DaMoshe:

An angry internal memo, while definitely a good first step, is not quite the denunciation I would have expected. If an organization that one belongs to says something so ridiculous, I think it’s only natural for the members who disagree to state publicly “This statement does not in any way reflect our opinion”.

The RCA didn’t tolerate his antics – they release many statements opposing things he did. Why do you ignore those statements?

I never saw those statements. What did they say?

SL, so it was indeed just an assumption?

Every year on Tisha B’Av I ponder, for whom were kinos written? How many people actually understand what they are saying were it not for the amazing translations available?

Actually, I was pondering the same thing. My suspicion is that the kinnos/selichos were written in a similar style as li’havdil Shakespeare, with much flowery prose and avant-garde vocabulary. The upside of this writing style is simple; it can convey an idea far better. But for those who are not quite so proficient in the language these texts were written in, this strategy can backfire and make it very difficult to understand the message.

Syag Lchochma:

If R’ Chaim says the problem with the name Shira (amongst others) is that it’s not a name, I think it’s highly probable that he holds this an inherent problem, not just a way of getting brachos.

Wolf:

It appears that R’ Chaim holds that a name must meet certain criteria to be considered a Jewish name. This is indeed not just about Shira; that’s just the most (or perhaps only) common application.

1) Also, it should be noted that although Chaim is not a name in Nach, it is still a word used in Nach; perhaps R’ Chaim holds that that is enough.

[mods, would you mind adding this into my previous post? It would read: A Jew should have a name found in Nach (which is kinda strange, cause as far as I know Chaim isn’t a name in Nach either. However, it should be noted that although Chaim is not a name in Nach, it is still a word used in Nach; perhaps R’ Chaim holds that that is enough.)]

2) Chaim and Shalom, life and peace, are certainly no shtus; they are important ideals.

3) The problem isn’t that the concept of song is foreign to Judaism; that is obviously not true. The problem is that naming somebody “Song” is not a Jewish concept.

So I don’t see a pircha on any of these girsa’os of R’ Chaim’s memrah.

Joseph:

I really don’t think what DY is suggesting is subversive at all. As I’ve pointed out, there are other Gedolim who disagree with R’ Chaim’s position on the name Shira; the same applies to shaving, peyos, and watches as well. So li’halacha, one certainly has who to rely on.

But there’s a different issue at hand here. The issue is that if somebody of R’ Chaim’s immense stature tells you to do something, you do it. Even if there is no halachic chiyuv, it is simply a lack of respect to ignore the direct instructions of such a great man.

R’ Asher Areilli is known for his Torah-only approach; he very rarely deals with anything besides learning. But a couple of years ago, R’ Chaim told him to give a shmooze against the internet. So although he never gives shmoozim about anything other than learning, he complied. They say that he didn’t want to, and he asked R’ Chaim to let him “off the hook”; but R’ Chaim did not relent, so he gave the shmooze. Because when R’ Chaim directly instructs you to do something, you listen.

I would imagine that this was the basis for R’ Dovid Feinstein’s psak as well.

Gee, thanks for spilling the beans. Now I have the Secret Service at my door wanting to talk to me. I think I’m gonna tell them I was planning on killing the leader of the Persians.

Sam2, I don’t believe that the issue is as simple as you’re making it out to be. For example, there is a famous machlokes if the words kadosh la’H’ on the tzitz were on one line or on two lines. So the TI, in an attempt to satisfy both shittos, printed kadosh in small and la’H’ in big. (This can easily be viewed on Google Image Search.) Now I’m admittedly no expert on the matter, but I think it’s somewhat of a chiddush to say that this could be considered two separate lines. And if that chiddush is not accurate, the man di’amar that holds two lines would hold that it is pasul. And it could be that even according to the man di’amar that holds one line, the words should be the same size.

charliehall:

I take somewhat of an issue with the premise of this thread. The fact that the RCA tolerated Mr. Weiss’s antics for so many years says more about the RCA than it does about Weiss. In my mind, the RCA will go down in history as the organization that brazenly and idiotically bashed HaGaon HaGadol Rav Ovadya Yosef Ztz”l (http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/about-the-rca-i-do-shudder) while tolerating, and hence legitimizing, Weiss and his nascent breakaway movement.

But hey, lets at least be glad that at this point Weiss no longer has whatever legitimization RCA membership conferred upon him, and that the RCA doesn’t have the legitimization of being able to say that they washed their hands clean of Weiss and his perverse denomination of so-called Judaism on their own.

Seriously? It took you 4 months to think of that comment?

#WishGranted

nothing about my posts ever indicated such

“people just don’t want to know about it or believe it is true” sounded to me like you were assuming those who disagree with you are doing so out of willful ignorance. But I’ll admit that I may have misjudged the tone of your comment.

To be clear, honesty and truth certainly do not “bother” me. I thought I had made that clear in the previous postscript: And just to make absolutely sure that this isn’t taken the wrong way, let me state that I am in no way trying to dissuade “acknowledging and supporting victims and… putting an end to cover ups” in cases where abuse has occurred.

Listen, I realize that this is a very sensitive subject and that people have strong opinions on it. But all I’m trying to point out is that there are other people here with legitimate opinions. You may believe that abuse and cover-up in unfortunately more widespread than commonly believed (and I’m not saying that you’re wrong), but just because somebody disagrees with you does not necessarily mean that they “just don’t want to know about it or believe it is true” or are bothered by the truth. Not everyone who disagrees with you is doing so only because they are ignorant.

Of course, you likely disagree. In which case, I’d say that it’s time to agree to disagree.

While its good to hear that you do not believe that all those who disagree with you are part of a malignant plot, that’s not the entirety of the point I was trying to make. I was trying to point out that there are other people have a legitimate position on this issue which is not born out of either malignance or ignorance. You may believe that abuse and cover-ups are more unfortunately more widespread than commonly believed, but just because somebody disagrees with you doesn’t mean that they have their head stuck in the sand.

The Temple Institute has built what they consider to be kosher keilim for the Beis HaMikdash (which can viewed in their location in the Old City, and make for a fascinating visit regardless of what one holds of the Institute and its hashkafos) and hope to follow through and build the actual Beis HaMikdash themselves. Needless to say, almost everybody is vehemently against this idea. And yes, they are one of the groups that advocates Jews visiting Har HaBayis, which the vast majority of the Gedolai HaPoskim of recent generations have ruled is a chiyuv kares ch”v.

IMHO, mik5 wins the prize for the most accurate answer – he’s basically quoting the Mishna Brura (although I think the MB may have only said that bi’shas ha’dchak). However, a very strong argument can be made that that was only true in the days of the MB when smoking was not known to be dangerous; but today, it is almost certainly always assur.

sushibagel: Some topics tend to make people fly off the handle, and irrelevant rants are a common effect. As you’ve apparently learned the hard way.

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/moshiach-rumors?

I think a large part of issue here is that the current generation of CRers are just too nice and polite. Which is obviously a good thing, but it does result in a less interesting conversations. In order to have a truly memorable discussion, the participants have to be either brilliant, or really be going after each other.

But not to worry; Yom Haatzmaut is almost upon us… 😉

Regarding the 15 minutes in the sun, it a question of metzius; it either is a life-threatening danger, or it is not. I just don’t know.

DaasYochid:

As far as the Wall of Shame, the title is a big clue, plus they list people who are in jail, so aren’t capable of abusing. One can argue that they’re allowed to shame to scare off potential abusers; in fact, this is what they say they’re doing. Is it halachically justifiable?

I don’t know. We find that danger of harm is an exception to mesira; does this also apply to publicly shaming people?

#AskARealRovNotAnAnonymousInternetForum. (No offense)

I use that hashtag when somebody asks a halacha shaila that is nogea li’maaseh as to what they should do; I don’t believe that this falls into that category, seeing as this organization will do whatever it pleases whether we like it or not.

But still, touche 🙂

yekke2, my first reaction mirrored yours. But then I remembered an excellent point that was brought up by none other than yourself:

I was, once upon the time, of the opinion that 2 Kosher Eidim would be necessary to convict any molester of wrongdoing. I asked a Rav (who was involved in the investigation regarding another Rav who was accused of halachic misconduct) how they could accept testimony of women. He rightly pointed out that we are not trying to kill the man, nor are we trying to give him Malkus or to force monetary compensation. The only shailah was in ????? ???? ??? (in that particular scenario, where even according to the allegations, he had legally done nothing wrong, but was not fit to be a Rav), and for that, 2 ???? are not required.

In hilchos loshon hara, I believe one is supposed to let others know about any realistic chance that somebody is out to do them harm. This person is not supposed to fully believe you, but they are allowed to take steps to prevent any possible harm to themselves.

I think that this idea should fall into that category. (Although I also think awareness and prevention should be the focus here, not shaming.)

Doesn’t listen to rules 😉

Sorry, can’t resist:

the main reason for the so called shidduch/divorce crisis today is that most girls are educated, pleasant, innocent and naive while the boys are either exceptional and are reserved while still an adolescent, or for the most part, they are self-centered obnoxious know-it-all babies and in many cases have some kind of secret addiction.

Talk about self-centered obnoxious know-it-all babies…

Joseph, while they have been working on it for years, the product is still not available for purchase.

Is it just me, or does the media turn this into a bigger and bigger deal each time?

(Although I’ll admit that (correctly) calling a particularly famous celebrity a “pornographic symbol” does help get headlines.)