on the ball

As others have already pointed out, owning an Iphone is not mentioned in Hilchos Eidus as being a Poseil and even looking at inappropriate images is not listed.

Therefore I am pretty sure that the Mesader Kiddushin was doing no more than trying enforce the Takanah against the internet and that he would readily agree that the person was not literally Pasul.

Squeak: The second line in your post is blasphemy.

Mods?

The actual words were uttered by Yitzchak Greenbaum during the war:

‘One cow in Israel is worth more than 100 Jews in Europe’.

So, interjection, the answer to your question is yes they send their sons and daughters to the front lines – but only to save Israeli Jews (and cows).

haifagirl: You said “Less is for things you count. Fewer is for things you don’t count. Just because we don’t count Jews doesn’t mean we are not able to.”

Wrong. It’s exactly the other way round. (Was that a typo?)

For example:

‘I listen to less music at night.’ and ‘There was less rain today.’

‘Fewer children are taking judo lessons this year’ and ‘There are fewer eggs in the red basket’.

Rabbi of Berlin: Rashi on the Pasuk of ‘Lo Sikrevu’ (Vayikra 18:6) answers your question stating that ‘Lo Sikrevu’ is written in the plural (in contradistinction to the beginning of the Pasuk ‘Ish ish…'[Sifsei Chachomim]) specifically to include women in the Issur.

Bbubbee: I think you are confusing 2 different women.

One is the wife of Ovadiah with whom the Nes of the oil was done.

The other is the Shunamis whom the OP is referring to – the mother of Yonah who was revived by Elisha after dying.

Which Poskim are Meikel?

Avi K: -“The Jewish equivalent is “eilu v’eilu divrei Elokim chaim”. Bet Hillel and Bet Shammai even married each other despite disagreements regarding yichus which were put into practice (Yevamot 14a).”

Yes but only after making sure the yichus of the particular shidduch was OK according to their Shitta

No, it’s not just minhag because the entire upper leg above the knee needs to be covered and here comes the crucial point – the definition of ‘covered’ in the context of tznius does not only mean covering the surface but also concealing the form.

So if the skirt is above the knee, the leg is ‘uncovered’ even if tights are worn.

Feif Un: Yes – really sorry it was meant for Yichusdik.

GAW: Glad to say I have no objection to this post as you at no point attacked Rav Falk personally. Your comparison to Rav Linzer is legitimate insofar as it is a derech that is not for you.

Tahini: I can only say thank you and I hope we have both learned something here. Although I believe you will find reference to amulet use in Rambam too (Rambam will never argue with concepts mentioned in the Gemara) despite his reputation as a ‘rationalist’.

Feif Un: You wrote (concerning amulets):

“…It is entirely valid to take the approach of the Vilna Gaon, The Noda BeYehuda and others that reject their use… ”

– regarding its actual use, agreed, but not to dismiss it as mere superstition which was the point I was addressing, and which no Acharon would come near to saying. The Gemara in Gittin (7th Perek) has 2 Daf that only talk about weird methods of healing various sicknesses which R’ Akiva Eiger, Chasam Sofer and others say are not to be practised today. However, they are not in the category of superstition

You wrote: “Finally, yesh din v’yesh dayon… – essentially you are sayig that no one has any right to question a posek, talmid chochom, or godol, and no one has any right to call out an egregious or uncomfortable fact about their works……………..

Yours is a pretty stifling standard, one that would silence all debate within frum communities. You may think that is healthy. I don’t…”

No, sorry you seem to have totally missed my point. Debate in Halachah is encouraged and one is permitted to question anything using one’s logic and knowledge. However I believe there are some basic caveats to this:

1) Not to make personal attacks against anybody but especially against a Talmid Chochom.

2) To use only Torah methodology and logic in formulating an argument – and not allow personal bias cloud that. As I mentione in an earlier post, this is very difficult in areas such as Tznius which impacts our way of life every day, in the public arena concerning our individuality and self-expression.

3) Ultimately to submit to greater authorities than ourselves even if we disagree or do not understand.

You wrote “And again, if these who are being “insulting” are truly in the wrong, they will be accountable to the aibishter at the end of their days, not to you.”

– Agreed, and I am unclear why you would believe I ever indicated otherwise.

Tahini: Diversity, including your list of examples, is fine when it does not go against Halachah. Amd again, if the Sefer causes you discomfort and mirth, that’s also fine as a natural reaction.

What’s not fine is the the following excerpts from your original post:

“…merging halacha with chumra….and confusing personal opinion with Torah obligations”

– Tahini, are you qualified to make a judgement on this? Have you studied the Torah to even a 1/1000th of the degree that Rav Falk has?

“….mentioning amulets and superstitious behaviour..”

– Amulets and so called ‘superstitious behaviour’ are widely found in the Talmud and Shulchan Aruch and other Seforim – some contemporary. It may be an area that you (and I) have little or no knowledge or experience and may find very strange but there are great people out there for whom this is not so and to dismiss it the way you did smacks of either arrogance or ignorance.

“…If this is what is termed as a Gadol I am deeply offended as it belittles the important mentors and guardians of our Torah” –

Tahini, as I did when writing to Gavra, I urge you to retract this statement. Rav Falk is a man who has dedicated his entire life to Torah and to clarifying the Halachah in all areas of the Torah. He is a widely recognised Godol, Posek and Talmid Chchom for whom other contemporary Gedolim have nothing but the utmost respect and awe, while at the same time disagreeing with him in various subjects including Tznius.

To speak of him in a derogatory way as you have done is severely prohibited by the Torah. Our Sages say that one who denigrates a Talmid Chochom is considered a heretic and has no portion in the World to Come. These words are not thrown around lightly in the Talmud. That is the severity which the Sages attach to actions that challenge our Mesorah passed on from one generation of Talmidei Chachomim to the next, on which our religion has stood firm for the last 3000 years since Sinai.

If you light candles every Shabbos as decreed by Chazal and make Brachos on food as instituted by Chazal, then you must also accept their take on this issue.

There is no need to belittle Rav Falk – you do not have to follow everything in his Sefer. But please, please, take back the disrespectful words you wrote concerning his personal status.

Tahini: Would you have found his Chumros ‘offensive’ if they were on Hilchos Brachos or Shabos? Or does Hilchos Tznius have a special place in your heart?

If you feel that his Sefer is not appropriate for you and your family – don’t worry neither is it for me, nor for many other very Frum and even Charedi families. There are enough Halachic authorities who are less strict. But I don’t feel threatened by Rabbi Falk to the point that I have to stoop to casting aspersions on his personal status as a Godol BaTorah.

And to say his Sefer contributed to the Bet Shemesh fiasco is so ridiculous – most of the idiots there on behaving so terribly have never heard of Rav Falk and would probably find his Sefer too Makil

I think you said that already in your last post. Sad that it gives you such a kick to repeat it.

MorahRach – actually yes that is exactly what Judaism is – it is precisely supposed to control every waking moment of our lives as we are all servants. Yes in a sense we are supposed to have zero decison as we are meant to be subservient to the decison of the Torah and our Torah leaders whether we like it or not.

‘Ki Li Bnei Yosrael Avodim….

Gavra at work: “To compare Rabbi Falk to those Gedolim is disrespecting the Gedolim.”

I only meant to illustrate the point using universally known Rabbonim. If I’d chosen a less famous Rav, I would have run the risk of you not knowing him.

“He doesn’t come to the toenail of our current Gedolim….,”

Can I ask, Gavra, what qualifies you, someone whom I muse is 1 million miles away from being as proficient in 4 chelkei Shulchan Aruch as Rav Falk, to decide with your balabat kop how Rav Falk compares with any Godol Batorah?

“In all truth, he created a serious michshal in Klal Yisroel, and (in the view of many Rabbonim) does not deserve respect for it.”

Ditto on that plus I note a healthy dose of Bizui Talmidei Chachomim – for which Chazal reserve exceptionally harsh words – but, Gavra, it would seem you couldn’t care less. He is universally known as an Ish Emess who delves into the Sugyos on which he paskens with no motive other then L’Asukei Shmatsa Aliba D’Hilchasa- but just because you disagree with him in Halocha does not mean he created a Michshol. There are far more serious disputes in Halocha pertaining to Chiyuvei Misa and Krisus and I have yet to hear any Posek describe their halachic opponent as creating a serious michshol. If you would care to name these Rabbonim, I would be grateful but I bet you either can’t or do not have the guts – (or possibly these Rabbonim themselves (I say this with no knowledge who they are) are too chicken to try and challenge Rav Falk in a serious Halachic debate in a detailed fashion that consists of more than simply dismissing his book as too Machmir.)

“I do not give him the same respect as I would most other Rabbonim. I only do not hesitate to call him “Rabbi” because people much lesser than him are also called Rabbi (someone even tried to call me “Rabbi” once, believe it or not!). Certainly he knows Torah, but so did Rabbi Moses Mendelssohn & Rabbi Mordechai Kaplan (I’m not claiming R’ Falk is reform, but the concept is true).”

You may not be claiming that but to mention Rav Falk in conjunction with these two Reshaim the way you did is beyond the pale and I hereby make a Macho’oh. According to the Gemara in Nedarim, one deserves to be put in Cherem for that. I urge you to retract that statement for your own good if nothing else.

“That is all I have to say on the subject. Sorry if you don’t like it, but that’s what makes the world go round.”

You should be ashamed. Please get hold of a Machze Eliyahu with Rav Falks Teshuvos on 4 Chelkei Shulchan Aruch, learn it for half an hour, and then tell me again that you stick with your abhorrent attitude towards one of this generation’s foremost, world-renowned and widely accepted Talmidei Chachomim. I do not believe for a single second that any serious Talmid Chochom in the world would have anything less than the utmost respect and awe for Rav Falk’s Torah knowledge.

And if you respond again simply ‘ you are entitled that makes the world go round’ then you don’t deserve the single iota of respect I have for you as a fellow Yid, that I am clinging on to in the hope that you will see how wrong you are.

Feif Un and Toi: So we have a situation where Rav Falk Shlita has written a Sefer which is very Machmir and nobody wants to write a Sefer that is more Maikil as they are scared of the backlash? But people need guidance of the halacha!

Actually if you read my post I made the logic very clear. It may be incorrect as I myself admitted but it is not illogical and I believe it is a possibly legitimate tzad as to how the halochah should be understood.

Please explain why you think it holds no logic. Or please provide a proof that your way of understanding the halocha is correct and that it is osur to put a gemora on a chumash.

If you are unable to do any of the above then YOU are guilty of the boich svora as you are just going with your feeling and/or with an understanding of the halochah that you have held many years and are unwilling to even question rather than applying logic or bringing a proof.

Unless, (as apparent) you define a boich svora as any svora that you, Englishman, disagree with even without giving it any due logical process.

The husband can ascertain that he has not been with his wife.

He could be a ‘Krus Shofcho’

Gavra at work – “If you really do want to make the world a better place, start by handing out booklets of Halacha (like the breslov pamphlets). Just make sure that it is real Halacha, not Falk or Sem “inspired”. Otherwise you will lose more people than you will gain.”

It’s Harav Hagaon R’ Eliyohu Falk Shlita to you.

He is a well respected Posek who has written Teshuvos to Rabbonim worldwide on many Chalokim of Torah. While many disagree with some of his Piskei Halocha including those in his Sefer on Tznius, to refer to him as Falk is a Bizoyon.

Mods – I respectfully ask that you edit his post

If there are witnesses or any other conclusive proofs that rule out the husband as the father.

The ‘Rov beilos etzel habaal’ is only applied when there is a degree of uncertainty.

“Let’s see. In America, I get anti-semitic catcalls all the time. In the civilized European countries, people are afraid to walk outside with a yarlmuke”

Really? I’m European and that’s news to me? Which areas of Europe are you thinking of? It’s not 1933 anymore you know.

Sam2: Again – one is simply not authorised to start making chilukim in the words of Chazal that have halachic no source irrespective of the ‘logic’ and irrespective of whether they did or didn’t know of other forms of entertainment.

Looking at other words of Chazal:

‘Logic’ would dictate that the Mitzva of Netilas Yadayim before eating was only for the days of Chazal when hygiene was more of a problem.

‘Logic’ would would dictate that Hadlakos Neros for Shabos was only for the days of Chazal when they had no electricity.

And ‘logic’ would dictate that we don’t need 2 days Yom Tov anymore now that we are proficient in astronomy and know exactly when Rosh Chodesh is.

But we simply don’t go down that route unless a recognised Halachic authority with the Daas Torah that comes with years of toiling in Halachah explains that that is how the Halachah should be understood.

Zahavasdad: “But this works in 2 directions as well. You can look in the opposite direction as well. to Quote Rav Shlomo Friefeld

“If the only way we can sell our children Torah is by forbidding everything else, then we are bankrupt.””

Yes, but the Issur of going to sports stadiums to sit amongst Goyim and watch non-Jewish sports accompanied by all the Pritzus is part of the ‘Torah’ in that statement and not the ‘everything else’.

mw13:

“True, Rashi does say it is assur to go to a stadium. But you have to realize, the program in the stadiums then quite literally consisted of giluy arayos, shvichas dumim, and avodah zarah. Today its just some ball.”

No, please don’t krum op that Rashi. He clearly means partaking in non-Jewish entertainment and sports irrespective of what it entails. If it contained A’Z and Gilui Arayos it would anyway be Asur.

Bar Shattya – the irony of your piece has been lost on nearly everybody here