Obaminator

gavra: That seems to be a change in tune from your previous comment of “Abuse, perhaps. Being used as nothing but a receptacle, maybe. Single? Nothing wrong with being single.” That sounded, to my ears at least, that being single isn’t any worse than being married – even aside from the abuse issue. Did I misunderstand? Cause the gemorah apushatayid cited would seem to disagree.

On the CR Main Page, under “FRESHNESS” click the number of minutes (or hours or days), and it will open the last post of that thread.

mdd:

Well stated on all points made on this thread. Yasher Koach.

kingdavid: So when I quietly learn from a sefer or listen to a Torah Tape, there is no mitzvah?

Which shittas say that if you lack kavana for something it didn’t count?

It may indicate other health issues.

Mod-80: You prefer Jothar’s second alternative but say it’ll never happen. Jothar’s first alternative seems even less likely to happen.

An invalid kula may give a reader ideas he never thought of before, that he would then have in his head and may come to unfortunately utilize later. As Mod-80 pointed out on the Kiddush Hashem thread.

Let me know so I can call and check the veracity. Awaiting.

That “story” is a bubbe maisa.

Correction: The name of the section in the sanctuary where he sat is called “South Nave” (not Stalls North – which is a nearby section) and it was right behind the church choir. It was right in front of the General Congregation and across from Prince Charles’ guests. And it most certainly is right in the sanctuary of the Collegiate Church of St Peter at Westminster.

Feif: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/rating-gedolim

He was sitting next to the Bishops heading Britain’s Catholic and Orthodox Christian churches. It appears to be right in the sanctuary on the videos.

Edit: Just checked the “seating plan”. He was seated in the “Stalls North” of the sanctuary together with representatives of other religions and the friends of William and Kate.

There’s no machlokes between gedolei yisroel here. The Chief Rabbi isn’t one of the gedolim.

Sam2: Those that were mekabel the geder upon themselves.

If a Minhag has developed as a Siyag Ve-Geder to correct some michshol, and that Siyag Ve-Geder was effected by a Chacham and then it was ratified by being popularly adopted as the Minhag (i.e. the Minhag did not evolve from a Machlokes in Halacha but from some weakness in Mitvah performance) then a new Chacham may not nullify that Minhag (see Teshuvos HaRosh 55:10 and Igros Moshe OH V.3, siman 64 and Igros Moshe YD V.1, siman 13).

So once a stringent minhag is established (based on a geder — i.e. separate seating at weddings) it can never be revoked, based upon the above?

If learning in Kollel is against the Chazals about Melachah and Derech Eretz, then so is being a Rebbi or a Rav. See the Rama YD 246:6. He brings your Chazals and says that therefore nobody can be a paid Rebbi or a Rav either, since he relies on the congregation. But then he brings dissenting opinions, and rules that the custom is that Torah scholars do benefit from their learning, by support from the community.

Then he brings other opinions that the community should support its Torah scholars even to the point of affluence.

The Rama then says it is a Midas Chasidus – praiseworthy – for someone who can become a Gadol B’Torah and make an independent living, but continues that not everyone is capable of this. It is clear that he is saying that if you have a choice between becoming a Godol B’Torah or making a living, becoming a Godol B’Torah comes first.

As an aside, the Halachah is that you are nowadays allowed to live off Tzedakah to learn (see the Ramah and Shach in Hilchos Talmud Torah.)

The Halchah as expressed by the Rambam which states that anyone who so chooses may learn in Kollel. See also YD Laws of Talmud Torah 246:21 and Shach ad loc. Also, Shulchan Aruch Hilchos Toalmud Torah, in the Shach ad loc, says that nowadays learning all day is the ideal, and that if someone has the ability to do it, he should. The Shach adds that regarding learning all day in general, nowadays we cannot reach our potential in learning the way the Rambam etc. did, since we are not on that level. Therefore, we should learn all day if we can.

yitay: You’re understanding of a Litvak (both as you defined it here and on previous occasions) is way off base.

pba: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/goyish-brands-that-are-kosher (what’s left of it, anyways.)

Instead of closing threads, I think it is wiser to delete all offending posts including a off-topic or inappropriate sub-discussion that develops. Delete all those posts (which will usually effectively end the bad posts), and let the thread live.

Sorry rshalom, but when Rav Moshe has a written psak strongly objecting to something, and he repeats himself in strong language three times in three separate psaks making himself very clear, there is no credence for someone to come claiming he has a private psak from him directly contradicting his written psak. (Especially considering the reasoning allegedly given is that he verbally said it is supposedly okay “if” there is no derech chiba, when in the written psak in EH I #56 he writes it *IS* derech chiba and he writes that you cannot claim there isn’t.)

ItcheSrulik: The part of your analysis I take strong exception to is the WEP point (3). if theres a password, including wep, it means the guy wants to keep you out. Additionally, even wep is not broken into without special tools. It’s only “easy” if someone a) is a techie and knows what he’s doing and b) went to get the tools to do it.

It is forbidden to make small talk about matters unrelated to business. Men and women working together should not discuss politics, current events, recent tragedies or gossip, even if they do not do so regularly. Discussing these matters on a daily basis, is a violation of halachos that border on giluy arayos, which requires one to sacrifice his life rather than transgress. (p. 9)

When conversing with female employees or co-workers, one must be careful not to us the word “we,” so that the man and woman are not referred to as one unit. For example, one should not say, “We must talk with the editor,” or “We must purchase that software program.” Rather, he should say, “The editor must be consulted,” or “Please purchase that program.” (pp. 10-11)

It is a custom amongst yirei shomayim not to call a woman other than one’s wife or immediate family member by her first name, thus keeping a respectful distance between the two parties. Referring to a woman by her first name brings inappropriate familiarity into the relationship. Similarly, a woman should refrain from addressing a man other than her husband or immediate family member by his first name. (p. 20)

A Helpful Suggestion:

It is appropriate for male and female employees [to] refrain from all conversation when they meet anywhere outside of the office. This includes not discussing even job-related matters when meeting in the hallway or elevator at work.

“It cannot be stressed enough that the term prutzim also refers to people who are otherwise shomrei Torah u’mitzvos, but are not careful in matters relating to kraivah l’arayos. They may be regularly exposed to immodesty through the media, or may often be in the presence of immoral individuals through their everyday social interactions….(p.39) meaning that they are exposed to immodesty through television, movies, in publications and the like. An individual involved in such activities is labeled a parutz. This is not limited to visual images; someone who is exposed to any form of indecent activity, such as chat rooms on the Internet, is considered a parutz. Such forms of recreation are a breach of morality.” (p. 34)

(Chofetz Chaim in chapter 6).