Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
LB – When you say that you said “berachot” for family members, what exactly do you mean by that? Were you saying the bracha on the candles more than once? If you were, that could explain why the Kiruv Rebbetzin got upset, since that would definitely be a problem.
Otherwise, it’s hard for me to see why it’s a problem to light more than 2. There are many minhagim when it comes to lighting candles. I’ll try to look it up when I have a chance, but I think there is a minhag to light 7 candles, for example, and maybe 10 as well.
ZD – a Jew. I try not to label people unless I have to.
If he were being “redt” to me, I would probably ask about the specific issues that are important to me (tv/movies, learning, etc.)
Anyone who is fully Frum would be considered Chareidi by many people. They certainly wouldn’t be considered “Dati” by itself. “Dati” implies not fully Frum. Anyone who is fully Frum would at least be called “Dati Chazak”, if not Chareidei Leumi or Chareidi. There is a reason why the terms “Dati Chazak” and “Chareidi Leumi” exist. If “Dati” meant fully Frum, there would be no reason for anyone to call themselves “Dati Chazak” or “Chareidi Leumi”.
Before I moved into an Israeli Chareidi apartment building, the landlord asked me if I was Chareidi. He was asking about my religious level, not my hashkafos. He didn’t care about my hashakafas; he wanted to make sure that I wouldn’t do anything that would offend the neighbors.
Thank you for wishing me a happpy new year! It’s only three months late -that’s not so bad – at least for me – I do many things more than 3 months late.
“The word for “frum” is Dati.”
That’s an American fallacy. Israelis don’t use the word dati to mean Frum. It means religious. It would not be used for someone who keeps halacha completely. It certainly is unlikely to be used for someone who doesn’t watch movies or tv, and doesn’t send his daughters to the army, dresses tzniusly,etc.
Lightbrite: there are many minhagim. Some single girls light one. I used to light one, until someone told me that I’m not supposed to, so I switched to two. I’m not sure if they were correct or not.
There are definitely minhagim for lighting more than two. I once saw a list of all different minhagim. Usually married women either light 2 or one for each member of the family, and single girls either light 1 or 2.
It never occurred to me that there could be anything wrong with lighting more. When I was living by myself, I sometimes lit a bunch because I was lighting tealights and I felt like 2 tealights was too little light. I thnk I also thought it would be a segula for getting married :).
Maybe I’m wrong though, so you should probably ask a sheilah before you light more candles. I know that it is a problem to light less than you usually do (so if you usually light 2, it’s probably a problem to start lighting 1).
Maybe her zivug is in Australia. Since she will be in Australia for vacation anyhow, this is reasonable hishtadlus in case her zivug is in Australia. She has the rest of her life to date guys in the US in case her zivug is in the US, but this may be her only chance to date guys in Australia.
In any case, it’s what her mother wants her to do. That is a good enough reason to do it.
CTLawyer – I wish your wife a refuah shelaima. I wish I could ask you for her name to daven for her, but I suppose that wouldn’t be possible. B”N, I will daven for her in any case.
I think the thing is that Americans are confused by the term Chareidi because it’s not really used in America, so Americans think it refers to some kind of movement. But that’s not how most Israelis use the term. Whenever I told an Israeli that I wasn’t Chareidi (before I figured out that I was), they would look surprised and ask me in what way I wasn’t Chareidi. They consider anyone who is Frum to be Chareidi.
Chareidi is the hebrew word for Frum. There is no other word for Frum in hebrew.
DY: “There’s no question that all streams are different than Jews were in the past, the difference between each of today’s streams is how they have adapted to today’s reality.
Everyone thinks that they have adapted in the manner that our gedolim from the past (going back to Chazal and even earlier) would have wanted, and therefore “default” Judaism, and the others are “movements”.”
That sounds very nice except that I don’t think it’s true. Zionism was a new movement that hadn’t existed previously, and the term Chareidi is just used to refer to any Frum Jews who don’t define themselves as religious-zionists.
Chareidi is the hebrew word for Frum. There is no other word for Frum in hebrew. Do you consider Frum to be a new movement?
Were the Perushim a new movement? They were just the Jews who didn’t become tzedukim – the same way that the Chareidim are the Jews who didn’t become tziyoni.
Lilmod: “Zionism is a hashkafa, not a sociological detail.”
GAW: “I would argue that Aderaba, Zionism is the biggest “detail” to split Torah society (at least in Israel) since the Chassidic/Misnaged divide, and maybe even the Pharisee chumrah of Chulin B’Taharah.”
That doesn’t make it a sociological detail as opposed to a hashkafa. Adraba, that is why it is so divisive – precisely because it IS a hashkafa.
Takamamash: I’m still waiting for your response to this. You disagreed with my limud zchus on the settlers, so what is yours?
I didn’t read the old threads, but are you trying to tell me that I didn’t say ANYTHING original that wasn’t already said? And here, I thought I was such an original thinker! 🙁 oh, well… maybe, great minds just think alike 🙂
This thread provides a clear proof that I can’t possibly be Joseph, since I posted Motzei Shabbos when it was Shabbos in the US, and it looks like he posted Erev Shabbos when it was Shabbos here.
besides, I think we have very different personalities..
Meno, it’s supposed to be about confusing halacha, minhag, chumra and shtus with one another. Unfortunately, some of the posters giving examples seem to be very confused themselves regarding which things are halacha and which are chumra.
Lightbrite, I also would like to know why you bumped this.
And btw, everyone has different approaches to dating, and different things work for different people. As a general rule, I don’t know if I would reccommend lining up 4 dates in 10 days, but it could work for some people. Additionally, it sounds like the circumstances here were unusual.
I could see it being more of a problem for a boy doing something like this, though.
Abba, btw, I was joking about the donkey rides. It had to do with a conversation from a previous thread.
“That there’s nothing in this thread that hasn’t already been discussed, by the same people, ad nauseum.”
I never discussed it before, and I have been one of the main participants in this discussion!
Sorry, Abba, I mistakenly thought you were talking to me.
Word of advice: As far as I know there is no halachic problem with being clear about who you are talking to, and it would make it easier to figure out who you are talking to if you are clear about it.
I once went out with someone who had this exact issue. He asked a sheilah – either the Yahrtzeit was kept the day before or the day after – I don’t remember which. Offhand, I would guess the next day – but I don’t know.
Ask a sheilah to a qualified Rav.
Meno, did you find it yet?
Lilmod: “Or: Possibility #2: One could argue that someone who votes Meretz is by definition not “shomer Torah u’Mitzvos”.”
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.
“That there’s nothing in this thread that hasn’t already been discussed, by the same people, ad nauseum.”
That wasn’t what you agreed on. What you agreed on was:
Did you change your mind from earlier in this thread? I thought you had said something very different earlier, but I may be mistaken.
Lightbrite: “1) If Chareidi Jews are characterized as being anti-Zionist, then wouldn’t that be a movement
Being against the legal and secular State of Israel is holding a political, social, and economic affiliation.”
Lightbrite, I didn’t define Chareidiism as being anti-Zionist. I even allowed for the fact that it could be possible to be Chareidi and be Zionist. My point was that being Chareidi includes all Frum Jews who do not define themselves as Dati-Leumi/Mizrachi. Dati-Leumi/Mizrachi is a new movement. Not being part of it does not make you part of a new movement.
Part of the definition of Chareidi is being Frum. Being Frum includes following Daas Torah. Following Daas Torah means listening to the Gedolim of your generation. The reason why we have to follow the Gedolim in our generation and it’s not enough to follow the Gedolim in past generations is that there are new issues in each generation. The fact that there are new issues in each generation that need resolved does not mean that being Frum is a new movement because being Frum might involve doing some things differently than it did in the last generation. If that were the case, then we are creating new movements every day because there are new issues every day.
So if you are going to say that Chareidiism is a new movement just because there are new issues today, then being Frum is also a new movement and so is being Shomer Torah U’Mitzvos.
I don’t get it – why do so many people have lost accounts?
IITFT – +1!
“everything else are minor sociological details”
GAW: “Like Zionism. :)”
Zionism is a hashkafa, not a sociological detail.
HGG- that’s the best way to do it! Mazel Tov again!
“Depending on how you phrase those goals, destiny and purpose I think all orthodox JEws and (probablly even many non-orthdox) will say they have similar goals”
So maybe none of them are new movements.
“everything else are minor sociological details”
“Going from an agricultural based society to an urban based society is a not a minor sociological detail
Also major transfers of population centers has had a major effect”
Even if they are not minor, they still are sociological details that are not connected to Chareidi hashkafa and hence, have nothing to do with this discussion.
Twisted- as I already explained, the things you are talking about have nothing to do with the secular education itself – they have to do with things that often go with it. That is not the same thing at all. That is why the girls do receive a secular education, including two years post high-school which are certainly not required by law.
Meno – +1. I think that’s about 4 and a half feet, so there really is no question. I mean, even if it were one foot, I don’t think there’s a question either, but 4 and a half feet? What’s the problem?
Thanks Utah for explaining! I still don’t get it though…
And what is a marginalized gopher?
IITFT – Thanks for the confirmation! +1
“None of which have to do with being a “Chareidi” as per LuL’s definition. One can wear a Rugby Shirt or khaki pants and be a Chareidi. Perhaps not a Chassid, but those terms are not interchangeable. Some Chareidim are Chassidim, others not. Some Chassidim are Chareidim, others are not.”
GAW, thank you. Also, I would think that you could be a Chassid as well even without the Chassidish levush.
“For example, Ner Yisroel, who LuL considers part of the “Chareidi world”, does work towards secular education for its students”
Thank you again.
And in Bais Yaakov of Monsey which is considered to be very chareidi, the Rebbetzin, a”h, told a girl who wasn’t sure if she should take the optional 12th grade college courses that she should take them because all knowledge is worthwhile. This was despite the fact that she was very anti-going to college. That is because her reasons for being against college had nothing to do with her attitudes towards secular knowledge.
This is true for most Chareidim. They are against too much secular education for boys because it’s bitul Torah. But if it’s not at the expense of limud Torah (for example, a boy who wouldn’t be learning anyhow or needs a parnassah), they are not against it.
And they are against or at least hesitant about boys or girls going to college because of the environment and influences. But if one could attain the knowledge without the environment and influences (and Bitul Torah for boys), they would not have a problem with it.
I don’t believe that your hypothesis could ever happen. And until I find out that according to halacha, I am allowed to entertain such a hypothesis, I can not entertain such a hypothesis.
Apparently, you are entertaining such a hypothesis. Maybe you should stop and think about why you are entertaining such a hypothesis without knowing if you are allowed to do so according to halacha.
WTP +1 on the rest of your post as well.
“When I said that the girl has to respond quickly if the boy already agreed to the shidduch or risk losing the date, I was criticized”
I think you might be taking something out of context.
“but if you are flying in it’s okay to stack them up.”
I never said that. I spoke about having a list of possible guys to go out with. Not the same thing.
“After a 23 hour flight the girls is to meet 4 boys within the first 10 days”
I never said that. I spoke about going to America or Israel for approximately a month with a list of at least 2 possible boys to date while you are there. I never said anything about arranging the dates beforehand.
I have never actually arranged more than one date beforehand, if that much. Personally, I have never dated on a trip that was less than 3 weeks, and even that I only did once. On that trip, I went out with 2 guys, and I had plenty of time to see friends and former students. The trip was worth it for that (seeing friends and former students).
The other times, I went for the summer. I didn’t have any dates arranged beforehand, but I did research and knew that there were guys to go out with and that it made sense to go both for shidduchim and other reasons. Once I was there, I realized it made sense to stay longer (either for shidduchim and/or for other reasons) so I did.
“ZD, I would say that your generalities are characteristics that apply to a majority, but not necessarily a definition.”
Winnie the Pooh +1 and thank you. After I wrote my post, it occured to that that would be a good way to describe the difference.
In terms of secular education, I think that it’s very inaccurate to say that the Chareidi world is against it even as a characteristic. I believe I mentioned this in a previous post. The Chareidi world (in general) considers secular education to be valuable – it’s a question of priorities.
Sorry, poor instructions – first click on Jewlarious and then click on Jtube. (btw, “It’s all about the nail” should be in there somewhere too).
“Nes Gadol hayah poh!” That’s great!
LB – do donkeys in parks count? They are giving donkey rides in the park across the street during Chanuka. Maybe I should have gone there on my date tonight. Too bad I didn’t think of it earlier.
ZD- if you read all my posts, I very clearly allowed for the possibility of someone being Chareidi and zionistic. I distinguished between someone who self-indentifies as Chareidi even though he’s zionistic as opposed to someone who feels that his zionism is such an important part of him that he labels himself as Dati-Leumi. I also mentioned that there is such as thing as being Chardel (Chareidi Leumi) which could possibly be considered Chareidi (although it could also be considered not-Chareidi).
I also brought up the differences in Daas Torah.
I don’t consider l’vush to be part of the definition of Chareidi. A person can be Chareidi and dress modern. A person can also dress “Yeshivish” and be dati leumi.
Likewise, I don’t consider attitudes towards secular studies to be part of the definition of Chareidi.
Nechomah – I’ve never done it myself, and I don’t even know if I know anyone who has done it. But I have heard of it. I know many people are against it for the reasons you stated, but I guess as CTL and WTP said, some people feel it’s necessary. I can hear both sides. I think it really depends on the person and the situation.
Funny true story: A friend of mine agreed to go out with a certain boy. He called her at work (this was in pre-cell phone days) to set up a date for Sunday. Later that night (or maybe it was the next day), the phone rings in her apartment, and she picks it up, and it’s the same guy calling to set up a date with her roommate for Monday. She is like, “Do you know who you are talking to? This is _____.” She said he cracked up. She told him that she and her roommate would discuss it and decide which one should go out with him. They discussed it and came to the conclusion that he made the most sense for their third roommate. L’maaseh, they decided that the second girl should go out with him first. Neither of them ended up marrying him.
Moral of the story: If you do decide to go out with 2 girls simultaneously, make sure they are not roommates, and pay attention to the phone number you are calling!
LB – and here, I was sure it was just a joke!
uh, I wouldn’t say his “two roles have come into conflict”. Last I checked, the Shulchan Aruch doesn’t mention anything about a chiyuv of eating sufganiyot on Chanuka!
Golfer +1
ZD – it’s not a question of big deal or not. It’s a question of what we are supposed to believe, and that is a big deal.
The issues that you mention are actually less important because there are no halachic ramifications (to the best of my knowledge).
I didn’t read through all the previous posts, but it sounds like they are dealing with issues with halachic ramifications. But in any case, our beliefs are very important too. If we are not allowed to believe something, it is possible that it is kefira (at least on some level) to believe it.
Meno – sorry, I don’t get it. Who is Ted Talk?
“Q please: Does Chareidi imply anti-Zionist [Torah-observant Jew/frum/religious]?”
LB, that’s what this whole discussion is about – the definition of Chareidi. According to me and Joseph (and maybe some others) it basically means anyone Frum who doesn’t identify as dati-leumi (aka Mizrachi)
Meno – go to Aish.com, click on Jtube and check out the 3rd (or 4rth, depending if you count the one on top or not) title there. I thought of you (and that other thread) when I saw it.
ZD – before the creation of the State, the Yerushalmim in Eretz Yisrael learned and people in Chutz LaEretz sent them money (instead of sending it to the State like they do now).
“So what? He is still a Shomer Torah U’mitzvos (qualification #1) AND not a Zionist/Dati Leumi (Qualification #2) AND self-identifies as a Chareidi (Qualification #3). Unless you are adding additional qualifications?”
I guess I’m adding additional qualifications :). Or maybe I am just redefining “not being dati-leumi” as being someone who is not “dati-leumi” for the same type of reasons that Chareidim are not dati-leumi.
Or: Possibility #2: One could argue that someone who votes Meretz is by definition not “shomer Torah u’Mitzvos”.
Or: Possibility #3: As I pointed out earlier, no definition will fit 100% and you will always find some people who don’t fit (as you probably would with any label). People aren’t labels, and there are people who don’t fit in boxes no matter how wide the box is. Since Shomer Torah U’Mitzvos people who vote Meretz are a rarity, I don’t think they are enough of a reason to be mevatel my definition even if they don’t fit. So you can either say that they are the exception that proves the rule or you can add to the definition to make if fit them.
Possibility #4: I’m not incredibly up-to-date on Israeli politics, but last I checked, Meretz was anti-Chareidi. So that would be the reason that someone who votes Meretz can’t be considered Chareidi. And we don’t really need the first 3 possibilities anymore, but I only thought of this after I wrote it.