Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
dear old man,
I am far from ignorant about “what actually happens out there”. I receive numerous Sheilos daily in person on the phone and by email. I am constantly networking with contemporaries and consulting with senior Rabbonim.
I can tell you with absolute certainty that in Eretz Yisrael and in the USA when the issue arises in the chareidi veldt NO mainstream Poskim are permitting abortions unless there is a realistic threat to the mother’s life.
Both the Mechaber and Rema seem to hold that the Ikar haDin follows the Rambam’s lenient opinion, but it is proper to be machmir for Tosafos.
Also, a friend of mine asked Rav Shmuel if whiskey is acceptable for the chiuv of getting drunk, and Rav Shmuel answered in the affirmative.
Actually, I clearly remember one bachur who was a bit of a trouble maker being encouraged to drink at Rav Shmuel’s house. After plying him with drinks, the Rosh Yeshiva asked “are you drunk, really drunk?” When the bachur replied in the positive, Rav Shmuel asked him “What is the worst thing you’ve done since coming to Yeshiva?”. He answered “Rebbe, I’m drunk, but not THAT drunk!”
Also, can you bring sources for your claim that “many valid Poskim who agree with Rav Waldenberg”
At this point, I see nothing worth addressing.
health: you drew the distinction between public and private, I was just following your statement to its logical conclusion.
I don’t understand why you are flying off the handle that I omitted a daas yachid, whille your statement “Poiskem Matter abortions in cases where it isn’t life threating – eg.- genetic problems with the fetus” omitted the majority opinion.
I have smicha from the Rabbanut, Rav Z. N. Goldberg and a local Rav I did shimush by for many years.
I know a couple that dated when he was 26 and she 18. They liked each other, but he broke it off because she “wasn’t mature enough”. 6 years later they agreed to give it another try, and the rest is history
I concede, I made a mistake. Generally we do not follow Rabbi Shimon, and certainly not against the majority Chachomim
However,
Halacha – Kohain
Submitted by anonymous Answered by Rav Peretz Moncharsh
Question: Is there a consesus that there is rabbinic tomas ohal for a non-jew or is there a disagreement among the rabbis on this?
Answer: The Gemorra brings a disagreement between Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai and the Chachomim if a dead goy creates tumas ohel, the Rambam Tumas Meis 1:13 rules that it does not.
Health: so, in a public forum it would be deceitful to state that 2 candles are to be lit the second night of Channuka, and if someone did so you would vehemently criticize them.
I think I can safely state that this behavior is not mainstream
I’ve personally seen Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky pressure bochurim to drink more wine, when he felt they were not sufficiently drunk
bigger yarmulkas are less likely to need assistance
yacr: “Hello99, you are incorrect on this one, and indeed the Halocho states that a Jewish Doctor should do the surgery. I heard this from the mouths of Rabbi Zev Leff and Rabbi Dr Yitchok Breitowitz.”
“I did not mention anywhere what Rabbi Breitowitz himself holds”
Please resolve!
Health: if someone asked you “how many candles do we light the second night of Channuka?” would it be “deceitful” to answer “2” without mentioning that Beis Shammai holds “7”???
yacr: but did you notice that I quoted Rabbi Breitowitz’s own writings where he says that even if it is hashchasas zera or chavala there would still be NO heter without Pikuach Nefesh. You are obviously misquoting him.
LMA: I do not think there is necessarily any disagreement between Mesilas Yesharim and Nefesh HaChaim. However, I DO think it is clear that the Nefesh HaChaim does NOT understand the Goal of Yiddishkeit to create an “emotional” Deveikus. I think the flaw is in your assumption that the definition of “Deveikus” is emotional.
In any event, while I think you are doing an overall fine job in this debate, I don’t think your understanding of the role emotions play in Yiddishkeit is representative of Litvishe Hashkafa.
Health: calm down. Stating that the Halacha follows the vast majority of the Poskim is not “deceitful”. It is not Geneivas Da’as to omit mentioning a da’as yachid among the Poskim.
toi: “goyim arent mitaameh b’oihel- i believe thats how w we paskin.”
as I said before, no. The Halacha is that they ARE metamei b’ohel
and
“Whatever the grounds,abortion is generally prohibited unless the delivery of the baby poses a direct threat to the life of the mother.The most obvious case is where the mother might die as a result of the birth This category is explicitly recognized in the Mishna. See Oholot 7:6..Halacha also recognizes that a threat to life may be more than physical; psychological stress and anxiety may be life threatening to either the mother or other members of the family and where such indirect pikuach nefesh(danger to life) exists,abortion may be justified if other alternatives such as adoption are insufficient to alleviate the danger.Assume,for example,that a child was conceived through rape or incest.According to most views,that fact standing alone would not justify abortion.The fetus is still at least a potential life that ought to be brought to fruition in the absence of a threat to maternal survival.However,halacha also understands that the psychological trauma arising out of the circumstances of conception may be so devastating as to constitute such a threat at least in some cases though it may not be so in others.In short,halacha does not have an automatic or categorical rape or incest exception;any dispensation must be folded into the general rule of pikuach nefesh.”
and
“QUESTION TWO::If a baby is determined in utero to have a life threatening disease that may allow them to live only after a few months, is it permissible to terminate the pregnancy?
ANSWER TWO:.The answer in brief:,Jewish law will generally not permit abortion because of a diagnosis that the fetus suffers from a genetic condition which will result in its early death.A number of views would allow early-term abortion within 40 days of conception(a time frame that may be too early for diagnosis through amniocentesis or ultrasound)”
yacr: “The source of the Torah prohibition is subject to disagreement.
Some opinions view abortion as form of murder [retzicha], albeit one that does not carry the death penalty similar to the case of killing a tereifah where there is a transgression of lo tirtzach without its corresponding punishment. Others view abortion as falling within the prohibition of hashchatat zera (destruction of seed) in that it wastefully destroys that which could potentially blossom into life. A third view treats “abortion” as an unjustified act of chavala (“wounding”). Within this view, there are some that regard the “chavala” in terms of the mother and others that regard the prohibited chavala as being done to the fetus. A final view would prohibit abortion as being inconsistent with the affirmative obligations to protect and preserve life and well-being, an obligation derived from “lo taamod al dam rayecha” or “hashavat aveida”.
5. The halachic theory for the prohibition would determine which extenuating circumstances may amount to a proper justification, i.e., if the issur is retzicha, abortion can be sanctioned only if the fetus qualifies as a rodef. General considerations of pikuach nefesh would not suffice. At the other extremes, considerations of chavala may be set aside by lesser concerns. Hashchatat zera and hatzala can be arguably set aside for pikuach nefesh even where the fetus does not qualify as a rodef but nothing short of pikuach nefesh would suffice“
The above is a quote from an article from the same Rav Breitowitz you mentioned as a lenient source. He clearly writes that according to all opinions pikuach nefesh is necessary.
yacr85: again, you the have failed to address issue of the doctor himself performing the abortion. Possibly, Rav Leff’s intention may have been to follow Tosafos who holds that there is no heter of pikuach nefesh for a goy. So when faced with threat to the mother’s life, it would be muttar for a Jewish doctor and assur for a non-Jewish one. However, the “bigger” and “smaller” aveira is not relevant.
I’m eagerly awaiting your “sources” to permit abortions without threat to life. I have heard Rav Dovid Morgensten relate in HaRav Elyashiv’s name otherwise. He specifically permitted “reducing” a large number of fetuses only when the number would be potentially dangerous, and even then only in the first 40 days.
only Rebbi Shimon holds that a goy is not metamei b’ohel, the Chachomim argue.
LMA: can you please clarify the definition of the “separation” that is a Jewish value. Some posters are interpreting your intention as “isolation” and “ghetto”, but your last post does not support that.
Health: actually, I am. You, however, are not.
yacr85: I’m referring to the Jewish doctor. He should decline and not do a “smaller” aveira to save a goy from a “bigger” one.
Lma: “Chareidim define their Judaism with their “Hergesh”/feelings, whereas MO defines their Judaism with their intelligence”
I’d strongly disagree with that characterization, unless you only consider Chassidim “Chareidi.” The Litvishe world defines Yidishkeit by subjugating emotions to the intellect.
ItcheSrulik: “To that end, chazal instituted many harchakos from gentiles that apply equally to assimilationist Jews (stam yenam, bishul akum etc).”
First of all, stam yainam is primarily due to yayin nesech which is a concern of takroves avoda zara, not a harchaka from assimilation. That is why it applies to a mechalel Shabbos, because we are concerned he also does avoda zara.
Secondly,bishul akum which IS a harchaka, does NOT apply to any Jew, no matter how assimilated.
Shabbos 31a. actually the third question after being honest in business and setting time to learn
yacr: better to tell a goy than to do it yourself. Certainly is only permitted when risk to mother’s life, and even then not always.
MichaelC “This includes the words Nu that is a Hebrew word”
actually, it is not Hebrew. However, it is in the Russian dictionary and presumably entered our vernacular through Yiddish. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Sefardim rarely use it
metzius. even that is a chiddush that requires emuna
lma: we can add the Rambam who writes that when society is corrupt one should move to the isolated desert.
haqer: no, according to the Rambam he is even chayav misa
alchahol is metabolized into sugar, but ironically can cause a sudden drop in glucose. Definitily consult your doctor. 4 cups at the seder could definitely be a problem.
yungerman: a cold liquid would be a problem even if it only reaches 110F, it doesn’t need to boil to be an issur dOraisa
zahavasdad: there are online “ask the Rabbi” sites where you are receiving an answer from a known and qualified Posek. They are still fully anonymous.
is liquid, correct. solid that will melt, Magen Avraham is matir
Also, i forgot Igros Moshe OC 4:74:34-35
Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer 6:32 explicity permits placing cold, cooked food on a plata for the reasons I explained. Mishna Brura 253:55 last line clearly implies that to be a problem of mechzi k’mevashel it must be regularly used for cooking, as he writes ????? ???? ???? ?? ????. Shmiras Shabbos k’Hilchaso 1:71 especially in tikkunim tends to believe it should be muttar, and is lenient to return cooked food that was placed on the floor, roughly equivalent to the fridge. See also Maor HaShabbos in Rav S.Z. Auerbach’s name. Rav Sternbuch in Teshuvos v’Hanhagos is lenient b’Shaas HaDchak. See also Har Tzvi OC 136.
Does this count as real names?
pba: you’re right. I read “milchik metal spoon that was used in the last 24 hours” but “par eve pea soup” went under my radar.
Of course here it was motzei Shabbos when I posted
pba: you’re right according to the Rema 95:3; however, in 94:5 the Rema says to be machmir on the food and the pot.
where is quark? I was looking forward to hearing him argue that there is nothing wrong with McDonalds. most cows are not treifos. Also, the cheese is only placed on the hot burger, and davar gush b’kli sheini is not derech bishul, so no basar b’chalav either. (please don’t take this post as serious halacha. the meat is certainly neveila, and there is at least bbc derabbanan)
placing cold food directly on an unadjustable hotplate is a machlokes. The motive of the meikilim is that with cooked, dry food there is no bishul achar bishul. With no knob, there is also no shema yatte, risk of increasing the fire. The remaining issue is mechzi k’mevashel, the appearance of bishul. Since cooking is not usually done on a hot plate, they hold this is not relevant either as noone will think you are cooking raw food.
I think we all owe quark a debt of gratitude for uniting the dissimilar members of the CR. A very appropriate sacrifice for the 9 days
chein: Jackie Mason was actually the Rabbi of an Orthodox congregation, once upon a time!
It’s dissapointing when a poster who has cultivated an image as wise and logical shows a very different side to their personality.
why are the mods permitting all of lbj insults to go through. he/she is entitled to their opinion, but it should be stated politely.
peacemaker: First of all, I didn’t write, I quoted from Revach.net.
Secondly, it wasn’t me who said to be machmir, it was Mishna Berura and many Poskim.
You could wear socks or very thin slippers.
peacemaker: “However there is a Machlokes between Rashi and the Rambam if wooden shoes that are not wrapped in leather, are assur on Yom Kippur because since you cannot feel the ground they are like shoes”
Sounds like Rashi’s issue is with feeling the ground, not formal wear
From Revach.net
Crocs For Tisha B’Av? – Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shternbuch
On Tisha B’Av it is assur to wear leather shoes. Crocs are synthetic and do not contain any leather. However there is a Machlokes between Rashi and the Rambam if wooden shoes that are not wrapped in leather, are assur on Yom Kippur because since you cannot feel the ground they are like shoes even though they don’t have leather. The Shulchan Aruch (614:2) paskens like the Rambam who says that it is permissible while the Mishna Brura (5) says we should be Machmir like Rashi.
On one hand, Tisha B’Av is not as stringent as Yom Kippur, which is Min HaTorah, so maybe we need not be machmir. On the other hand, Crocs are worn by millions of people as shoes every day of the year. The Gilyon Halacha U’Maaseh asked the leading poskim their opinion.
Rav Elyashiv said that since Crocs are worn all year round, you are not permitted to wear them on Tisha B’Av. Rav Moshe Shternbuch said that while technically you may wear them on Tisha B’Av, it is better not to. Similarly Rav Nissim Karelitz and Rav Meir Brandsdorfer held that it is not assur but Yirei Shamayim should not wear them.
AZ: “For the record Neither I nor any person in their right mind would promote the ideas that you continue incorrectly attribute to the NASI”
These are the things YOU have repeatedly quoted nin their name!
“Of course they’ved (the Rabbonim) been part of the discussion”
Don’t be a Slick Willy, what do these Rabbonim say?
“you write “If they are not ready, wait. If they are ready, they are anyways dating.” yet you yourself ealrier on this thread claimed otherwise.”
Where did I contradict myself?