Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“While on the subject…”
What subject? New York?
assurnet – I kind of figured that the subtitle would be connected to your username. With a name like that, you are asking for it!
You were here for years without a subtitle? Well, I guess now we know how to get one – either ask for one yourself or have someone else ask.
There must be Jews who shave because there are a lot of Jews without beards .
Can we all find something we agree on? I hate arguing. Thank you.
Tiferet is completely different from the other seminaries you have mentioned and very different from many of the things you wrote you are looking for in a seminary.
It is also very different from the background you are coming from.
From what you have written about yourself and from what I know about Tiferet, I wouldn’t think it’s the best choice for you. (keep in mind, of course, that I don’t really know you).
I could see a non-Bais Yaakov possibly being a good place for you, but I think that coming from the background you are coming from, you would want to go with either a more right-wing (religiously) “Modern Orthodox” seminary or a more open Bais Yaakov seminary.
I wonder if Maor or Sharfman’s could be for you. I hadn’t thought so originally after reading your first post, but after reading your later posts, I am wondering if they could be options.
Midreshet Tehila might be a good choice as well (maybe more than Maor or Sharfman’s actually). It’s on Neve campus, so if you are checking out B’nos Avigail, you might want to check it out.
“No, these are Jews you’re talking about, holier than any menorah”
RebYidd +1.
I do hear your point, Pro Jews, and it’s nice that you have such sensitivity to divrei Kedusha. I personally am not on that level so it’s hard for me to see the problem here, but I think that Rav Akiva Eiger, zatsal (was he the one? Where’s my bekius expert, Iacrsmma?) might agree with you.
“Hisnagdus and anti-zionism aren’t simply not joining a movement.”
I didn’t define “Charedi’ism” as anti-zionism because I don’t think that’s what it means. It simply refers to those Frum Jews who didn’t join the Dati-Leumi movement.
LU :” Chassidism was such a change whether or not you support it.”
“Again, chassidim deny this. I deny that religious zionism was a change. You deny Daas Torah was a change. that is my point”
Are you sure that Chassidim deny that? I never discussed it with a Chassid, but I would find it hard to believe. I brought that as an example because I assumed it was something that everyone agreed to.
Saying something is a change doesn’t necessarily make it wrong. Not the way the term “change” is being used here. Unless the word “change” is being used to mean that chasv’shalom someone is trying to change Torah and Mitzvos, which is not the way the term “change” was being used in this thread.
I think that the Dati-Leumi would agree that the Dati-Leumi movement was a new movement even though they think it’s correct. I think that Lubavitchers would agree that Lubavitch was a new movement even though they think it’s good (I don’t want to say “correct” because I don’t know if they say that everyone should be Lubavitch). And the same with every Chassidus.
“What would you call the change that moved the center of Charedism to the US and Israel. Is that a Hashfakic Change or a sociological change?”
Sociological. It wasn’t even by choice, so it can’t be hashkafic.
“The type of change that would be a different type of change would be a hashkafic change.”
“That should include hisnagdus and anti-zionism.”
That is another argument. My whole svara the whole time was that not joining a new movement is not called creating a new movement. Chareidi are simply Frum people who did not join the Mizrachi movement, although they may be zionists.
“But if you say “I am Dati (using the word Dati by itself) not Chareidi”, then you are saying that you are less Frum.”
“If we are at the point of arguing what the colloquial usage of the term is in Israeli society, I will note the absurdity of the question and bow out.”
As opposed to what? The word only means what society uses it to mean.
I may agree with you about the absurdity of the question. So we may actually agree on something. Which would be nice, because I really hate arguing, and this whole discussion is starting to make me nervous. I think I must be a girl after all.
But what did you think the discussion was about if not the usage of the term in Israeli society? (And btw, what does colloquial mean)?
“No True Scotsman.”
What does that mean?
sorry, BG, I didn’t mean to make you feel bad about making me feel bad 🙂
I was kind of just rambling. But thank you for making me feel better. I guess it’s true that getting hurt (and hurting others) while dating is inevitable. But I do think that there can be better ways to handle things. I don’t think that hurting others should be inevitable. I think that there was a Gadol (maybe Rav Moshe Feinstein, zatsal, but I’m not sure) who said that he never hurt anyone in his life. And Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zatsal, said at his wife’s levaya, that he had nothing to ask her mechila for.
I think that if someone really wants to, it should be possible to never hurt someone else. But maybe I’m just too much of a perfectionist.
Anyhow, I appreciate your words.
“As for Darchei Binah, hopefully this won’t get edited – is it a serious place?”
I don’t know the answer to that question, but I am also not sure if I would be allowed to answer it online if I did.
I can tell you that I know that there are a lot of serious girls there, but I do not know whether or not they are all like that. I have no particular reason to think they are not, but I don’t know for sure (and even if I did, I’m not sure if I would be allowed to say so online).
In terms of American politics, I never heard of anyone (students or teachers) discussing American politics in seminary. I’m sure in every seminary you can find someone who is into politics, but it is usually not a major topic of discussion for seminary girls! (Note the practical absence of any females on the political threads in the CR, and probably complete absence of seminary-age females on those threads). So I really don’t think you have to worry about American political views in seminary.
Regarding M’s post, I strongly disagree! Most of the seminaries mentioned have many teachers who are very learned. First of all, they have a lot of men teachers whose background in learning does not consist of “one year of learning”. In terms of the women teachers, you can not tell how learned they are based on what is written in the brochures/websites. Most women either found ways to learn on their own or they attended institutions whose names they may not want to put down.
I know many of the women who teach in these seminaries and they are extremely learned! To name some examples – Rebbetzin David, the head of BJJ, is extremely learned. She did not even attend seminary – she had a private melamed, which is something that probably few people know and I doubt it’s written anywhere. Rebbetzin Heller, the head of B’nos Avigail, is extremely learned even though I think her official education ended after seminary. I don’t know where she got her learning from, but she got it from somewhere.
I know someone else who taught in seminaries who learned for about 10 years after high shool but doesn’t write it anywhere official.
Many seminary teachers attended Michlalah or Stern for college where they studied Limudei Kodesh for several years.
But many of the most learned women throughout Jewish history have been women who were dedicated and motivated to learning enough that they found ways to learn even without being officially enrolled in any official institution. Where did Bruriah learn for that matter?
“how you define which change is “the type that takes place on a regular basis” and which is “a new movement” new depends on if you support that change.
This”
No. That is not true regarding the type of changes that were being discussed. They were talking about sociological changes that had nothing to do with hashkafa. There is nothing to support or not support there.
The type of change that would be a different type of change would be a hashkafic change. Chassidism was such a change whether or not you support it.
Avi K: “Lilmod, while the Mizrahi (actually there were two until they merged to form the National Religious Party sixty years ago, Mizrahi, which represented the urban middle class, and HaPoel HaMizrahi, which represented the kibbutzim and moshavim) considered Rav Kook to be their posek and he held them in high regard he was never a member of any political movement. His dream was to establish a non-political coalition of all frum people who wanted to work for yishuv Eretz Yisrael to be called Degel Yerushalayim. Unfortunately, he could not find talented organizers and the plan was never actualized. His son, Rav Tzvi Yehuda, never explicitly endorsed any party but gave a beracha to anyone who asked for one as he considered all to have a part of the truth.”
Avi +1. Thank you for confirming my “svara”. I had thought so, but I wasn’t sure. Someone I know who is very strongly Mizrachi argued with me on that point once, so I wasn’t sure.
Avi K: “Lilmod, you are absolutely wrong. “Dati” is used for someone who is considered (some people talk the talk but in private don’t walk the walk but that is true across the board) a member of the non-Chareidi (or Chareidi Leumi – Chardal) religious public.”
Chardal call themselves Chareidi Leumi, not dati. That is precisely my point. They are calling themselves Chareidi and Leumi – Chareidi describes their religious level and Leumi describes their hashkafa.
ZD: “Most chilonim know the difference between Dati Leumi and Charedim”
If you stick in the word “Leumi” you are describing your hashkafa, and not necessarily your religious level. But if you say “I am Dati (using the word Dati by itself) not Chareidi”, then you are saying that you are less Frum. Hence, my statement that there is no word for fully Frum other than Chareidi.
The word “Dati” is not used by itself to mean fully Frum (or at least rarely), to the best of my knowledge.
One point that may be important to mention here, since this may be where some of the confusion lies. Since Dati means religious, it can include anyone at various levels of religion (although there would have to be a certain minimum), so the term can be used to include Chareidim as well. It’s like saying that if you have two candies, you must also have one candy. Most people who have two candies wouldn’t say that they have one candy, but it can be done. Same here. Technically, someone who is Chareidi could be called Dati but it isn’t normally done. (I suppose it would depend on the context of the conversation). Normally, you would at least add the word Chazak, if not Chareidi.
I never did. Thank you for letting me know. I feel bad about a lot of things now… I have tried asking mechila from guys I went out with, but it’s a bit awkward. I’ve never been sure if it’s the right thing to do or not. It’s kind of like asking someone mechila for speaking L”H about them (which Rav Yisrael Salanter, zatsal, says not to do). I always did it through other people so it was less awkward, but still…
I don’t know if I could have done things differently than I did at the time. The situations I was in probably would have made it impossible. But I still feel bad about possibly having been the source of someone’s being hurt, even if I couldn’t help it. “Megalgilin chova al yedei chayiv”.
In any case, I very much appreciate your letting me (and whoever else is reading this) know.
“As for the claim that no changes having been made since Sinai, this is errant nonsense.”
Of course, “changes” are made all the time. That is exactly the point. Since there are constantly changes, any kind of change doesn’t qualify Judaism as a new movement. If it did, then any kind of Judaism would be a new movement every second. The point is that it is inherent in the defintion of Chareidi or Frum that there are continuous changes, and therefore Jews have always been Chareidi or Frum (despite the type of changes being discussed) and therefore it is not a new movement.
In order to qualify as a new movement, there has to be a change that is a change from the type of changes that take place on a regular basis (that are not really changes since these changes have been taking place since Sinai, and there is no change in the type of change taking place.)
“I don’t think there are any Gedolim who say to vote for Meretz.”
“But there are certainly those who will tell you to vote however you feel is best. The Rema brought earlier seems to be an example.”
I don’t think there are Gedolim who would say it’s okay to vote for Meretz.
“I cant say for Israel, but in the US a Gadol has to be very careful about elections”
In EY, it doesn’t seem to be an issue.
“Do you mean within Israel or Israel vs. America?”
“Israel vs. outside Israel.”
Since the term originated in Israel and is still mainly used in Israel, and the chutznikim are trying to understand how the term is used in Israel, it doesn’t seem to me that it makes sense to do so.
I think that the Americans need to have a better sense of how Israelis use the term before they can start throwing it around and arguing about its meaning.
AVi K. “The term “Chareidi” to refer to anyone observant was in vogue 100 years ago. Since then the number of labels has grown. “Dati” refers to non-Chareidi frum.”
Which means that the term “Chareidi” came first and was used to refer all Frum people. This (if it’s correct) proves my point that Chareidiism is not a new movement, and Datiism is.
“I don’t know who made that comment, but I assume that they would differentiate between American elections and Israeli elections.”
“Who is “they”? This is a boich svarah from IITFT. The Gedolim certainly never said such a thing. In fact, they are on record that you should vote for whomever will give Yeshivos the most money, regardless of the Gimmel Chamuros.”
I meant – I don’t know which poster in the CR made that comment, but I assume that that poster was differentiating between Israeli elections and American elections.
“Having lived here for many years and spoken to many people, this is my definite impression as to how many, if not most Israelis use the term “Chareidi”.”
“Can we agree that the definition changes depending on where you live?”
Do you mean within Israel or Israel vs. America?
LU
“They assumed he was Chareidi because he was learning”
But he wasnt, right? Who cares what an ignorant reporter wrote OF course there are some who dont know the difference. You dont seem to be one of them Im not sure why you are having trouble with this.”
That was just one example. My point was that most people use the term “Chareidi” to refer to anyone seriously Frum as opposed to just using “Dati” without a qualification.
“Supporting any movement that publicly disapproves of any of the 3 chamuros makes other than a charedi or Frum ( irresepective of your garb)”
“Hence it is Assur to vote in any American Election.”
I don’t know who made that comment, but I assume that they would differentiate between American elections and Israeli elections.
Hey Assurnet, I see you got your subtitle! Mazel Tov! I figured they would give you something to do with your username once they saw you asking for a subtitle! 🙂
Do you think he made up the fact that the word “chareidi” came before the word “dati”? When do you think each word originated, and do you have a source? If you have any information on the topic, I would like to know.
1.”Do you think Machon Raaya would be okay with me going away to college?”
I don’t know.
2. “I may be wrong about the first two, please let me know if you have another perspective!”
Something in your original post was edited, so I have no idea what you are asking me! Sorry!
3. “By RWMO, I assume you mean hashkafically and not politically?”
yes. I mean, sincerely Frum.
4. “Do you think the places you mentioned would be unanimously right wing politically?”
I’m not sure what you mean by that. Are you talking about Israeli politics – not giving away land, pro-settlements, etc?
I would imagine the more Bais Yaakov places don’t talk much about politics altogether. The non-Bais Yaakovs tend to be pretty right-wing politically when it comes to the above issues. I don’t know how much it is discussed – it probably depends what’s going on in the country at the time. But again, is that what you are talking about?
5. Also, I suppose seminaries have marriage focused classes – are they the kind of stuff I’ve heard in high school (support your hubby’s learning, passive female roles etc.)?
It really depends on the school. MMY doesn’t talk much about that type of stuff. You can choose your classes, so even if there are one or two classes like that (which I don’t know if there even are), you would not have to take those classes.
I don’t know about the other schools mentioned. I think that most of these schools are on the open-minded side in terms of being understanding about where their students are coming from, but I don’t know how each compares to the other in that way.
“By the way, in terms of academics, I would love to have interesting Judaics classes, but I dislike the way most of high school was memorization. I would want a year without lots of pressure so that I’m not worn out when I get to college. At the same time, I do like learning and don’t want to be around people whose goal is to skip class.”
MMY pretty much fits that description. In terms of pressure, it depends how you define pressure. Unless things have changed, they don’t give much homework besides for studying for Finals during Finals time, so you don’t have that kind of pressure.
What they do have is a lot of cheverusa time including night seder (when you can learn with a chevrusa anything you want) from approximately 8:00 -9:45 at night (unless the schedule has changed over the years). But there are breaks during the day.
I think Machon Raayah, Darchei Binah, and B’nos Avigail all fit that description as well – interesting classes, not memorization type of learning, girls who seriously want to learn.
I do not know how Machon Raayah and B’nos Avigail are in terms of pressure. I don’t think that’s an issue at Darchei Binah.
Gavra-at-work: “Where is the Aveirah of voting for Meretz? Does this tie into “following the Gedolim”? Wouldn’t that be an additional qualification?”
I think it would be “not following the Gedolim” which is part of being Shomer Torah and Mitzvos.
I was almost hoping you would go there.
1: Following the “Gedolim” is an absolute qualification for being a Chareidi.
2: Included in “following the Gedolim” is voting Gimmel, as the Gedolim have told us that we must vote Gimmel.
Hence
3: Anyone who did not vote Gimmel is not a Chareidi.
Or
3: One may have different Gedolim than you (ex. Satmar Rov, Rav Avital, Rav Meir Stern, Rav Fuerst, etc. etc.) and still be a Chareidi. If their Gadol doesn’t tell them for whom to vote, they may vote Meretz (or Labor, NRP, etc.).”
1. I never said that “anyone who doesn’t vote Gimmel is not Chareidi”. As you yourself pointed out, there are Gedolim who say to vote for other parties. I voted Shas one year.
2. I don’t think there are any Gedolim who say to vote for Meretz.
GAW: “This assumes that having the Gedolim tell people from whom to vote is not a new “movement”. Gantz Shayach it is, as ubiquitin said earlier.”
Finally, people are giving an intelligent reason to consider Chareidiism a new movement!
I disagree, since I don’t think it is a new idea that we listen to Gedolim when it comes to these types of matters, but at least that was an intelligent argument!!
Now we have to start the debate on “Daas Torah”, what it means and whether or not it is a new concept. But I don’t have time or energy now.
To be continued….
ZD: “Amazing you could forget Rav Kook, It is true his zionistic leanings were not the majority and were a Daas Yachid at the time. He was definatly in those circles. I forgot exactly what, but he had something to do with Rav Elyshiv wedding (I think he was Masadar Kiddushin)”
I’m almost positive he was his Rav and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zatsal’s as well (at least one of them, if not both). He was also Rav Hutner, Zatsal’s Rav (or at least one of his Rabbanim). And I think he saved Rav Elyashiv, zatsal’s life somehow by getting him out of Europe or something. It is mentioned in the biography of Rebbetzin Kanievsky, zatsal.
Of course, I didn’t forget Rav Kook, zatsal. I wasn’t sure (and still am not sure) if he considered himself to be Mizrachi. Being Tzioni and being Mizrachi are not the same. That is precisely the reason that I wrote that I wasn’t sure whether or not there were any Gedolim that defined themselves as Mizrachi. My impression is that he didn’t, but again, I am not sure.
The term Chareidi predates the term Dati. Chareidi was used to refer to all Frum people. At some point, those who wished to disassociate themselves from the Chareidi world while still remaining religious (but more modern) started calling themselves Dati.
While different terms can be and are used differently by different people, many (and I think most) people in Israel consider “Dati” to mean less Frum than “Chareidi”. Many, if not, most Israeli Chilonim will use the term “Chareidi” to refer to anyone “very Frum /sincerely Frum”. People who are very Frum and tzioni usually refer to themselves as either Dati Chazak or Chareidi Leumi or Chareidi.
Since the word Chareidi is not usually used in America (until recently, I don’t think it was used at all, and now it is just starting to be used), Americans usually assume that the word “Chareidi” refers to something specific that does not exist in the US, and they don’t realize that it is simply the Israeli word for Frum for the most part.
I think most people in the CR live in America. I don’t know if anyone here has lived here as long as I have (close to 30 years). Having lived here for many years and spoken to many people, this is my definite impression as to how many, if not most Israelis use the term “Chareidi”.I have not taken an official survey, so I can’t say 100% that that is how most people use the term, and of course these things can change over time. I was out of the country for a few years, so it is theoretically possible that things changed over the past few years, although I doubt they changed that much. It seems to me that the majority of people do use the term that way, but if not, it is certainly a significant minority.
I know someone dati-leumi who was referred to in the secular newspapers as being Chareidi because he was learning on a bus when he was shot at and he was saved by his sefer when the bullet or missile hit the sefer instead of him (at least I think the story went something like that – I don’t remember the exact details anymore). They assumed he was Chareidi because he was learning.
And I can tell you of many times when I heard Chilonim use the terms “Chareidi” to refer to anyone who was sincerely Frum. And most people I know who are seriously Frum and tzioni do not call themselves “Dati” by itself. They either say Chareidi Leumi or Dati Chazak or Chareidi.
All of you who are arguing with me about this – How many years have you lived in Israel? How many Israeli Chilonim have you spoken to? Do you have immediate family members who are Israeli dati-leumi and Chilonim like I do and do you know how they use the terms?
I will concede that it is possible that things have changed in the past 5 years (although I doubt it) and that there are people who use these terms differently. But it definitely was the way that many (if not most) people used the term up until 5 years ago, and it certainly was the original usage of the terms.
Very important point I almost forgot to mention: If you want to see the origin of the terms Chareidi and Dati as well as a definition of the terms, See “Defenders of the Faith by Sam Heilman.
You can find the pages that discuss this topic if you google the words “origin of the term Chareidi” or something like that. At least it worked yesterday, but today I’m having trouble finding it that way.
If you read this, you will see very clearly that “Chareidi” was the original term used to refer to Frum people, and “Dati” was a new thing.
Iacisrmma- thanks. You are really full of sources lately (or maybe always)!
Iacisrmma – thanks! I always mix them up. Their first names both start with the same letter, and I think they were both nifter around the same time, or maybe I only really started hearing about both of them at the same time.
BigGolem: “Wow, everyone offered real good advice. This thread is looking like a community, isn’t it?”
🙂 +1
I also wanted to add that I think it is great that you put so much effort into your shidduchim. I know I said that before, and I suppose it should be obvious that people do that, but I’m not sure if it is. If it is, I never realized it before.
I certainly think it’s really nice that you are trying to find a way to build an emotional connection and not just saying, “I don’t feel anything. Next…” which is what I imagine a lot of guys in that situation would do.
Hatzlacha!
Hi baisyaakovliberal,
I know something about the seminaries, have worked in some of them in the past (although it was a long time ago, and schools do change), and have friends who still work in some of them, and I would love to be able to help you if I can.
Based on what you’re saying, I am not sure that Michlalah is the best option for you. The type of things that are issues for you could potentially. be bigger problems at Michlalah than in a Bais Yaakov seminary. On the other hand, Michlalah is a huge place and there are many teachers and types of teachers there, so everyone who goes can have a very different experience. A lot of it has to do with which teachers you end up having a kesher with. I still would not recommend it as a first choice. But I wouldn’t rule it out altogether.
I think Machon Raaya sounds like a very good idea. I don’t know enough about B’nos Avigail. I would also highly recommend Darchei Binah. I am surprised that you didn’t mention Darchei Binah as an option. It sounds to me right up your alley.
One advantage to DB is that it is not in a box – it is neither MO or untra-Orthodox. I can’t imagine your school would have a problem pushing you in, especially since your other option is going straight to college, and I would imagine that they would prefer that you go to any (or almost any) seminary first.
I am also wondering if Tomer Devora could be for you. I think it is different than the other schools you mentioned, and I don’t know a ton about it, but I wonder if it be worth looking into.
If none of the other options works out, you may want to consider MMY. I think it could make a lot of sense for you. It is the most intellectual seminary (and I have the impression that that is important to you). It is not really in a box, and the teachers are a range of hashkafos to some degree, but if one were to label it, it would probably be RWMO (right wing Modern Orthodox).
If you feel like you are heading in the direction of Modern Orthodox, it might be a good idea for you to experience sincere balanced Modern Orthodoxy rather than going to a BY seminary where you run the risk of either getting turned off or getting too “brainwashed” and then going in the opposite direction once you are in college. I’ve seen both happen to girls who were probably similar to you.
The only problem with MMY is that I don’t know how you would get in at this point. It doesn’t sound like your school would want to push it. Of course, if you point out to them that your other option is going straight to college, maybe they will decide that almost any seminary is better. Even if they do decide to push you in, they may not have any connections there, and I also am not sure that MMY is the type of school that one can push themselves into. But it might be worth trying.
In my case, someone asked them to give me a subtitle and then someone else made a suggestion as to a subtitle for me.
I don’t know what usually happens. They probably just happen to think of something funny or cute or nice that seems appropriate for a particular person based on things (or a thing) that person has been posting or based on the person’s username.
LB +1! That was so nice how you were melamed zchus and found a way to reconcile things.
There is a story with someone – it’s either Rav Avigdor Miller, zatsal, or Rav Avraham Pam, zatsal. One of his talmidim (we’ll call him Reuven) was engaged. Reuven was of course very excited and he called his friend Shimon to tell him. Shimon asked him when he’s getting married, and Reuven gave him the goyish date. Shimon immediately started giving him mussar, “how can you go by the goyish date?!!”
Reuven was really hurt by this. He then called his Rav (either Rav Avigdor Miller or Rav Avraham Pam) and told him that he was a chosson. His Rav was really excited and asked him when he’s getting married. He again gave the goyish date. The Rav got really excited and said, “Wow, that is also my anniversary! We will be celebrating our anniversaries on the same day”.
After that, Reuven always made sure to send his Rav a card on their mutual anniversary wishing him a happy anniversary and sending him a picture of his ever-growing family, bli ayin hara.
I think maybe the Rav was nifter shortly after the mutual anniversary one year. In any case, when Reuven went to be menachem avel his wife, she made a point of telling him how much the Rav enjoyed his cards and pictures every year.
I think that wishing someone a Happy new year might be slightly different since new year’s is actually a religious holiday, although most don’t realize that.
But even so, perhaps I owe you an apology, Joe Jake, for not acting in the footsteps of (Rav Avigdor Miller or Rav Avraham Pam) and instead giving a sarcastic response,
so it was very nice and thoughtful of you to wish me a happy new year (ok, it wasn’t personally me, but I was included), even though I don’t celebrate it.
And I wish everyone in the CR a happy and good new month!!!! (Teves)
BigGolem: “Would you agree with someone ending a relationship due to lack of emotional connection, even if the other party has everything this person is looking for?”
Avrum in MD: “If that were the case, then I’d first investigate why an emotional connection wasn’t forming.”
Avrum in MD +1. There have been many times when I went out with someone and I felt that it made sense logically but emotionally there was no connection. I would continue to go out with the person several times even though I was miserable, because I felt that I didn’t have a good reason to stop and people were pressuring me tremendously. Eventually, I would break up with the guy (despite the pressure) but feel very guilty about it, because I felt like I didn’t have a good reason, and people would still pressure me (after I broke up with him) to go out again. Sometimes, this would continue until the guy finally got married, Boruch Hashem!
Usually, it’s only after I stop going out with someone that I am able to realize that there WERE very good, logical reasons why he wasn’t for me, but it was hard for me to realize it at the time because I didn’t want to be judgmental and think badly of someone.
The point is that if you are not feeling an emotional connection, there may in fact be a very good, logical reason for it.
Big Golem – it is true that giving helps build a connection, so what I would do is to find a way of giving that doesn’t involve giving actual gifts or even notes. I think a compliment might be a good way to start.
Obviously, you have to be careful about the type of compliment, but there are many types of compliments you can give people without having to be concerned that it might sound inappropriate. For example, I remember telling a boy on a first or second date that his reference had said really nice things about him. That is the type of thing that anyone would be happy to hear. In general, an appropriate compliment can go a long way to building a connection.
Another way to give is by doing something thoughtful for the person. Think about something she might want you to do for or say to her.
Hatzlacha! (if you’re talking about a specific situation or even if you’re not).
never happened to me, so I don’t know.
WTP +1
Rebbetzin Kanievsky zatsal used to spend the 40 minutes after candle lighting davening for all the people who came to her and asked her to daven for them.
Thank you DY.
In one of Rabbi Dr. Avraham Twersky’s books (possibly “From generation to generation”) he writes about how good he would feel when he saw his mother lighting one candle for each person in the family. He realized that there was extra light in the world because of his existence.
I don’t know if there is a specific source for that concept or not, but it’s not the type of concept that requires a source.
Big Golem – personally, I would be a bit cautious about giving any kind of gift if either of you is not feeling emotionally connected to the other. I remember feeling very uncomfortable when someone I went out with who really liked me (and whom I didn’t like) gave me something.
The “gift” itself I wouldn’t have minded (it was Divrei Torah – something he had gotten ahold of that he knew I would want and he had photocopied for me), but the fact that he wrote a note on it made me very nervous. He didn’t even write anything so terrible, but the fact that he wrote a note made me nervous.
Chocolate is fine – I never minded when guys I went out with gave me chocolate. But I would be cautious about notes. That is just my opinion though – I don’t know how other girls feel.
I do vaguely remember once when I set someone up and the girl wrote notes for the boy (it was her type -she used to that in general- I’d gotten several notes from her on different occasions), and I think I remember his sister telling me that it made him nervous. And they had been going out for a while at that time. So it could be it’s not just me.
I would also be careful about giving flowers too soon (I remember there was once a thread about that). My friend’s chosson gave her flowers a while before he was her chosson and she wasn’t ready for something like that, and it made her nervous.
But then again, these things all depend on the people and the situation. I would try to stick with something as neutral as possible though – like chocolate. But that’s just my opinion.
WTP: “Single girls/women living in their parents’ house generally don’t light (with the exception of chabad where girls light one)”
It’s not only Chabad.
“There is a custom to add a candle for each child born, the basis for this is that if a woman missed lighting candles (which she would have done when hospitalized, or in the olden days, confined post-birth) there is a penalty imposed that has to light one extra from then on. Now, even when the woman does not miss lighting post-birth, she still adds one for her new baby.’
I could be wrong, but I don’t think that is the only reason for the minhag.
I just remembered when I first started to really realize that the Chilonim use the term “chareidi” to refer to anyone who is fully frum. It was when I watched a youtube video where a chiloni guy was explaining to some (not-Jewish) foreign workers the differences between chiloni, dati and chareidi. He used dati to refer to people who are not completely Frum. That is the general usage of the term in the Chiloni world. They generally use the term Chareidi to refer to people who are fully Frum.
“The RZ would say that the gedolim in past generations would react the same as they did to the opportunity to populate and build Eretz Yisroel, which wasn’t possible in the past.”
1. What do you mean by “opportunity”? Weren’t the zionists the ones who created the opportunity? Why couldn’t that have been done previously? (It’s possible you are right and it couldn’t have been done – I am just wondering why.).
2. Maybe I’m wrong, but I didn’t think that the Mizrachi movement was started by Gedolim or that there were any Gedolim who considered themselves Mizrachi. But again, I could be wrong.
For them to talk about what the Gedolim in the past would have said is ridiculous; you have to listen to the Gedolim of your times. And that is what the Chareidim were doing. And that is what the Yidden in all the generations past had done, and that is why they are a continuation of the past.
3. Even if there were Gedolim at the time who aligned themselves with the Mizrachi movement, today, I’m fairly certain that there aren’t. In any case, the Chareidim are certainly following the majority of Gedolim and the biggest Gedolim, if not all of them. So they are doing what Am Yisrael did throughout history.
4. Furthermore, Mizrachi was a new movement. All the Chareidim did was to not follow it. Saying that is a new movement is like saying that not being Chassidish is a new movement. Maybe the Chassidim thought that the Gedolim in past times would have become Chassidish. But that doesn’t change the fact that Chassidus was a new movement and not following it is not a new movement.
Why do you need to kasher fruits and vegetables? Do you mean clean?