Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
why have the mods been allowing insults and personal attacks recently, especially from one specific poster? Isn’t the purpose of moderation to prevent this?
It diminishes the attractiveness of the CR to everyone.
Yes, we will try to be more careful. I will no longer allow insults, and will be very strict about it. I will not edit the posts, and will instead just delete them. Thank you for bringing this up.
sam: “some form of Shemen”
the problem for Chanuka is that you need a half-hour of fuel at the time of lighting. an AC menora won’t give you that. a battery is aslo questionable, as there isn’t really electricity stored in the battery, just chemichals capable of creating it.
DY: I think they should let him win it 😉
simpler to run it through the self-clean cycle in an oven
mods: why is Health allowed to continue this behavior???
Avi: are you again addressing me as “Health”?
“While we re talking about toelet, do you”
what does this mean?
1 No. absolutely not. if 99.9% of the readers do not derive any to’eles from it, it cannot relistically be termed to’eles.
3 i agree and made no pretense of supporting the perp. I merely challenged the propriety of reporting it.
avi: your posts are becoming more and more unintelligible. could you please reread what i wrote and repost your reactions.
Health: “Since when is a coil -Aish?”
Achiezer, and pretty much universally accepted since. Vadai and not Safek.
“The cooking in a crock pot is not the same as cooking on a fire. The fire is much hotter and therefore the food gets done much quicker!”
The Temperature is irrelevant. Anything over Yad Soledes is Bishul Min HaTorah.
“Since you didn’t post a copy here of what they wrote -either you are misconstruing what they say or we don’t Pasken like them.”
That’s a ridiculous assumption. If you wish to look them up inside, just ask nicely and i will post precise Mareh Mekomos.
“Acc. to you this should be Ossur M’doraysa because the outcome is the same -so it’s a Toldah. But I’m sorry to inform you -the Achronim say this is only Ossur M’drabonon”
Actually, the Gemara says it’s only d’Rabannan. However, many Achronim explain the reason is due to a distinction in the quality of the output; solar heat will not cook as well as fire.
sam: let’s just say I already mentioned “earlier” as a separate factor
pba: you’re correct. If there is significant risk of edible, non-kosher oils being used, Libun Chamur would be required. Hagola would NOT be sufficient. your coals might not be enough if the heat doesn’t penetrate to the outside, you’d have to check the metzius.
Health: “How I love the Mechelmta of Torah!”
I think the differnce between us is that you love Milchama and I love Torah
Health: Your distinction is irrelevant. The Cheftza of the coil is unchanged, regardless of whether they are always or only sometimes covered. The coil remains the same coil.
Anyways, that answer was all l’Shitascha. As others have pointed out, your understanding of Dumia l’Meleches HaMishkan is critically flawed. Sewing with a machine is still Tofer as is harvesting with a combine Kotzer, or for that matter uprooting by hand. As the Eglei Tal and Shvisas HaShabbos explain, when the outcome is identical to the Ma’aseh haMishkan and only the procedure is changed, it becomes a Toldah. Still d’Oraisa, just not the Av Melacha. So, if you wish to claim that a crockpot is only a Toldah of Bishul, as Tzli and Tigun are, and not the Av, there would be what to discuss, however there is no practical Nafka Mina. However, it is rediculous to claim it is only d’Rabbanan.
Reb Moshe writes in 4 different places that shaking hands is forbidden.
Avi and Sam: the Ezer MiKodesh is earlier, more reliable and much more radical. but thanks for the Mareh Makom
Avi: “However, convincing others not to supppoert these groups is definitely a toelet”
Do you get the impression that there are a significnat number of sane people out there who need convincing of this. I am very, very skeptical that this is the author’s motive.
“The criteria is that the actions are well-known to be prohibited”
Now you put yourself in a catch-22. If attacking people whose level of tnius is slightly sub-par is “well-known to be assur”, there is no to’eles in printing it. If it is not well-known, then the perp is potentially shogeg and we may not talk about him.
The bottom line is that much of what is reported in (even frum) newspapers and news sites is an Issur of Lashon HaRa
pba: why did you wake up now? what have you been doing for years with your aluminum foil etc? do you think it comes from the ground so nice and shiny, and only on one side? foil, stainless pots and pans etc, they’re all greased! do nothing!
the grease is likely petroleum based. and if not, likely vege. it is Nifsal me’achilas kelev and eino ben yomo. it is also applied at a higher temperature than libun chamur, i am told by a frum yid in the steel business and a mashgiach kashrus.
don’t worry, just toivel the pan and use it in good health
PC: “I believe there is a concept that it is permissible to eat in someone’s house if they are shomer shabbos (correct me if I’m wrong)”
That would generally be true because there is a presumption of a Chezkas Kashrus. If I didn’t know that you eat food without a Hechsher, I would not suspect so and need not even ask. However, once I am aware that your standards are radically different than mine, I could no longer eat at your house. Your definition of the word “Kosher” is substantively at odds with mine.
Sam: if you want a source with a radically different approach to Reb Moshe’s regarding the definition of “Derech Chiba”, see the Ezer MiKodesh at the beginning of Even HaEzer Siman 20. I will not post what he says on a public forum because it could easily lead to a Michshol.
The blind man is truly a lack in the Gavra; however, the blanket covers the Cheftza the same way the casing of the crockpot covers its heating element.
Nice try
I assume your second post was mistakenly addressed to me. I have intentionally avoided these issues altogehter.
Avi: 14 is questionable. The perp feels that he is correct in terrorizing a “sinner” to dissuade him from his “evil ways”. He clearly feels he is a meritorious Kanoy and not evil. While deeply misguided, he does not meet the criteria of 14.
You misread 15. The Chofetz Chaim writes that he MUST intend a To’eles, which is questionable here. I think you confused ?? with ???.
Are you at least willing to discuss the Rambam I cited?
sam: “I have meticulously studied every Makor R’ Moshe quotes there. I still do not understand how he came to his conclusion”
can you please elaborate. I think his Teshuva is very logical and would be happy to help you
Can you explain the logic of the Shach to support your position, and not just observe that he is discussing a different case?
Health: “Who says it gets red hot? I highly doubt that kind of heat from a crock pot or a hot plate”
Open one up and look as I have. The coil glows red hot, but due to the relatively small size of the coil, it does not get as hot as an electric range.
Additionally, for the 99.9% who are not Talmidim of your Rav, even knowing what to look for would be absolutely forbidden.
I personally find it very challenging to answer Shailos and deliver Shiurim in Yiddish and Ivrit (both Ashkenazi and Sefardi pronunciations). Neither are my native language, and the risks of misunderstandings are multiplied. I am careful to take precautions to avoid errors.
Sam: the Rambam Issurei Biah 21:1-2 equates Histaklus and singing to other Issurim of Lo Sikravu.
Avi: I assume #4 and on were directed to me.
Avi: Are you addressing me or Health? You seem more confused than usual.
Avi: Nope. Look inside. The question related to a platonic friendship, Reb Moshe replied that if you want to be friends with a girl more than with a boy there must be an underlying, even subconcious, physical affection. However, there was clearly no question of outright “romantic” conversation he wanted to talk to her the way he claimed he would with a boy.
I heard a Shiur from Rav Schachter where he said that a Mashgiach technically only loses his ne’emanus if he violates the Halachos of Kashrus or is a Mumar l’Kol HaTorah (i.e. Mechalel Shabbos). If he is guilty of other Avairos, no matter how severe, he is not automatically disqualified. Thank being said, you would not necessarily want him as your Mashgiach.
BTW, a shochet working for one of the lessreputablee hechsherim once told me thelocationn he worked had 7 shochtim who were Shomer Shabbos and 6 who weren’t. the Rav HaMachshir said, “Better to eat Neveilos than Treifos”
Health: a crock pot has a heating element that glows red hot and is certainly an Issur d’Oraisa. Therefore, there is no Heter whatsoever to tell a Goy to turn it on.
DY: “We can go back and forth on this ad infinitum (ad v’lo ad bichlal 🙂 ), but he says no such thing”
We’re only going back, not forth. I still haven’t heard how you understand this Shach.
“R’ Moshe clearly personally felt that it was only based on chasnus, yet in his teshuva never clearly paskens to be totally matir, in fact apparently only wants to rely on it with a tziruf”
Again, that’s not true. He does so in 1:45 and especially 46
sam: once Reb Moshe proved that even speaking, which is not clearly brought as an Issur at all could be Lo Sikravu, Kal v’Chomer Histaklus and Kol b’Isha Erva which are clearly Assur. Anything that leads to Kirva and Ta’ava is included in Lo Sikravu
yitay: while I acknowledge that my main issue is not with you, it is with Rav Abadi, you do bear some personal responsibility for the tumult here.
It is a mistake to mention an extreme and controversial Kula on a public forum where many readers are not as educated as you are. There could be numerous readers who will walk away from this thread thinking that they can buy uncertified foodsbecausee there is a legitimate Halachic authority that permits it. They will not even have the knowledge you do on what to look for in the ingredient panel, and without which you must acknowledge that they will certainly eat treif food.
Think carefully before you post something similar in the future.
Avi K: “hello, Rav Moshe is talking about a romantic phone call in the context of a teshuva about dating.”
First of all, I was responding to a challenge if there is a connection between Lo Sikravu and Yeihareig v’Al Ya’avor. Reb Mosha and the Rema clearly connect them.
Secondly, the Teshuva relates to “friendly” phone calls and not “romantic” ones.
Thirdly, there is NO context of dating.
Sam: what problems do you have with this IGM, I’m happy to answer your questions.
If you saw the Rema I cited you would see that he writes that any time there is a Lav (and some say even an d’Rabannan) there is Yeihareg V’al Ya’avor due to Abizraihu
DY: I don’t know what you want from IGM 8 against the words of the Shach. The Shach clearly says that Stam Yainam requires some connection to AZ.
Also, you are ignoring the main point, that Rav Belsky agrees with me regarding Reb Moshe’s Shitta on Bishul
R’ Nissim Karelitz is a great idea. My son goes to speak to him often, and even got invited for a Shabbos meal. He had a memorable time.
sam2: Igros Moshe EH 4:60 famously writes that even talking to a girl on the phone is an Issur d’Oraisa of Lo Sikrvu and Yeiharei v’al Ya’avor. See also Gemara Sanhedrin 75a, Rema YD 157:1, Chavos Yair 182, Sidrei Tahara on YD 195:15 and Gra there
“Are the gedarim for hana’ah from a goy the same as from a Yid?”
I don’t see any reason to be Mechalek. Either it is Hana’ah or not. If you can demonstrate a source or reason to differentiate, I’m happy to consider it.
“Also, since according to the shittos that there’s no bishul after mB”D it would be a shvus d’shvus b’makom mitzvah, could we not at least be matir b’dieved?”
MB doesn’t Pasken like them
DY: “I believe the OU is probably being meikil with some sort of tziruf, as R’ Moshe does. I will bl”n try to ask R’ Belsky”
go ahead and ask, but I posted what he wrote, and it is clearly NOT a Tziruf. He disputes any grounds for Chumra, and cites Reb Moshe as agreeing.
“You are making the m”S worse than the akum by attributing to the Sha”ch the possibility that he was menasech to A”Z. The Sha”ch, in fact was not reffering to a m”S at all so no inference can be made from his words”
NO, the Shach would have to say the same for an Akum; the possibility remains that he was menasech. He clearly defined Stam Yainam as requiring some possibility of Nisuch.
“He is unsure of what the Sha”ch held”
Where do you see that?
????????? ?????? is ???? ??? ?????
Rav Elashiv Davens Shacharis every day in his shul, if he is feeling up to it. You can get a Bracha from him as he walks out, but you won’t be able to say much more than that.