Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
He has no chance of winning. If he were President he might be a good president. He did bring well deserved attention in the election to the problem of illegal aliens run amok.
Wolf, I offer advanced refresher courses in English. squeak is my most recent satisfied client.
Yekkes are never late.
DaasYochid has prevailed in this discussion.
DY: My reading of Curiosity’s jestful comment is in line with ca’s.
ca,
Hashem still runs the world.
It’s a fact.
A frum developer just built dozens of brand new homes in Bloomingburg, NY in Sullivan County, and is planning to build another over hundred brand new homes in a developing frum community. From what I understand the pricing is very good. You can google “Chestnut Ridge Bloomingburg” (without the quotes) to find the website with the information.
Yiddish is over 1,000 years old.
charliehall: Yes, just a lot of different mitzvot…
Yes, just a small number of different mitzvot.
2+2 = 3+3 (Just a small difference in numbers.)
benignuman: I don’t know the answer but Rav Chaim does. And surely others do as well; perhaps even a lurker here.
The Wolf = Anav.
The Wolf = Lamid Vov.
A woman’s place is at home. (Azoi zugt der Torah un halacha.) Anywhere else is, at best, a b’dieved.
(Obviously in the latter case the food is milichigs.)
That depends on the case, and how you define “milchigs”.
Er, please explain how “Cholov Yisroel food made in Cholov Stam keilim” is ever not milichigs.
Rav Chaim doesn’t have a list. He said names should not be used if they have no traditional basis among Jews to use them. (And he isn’t shy about specifying names which are inappropriate.)
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/the-name-shira-asur
ubiquitin: According to the quote from Rav Ahron it is abundantly clear he means “must”. The rest of the recording is only Rav Heinemann’s opinion.
benignuman: Unless you provide names of rabbonim, your definition of “yeshivish” vastly differs from the common definition. The only names you provided are those of unsourced and unwritten rulings that someone allegedly claims to have heard. And if, as you say, “when someone asks a personal shaila, the response is meant for him alone, not for publication unless the rov says so”, why then are you publishing these supposed shailas and alleged responses that you acknowledge were at most a one-off responsa that the rov didn’t want published or used generally by the public? As you say “Rabbonim are often reluctant to publish heterim because they do not trust that the heter won’t be misunderstood/extended”, why are you extending it where it is easily liable to be misunderstood as the rabbonim feared?
The mainstream view and psak, as abundantly demonstrated by numerous written psakim by the gedolei haposkim across the spectrum (yeshivish/litvish, chasidish and sefardish) is that it is prohibited to shake a woman’s hand in a business setting or otherwise. There may be any number of private heteirim to do any sort of aveiros the Torah might prohibit based on unique circumstances. But those heteirim in no way, shape or form indicate that the underlying aveira is anything other than prohibited. No less that when someone receives a heter to be mechallel Shabbos does it mean that chillul Shabbos is permitted. Or “mainstream”.
newbee: What if you have to physically pick a woman up and take her off the train tracks to save her life? Being permitted to do so demonstrates that other times you can pick a woman up if you feel it isn’t derech chiba? You’re arguing since you can carry her out of the pool so you should be able to carry her to a cot if she fell asleep on the kitchen floor if you believe it isn’t derech chiba for you.
And all doctors don’t shake hands. What on earth are you talking about?
Rav Moshe writes multiple times that shaking a woman’s hand is objectively derech chiba.
“I will tell you what my Rebbe said “mdarf zich arose dreyen fun deim”
The translation of that is Rav Ahron said “one must get himself out of that”. Must.
newbee: What if you have to physically pick a woman up and take her off the train tracks to save her life? Being permitted to do so demonstrates that other times you can pick a woman up if you feel it isn’t derech chiba?
Soon people will be quoting this story as a psak that some “prominent posek” permits hugging women if it isn’t derech chiba.
Rav Moshe in OC I 113 also writes it is assur because an unmarried woman is a nidda and a married woman is an eishes ish (and also may be a nidda).
You don’t have to klerr what Rav Moshe was saying. Rav Moshe is very clear in multiple teshuvos (EH I 5, OC I 113, EH IV 32.9) on this issue that a handshake with a woman is objectively derech chiba.
writersoul, when folks backup themselves with a “well-known rosh yeshiva” (Dov Linzer is a well known RY) or “a substantial posek” who must remain unnamed (which poskim want their psaks published without attribution?), especially when they are going against numerous written piskei din by the gedolei haposkim, and they can’t cite any written psak justifying their deviation from numerous written psaks to the contrary, that is the typical reasoning.
Sam, we’re still waiting for information on this so-called psak you made up in the name of the CS that one can only sell chometz to a woman.
Sam: Please provide a citation to this alleged Chasam Sofer where he rules one can only sell their chometz to a woman (and that the Rov must shake her hand.)
Sam: I am not incorrect – I didn’t even address the issue of whether a handshake is needed to seal a deal. I simply pointed out that you don’t need a gentile woman to sell your chometz too. You can be less egalitarian.
newbee: Rav Moshe is very clear in multiple teshuvos on this issue that a handshake with a woman is objectively derech chiba.