Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Joseph: “lilmod, correct, I’m saying it isn’t so (LB’s assertion about higher spirituality, which is commonly heard these days in some circles.) I directly made that point, with details and sources, in the second post of this thread citing the Maharal and many others. And you’re also absolutely correct that these posts are not about putting anyone down; after all how could Torah do that to anyone. And it certainly was never my intent. I also though the title could have been better descriptive after I made it (and could no loner edit it.)
Also, nowadays it has become popular in many circles to put men down. In popular culture, on TV programs, in advertisements and elsewhere, it is popular to make the men out to be imbeciles who are corrected and smartly fixed by the heroine. Even in some frum circles if, for example, you go to a sheva brochos you’ll hear jokes at the husbands expense but never the other way. A speaker might advise the choson that the two most important words are yes, honey, though you’ll rarely to never hear that public advice to the kallah in those circles. Even when teaching obligations these days the focus in some circles appears heavily on what his are to her rather than hers to him. Of course both are equally important to know, but if one skips half of it, then it’s sometimes necessary to stress the parts that this generation is often lacking in hearing.”
Joseph, I never got around to thanking you for making this clear. It’s unfortunate that most people who see this thread only read the title and OP and kind of get the wrong impression.
It was also enlightening to hear your perspective that it is in style to put men down nowadays. That was something I had not really been aware of. It definitely is food for thought. Thank you.
I am curious to know what other men posters think about that. I imagine that it is something that most men wouldn’t admit, at least in real life (which may be part of the reason why it could potentially be easier in some ways for women to get away with putting men down than the other way around) but maybe on an anonymous website they would.
Knees and above are completely assur. That is from Chazal, and there is no disagreement on it. Upper arm above the elbow is also. It is also completely assur to not cover your hair at all. By mixed swimming, I meant while wearing a bathing suit. I’ve seen many Modern Orthodox women wear shorts and go mixed swimming wearing bathing suits.
Yum!I wish! Where do you eat your Shabbos meals? Can I come?
“LuL, the children in question presumably aren’t Arabs. They’re of Turkish origin.”
I know. I was just trying to figure out what Huju was talking about.
“Switzerland isn’t exactly a bastion of religious freedom. Shechita has been banned since 1894. Muslim boys who refused to shake hands with their female teachers were denied citizenship.”
I didn’t know that, but it still doesn’t make it okay. There’s no shechita in Switzerland? What do Frum Jews in Switzerland do? Is there a Frum community there?
And I still don’t know what free verse is.
unicorn
insight
Frumguy – whoops! Thanks for the correction!
“This is a very unique definition. Not one that I have seen shared by anyone else. Certainly not the people who you are calling MO, except perhaps Rabbi Shachter.”
Maskim. I don’t really see how you can put Rav Twersky, HY”D in the same category as Avi Weiss unless the category is Jewish and you are including all Jews (which perhaps is what we should be doing anyhow, but that’s another story).
GAW: “LUL – Not at all. My argument was that many women whom you consider not following the Halachos of Tznius really are, whether MO or Chassidish.”
Not at all what? How do you know what I consider following the halachos of tznius? I didn’t specify any halachos in my original post. When I said halachos, I meant things that are halacha and not minhag hamakom, whatever those halachos may happen to be.
If you want me to be more specific: hair that is not covered at all, knees, upper arm above the elbow, mixed swimming, shorts.
On the other hand, I was not referring to not wearing socks which is minhag hamakom or to the elbows themselves which might not be assur halachically, or to nail polish of any color.
Just curious- what did you think I was referring to? Wearing thick stockings? Wearing burkas?
Bounced
umbrella
LB- this is a great idea. The problem with the other way was that the same letters kept getting repeated (t and r). This way, I think there might be more variety. Shkoyach!
“Unless you copy/pasted and forgot to take that line out.”
Apparently, that’s what must have happened.
YYTZ” “But why not move to a small town in Israel instead? Then at least there are kosher restaurants…not to mention the opportunities for mitzvos that we can’t perform here.”
YYTZ +1!
The ideal is for all Yidden to live in Eretz Yisrael. If you’re already moving anyhow, why not come home?
DY: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/divorce-in-the-jewish-community/page/5#post-638302
DY, what’s your point?
reviver
retrain
Iacisrmma- are you saying that there is a halacha that it is assur for a woman’s elbows or knees to ever be revealed any time she is in shul even if there are no men present? Obviously, people should try to be tznius at all times, but I never heard of a specific halacha like that – which doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Does it? Where does it say that? And is that only during davening times?
And if that is the case, why doesn’t every shul have a sign posted saying that it is assur to enter if your knees, elbows, collarbone, or hair are uncovered?
Emunah with Love and Chicken Soup by Sara Yoheved Rigler. Definitely required reading for everyone!
Iacisrmma: “gaw: The Ezras Nashim is not part of the Beis Knesses?”
This is a side point, but I actually always wondered if the Ezras Nashim has the exact same din as the Beis Knesses. I always wondered if there might be more leniencies regarding standing when the Aron Kodesh is open, or saying Tehillim during parts of davening when it might be a problem.
Lul: “If it’s against halacha, it doesn’t matter if it’s according to the standards of her community.”
GAW: “If the Halachos don’t depend on the standards themselves.”
I was referring to halachos that are not dependent on standards.
Lesschumras, GAW, and anyone else who seemed to be questioning my definitions of MO:
I want to clarify that I was giving definitions of MO based on how I have heard the terms used by those who call themselves MO. I was not giving a personal opinion regarding how I think the term should be used. I also listed a wide range of usages.
The part about tznius was not meant to apply to all of those who call themselves MO. I have a friend who considers herself MO who I consider to be one of the most tznius people I know (just for the record, GAW, she wears things that would not be considered acceptable in Yeshivish communities, but she dresses far more tzniusly than many Yeshivish people who would not wear those styles). I know many others like this as well.
But, there are also MO people who use the term to refer to the fact that they keep some halachos and not others. For example, I once saw an advertisement looking for someone to work in a bungalow colony that was described as MO and in parentheses it said mixed swimming. They were calling themselves MO BECAUSE they had mixed swimming. That was their definition of MO. I have yet to see someone advertise that they are Yeshivish and write in parenthesis after the word Yeshivish that they engage in civil crimes and this is the definition of Yeshivish.
Again, to be clear, this is one way that the term MO is used by people who refer to themselves as MO. There are many others. Many of the people and definitions even overlap with the definitions of Yeshivish or Chareidi (certainly my defintion of Chareidi :)). There are definitely many ehrlich people who are makpid on halacha who refer to themselves as MO. Some of them are probably here in the CR.
Avi K: “Lilmod, in fact, I know a Chareidi rav who tried to justify the fact that some “frum” guy helped people receive insurance payments even though they were not insured by saying that he did not personally profit but just wanted to do chesed (interestingly, the Torah says that marrying one’s sister is chesed). So far as I know, OO rabbis say that certain acts are sins but that the sinners should be mekareved by looking the other way.”
Avi, I’m not sure what comment of mine this was in response to? Please clarify. Thanks!
wishful
lighter
I have a Rav who said that he didn’t have a photographer at his chasuna. The reason he gave is that the photographer is the most important person at the wedding because a wedding is two pictures marrying each other.
“Not familiar with the term, didn’t expect anything of that sort from him and thirdly, if you object to his presence (rightfully or not), there should be objection to many other’s as well”
+1. I would like to say in Avi K’s defense, that I do think the comment was atypical for him. I think that he is someone who does try to avoid negative comments about other posters, people, or groups. It is possible that, as he implied, he was coming from a place of being upset about comments others have made about other groups. I am not saying that made the comment okay; I am just being “dan l’kaf zchus” regarding the source since I do think it was atypical, and is not a reflection of what he is about.
ZD: “For people who learning is the most important thing, Scranton is a better choice as the cost of living is lower.” +1
It is true that it is hard to find a job if you’re not in klei Kodesh. But there are a couple of people who commute to Monroe (not as far as NYC – I forgot how long it takes). There is also someone who works somewhere else, he only goes back and forth once a week since he only works 3 days a week, so he can only has to sleep over 2 nights a week, and he can be home the rest of the week.
Nowadays, I would think that it would be possible to get a job working from home online, so it wouldn’t matter where you live. In Eretz Yisroel, many people do that, and there are people who do that in the US as well.
Benignuman: “Tikkun olam in the Talmud is a rationale for takanos Chazal. It means to fix a problem in Klal Yisroel or a portion of Klal Yisroel.”
Which means it has nothing to do with contemporary usage. So that’s the answer to the question.
“However depending on the video. It might get passed for the wrong reason or with other motives.”
Which could pose a serious halachic problem.
In addition, we don’t even know that she gave permission for the video to be taken or posted and passed around in the first place.
Plus, whatever the intentions of the OP, the title and some of the posters’ comments are problematic.
What is discussed in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka?
“I’m curious about your definition of MO ( failure to observe tznius).”
“That’s not how lilmod ulelamaid defined MO. She wrote, “MO has many meanings and contains a very broad range..”
“There have been a number of arrests and convictions of right wing Jews in the NY area for all sorts of civil crimes ( Ponzi scbemes, fraud, bribery, slumlords etc ). Does failure to observe these kind of mitzvahs make them MO also?
“False equivalence. There is a difference between committing a sin and asserting that an act is not a sin.”
Avrum, shkoyach! Regarding the first point, it is possible that lesschumras was only referring to one of my definitions of MO. In any case, you answered the question for me.
Iacisrmma: “LU: In a non-tznius manner”
GAW: “1: Prove it.
2: Prove that it is a problem as long as it is behind the Mechitza.”
Iacisrmma, thank you for clarifying.
Is the issue that men might see her (either because they can see through or over the mechitza or from the hallway or if they happen to come in to the ladies section which does happen sometimes, since they are allowed to do so if they are not in the middle of davening), that it is halachically assur for women to daven in front of another lady who is not tznius, that it is not nice to the other women who might not want to daven in front of someone untznius, or that she shouldn’t be davening while nursing?
“OK. Why must a woman keep what you call “Tznius” in an MO community where she dresses to the standards of her community? And what sort of “sin” is she committing?”
If it’s against halacha, it doesn’t matter if it’s according to the standards of her community.
lesschumras: “LU, who are the Rebbaim that you are referring to? You make it sound like they are apart from MO but have a role in deciding if MO is Orthodox.”
I probably should have qualified the statement by putting “my impression is” in front of it. I didn’t do so because I thought it was a given although I don’t have sources. To answer your question, I do not remember who the Rabbanim were, but I read that many Rabbanim declared them as being non-Orthodox. I thought that both MO Rabbanim and Chareidi Rabbanim considered them non-Orthodox, unlike all other streams of MO which (as far as I know) have not been declared as non-Orthodox. I think it may have been the RCA which declared them as non-Orthodox. There are probably others here who know more about it.
Huju: “Some of the commenters who consider Muslims to be “animals” or “subhumans” should weigh in on the question presented by the opening poster. And don’t make me name names, because I can (but I am lazy).”
I’m not exactly sure what your point is, Huju. Can you clarify? Are you trying to say that if they care about tznius, they can’t be animals?
Or are you trying to say that if are animals, they can’t care about tznius?
Regarding the first point, I don’t think that one point has to do with the others. Someone can have one good middah and another bad middah.
Also, the fact that many or most of them are animals doesn’t necessarily mean that they all are. Personally, if I ever said anything about muslims being animals, I certainly did not mean it that way – I was referring to those that are terrorists or support terrorism which is not 100% of the population. I certainly would not assume that a little girl in Switzerland is a terrorist. But even if she is, that is a separate issue, and does not give the authorities the right to force her to do something against her tznius sensitivities.
Regarding the second point, the truth is that a lot of the so-called “tznius” amongst Arabs is coming from the wrong place and is actually very twisted and is coming from pritzus not from tznius. However, that is regarding the men and not the women, and in any case, does not necessarily apply to every person in every case. It is very possible that the girls really are uncomfortable going mixed swimming and if that is what they claim, they should be believed and it should be respected.
“For a public school, this rule doesn’t seem like forcing anything on anyone.”
It is against their religion. No one should force anyone to do something against their religion. And there are gender differences before puberty.
“LU, while it is not according to halacha, it is not sick”
I meant that it is sick to force someone to do something against their religious beliefs or against their tznius sensitivities. This falls into both categories.
“No different than public schools teaching about education to prevent STDs, or Families with two Mothers/Fathers, etc. which already exist in most of the western world.”
Okay, so those are also problems.
“If you don’t like it, home school or send to private school.”
I don’t know if it’s reasonable to expect someone to home school their child because the public school is acting against freedom of religion. It’s not necessarily a realistic option for everyone.
But as for private school, that was my question. Why would someone who is so concerned about religious issues send to public school in the first place? Perhaps there are no local Muslim or non-religious private schools so they had no choice? Or maybe they couldn’t afford private school? Either way, the public school has a responsibility to not force people to do things against their religion.
Veltz Meshugener +1
“ezapie, you mean you’re not 35?”
LB, I thought you meant his whole life-time. Maybe that’s what he thought you meant too. Or maybe he did mean he is much younger than 35 as you seemed to think he meant.
LB – I just noticed this now. Thanks so much for sticking up for me! 🙂
I have a feeling this may have to do with differences between Martians and Venusians since DY is usually pretty nice. The problem is that I sound like a Martian sometimes, so real Martians forget that I’m not one.
When I reread DY’s posts, I could see that he probably meant something different than the way it sounded to us. And I’m sure he still hasn’t “chapped” that I wasn’t trying to criticize him; I had just wanted an apology. But it’s fine; I figured out for myself that he didn’t mean it the way it sounded, so I don’t need an apology anymore. I can be moichel him without it.
“What’s the difference between MO and OO?”
The main difference is that OO has been declared off-the-map of Orthodoxy, and MO hasn’t. Nowadays, it takes a lot for the Rabbanim to declare something as being off-the-map (my own terminology). They may speak strongly against certain Orthodox institutions etc, but they won’t say that they aren’t Orthodox.
I think the Rabbanim had a lot of issues with OO for a while, but they only declared that they can’t be considered Orthodox when they crossed a certain line.
On the other hand, when it comes to MO, the Rabbanim have not declared that they are not Orthodox.
MO is a very broad category and OO was the most left-wing of MO, but today it is not even considered MO since the Rabbanim have declared that they are not Orthodox.
MO has many meanings and contains a very broad range. On the most right-wing side, there are people who are extremely Frum and have very Torahdik hashkafos, but do not want to call themselves Yeshivish for whatever reason.
In some cases it is for sociological reasons (they didn’t grow up in the Yeshivish world so they are not comfortable with the Yeshivish community or the label), and in other cases, they may differ on certain hashkafic issues, and in still other cases, they just have to give themselves a label and since they are not Yeshivish, they have to call themselves MO.
For other people, MO means that they keep some halachos but not others. Often, this would involve not keeping hilchos tznius. In many of these cases, they may not be aware that these things are halacha and may think they are chumras.
And then there are left-wing MO people who have very liberal hashkafos that are problematic according to the Torah, but either they are not quite left-wing enough to be considered OO or they really are that left-wing but they are not calling themselves OO.
Iacisrmma- I was assuming she was in the women’s section. I was also assuming that she was doing so tzniusly.
I agree that it doesn’t sound so appropriate, but I wasn’t aware that it something that is discussed in piskei halacha (either to permit or to forbid). (which doesn’t mean it’s not – I was just wondering if it is and what the issue is).
Or are you talking about a situation in which both those conditions are not present?
WTP – lol.
“I commented about free verse and everyone started listing proverbs”
I just copied the person before me, but what did you mean? What is free verse?
“BTW, the reason why the majority in Lakewood are no longer learning full-time is that budget cuts forced the yeshivots to give exams and cutoff those who were not up to pa.”
I don’t see how that could be the reason, since BMG pays very little in the first place. The Kollel stipend is not what people are living on. I think most people who leave full-time learning do so either because they are not cut out to learn full-time forever or because once they have a certain number of kids, they can no longer afford to live on the wife’s salary.
“Full-time life-long learning should be only for a small elite.”
I don’t think that’s what the Gedolim and Roshei Yeshiva say. Of course, that also depends how you define “full-time life-long learning”. From one of your previous posts, my impression was that you were including those who work in Klei Kodesh. In that case, it is definitely not true.
If you literally mean full-time life-long learning (and are not including those who work in klei kodesh), it is POSSIBLE that you may be right (I don’t know enough to have an opinion on the matter – that is a question for the Roshei Yeshiva), but in that case, in EY as well, most people don’t learn full-time forever either.
Also, as GAW pointed out, there can be other considerations as well. He mentioned the army issue in EY, but there are other issues to take into account as well.
One important issue is the fact that it used to be possible for someone to work for 3 hours a day and to learn for 9 hours a day (as the Rambam talks about) but today that is rarely an option (especially in the US). Nowadays, if someone works, it often (and I think usually) means that they have very little time to learn. Even if someone feels that he is not cut out for full-time learning, he still has to weigh that against the fact that leaving full-time learning may mean having barely any time to learn.
Additionally, some people get too caught up in this idea that “not everyone is cut out to learn full-time” and assume too quickly that they are not cut out to learn full-time. There are many people who thought they were not the type to learn full-time but they persisted and discovered that they were.
There are people who are meant to learn full-time and people who are not. I don’t know how many or who is meant to do which. (The only ones who can really know that are the people themselves and their Roshei Yeshiva). But, I do know it is very presumptuous to say that it is a problem that people are learning full-time. Boruch Hashem, it’s an amazing thing that so many people are learning, they are holding up the world for us, and we should be very thankful for them for the zchusim they are providing us with. And we should certainly not be judging them negatively and assuming they are not meant to be learning.
“For people who work in NYC, not so great.”
True, but there are some people who live there and work in other places and commute to work. They do it because they like the school and/or community there, so it’s worth it to them.
That is sick! But I wonder why these girls are in a coed school in the first place? Or are there no other options for Muslim girls in Switzerland?
catch yourself – lol.
Geordie: “I would say, the mitzvah is not to take it home and put up signs, the mitzvah is to get the object back to the owner ASAP. If that means leaving it where it is, then do just that.”
+1. I think this is what is meant by “the Fifth volume of the Shulchan Aruch – common sense”. When it comes to Mitzvos bein Adam l’chaveiro in particular, you have to use your common sense sometimes and think about how the other person will benefit the most (obviously I am not referring to a case where that would mean acting in direct contradiction to a clear-cut halacha, chalila.)
I also usually leave things where they are unless there is contact information on the object so I can call the owner. I figure I am doing the owner more of a favor by leaving the object where it was lost, so he can find it.
There is a famous story about some Yeshiva. I think it was Kelm. The story is that someone left an umbrella there and came back 13 years later and it was in the exact spot where he left it. The story is told in order to portray the middos and ehrlichkeit of those who learned in Kelm.
That’s true- I usually don’t – care to explain?
ZD: “In all seriousness I advocate for frum people to move to Scranton, PA
houses there are like $100,000. its very cheap to live there and you can easily drive to brooklyn in about 3 hours or so, so that you are close to family and friends”
+1,000! And most importantly, it’s a great community! And it has the best school.
So I finally read the Mishna DY brought above. Completely different meaning in the Mishna. Similar to mw13’s example above.
Behind every great man is a great woman.
regular
rainbow
DY – thanks, will try to look at it when I have a chance b”n.