Some story about a building in Manhattan was going to get cited with massive violations, the frum foreman mentioned this Rebee’s name to the non Jewish inspector, upon which he went back to his car for a while and came back and issued a minor violation.
Was all over social media when it happened. Very recently

Probably because of the story that took place this year with the Buildings Department made him very famous

בחולין צב ע”א: “עולא אמר: אלו שלושים מצוות שקבלו עליהם בני נח, ואין מקיימין אלא שלשה. אחת שאין כותבים כתובה אלא לזכרים) כלומר שלא העיזו למסד זוגיות במסגרת נשואין). ואחת שאין שוקלין בשר המת במקולין. ואחת שמכבדין את התורה.”

I see my comment came out garbled I was trying to say that in a small spread out family you can exercise such security measures and they will work when one is blessed with a large family with many children one has to be concerned that while the parents are away one of the older children who is not yet fully responsible will figure out a way to go in and then will not be careful and a younger child will manage to figure out their way in God forbid and you can result in a tragedy recriminations later will not bring a child back to life it’s a risk not worth taking

Ctl your last story is not really a proof
I would not put in a pool on my property were I to be able to afford it, due to safety worries.
But you can be sure I would use one I had access too as often as I could.
Reason being, the safety issue people are concerned about is c”V a child getting in when nobody is around.
Not really concerned about allowing my. Kids to swim while I or a different responsible adult watches them.
It’s no different than any other pool.

?
CT lawyer
Am I missing something?

In terms of sightseeing not much
Bob mellow state park is gorgeous
(they may have changed the name) but it’s not sightseeing.
Rabbi fine is a sight to see.
Massive Talmud Chacham down to earth and as sweet as you can get
Fink poultry farm
Go to national bakery on ash street
Cheap delicious and PAs yisroel too!! (some stuff is dairy, pizza I believe is dairy cholov yisroel)
If your coming from new York and you have little kids, check out apple blossom farm on the PA border
Enjoy

R golden
It’s good pesach is over cause nobody allows mishing as much as you did there
I can’t even untangle what you did, and you did it to my post!! Enjoy
If you repost in a coherent fashion I’ll be glad to respond

From Rabbi Chaim Fogelman as printed in the OK’s Kosher Spirit magazine (spring 2017)

We don’t find any other Yom Tov which has a special name denoting the last day – there’s no Acharon shel Sukkos or Acharon shel Shavuos
Really??
Let’s go through the holidays

Rosh Hashana
chazal we’re quite unequivocal that though it is two days they are considered as one long day so of course there won’t be a separate name for the second day

Yom kippur
Only one day
Succos?
Take your pick
Hoshana rabah
Shimini atzeres / simchas Torah
(Simchas Torah separate day in chutz laaretz but probably only named such because in e y that name exists too)

Chanukah?
Ever hear of ”zos Chanukah?

Purim
Shushan Purim

Pesach
Acharon Shel pesach

Shavuos is only one day.

No name of any other holiday is for a day that exists only in the diaspora

More accurate to say that all ends of holidays have special names
They are just different for each
It’s almost like asking

No other yom tov is called pesach so how come this one is?

Yes
But not because of you

The Mishna berurah says the minhag is to do it in the courtyard and also not in an oven
תמה-י”א

אכן המנהג לעשות לו מדורה בפ”ע אפי’ בשעה ה’ כדי שלא יבואו להקל גם בשעה ששית
ונוהגין לשרוף אותו בחצר ולא בכירה [אחרונים]:

Not sure what the question is
שו”ע תעב-יד
גם הנשים חייבות בארבע כוסות ובכל מצות הנוהגות באותו הלילה
מ”ב
(מה )
מצות הנוהגות וכו’ כגון מצה ומרור ואמירת הגדה

Let’s start with something simpler
How would you answer someone who says they don’t believe in, let’s say, terminal velocity?
Any quick sharp answers that can convince them?
Of course not. It’s a huge discussion not a short answer
And your question is way harder

*obviously supposed to say ”I say ”

You can say anything you’d like
As knaidlach told me way back
Anyone is free to post anything

there are plenty of others to pick up the mantle

Wonderful
Finally
However a few points
Firstly, as I pointed out, if the hit was not hard enough to make sense that it killed him, everyone would be patur. So we are talking about a full fledged hit
Secondly In the context of teaching a career or swimming as the case may be, you are correct
However the first Mishna is talking about learning that’s why the father and Rebbe are together.
Over there it’s always patur .
As to the rest of your post, sure I said many times that I’m today’s day the common consensus is not to hit, I was just laying out the Torah starting point. Which even you go your post agreed that for valid chinuch reasons, the Torah allowed hitting.
If hitting was not a chinuch method it would never be allowed

im duly chastened r”y23
sorry

Effi
Cute question
If you drive a car and cross the street how do your teach your kids not to?
The answer is you don’t.
If parents are justified in sometimes hitting their children then children should know that.
Otherwise what will they think when you hit them.
Part of your chinuch would be to explain to them that a parent has a right to hit their child for chinuch but you can’t just hit because you are angry or don’t get your way.

By the way, to open another whole other can of worms, if someone hits you are you allowed to hit back?

Tlik
I am quoting this directly from Rav Wolbe ZT”L. Hitting is not chinuch, and never was. It is untrue to attribute this to שלמה המלך. He never said that.
Well perhaps you can explain the gemorah in makkos for me
And the other פסוק במשלי
יסר בנך ויניחך

That I was unclear, is obviously possible though hard to accept as I spelled it out many times.
Relief, I was not ”unrelieved ”so I don’t need any selfie
But that im misrepresenting the Torah viewpoint,is simply wrong
Take a look at the gemorah in makkos daf ches.it’s really on both sides.
משנה:יצא האב המכה בנו
I’ll type in English. You point out specifically where I go wrong

Someone asked rava,how do you know that the situation with chopping trees is a voluntary situation maybe he is chopping for a succah ? He responded,since if he finds cut wood he does not need to cut, it’s considered voluntary.
Asks the gemorah,
So why does the Mishna say, a father who hits his son to death is exempt from galus, since it’s a mitzvah? Why don’t we say since if the son has learned (as in learned Torah) you don’t need to hit him so even when he doesn’t learn, it’s not a mitzvah (the reason that learning is used is because the Mishna puts a father and a Rebbe together and a Rebbe only has the right to do it for learning)
Answers the gemorah
Even when the son is doing what he is supposed to be doing it’s a mitzvah to hit him like the passuk in משלי says
יַסֵּר בִּנְךָ וִינִיחֶךָ וְיִתֵּן מַעֲדַנִּים לְנַפְשֶׁךָ
So let’s put it together
The פסוק requires that in mopeds to be חייב גלות it must be a hitting that makes sense that it can kill. The Mishna says a father who does so and kills his son is exempt because it’s a mitzvah (to hit him. Not to kill him.) the gemorah clarifies that it must be so that it is a mitzvah even when the son is acting properly not only when he does something wrong otherwise the din would be different. And the gemorah proves that from a פסוק as well
Now let’s think further
what is the purpose of hitting a child who is currently doing everything right?
It can’t be to effect an immediate intervention as some posters understand the only benefit of hitting, because if is currently acting properly. So we need to look in the מפרשים who explain it’s to instill fear in him so he continues to act properly.
That sounds a lot like what chinuch is about. Training a child to act properly.
Look In the מפרשים on the פסוק that the gemorah brought. I’ll cut and paste them for you
יַסֵּ֣ר בִּ֭נְךָ וִינִיחֶ֑ךָ
  וְיִתֵּ֖ן מַעֲדַנִּ֣ים לְנַפְשֶֽׁךָ׃

רלב”ג (כל הפרק)
עריכה

“יסר בנך”. בעודו קטן בדרך שתקנהו מוסר ויתן לך הנחה וקורת רוח מפני טוב מוסרו ויתן לנפשך מעדנים מרוב שמחתך בו עם שזה יישירהו לקנין החכמה ובה יתן לנפשך מעדנים במה שתשמע מפיו מדבריו חכמה:

מלבי”ם (כל הפרק)
עריכה

“יסר בנך ויניחך”, האב שאינו מיסר את בנו לבסוף ישנא את אביו ולא יהיה לו מנוחה ממנו, וקשה תרבות רעה בתוך ביתו של אדם וכו’, וכ”ש שלא יכלכלהו לעת זקנתו, אבל ע”י “שייסר אותו” לא לבד “שינחהו” כי גם “יתן מעדנים לנפשך”, שעי”כ ילך בחקי החכמה ואח”כ יוסיף אהבה וכבוד להוריו:

מצודות (כל הפרק)
עריכה

מצודת דוד
“ויניחך” – יתן לך מנוחה ולא תרגז בעבורו, ועוד יתן מעדנים לנפשך ר”ל תשמח עוד במעשיו.

מצודת ציון
“מעדנים” – דברים חמודים, כמו (בראשית מט): “מעדני מלך

So not only do they clearly learn it is to train him to go on the proper path (chinuch) BUT THEY EVEN THROW IN THAT YOU WILL PERSONALLY PHYSICALLY BENEFIT From such a child in your old age.
So שלמה המלך felt it’s proper to take action in chinuch that is not only good for the child but you can ALSO take your own benefit into consideration.

I’m waiting to be shown exactly where I erred, and what exactly the פסוק and גמרא mean other than what I have written.

Please don’t respond with the same tripe,
Wow I fell so bad for you.
Boy you are totally misrepresenting that.
Those are not response
They are denials.
I have presented a clear detailed position.
If I am incorrect it should be quite simple to say
Here you erred. The gemorah means this. The passuk means that.

Again my point here is not to argue on the current rabbinical consensus that today one should barely hit their children
Rather it’s to show tattie original Torah methodology was actually extremely pro hitting your children.
If that doesn’t sit well with someone they need to reexamine where their sensitivities are coming from.
Are they real Torah sensitivities or western ideals which have leeched into Torah true Jews

הַזּוֹרֵק אֶבֶן לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים וְהָרַג –

הֲרֵי זֶה גּוֹלֶה.

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר:

אִם מִכְּשֶׁיָּצְאתָה הָאֶבֶן מִיָּדוֹ הוֹצִיא הַלָּז אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ וְקִבְּלָהּ –

הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר.

זָרַק אֶת הָאֶבֶן לַחֲצֵרוֹ וְהָרַג;

אִם יֵשׁ רְשׁוּת לַנִּזָּק לִכָּנֵס לְשָׁם – גּוֹלֶה,

וְאִם לָאו – אֵינוֹ גּוֹלֶה;

שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יט, ה) “וַאֲשֶׁר יָבֹא אֶת-רֵעֵהוּ בַיַּעַר”,

מָה הַיַּעַר רְשׁוּת לַנִּזָּק וְלַמַּזִּיק לִכָּנֵס לְשָׁם –

יָצָא חֲצַר בַּעַל הַבַּיִת,

שֶׁאֵין רְשׁוּת לַנִּזָּק (וְלַמַּזִּיק) לִכָּנֵס לְשָׁם.

אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: מַה חֲטָבַת עֵצִים רְשׁוּת –

יָצָא הָאָב הַמַּכֶּה אֶת בְּנוֹ, וְהָרַב הָרוֹדֶה אֶת תַּלְמִידוֹ,

וּשְׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין.

ברטנורא משנה ב

זרק את האבן לרשות הרבים. ואף על גב דקרוב למזיד הוא, שהיה לו לחשוב שבני אדם מצוים ברשות הרבים תמיד, הכא עסקינן באשפה העשויה ברשות הרבים להפנות בה בלילה, ואינה עשויה להפנות בה ביום, וזמנין דמקרי דיתיב בה, ומשום הכי גולה, דלאו פושע הוא, ולא אנוס גמור הוא.

והוציא הלה את ראשו וקבלה פטור. דכתיב (דברים י”ט) “ומצא את רעהו”, פרט לממציא את עצמו.

אם יש רשות לניזק, שנתן לו בעל הבית רשות ליכנס.

מה חטיבת עצים רשות. דאי בעי עייל לחטוב ואי בעי לא עייל.

יצא האב הרודה את בנו. דמצוה קא עביד.

Avram
”One more thing klugeryid, if your hypothetical child is indeed so disrespectful to his parents that he would sneak into their room to take back his books, then what’s to say he won’t respond to being hit by hitting back? And once that becomes a possibility, it’s halachically forbidden to hit him.”

Firstly it was a random example, not an actual case so don’t sit and nitpick it.
Secondly even in my example I didn’t say the kid sneaks into your room
You put the book back into the bookcase, or he takes a new one. You have a whole family, you going to take away all their books because of one child?
I never said you smack a child for reading. The question was he is not going to daven in the morning. Does that EVER warrant giving a smack. to that I said yes. Not that your first line of parenting is to smack him. But it’s not something which can never be done.
I’m sorry if I didn’t list off the thousands of different ways of parenting besides smacking in my posts,
as you said, ”Asking is a shorthand way of saying that the first step is to try and connect with the child.”
So to I say, those parenting strategies I mentioned are a shorthand way of listing the global entirety of relationship based parenting as well as reward based parenting.
Only I didn’t ruffian myself with writing shorthand and expecting others to decode it.
No I actually spelled it out clearly multiple times.
Seems when one wants to ignore something, it makes no difference how clear it is.
Again I am approaching the question as a purely hypothetical query. Comprised of two parts.
Namely
a) is hitting a valid component of the chinuch toolbox.
And
b ) is it applicable nowadays.
There are posters on this thread who unequivocally say no to both
I say that a) is an absolute yes. Backed up by mikra ,mishna,gemorah, and psak.
B) is still a yes but majorly curtailed from previous generations as evidenced from the many quotes brought here by tlik.

Is that clear enough?
I’m not advocating beating children, nor am I viewing parenting as a transactional relationship.
I’m not even commenting on my general parenting strategy (excepting one specific comment I made)
Just laying out the facts.
The application is of course where it gets tricky.

to syag and avram
neither of you responded to my post of the words of the gra
Look In גר”א
אגרת הגרא
ועל קללה ושבועה וכזב –תכה אותם ולא תרחם עליהם כלל–כי ח”ו
those few pithy words address almost all of your shittos
to syag thanks for a pleasant discussion
to both to calm your nerves, i dont hit my children and they are quite close to me
to shwarmai wow!!
dats alotta conjecture going there. not worthy of any direct response.

Syag
I have many posts up not sure which you are referring to .
Please repost

Additionally
you would actually say those words?
Which words?
I don’t see where I said to say anything specific to a child (except way back about a conversation opener which we dealt with already)