Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
We say several times a day that ועבדתם leads to ואבדתם
If the people of your state vote for ridiculously high state taxes there’s no reason for the rest of the country to subsidize them. The full burden should fall on your state’s taxpayers, so you will fight to get them lowered, or else move to a state with more reasonable taxes.
Candyland is a “game” that cannot appeal to anyone over the age of about eight, since it’s completely deterministic. There are no decisions to make. Draw, move; draw, move. A robot could play it. A stupid robot.
Years later, when you’re thinking back on those early years, you end up playing Run For Your Life, Candy Man.
can an Ashkenazi eating at a Sephardi eat food that was used to cook rice?
Yes. Kitniyos is batel berov, so whatever taam of kitniyos the pot expels into the food will be batel. If an Ashkenazi does this for himself it could be considered mevatel issur lechatchila, but to a Sefardi it’s not an issur, so there’s no shyla.
Further, since an Ashkenazi may cook kitniyos for Sefardi guests, it seems obvious that he may also cook non-kitniyos for them in a kitniyos pot, and having done so beheter he may then eat the food.
PS: I have a vague recollection at the back of my head that it’s in volume 6, so look there first, but don’t hold me to it. I don’t have it to hand to check.
iacisrmma, for matzos mitzva nobody allows egg matza. The question is only for the rest of Pesach. Sefardim allow it for everyone, Ashkenazim only allow it for those who are unable to eat normal matzah (veyesh lomar that now that we have potatoes perhaps even they should not be allowed).
YabiaOmer, there is a teshuva in Yechaveh Daas (I don’t remember which volume but I’m sure you can find it in the index) about whether a Sefardi shopkeeper who carries matza ashira on chol hamoed may sell it to a customer he knows to be Ashkenazi. He paskens that the shopkeeper must put up a sign informing customers that this is forbidden to healthy adult Ashkenazim, and then if an Ashkenazi brings it to the counter he may assume that he must be buying it for those who are permitted to eat it.
In one of the Chasam Sofer’s teshuvos he apologizes to his correspondent for the brevity of his response, explaining that he has no access to his seforim because the נשים צדקניות have expelled him from his study so they can clean it for Pesach.
He inherited it from his father, who was also a Lubavitcher. When he was appointed, in 1936, Bnei Brak was a very different place, and there was no reason to be surprised at the appointment of a Lubavitcher rov.
“They” can say all kinds of things but it doesn’t make them true. Corn was not available at the time of the geonim either (not that the geonim had anything to do with this gezera, which was completely unknown where they lived, but it was also not available in 12th-century France, where it seems this gezera originated) and yet everyone agrees it is forbidden.
And don’t be so sure that making flour has anything to do with the reason for the gezera. Some achronim suggested it as a possible reason, but who says they were right?
Laskern, there is indeed such a story, but it’s not true.
They say something which normally means someone is alive, and they mean he’s alive, but I shouldn’t object to it because it can be twisted to mean something else?
Not twisted. It can mean something else, so you should simply understand it that way. What they mean by it is their problem, not yours. So long as what they are saying is not objectionable, you have no right to object to it.
Neville, yes, Lubav uses raw onions. The reason is not recorded, but remember where Lubav come from, and not much green was available at Pesach time. I was told that the reason to use onion rather than potato is to ensure that one will not eat a kezayis, but I have not seen this in writing.
(Consider also the northern European practice of using horseradish for maror, and subsequently the mistaken belief that it is “tamcho” which is one of the 5 kinds of maror. In northern Europe none of the 5 kinds were available, so they substituted what they had, and over time developed the belief that it was one of the kinds. But everyone agrees that where lettuce is available it should be used.)
Re: asking the dead to pray for us, this is minhag kol yisroel for all the generations. I know there are seforim that object, and say we should daven directly to Hashem in the niftar’s zechus, but the Jewish practise throughout all the generations is against them. They are like those who object to “machnisei rachamim” and “sholom aleichem”; the accepted halocho is not like them.
In particular, the Zohar explicitly rejects their objections, and says ודורש אל המתים refers to resho’im, who are considered “meisim” even when they are physically alive. It explicitly says when the world needs rain we should take a sefer torah to the cemetery and directly ask the meisim to intercede with Hashem to give us rain. It then says the local meisim who have been so alerted go to Chevron and inform those buried there about our plight, and together they go to the higher worlds and inform everyone there, and everyone prays for us, and Hashem makes it rain.
This is the Zohar, which klal yisroel has accepted as part of the Torah, so one who denies it is a kofer.
There is no reason to believe that the Jesus of the NT was at all distant from Judaism. Nor that his talmidim who thought he was moshiach were distant from Judaism. The Jewish opposition to the “minim” doesn’t appear until after the new movement had been taken over by Greek antisemites, and the original Jewish leaders had died or been thrown out. That’s when we get Birchas Haminim.
(PS, to forestall arguments: the “Jewish sinner” whose spirit Onkelos called up is not named. It could be anyone. The “Yeshu Hanotzri” in mesechta Sanhedrin cannot be the Jesus of the NT; their stores are completely different, and he was at least 100 years too early. And “Ben Stodo” was about 100 years too late.)
Rebbetzin, Rebbi came home for kiddush, not havdala. That he was motzi his family, and therefore had to have a din of a living person at those moments, is in Sefer Chassidim. But the rest of the time he had a din of a meis.
In general, the definition of “dead” when we talk of tzadikim is vague. It’s clear that tzadikim are capable of things in “death” that most people are not. Not only Rebbi coming home to make kiddush, and all chachomim moving their lips when their torah is repeated, but also R Elozor br Shimon lying dead in his attic for years, answering shaylos!
(Though even normal people are capable of things that goyim and apikorsim deny. Yidden believe that the dead are aware of what happens to their bodies and at their graves, and that if you visit their graves and speak to them they listen.)
But they are still “meisim” because that is what the Torah calls them. Avrohom and Yitzchok are meisim. Moshe is a meis. R Elozor br Shimon is a meis, and was one even when he was in the attic. The only two people whose demise is recorded in Tanach without the word “meis” being used are Yaacov and Dovid. The gemoro discusses what exactly this means, and the conclusion is not clear, but Rashi understands it literally, that Yaacov and Dovid are lying in their graves, alive in the normal sense, even though they have nothing to eat, etc.
(On the other hand there are contexts in which the Torah uses “meisim” to mean resho’im, even when they’re physically alive, and “chayim” to mean tzadikim even when they’re physically dead.)
Also see the Shaloh on “Yaacov lo meis”, who explains that Yisroel died but Yaacov didn’t, because he had already died years earlier and had come back to life, so without Yisroel he was like people will be after techiyas hameisim.
DY, it doesn’t matter what they mean by it, YOU can’t object to it because it can be understood in a normal way, so you should just understand it that way.
Daasyochid:
If they made a mistake because of some type of conspiracy theory, and there wasn’t a body, etc., you might be right.However, the reason they think he’s alive is because they think he can’t die, because he’s divine. That’s apikorsus.
That is simply not true. None of them say that. The reason they insist he’s alive is precisely because, like you, they reject the idea that moshiach can be from the deceased, and since they can’t let go of the idea that he will be moshiach they have convinced themselves that the funeral was an illusion, like Moshe Rabbenu’s funeral that the Jews saw at Mt Sinai, and he is really living in 770, hidden from unclean eyes, in keeping with what is found in the Ramban and in the Zohar that Moshiach will go through a period of hiding. That’s crazy, but it’s not apikorsus. They fully agree that the Rebbe is capable of dying, after he has done his job and brought the geulah to physical reality.
Daasyochid, Joseph, I’m telling you what the Rebbe himself said. It’s ambiguous so you can take it any way you like. Therefore what they mean is irrelevant; you have no grounds to object to it.
My father used to give presents to all those who did not steal the afikoman. He said a thief does not deserve a present. And he made clear that we don’t need the piece that was put away. The only reason it’s hidden is in case we eat up all the other matzos, but we have plenty more so that isn’t going to happen. If someone steals it, let him keep it.
The L Rebbe himself explained, in connection with the wish “yechi hamelech”, which is found in Tanach, that it can be understood two ways. In the case of a living person it can be understood as a prayer that he not die, and in the case of a deceased person it can be understood as a prayer for techiyas hameisim. The same is true for “shlita”; we hope that all the shochnei ofor will wake up and sing, and live for a long time (according to the Rambam) or forever (according to the Ramban),
Re: Tibulei bemashkeh, something that is never eaten with the hands does not require washing when it’s indeed not eaten with the hands. E.g. there is no need to wash for cereal with milk, since it’s always eaten with a spoon. But something that is usually eaten with the hands requires washing even if you happen to be eating it without them.
This is why it’s a good idea to cultivate the habit of always eating pickles with a fork, even when you’ve already washed for bread or for some other wet thing. That way when you eat them outside a meal, with a fork, you don’t have to wash for them.
Rebbetzin, every posek I’ve seen on the subject, except Reb Moshe, takes for granted that the gezera (or takana) was not on specific species but on the entire categories of seeds that grow in pods and pesudo-grains, and therefore peanuts are forbidden. The best proof is from mustard, which is forbidden only because it grows in pods. Corn was also unknown when the gezera was made, and yet not even Reb Moshe permitted it.
Rebbetzin:
The Pri Migadem s. 453 Mishbitzos Zahav ss.1 and a”a s. 464 ss.1 writes that potatoes are mutter IF it is not in a place that prohibit the. (This implies that such places exist!
No, it merely implies that the Pri Megodim thought such places might exist, somewhere in the world. Perhaps he even heard rumors of such places. But he had no first-hand knowledge of them, because there weren’t any.
The Nishmas Adam s. 20 that the custom was not to eat potatoes except during a great hunger the Bais Din convened to be mattir it to avoid danger and extreme hunger.
Again, he was not speaking of his own knowledge. He had never seen such a place, or any evidence of its existence. He heard rumors, that is all.
That is the history of this strange myth. Nobody ever writes that here we ban them, let alone that I ban them. It’s always someone else, far away, where I’ve never been.
It is brought in Alef that Rebbe Yehoshua from Belz was makpid not to eat potatoes.
What is “Alef”? In any case, all kinds of people don’t eat all kinds of things on Pesach , without thinking they’re forbidden. Belzer don’t eat carrots, but they don’t asser them. Lubavitchers don’t eat radishes, Oberlanders don’t eat fish, Egyptians, who do eat kitniyos, don’t eat chickpeas. So it doesn’t surprise me that someone didn’t eat potatoes, but it would greatly surprise me if he held they were kitniyos.
One sefer says that we are all fortunate that there were no potatoes in times of Geonim for if they would have them then, they would surely prohibit them as kitniyos because of their ability to produce flour.
That is pure speculation. “One sefer” can say whatever it likes about what could have been in some alternative universe, but in this universe nobody ever prohibited potatoes. Nobody.
5ish, no, he certainly doesn’t mean Ha’aruch Meshach. That is a commentary on the first volume of Yoreh Deah; how would potatoes or mushrooms come up there? And why would you even think of that sefer in the first place? No, he means exactly what he says, the Aruch. But the Aruch never heard of potatoes, let alone saw one, and obviously does not mention them at all. He says truffles and mushrooms are shehakol, because they are fungi, not plants. The Ropshitzer simply confused potatoes with truffles. And of course there is no possible dispute as to the FACT that potatoes are plants, not fungi. So the Ropshitzer’s psak was wrong, and it is wrong for anyone to follow it.
Rebbetzin, there are NO opinions that potatoes are kitniyos. I have looked, and there is NO source, anywhere, reporting first-hand knowledge of any community where potatoes were forbidden, or any rov who forbade them. I know there is a peculiar belief circulating that the Chayei Odom forbade them, but it’s not true. He merely reports a rumor he heard that in some other country they forbid potatoes, but he never saw it and does not endorse it.
A reason not to use watermelon, pineapple, banana, or even potato is that it’s too easy to eat a kezayis of them. Using radish or onion makes it more likely that you will only eat a tiny bit.
DaMoshe, this custom started with Rav Teitz’s father-in-law, Rav Prell. The reason was in order to teach people derech agav that the brocho on bananas is ho’adomo.
Rebbetzin, where a practice has a reason, it makes sense to continue it.
5ish is referring to Tzanz and its offshoots such as Bobov.
Meno, they say shehakol.
Neville, no, it has nothing to do with it not being eaten raw. Plenty of vegetables are not eaten raw, but when they are cooked they are ha’adama. And Avram, he did not mean raw potato, which everyone agrees is shehakol. He meant cooked potato, on which Tzanzers say shehakol because the Divrei Chaim confused potatoes (kartofel) with truffles (tartuffe) and thought they are fungi.
Neville, first of all, what lie? I have no idea what you’re talking about. While the Rebbe was alive it was completely reasonable to expect and hope that he would be the moshiach. Where is the lie in that? Now that he’s no longer alive (at least in the usual sense) it’s no longer a reasonable thing to expect, but however unlikely it’s technically possible, so if someone wishes to hold out hope for it, and it helps his avodas Hashem, where’s the lie?
As for Shatbai Tzvi, I did *not* write that he was not rejected before his shmad. I wrote that he was not rejected until he went off the derech. When he publicly did aveiros, and instructed his followers to do so, *that* is when those not under his spell rejected him. Not earlier. And had he not done that, had he remained a tzadik throughout his life, we would now be speaking of his memory with reverence, not contempt, just as the Rambam does about Bar Kochva, because there is no shame in trying and failing to be moshiach. The concept of “moshiach sheker” is invalid, an invention of maskilim, in order to cool off the whole idea of moshiach.
The Rebbe’s father-in-law spoke very harshly of the Jews in Europe, saying they deserved to die in the holocaust
This is a filthy lie. You present no evidence for your claim that Norman Lamm said it, so I don’t believe you; but if he had said it then he would have been a liar. But more likely you’re the liar.
Joseph: Many Gedolei Yisroel condemned and denounced Shabsai Tzvi long before he started committing public aveiros and was exposed as a fraud.
Such as?
The Lubavitcher Rebbe never said he was Moshiach, or even that he was going to be Moshiach, but he said a lot of things that could easily be understood to imply that this would happen. Since during his life all his chassidim took it for granted that he was going to be, many of them understood these ambiguous statements in that light. And perhaps he did mean it that way; after all, just as it was reasonable for his chassidim to expect him to be moshiach, it was reasonable for him to have the same expectation.
And who is to say that it was wrong? It is very possible, even likely, that had we merited the geulah during his life he would have been the one to bring it. However, that didn’t happen. Whether he thought it would is now irrelevant. We should now expect moshiach to be someone who is currently alive in the same physical sense as all normal living people.
However, if he comes back to life before the geulah, as certain tzadikim will, then it will once again become possible for him to be moshiach. It’s not likely, but it could happen, and if it did it would not contradict the Rambam. So it’s not wrong for those who wish desperately to hold on to that hope, to do so. If it encourages them in their shmiras hamitzvos it’s a good thing. So long as when the real moshiach finally does come, and it’s not him, they will accept him. (The same goes in reverse; if it does turn out to be him after all, the rest of us will need to accept him.)
IF he indeed claimed himself to be moshiach, as many (probably most) Chabad chassidim claim, and as posted by several in this and other threads, then there are two options: he’s moshiach, or he was a moshiach sheker.
Where do you find in Torah such a concept as “moshiach sheker”, or the idea that there’s something wrong with it? “Novi sheker” is a genuine halachic category; “moshiach sheker”, as fa as I can tell, is an invention of the maskilim.
Shabsai Tzvi and Yaakov Frenk were rejected, not because they turned out not to be moshiach, but because they became resho’im, openly rejected observance of halacha and told their followers to commit serious aveiros, and eventually committed shmad.
But the only halachic source we have for hilchos moshiach is the Rambam, and he holds that Bar Kochva was a tzadik and should be admired even though he failed as moshiach. Nor have I ever heard that gedolei yisoel ever condemned Shlomo Molcho or Dovid Reuveni or any of the other people who tried to be moshiach and failed, but did not go off the derech.
So even if the Lubavitcher Rebbe had publicly announced (which he didn’t) that he was moshiach, and then he failed, there would be notihing wrong with that.
Whenever you go to a wedding, you’ll notice friends of the chosson hitting up everyone for money to pay for the limo that will take newlyweds, from the hall to their destination.
I have been to many weddings and never once seen or heard of such a thing.
You shouldn’t give food that you wouldn’t eat,
That’s ridiculous. I detest olives, and don’t much care for hearts-of-palm. If I receive these in SHM I will definitely regift them immediately. Let someone else enjoy them, rather than have them sit unused in my pantry.
If you give anything fridgable you should warn the recipient to put it in the fridge immediately, and never leave a package on someone’s doorstep.
Does this mean that if you’re still on Ashrei when the chazzan begins half-Kaddish, you stop and wait for him to finish (without answering)?
Why “without answering”? On the contrary, you definitely wait and answer. Even in psukei dezimra you answer kaddish (until da’amiron be’olmo); but in the second ashrei of shachris, or the ashrei of mincha, there is no inyan at all not to interrupt, so of course you answer for the whole kaddish, as well as greeting people and returning their greetings, etc.
What about the Boston minhag of leaving a chair on the road to reserve a parking spot?
The posuk calls Koresh “Moshiach”. So Trump can be a “Moshiach” too. But as the gemoro says on that posuk, he’s not <i>the</i> Moshiach.
My yeshiva days were before Artscroll, but the library had the Steinsaltz gemoros on those mesechtos that had been published. Before each zman the Rosh Yeshiva would remove the mesechta we were going to be learning from the set and lock it up in the office. We were allowed to use the other volumes to look up references that came up in the course of learning our mesechta, or for independent learning of other mesechtos, but for the mesechta that we were officially learning we could not use Steinsaltz.
He also did not approve of our using the Otzar Meforshei Hatalmud (by Mechon Yerushalayim), calling it “spoon-fed meforshim”. (I once asked him the difference between that and Shita Mekubetzes, which does the same thing to the rishonim, but I don’t recall his answer.)
As for Jastrow, we were expected to first try looking up words in the Oruch, but if we still needed help after that then we could use Jastrow.
Cessna, what you write in your rebbi’s name is ridiculous. It is not a chumra, it is shtus. As I wrote earlier and you seem to have ignored, a 10-hour flight is no more subject to delays than a 1-hour flight. Whatever buffer you determine is sufficient for a 1-hour flight should be sufficient for a 10- or even 18-hour flight as well. On the contrary, as Gadol pointed out, longer flights actually need less of a safety buffer than shorter ones.
Driving is different, of course; there the risk of delays is on the road, not while sitting in your own home or driveway, so the longer the road the more likely they are.
No, people who call themselves MO do not claim that being MO allows them to eat things that one may not eat at non-meat treife restaurants. This does not happen outside your hateful fantasies. The MO who eat in such places, just like the charedim who eat in such places know very well that this is not allowed and do not pretend otherwise.
I was once at a factory which had three hechsherim for its various products. The non-Jewish quality control manager was asked what differences he observed between the three and he answered: the only difference I can see is that Agency A visits every two months, Agency B visits every three months, and in the seven years I’ve been here I’ve never seen anyone from Agency C.
anoymous Jew, everyone knows the OU — like all the other mainstream hechsherim — does not supervise products full time. This is not a secret, and the OU openly acknowledges it. The mashgiach visits every two months and does a thorough audit, concentrating not so much on what he can see on a quick walk through the facility as on a careful inspection of the records, and on this basis the product can advertise itself as kosher. Some people might not like that, for whatever reason, and want an actual mashgiach there while the product is being made.
Yserbius, that is not true. Most of the time there is no OU mashgiach at production time. If there is one, the heimishe hechsher doesn’t automatically rely on him, it depends on who he is. If he is someone they feel comfortable with, then yes, they’ll just rely on his being there and decide they don’t need to do anything more. But if he isn’t someone they trust so much, then they’ll send their own person.
I do know one person who was supervising for the OU when a heimishe rov walked in, took one look at him, and said “if you’re the mashgiach here then I’m sure everything is good”, and walked straight out. He thought this meant the rov was not doing anything to give his hechsher. I pointed out that he had done all he needed; he didn’t just rely on the OU, he went out there and saw who was in charge, and that is very valuable information for those who rely on his hechsher.
“Eating in places like that is Not MO! That’s Frei. But I’m sure you know this.”
Doesn’t change the metzius that people call themselves “Modern Orthodox” and then go ahead and do it.
I’ve got news for you. People calling themselves “chareidi” and “chassidish” or “yeshivish” also go ahead and do it. People calling themselves “modern orthodox” or “charedi” or whatever also do far worse things that you will hopefully never find out about. What people call themselves, and even what people truly are, doesn’t always match up with what yetzer horas they have and how they fail in dealing with them. כל הגדול מחברו…
“The drawback to Passaic and Clifton is also that housing is tight, kind of like Brooklyn.”
It depends where you look. If you insist on living on a block with only frum people except for the one shabbes-goy, then yes. If you don’t mind living 2 blocks out of the core frum area but still within the eruv, you’ll find that houses around the hospital area are very reasonable.
No, microwaving is not bishul. Even if a nochri cooks a gourmet meal in a microwave, from scratch, and it’s completely fit to serve at a state dinner, there is no issue whatsoever of bishulei nochrim.
Yitzchokm, “mazeltov” in English is not “good luck”, it’s “congratulations”, or just “mazeltov”.
But the OP is wrong. It is normal Jewish practice to wish people “mazel in brocho”, or “es zol zayn mit mazel”, etc., and nobody of any significance has ever had a problem with it.
DaasYochid, it’s got nothing to do with the fact that more people drive than fly. There are more injuries and fatalities when driving than when flying, per passenger/mile traveled. Simply put, if you have to travel 500 miles, you’re more likely to be hurt if you drive than if you fly.
Phobias can’t always be explained; they just have to be lived with. Some people are afraid of being enclosed in small spaces, while others are afraid of being unprotected in wide-open spaces. Some people are afraid of crowds, others of isolation. Some of heights and some of being at the bottom of tall buildings. You can’t reconcile those, they’re opposite phobias, but both are very real and debilitating for their sufferers.