line I hear from current YU students, when asked about a given YU/MO affront to our holy Torah, is that the students don’t care for that nonsense and they are instead interested in learning and a quality degree.
That includes the Catholic Cardinals’ visit, Crosses blazing in the reflected lights, to the Beis Midrash for some good ‘ol bittul Torah (and assorted other issurim that came along for the ride). Or more recently, about the toeivah rally.
I do believe my acquaintances that they are sincere in that reasoning, and they certainly seem like good Bnei Torah who are kovei ittim, et al. and that they truly do have no interest in these travesties.
But the latest Beacon story, unlike the Toeivah rally, is, in my opinion, much worse than the toeivah rally and the Cardinals’ visit. As written, it portrays a gross lack of sensitivity to, and Chashivus of, the Torah on the part of both the writer and the editors of that publication. (I don’t mean to judge them personally, CH”V, as they are all likely tonikos shenishbu to a very large extent.) This is unlike the Toeivah rally (and letters by those struggling with this issue) where they claim they were trying to be understanding and caring, working within the Torah’s values, even if they were misguided as Rabbi M. Twersky clearly explained.
(In truth, other YU papers have written things that are highly inappropriate and convey the same lack of chashivus, but to a far lesser degree, with HaMevaser coming in a fairly competitive second place after the Beacon. Yet people contaminate the sanctity of shuls with Hamevaser editions, Hashem Yiracheim)
Whatever struggle(s) the author of that article was dealing with, there was no excuse to glorify the experience of violating BiMeizid (and, as written, seemingly BiSimcha, too!) a number of issurim chamurim including one of the “big 3”. Again, no excuse to write it like that. At least in the Toeivah articles, it is written in the context of them wishing they could be like everyone else, etc., how much of a struggle they have, and not how, CH”V, excited they would be to violate issurim chamurim as in the Beacon story. On the other hand, a (valid) point in the Beacon story could have been made by glossing over much of the terrible occurrence and then explaining the experience to have been empty and regrettable after all that, in addition to the aveiros committed.
In other words, the aveirah/aveiros, terrible as it is/they are, is/are not so much the concern to others, as people do stumble, CH”V, and that’s why Hashem graced us with the gift of Teshuva. So confessing to a student newspaper, while perhaps anyways not appropriate in the final analysis, is not what is shocking. But the writer’s glorification of committing one of (speaking of Cardinals) the 3 “cardinal” aveiros is inexcusable and shocking, even for MO (who proudly ignore their own Rav’s (as in Rav JBS) words that “the greater they can distance themselves from culture the **better** they are for it” and instead whose students proudly proclaim that, for example, it must be muttar to go to a Broadway show because everyone does it and that Kol Isha and other issurim must not apply).
So it is not so much the halachic concerns that arise. Because those can be avoided (if you care to). But it’s the attitude and hashkafa that holds secular culture to be, not in the running with, or even on par with, but (de facto if not de jure) outright *trumping*, our holy Torah, CH”V and the resultant matir issurim that accompany that belief, denials to the contrary not withstanding. Breathing in that air is poisonous to the soul and is the biggest travesty of that ideology no matter how much learning goes on anywhere.
(At least Conservative Jewry claims they can make up and discard what they please, and Reform and Reconstructionist do not claim any fidelity to Torah MiSinai. So if they were to engage in such behavior then it would not reflect on their being Jews and would be a simple reflection on the decrepit society and culture they are surrounded with. But regarding one who claims to be anything-orthodox, it most certainly does reflect on their being Jews and this is a terrible chilul Hashem.)
Wolf, I appreciate your sensitivity, but I don’t think there’s a problem to lip-sync on Simchas Torah, unless you do so in such a way that really draws attention to your “singing”.
In other words, moving your lips in a way that conveys you are singing loudly when in fact you are silent, seems to be an issue when viewed through this sensitivity. But merely moving your lips to the tune is a legitimate expression in joining in the simcha, just as dancing animatedly with your mouth closed would be participation.
So I don’t think it’s sheker to lip-sync at Simchas Torah as part of the kahal, because people participate in different ways, and one way of participating, in the case of a sore throat, cold or other need to protect the vocal chords, is by utilizing lip-sync. Seems okay to me.
I think both Popa and BTGuy are correct, but depending on the time.
There is certainly much to be thankful for, B”H, at this point in this galus. That includes the things Popa mentioned.
However, there were gedolim of yesteryear who went so far as to demonstrate and rally in Washington (for Pikuach Nefesh purposes, true, but there is such a precedent) and did not instead bow down and ignore the danger.
So I think a balance must be struck between the two, and sometimes one attitude may be called for while, at others, the opposing attitude may be the correct one.
“pet peeve”, I think you’re wrong.
Men, who have spent many years learning halacha and other areas of Torah are quite capable of expressing an opinion on this matter, though there should always be sensitivity.
Back to the topic:
Again, Zumba is “sensual” in nature. You simply cannot argue around that and it is therefore not justifiable for anyone no matter who they are or are not in front of. For other types of womaen’s dances/exercises, too, there’s no reason to use perverted motions and/or non Jewish music.
There’s no reason you can’t do fast dances, to fast Jewish music, that exercise your entire body in a dignified manner befitting a bas melech without resorting to disgusting animalistic imports from the land known for this particular form of pritzus.
I did not see anyone discouraging exercise for either gender, and that would be a mistaken notion if anyone did. But find a way to exercise that fits with kol kevuda bas melech penima, not to mention simple kavod haAdam and don’t resort to the many impurities from the street.
I’m curious how many defenders of this disgusting practice would feel if they heard the Queen of England takes Zumba lessons. Would they not think it’s at least tacky? Why is a Bas Melech not given *at least* that much chashivus?
kollel_wife, Stern and Touro are not comparable in terms of potential issues. For starters, Stern is (proudly) “Modern Orthodox” while Touro is not.
If you went to an army ceremony, it would also be hard to pick people out due to the uniformity (pun intended) of the dress. Is that also objectionable?
There is an appropriate way to dress for each occupation.
In a business setting, you will likely find the same dark suits, etc.
While there is room for some variety in many professions, a (married/Kollel) Ben Torah, lihavdil, should look at least as professional as a business man, and this is probably what you saw in Lakewood.
As far as the raincoat, I only know of one that covers the felt hats that Bnei Torah wear, so that would explain the uniformity of that choice.
Vayeitzei, the shirt color is NOT “meaningless”. Shabbos demands a more fine mode of dress than during the week. But for during the week, it would seem perfectly reasonable for a Yeshiva boy to wear a “conservative” (i.e. non-flashy) colored shirt.
I never heard of this whole business, but the only reason I could think of to *not* wear a white shirt is *IF* by wearing a white shirt it makes you think you’re an automatic Gadol HaDor. So if by not wearing a white shirt you maintain a balance and sense of perspective of who you are and where you’re holding, then it makes sense to not wear a white shirt (until it’s appropriate for you). Same goes for a tie and suit.
Imagine 4th graders coming into Yeshiva with suits on every day; it just doesn’t befit them, as nice as it may look.
However, if the standard dress is now to wear a white shirt, NOT because of the above, but simply because that’s the normal decent dress mode even for teens, then it makes sense that they would require white shirts even if they had not previously done so. BTW, this could also be extended to ties and even suits, if that’s what the (non-“faker”/”macher”) norm happens to be.
Just speculation…
I think “a mamin” made an excellent point.
A poster further back said “as long as its only women, who cares what they do”? There is a clear lack of thought that went into that statement? What if they had pole-dancing classes, women only? Is that okay, too? Obviously not.
To be blunt, dancing like a zona is 1000% assur even if nobody is watching. It’s even worse if others, particularly men, are watching. But it’s still 1000% wrong even in total privacy.
But as someone else wrote, anyone (regardless of gender) who condones this terrible lack of tznius is clearly lacking in sensitivity to what it is to be tzanua.
To spell it out further, if you participate in immoral dances “with women only”, you’re guaranteed to be overall changed by this and, therefore, in front of men, too, you will also (to some extent) FOR SURE, dress/behave/act inappropriately (to some extent).
As to the ridiculous comment about tennis and house-cleaning, tennis is not intended to highlight the body and is not inherently non-tznius even if *might not* be advisable to play in front of men. On the other hand, Zumba and Latin American body dancing are clearly intended to highlight the body, which is completely antithetical to tznius.
kfb, I’m not sure what your statistical sample is, but from a quick survey of my own “network”, the recent Touro grads in my network did get jobs in businesses large and small, depending on the individual. I don’t think it’s true that you have to go to YU if you want to get a job; that sounds a little absurd.
real-brisker, I agree. So if you’re not invited for the meal, what are you supposed to do between the chuppah and the first dance? And afterwards until the second dance? I assume you’d eat supper elsewhere…
If you get an invitation without a response card but with a Simchas Chassan ViKallah, it seems plain to me that nobody expects you to drive an hour or more just for the chuppah, then drive back home and turn around and then come right back for the 10:30 PM simchas chassan viKallah.
In this case, it’s obviously an either-or (but if you want to come to both then obviously they’ll be just as happy).
BTW, I happen to feel that this should be the norm; only very close family and select close friends should receive a response card. This would eliminate the “second class” issue.
The norm would be that unless you’re, say, either a brother or you’ve learned with the guy for 20 years, you’re getting a Chuppah and Simchas Chassan ViKallah invite. This would save millions of Jewish hard-earned dollars per year on full invites while still conveying to the invited party that you want to see them at your simcha and would be happy to provide dessert and tea, too, and allow that many more people to be misameach chassan vikallah (and stay for Sheva Brachos, too, once you’re coming that late…)
I am not at all insulted when I get a Chuppah/SImchas Chassan ViKalah invite. I take it as an acknowledgement that they wish me to participate in their simcha to the extent that they can reasonably offer, and I appreciate that. I don’t see the need to be insulted…
MeinMeinung said it well, above.
In my humble opinion, I would add, if you were fortunate to have received a Yeshiva education, you might want to get both an Oz ViHadar to learn from and an Artscroll to refer to as needed, particularly for perakim with lots of aggadita and other heretofore unfamiliar concepts.
I’m not familiar with all of them.
The Oz ViHadar has some excellent “Hagahos viTziyunim” on the side, which show both mareh mekomos and also textual corrections, additions, and re-insertions of text previously censored. These are not found in the slightly older standard Shas editions. It also takes other Rash”is found elsewhere in Shas and places them on the page for reference and to compare with the Rashis on the same words in the current tractate.
Also, the Oz ViHadar re-did the layout and text of the Ros”h, Maharsh”A, the Ra”N and others, and it is far more readable and clear, in my humble opinion, than the older format used in older standard gemaras.
In addition, the Oz ViHadar has some other nice touches both on and off the page, such as for each pasuk referenced on a given page in the gemara, the complete passuk is shown both on that page and, in the back, in the “Torah Or HaShalem”, is also shown there with some basic Rash”is, which gives the learner some context and basic explanation of the passuk.
Finally, like some other editions, the Oz ViHadar combined many of the smaller commentaries into one “Yalkut Mefarshim” browsable in the gemara’s page order, instead of giving a page or two to each and making the user search through each one individually as done in the older editions, which is far more time consuming than Oz ViHadar’s and some others’ way. There may also be some other acharonim in the yalkut that are not in some others.
Artscroll is best known for its English translation and associated commentary on facing pages, both in-line with the English transaltion of the text and expository comments below it. It is otherwise essentially the standard Gemara, minus all the commentaries in the back, but does have, on the page, Likutei Rash”i which bring down Rash”is on the same words that are found in other tractates, and Laazei Rashi which translates the Old French words occasionally brought down in Rash”i.
I’d personally recommend both, for many people. The Oz ViHadar is a beautifully done gemara with many mefarshim and enhancements, and the Artscroll can supplement that with an excellent translation and commentary, both running commentary in-line with the text and expository comments below the text.
It really depends on the person. It takes work to go to college and still learn bihasmada, so I don’t think that decision is for everyone, necessarily, provided you are sure that with Hashem’s help you will work in some sort of klei kodesh job and/or you will take a BTL and go for a Master’s in Education afterwards, which will make you a suitable candidate for many jobs in the field with that credential. Sorry for the rambling sentence…
Bottom line: does it look “nice” and “well-put together”, or does it clearly exceed that and demand inappropriate attention?
Is a long-hair sheitel the latter? Or the former? Or could it be either?
If your posek allows use of Braun (foil) shavers, those are great shavers.
Zionists are Euro-liberal and due to their unending struggle to be post-Jewish, will, as in the past, always turn the other cheek (like good Christians) regardless of what NK does or doesn’t do.
So it is absurd to suggest that NK is the cause of Israel’s lack of good PR, and it is further absurd to think that NK are the cause of their using second-choice military responses.
Think about what you’re saying, and you’ll realize it’s ridiculous.
The Zionsts were clearly wrong in charting this course against the majority of the gedolim of the early part of last century, and again, it’s their post-Jewish Euro-imitation that makes them not go in with force. Nothing to do with NK, however wrong as the NK’s methods may be.
There are major differences between our society today and that in Europe. For one, nobody in Europe then dressed like society does here. The entire attitude of sexual permissiveness has infected our society far more than in any other. This, like anything else in society, unfortunately, has a clear trickle-down effect to everyone no matter how frum they are unless they really work on themselves. So social meeting in a suit and tie or long coat versus social meeting in casual clothes or worse in today’s society cannot be compared.
To put it more bluntly, social-meeting today causes people to be attracted to each other for purely physical reasons (this goes for guys and even for girls) rather than for crucial personality and compatibility reasons (which is one reason why a shadchan who can try to determine this before-hand is so helpful), besides for physical attraction.
I think it MIGHT have been a perfectly innocent compliment so I wouldn’t blow it out of proportion. But I would make sure it doesn’t go beyond a one-time compliment and stays 100% professional.
splenda, I appreciated your post. Thanks.
As far as the mussar stuff, I disagree that it is applicable here because what you seem to imply has nothing to do with personal middos but is rather a cultural issue, not a personality issue, from your description.
Perhaps you can introduce to him, in a non-judgmental way, an alternative way. There’s no law that says he can’t relate differently to your kids if the two of you decide that works better. Perhaps speak to a trustworthy Rav that knows you both and see what ideas he has.
It’s also important to differentiate between the different types of “going slow” as I can’t believe gedolim are against learning pshat, whatever it takes this generation to do so.
Speaking of weather, the other week there was a storm consisting of “tea-cup sized hail”, as in ICE in AUGUST, that fell on the communities roughly along the Queens-Nassau border.
China today had sustained 60+ ft waves that threatened a chemical plant that, it seems, they’re scrambling to keep safe.
Not to mention Japan’s 1-2 knockout punch earlier in the year.
And on a different note, the relatively vast number of roshei yeshiva who recently joined the Yeshiva shel maalah, as well as the young kadosh vitahor tinok shel beis rabban Leiby A”H who did as well.
Lihavdil, the general economic situation/depression and now the “threat of default” nonsense that just ate up more millions of dollars of people’s money…it’s hard to imagine that such things could not have been prevented and/or at least nipped in the bud. But they weren’t and here we are.
And in Israel, supposedly not so hard hit by this “recession”, even working people with decent salaries can’t pay their rents and have taken to the street to emphasize that.
The umos haOlam obviously don’t get it, of course, and, in truth, nobody other than a navi knows what Hashem’s reasons are, but if one had to speculate, one might think that while the umos are busy upending the natural order of the world by turning upside down the definition of marriage to include kesivas kesuba lizachar, about which that is their only zechus for kiyum as Chazal have said, (not to mention their general descent into ever more brazen and deeper immorality) Hashem has inflicted massive physical upheavals to the natural order, most easily seen in the major weather-related anomalies.
And the riots in London that have spread to neighborhoods where acheinu binei Yisrael are living.
This is all (both individually and together in the broad picture) very, very, very much not normal.
May we all be zoche to the geulah sheleimah BB”A.
I have a number of good friends, some Ashkenaz and some Sefard, and there are plenty of “intermarriages” between the two groups.
But the comparison to MO or chassidus is a faulty one. An Ashkenaz person and a Sefard person who went through the same or similar schools are likely at a similar level of observance and hashkafa (every individual is different, of course, though) so you would expect shidduchim between those 2 groups would make sense. But to compare that to an MO or Chassidic person who went to very different schools and/or has very different hashkafos, is ridiculous as one would need to adopt a very different STANDARD of observance rather than adapt to slight differences in the SAME LEVEL of observance.
First, I’m sorry to hear of your pain.
Second, I think observanteen and others said it well.
Clearly, he is having some serious issues, and, as much as he *may* be struggling, it is obviously absurdly ridiculous to blame all that on you not looking like you did the day you got married.
From what you described, it sounds like he is depressed and/or otherwise dysfunctional primarily due to other issues, including perhaps his marital history and other reasons not directly related to you.
Also, if he’s not putting on Tefillin due to depression then that’s a whole different story than if he CH”V does not believe in Torah and Mitzvos. I’m assuming that’s why this Rav told you to stay out of your husband’s observance issues, as it seems to be due to external issues and not anything that can be addressed in that way. If it were a matter of chizuk in emuna then that *might* be a different story, but if he knows full well he should be putting on Tefillin (and more) then that’s not something to be dealt with lightly.
As far as his rejecting you, if he’s depressed and/or otherwise struggling with other issues then even if you looked perfect it still wouldn’t take away that depression and/or other issues. That doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be helpful to him; the more that works out well, the better, of course. But from what you write, the main problems/issues would still be there and outside intervention of some sort might still be needed.
A professional should be able with Hashem’s help to sort this out and that hotline might have the right shaliach on their lists.
Hatzlacha Rabba and much simcha viNachas to both of you from each other and your families.
I’ve seen many good photogs who do NOT “get in the way”.
Though I don’t really see the premise of the question…
The comment of:
“” but if you look into the story lines”
True, but by that standard much of Tanakh would be problematic.”
has implications that border on apostasy, CH”V.
And how dare anyone compare our holy Tanach to the depravity of the secular world?
Looking into the story lines of an opera, by your own admission, indicates various problems that make it unsuitable for consumption by G-d-fearing Jews. You mitigate that by positing that Tanach has similar issues, CH”V.
In this regard, the key difference between opera and, lihavdil ribei rivavos havdalos, our holy Torah, even assuming the stories are somewhat similar, is that if Hashem chose to put the story of, say, pilegesh biGiv’ah in the holy Torah, then he intended at least someone(s) to intentionally sit down and study it learn something from it, perhaps not a 10 year old child, but certainly some people at some point in their live(s). And, equally important, even *if*/when there were aveiros committed in some of the stories, there is no tumah in appropriately *learning* about it, as Hashem and His Torah are kulo kodesh. There is certainly no such guarantee about much else on this earth, and as you yourself admitted, certainly not on an opera performance.
Even if you might find one or more positive lessons to learn from an opera show, which is quite possible, this does not permit one to trample the other issurim to do so. So the holy Tanach (of all things!) cannot be used to justify immorality nor CH”V to suggest that any immorality is found in appropriate learning of the holy Tanach which is the far worse of the two implications, imho.
Unless you get a personal psak otherwise, I would think Pac Man is basically on the money (perhaps they’re not 100% treif, but they are all definitely treif to various extents).
FACT: You are at least 99% guaranteed to negatively affect your neshama if you go to any performance that is NOT conceived, produced and acted by (pure) Torah-observant Jews. Simply, there has to be at least something in there, whether in concept, execution or both, that is kineged the Torah.
Shevet Reuven fell for Korach’s illogical arguments and rebelled against Moshe Rabbeinu who spoke to G-d face-to-face, Rashi says, because of their proximity in their encampments. But you’re sure you won’t be in any way negatively affected by going to an opera show? Really? It seems foolish and intellectually dishonest to bring raayos from what great men like these did in the times they lived in then for what could very well be personal or otherwise specific reasons/parameters.
In case this is not obvious: when you go to an opera show (or baseball game or anywhere else), you are subconsciously assimilating everything you see and hear. Now multiply that as needed given the emotional song and dance that goes on and it’s much more than subconscious (which is bad enough as you can’t defend it if you tried, unlike someone offering you a ham sandwich).
Besides the above:
The sexual debauchery of today was not what Rav Hutner allegedly went to see at an opera show. Also, since you’re not Rav Hutner, unless your Rav tells you it is okay, it is absurd to cherry-pick something he did then and take it as a carte-blanche heter for you. Incidentally, I don’t recall he recommend Opera in Pachad Yitzchak. Do you have a source for that?
Ditto for Rav Soloveichik, who, by the way, said that the more one can DISengage from modern society, the better! But cherry-picking and ignoring that is more convenient, of course.
Again, not every heter is universal or even close to it. Many are highly individual.
The technical parameters of kol isha are mainly irrelevant if you’re trampling on other issurei dioraysa and dirabbanan as those would in and of themselves forbid one from going to an opera performance. Such as, perhaps, Lo Sikrivu and uvichukoseihem lo seleichu for starters.
Whatever bein-adam laMakom aveiros you may choose to do are between you and G-d (and your Rav, if he permitted YOU to do it), but it’s certainly inappropriate to besmirch the name of great talmidei chachamim (who, as human beings, could have had special circumstances and/or could *possibly* have erred) to give yourself a faux heter to violate issurim chamurim.
I believe it’s actually a machlokes if the mitzva of tzitzis applies during the day or if wearing daytime clothes.
In addition to being mevatel the mitzvas asei, since everyone else is wearing tzitzis all day, one would likely be considered poresh min hatzibur if one decided that he knew better. Pirkei Avos (and, lihavdil, common sense) says not to do so.
Ask your LOR, especially regarding sports; I don’t see the sense in sweating up and walking around with sweaty tzitzis. So if you’re playing intense basketball in shorts and a tee shirt then it would make sense to me to leave the tzitzis off during that time on the court.
minyan gal, the founders of this country were proud Christians, and since their concept of “God” is the trinity while yours, lihavdil, is not, what they did at that first Thanksgiving is certainly NOT what we do every Friday night and Yom Tov.
On another note, we thank Hashem at daily tefillos and other occasions, not the once a year we get around to it, so it is at least inappropriate for that reason. (Similarly, Mother’s Day and Father’s Day are also not up to par.)
July 4th, on the other hand, is completely secular and national so Christianity has nothing to do with it, presumably. Having said that, that doesn’t mean it’s therefore a mitzva to celebrate it, but simply celebrating/BBQing in a dignified manner, preferably as a seudas mitzvah, would seem to be appropriate Hakaras HaTov to this Medina Shel Chessed. Ask your LOR, of course.
Rabbi Horowitz did do a video on this topic recently, and, though I only watched part of it, it seems to be excellent.
My guess is that hoods are too casual, like Jeans skirt vs Cotton/Poly/Wool.