Lilmod Ulelamaid

I wasn’t aware of that.

“DY, you and your wife don’t vote in sync with each other?”

Do you and your wife always vote the same? If she wanted to vote for s.o else, would you consider this to fall under the category of “Isha kesheira..” or would that never happen in the first place because she asks you who to vote for?

Not attacking, just curious because of your question to DY.

You might want to try contacting Partners In Torah. They may know of books on the topic. I don’t know of anything offhand, but when I have a chance, I will, bli neder, try to do some research on the topic.

In terms of the original topic, though, I gave it some thought and decided that I think that it is inappropriate. I know that this was already brought up and the moderators said that it was a joke. I do not know if that is true or not, but whether or not it is the case, I think the whole topic is inappropriate if you think about what people are really saying.

“Additionally, under Jewish law a convert, once converted, is considered to no longer have any relationship with his biological family. This is true to the point that under pure biblical law it is even technically permitted for a convert to marry his biological mother if she also converts. The biblical obligation of honoring one’s parents doesn’t apply to them, though by rabbinical edict some obligations apply and marriage to them is prohibited.”

Most Rabbis do tell converts that it is praiseworthy to maintain some contact with their biological family, although of course, caution must be used which is why Rabbinical guidance is needed. I am under the impression that the concept of gratitude for your parents for having brought you into this world does apply.

It wasn’t Bill who was running – it was his wife.

I can’t say with 100% certainty, but I am almost positive that you don’t need any prerequisites for social work (just a B.A. but it can be in anything) I have done a certain amount of research on the subject since it is something I had considered.

In case anyone is interested, the post “And on that note, maybe we should return to the original topic of discussion. As inappropriate as I found it, I am finding this topic more inappropriate (my own posts included).”

was written in response to my own previous post which has not yet been posted.

“If tznius being so important is something that I contest, then

perhaps it is because it’s a huge issue for me (which it is).”

Your intellectual honesty is astounding!

And on that note, maybe we should return to the original topic of discussion. As inappropriate as I found it, I am finding this topic more inappropriate (my own posts included).

“lilmod ulelamaid: Isn’t that a tremendous Chilul Hashem, that she is walking around blatantly disobeying an explicit halacha in the Shulchan Aruch for all to see?

Actually, there’s no tznius section of the Shuchan Aruch – rather,

the requirements of tznius are derived from the halachos about

not saying divrei kedusha in the presence of ervah.”

Thanks for the correction. I actually did not know whether or not it was in the SA, so I should not have said that. I knew it was in the MB, so I assumed that it must be in the SA, and I thought that the phrase “an explicit halacha in the SA” sounded better than “an explicit halacha in the MB”

But you are right – I should not have said that w/o knowing for a fact that it is in the SA. Thank you very much for the correction.

DY – I’m more bothered by that actually.

Sam2 – if you can find few other things to be sadder about, that sounds pretty good to me. I can find a lot of other things to be sadder about, personally!

I think that Torah4Me is still waiting for parents’ perspectives on this matter. I would be curious to know what other parents have to say.

Because he is not our leader, Boruch Hashem!! We are Yidden – our leaders are Rav Chaim Kanievsky, and Rav Shteinman, etc. Halivei we should be as “responsible” as they are.

After I wrote my above post, I reread your last posts and I think I understand your question a bit better. I think that your question may be based on the understanding of the term “metaphor” the way it is usually used. I think that usually when people speak of metaphors, they mean that they are using one word to mean something else (usually for poetic reasons). In that case, you have a valid question – why didn’t Chazal just use the word they mean?

However, that is now my understanding of how Midrashim work. That is the reason that I do not like to use the word “metaphor” as I stated above. The point is not that Chazal are using the term “tail” to mean something else. The point is that they are referring to the deeper, more conceptual meaning of the term “tail”. We live in a physical world and we are used to thinking in physical terms. But everything in the world really has a much deeper meaning.

When a child asks you a question about a topic that is difficult for a child to understand (for example, death or Neshamas or Olam Haba), you use terms and concepts that the child does not understand (such as death and Neshamas) and then you attempt to explain these terms and concepts on a level that the child can grasp to some extent.

Chazal are using the correct accurate word to describe Vashti’s malady (a tail). We then need the Mefarshim to try to bring it down to our level and explain what that means in a way that we can grasp to some extent.

The beauty of Midrash is that it gives us some idea of how much more there is to reality than what we ordinally perceive. It is our glimpse into Olam Haemes.

I hope that my explanation of Midrashim is accurate and that it helps to answer your question. Let me know what you think.

any of which – my post or the OP?

Flatbusher – I’m sorry I didn’t have a chance to respond to your question yet. The truth is that it is a bit hard for me to respond because I don’t really see the question. This is what Medrash is about. That is why it is called “drash” and not “pshat”. There are different levels of understanding the Torah, and this is the drashic one. Would you have the same question about understanding Kabala?

I’m not sure why you think that every Jew has to be able to understand every aspect of Torah. As a girl, I and 50% of the Jewish population don’t even learn Gemara at all. That doesn’t make me any less of a Jew and it doesn’t mean I have any less of a connection to Torah.

In this case, the issue is not even that every Jew can’t learn Medrash. It is just that you must learn it with mefarshim in order to understand it. I think that it may actually be much easier to learn it and understand it than it is to learn and understand Gemara. Also, with Gemara if you don’t get it precisely, then you have an incorrect non-Emesdik understanding, whereas, with Midrash, since it’s conceptual, by definition, you don’t have to have a precise understanding.

I am guessing that perhaps part of the reason that you find it hard to understand (why Medrash is written this way) is that you are a man and you are used to learning things that are meant literally and practically, whereas, as a girl, I am used to learning things that are meant conceptually (and may even find them more meaningful).

Torah contains everything. There are many levels to Torah – practical ones and more conceptual ones. In Olam Haba, the Torah we will learn will be on a much different level than the Torah we are learning now. It will be more conceptual than the Torah we are learning now. Right now, we learn Torah on a much more “physical” level than they way we will learn it l’asid lavoh. Perhaps, the idea of Midrash is to give us an opportunity to experience higher, more abstract levels to some extent even in this world.

But if it doesn’t speak to you, then you don’t have to spend so much time on that area of Torah. There are many areas of Torah, and each person can choose what he wishes to focus on.

Meno – lol! Was waiting for someone to say something like that. And now, maybe I can work on my remazim proving that I’m Mashiach…

Iacisrmma – I think the issue here is someone who is “very makpid on looks” as the OP put it. I think there are boys for whom the looks seems to be the main thing that matters to them (and they “need” a specific look and only 1-10% of all girls fulfill their requirements) and then there are boys for whom the girls’ looks is not the main thing they are looking for in a wife but they obviously can’t marry someone whom they don’t think is pretty.

Also if someone has their priorities right, then I would think that whether or not they consider someone attractive will involve the person’s personality and middos as much as her looks. Okay, I realize that I am a girl so it’s different. But I do know boys like that, so it’s clearly possible for a boy to be that way.

Also, usually when boys are makpid on looks, they are davka into thinness. This comes from society and is not something natural or objective. ( think this may have been pointed out already in this thread.

Also, there is a difference between saying that you can’t marry someone whom you feel is ugly and saying that you only want to marry someone super-gorgeous. (unless of course your definition of super-gorgeous is based on middos, personality and Yiras Shamayaim).

Spunk stated that Torah4me might have been referring to himself and not his daughter. If I am understanding you correctly, you took this to mean that Spunk thought that Torah4me said that he was referring to his daughter but he was really lying and referring to himself. (I’m not even sure what that means – how can you be lying about what you mean? But whatever, that’s not important)

In any case, I did not understand Spunk’s words that way at all. When he said that Torah4me might be referring to himself and not his daughter, the reason for the words, “and not his daughter” was that Spunk felt that other posters (such as myself) THOUGHT that Torah4me was referring to his daughter and he/she (Spunk) thought that WE were wrong.

In other words, the words “and not his daughter” were referring to MY misconceptions and not to any dishonesty on Torah4me’s part.

Spunk thought that I must have misunderstood Torah4me’s point since I was bringing an example as a daughter. So I had to explain to Spunk that I had not misunderstood his point, and there was a reason why I brought my example.

Based on Torah4me’s response, it seems that Spunk and I were correct in our understanding of his original post.

You write, “The question posed was should Torah4Me be concerned about the child’s behavior. Not does Torah4Me have OCD.” But as can clearly be seen from Torah4me’s last post, his concern was that he may have OCD.

So I really do not think that there is any reason whatsoever to think badly of Spunk and to assume that he/she was accusing Torah4me of lying.

But I appreciate your concern that I was speaking Motzi Shem Ra and your attempt to spare me from gehinnon. That was very kind of you.

“Listen, you cant have brains and looks.”

Why not? I do. Humility too.

RebDoniel:

“To me, at least, there are very few girls that are “ugly.” To me, each and every bas yisroel is beautiful in her own way, and what is attractive to me is a girl’s desire to treat her husband well, her desire to raise children that are ehrliche yidden and proper young men and ladies, and and her middos. I want an aidel maidel and a girl that shares my principles and Torah middos. This is what is beauty to me. A beautiful interior makes for a beautiful exterior.”

+1

potato kugel. I’m not such a big fan of rugelach. Maybe if it’s fresh from the bakery and warm. I guess most rugelach I eat is not.

True. Although a friend of mine told me that her husband’s Rav (Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky) says that she has to daven Maariv on Shabbos in order to avoid the problem of her husband not being able to be motzi her in Kiddush since he already davened Maariv so it’s D’Rabbanim for him and D’Orasia for her (if she didn’t daven Maariv).

That was the only time I have ever heard anyone give that as a solution though. And it is possible that he meant it as a chumra.

YY- no, I don’t think so. I think they were talking about Thursday night chulent and the chulent served for lunch in the middle of the week in many chadarim, etc.

I told this over at a friend’s house whose husband is a menahel of a cheder. He agreed that there can be an issue with eating chulent during the week as it is supposed to be special for Shabbos. So his wife said, “So why do you serve it in your school during the week?” He shrugged and said, “Cuz it works.”