Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
New2, here are some of your posts:
“Hi, I’m a bachur in yeshiva and have been looking during last few weeks into different options towards college. I can possibly get a btl from past yeshiva credits. I know there is (ARE) a lot of opinions if this works or not. I know there are a lot of guys in same parsha contemplating between working towards a real BA (with using yeshiva credits) or settle (SETTLING) for a BTL. Please post if you have applied to grad school, which one, for what and what happened. All detailed reply’s (REPLIES) will be appreciated. THANX!!! “
“I agree with you that going to grad school without a basic command of the english language is atrocious. I like to think I have a decent holding (NEVER SAW WORD USED IN THIS WAY), but would appreciate greatly if the yeshiva’s (YESHIVAS) would have offered courses on the side, in this area. Btw, any college grad’s (GRADS) that read my other posts in this blog, how is my english (CAPITALIZE)? “
I made a few corrections to the English which are in parentheses. (I need to learn the italicizing procedure on this blog, but until then I am using caps.)
Mdd, I think we would be better off hating reshaim like Ahmadinejad, Hitler, Arafat, Hamas, than hating our own brethren who may have different views than us.
Sacrilege, since you are a female, I am especially glad that you agree. There is definitely something about women drivers that causes them to be spaced out and not notice what others are trying to do on the road. A good driver not only knows what he wants to do, but also understands what everybody else on the road in front or in back is going to do next. When he makes a move, he takes into account how it will affect those others.
As an example, when he makes a left turn, he will move all the way to the left as close to the yellow dividing line as he can, so there is room for others to go around him on his right. This way, he does not block traffic. When he makes a right turn, he will first get far to the right. This prevents blocking traffic, as before, but also prevents somebody else from trying to squeeze by and also make a right turn at the same time, so that he will hit that other person when he begins his own turn. Unfortunately, I constantly see people who make right turns by first moving to the left and then making a wide loopy turn. They have no clue how many people they are confusing, impeding, and almost hitting. I don’t know where they learned this left, then right method. It is almost never necessary to swerve left before a right turn, except in the most tight situations, like in a narrow parking lot.
Nevertheless, here in the USA, there are many frum girls who drive and behave like bnos yisroel and only use the car for chesed or errands and going to and from school and the like.
A girl who had a proper chinuch usually doesn’t get into trouble, and acts lshem shamayim. Too many rules often causes the opposite effect. In the USA we trust our kids and they usually live up to it.
In EY they usually never operate on the principle of trust, and think they have to legislate and forbid everything to make people behave. This includes concerts, etc. I have been to numerous concerts in the USA, and never recall any promiscuous behavior by frum people. People enjoy the music, families shmooze in the halls afterwards for a few minutes, and then everybody goes home.
There is a completely different attitude in EY where they think that every person is itching to go off the derech, and if we don’t hold them back, they will leave yiddishkeit in the blink of an eye.
I think the reason Chassidish women don’t drive is the idea that a woman is supposed to be in the home (kol kevudah), and not galivanting around. They consider it to be loose behavior. I believe this is true after marriage, as well.
But don’t get me started on the topic of women drivers. Whenever I see one, I know my trip will now take 3 times as long. There is something about how they dart into a street in front of you like a cowboy (although they seem to be looking carefully, they invariably miss your presence, and that you have right of way), but as soon as they do this daredevil act of getting onto your street almost hitting you in the process, they begin driving 15 MPH below the speed limit, and are totally unaware that they are impeding traffic. Oy vey, don’t get me started.
New2, I think you totally misunderstood my previous post, even 180 degrees. I was not saying that Univ. of Phoenix is a great school because they advertise. I was saying the exact opposite. That if one thinks he can get some online degree and people won’t know the difference, in truth, everybody else knows about online degrees, too, as they see the same ads.
Now the second point is that you mention Wharton as being the top B-school, but come on, you forgot about Sloan, which is MIT’s business school. As they say in MIT, Harvard is the playground down the block.
Third, while it is true that gemara develops the yiddishe kup, but one must also develop skills in secular studies to be able to communicate with the secular world. One does not go around convincing others of his point by waving his thumb in the courtroom or the law firm, as one does in Yeshiva. One must learn to write focused and well-reasoned and well-sourced briefs and documents. This is a skill which many yeshiva bochurim lack, as their English and writing is atrocious. And if you want to go into a scientific or technical field, al achas kamah vkamah that you will need to learn real material in real courses.
Another quote by Winston Churchill: A lady once told him he was drunk. He replied, “Well you are ugly, and tomorrow I will be sober.”
Mamashtakah, this has happened to very high officials, and one often reads of the consequences in the paper. You probably could not only lose the job, but be taken to court, as well. I wonder if they can go after any salary they have paid you.
New2, I don’t have first hand knowledge of people with those degrees, but whenever I check my email I see ads for Univ. of Phoenix online degrees. Now, if I see those ads, you can be sure that people doing the hiring and making the admissions decisions also see the ads.
I have recently heard of programs where some colleges come down to a yeshiva for 3 Sundays of all-day coursework, and credit is given for a full semester. All these things make me nauseous. The one good thing I saw in that Bachur’s Guide to College book, which someone gave me as a joke, is in the introduction. It says, Do not show to your parents.
The RBSH made clear he does not want child sacrifices, because there is a pasuk somewhere in sefer Devarim which states something like Ki brishas hagoyim hahem ani morish osam mipanecha ki gam beneihem uvnoseihem yisrifu baeish lelohehem. Hashem says he is disgusted with the nations who lived in EY before the Yidden because they burn their own children in fires for their gods. Now, if Judaism also believed in that practice, wouldn’t that pasuk be completely hypocritical and false?
MW13, Having a police department is in my view no contradiction to menschlachkeit. There are dangerous individuals who are a threat to society and must be detained to preserve shalom for everybody else.
While there are many fly-by-night ways to get a degree, and there is even a book on this called the Bachur’s Guide to College or something similar, please don’t think that hiring managers and admissions officers aren’t aware of this, as well. They very well know the difference between a real degree and other alternatives.
The better the school, and the more rigorous your education, the better chances you have of success. Of course some people do well without this, but some people also win lotteries.
Especially in this economy, all fluff is out. You must have skills that make you indispensable and be willing to work hard. All companies are cutting costs and personnel to the bone to raise their bottom line.
Do your hishtadlus properly, and keep davening.
MW13, You are the one who suggested that menschlachkeit is not the be all and end all of yiddishkeit above, because of your kashya from the Akeida. These are your words:
“We extol Avrahom for suspending all sense of decency to do Hashem’s will: it seems to me that this is a clear proof the ultimate good is following Hashem, no matter what.”
All I am saying is that after the Akeida, the RBSH made it clear that he does not want child sacrifices, and now all he wants is kindness. Deracheha darchei noam.
Mdd, in the interests of intellectual honesty, I will bring you a rayah, but it may not be conclusive.
The gemara says if a man was mekadesh a woman al mnas sheani rasha, afilu tzadik gomur kol yamav mekudeshes, shema hirher dvar avodas kochavim blibo. It is mashma that the thought alone can make someone a rasha. But to defend my point, in that case it was a thought to actually do avodah zara, and I believe that such a thought, even if he does not carry it out, HKBH metzarfo lemayseh.
I need to think about it. I also want to look up the gemara about Elisha ben Avuya who saw someone doing kibud av and shiluach hakan, and the person died. Because of this Elisha ben Avuyah became an apikorus. Why did this make Elisha not believe in schar mitzvos? Maybe the person was thinking an apikoreseshe thought at the time and deserved to be punished. Yet the gemara, I believe, does not explain the reason for this person’s death that way. It instead says he died because schar mitzvah bhai alma leika.
I need to look up and think about it, but tired now.
Sacrilege, not really possible to be over on giluy arayos through those, but there is a problem of hirhur. Also, many movies and songs are not positive Jewish influences, although I would agree that there are some worthy movies and songs that have been made over the years. It is not black and white, but one should carefully think it over. Even in the best movies, often there will be at least a scene or two that are embarrassing and not family fare.
In general, I think the Akeidah was a nisayon to set the stage for later generations R”L who gave up what was dearest to them, including their lives, for Kiddush Hashem. We have had so many kedoshim who refused to convert to other religions and were willing to be slaughtered all through the ages. Hashem wanted to see if Avraham had this mesirus nefesh in him.
Neverthless, we never found any time when a person was asked to kill his own child ever again. And if a person would ever be asked to do so, he would not be permitted, as it is now yehareg v’al yaavor to take the life of any person, including his child.
So while Avraham was asked to withhold his menschlachkeit and humanity at the Akeida, that was a one-time event, and I think that ever since, menschlachkeit is the ikar.
Of course, you may ask me about Mechiyas Amalek and the Milchemes Zayim Amamin. But that is a long and separate discussion, and I am too tired now.
MW13, Yes, I am aware that the Rambam defines apikorus differently in Hilchos Teshuva than in Hilchos Avodah Zara. See the nosei keilim who debate whether there is any possibility of doing teshuva under either definition. Nevertheless, one can say that one who denies Techiyas Hameisim is claiming that there is no eternal reward, therefore why should I do mitzvos; I might as well be hefker. I still believe that there must be some nefarious motive to be a bona fide apikorus, not just a matter of innocent beliefs that do not ever translate into actions.
Your second question about the akeidah is a very good one, and one that has bothered me. I asked my family what amounts to the same thing on R”H at the meal. Why did Avraham not daven for his son Yitzchok to try to save him from the Akeida the same way he davened for the chotim of Sdom? Was his son any less worthy? Second of all, he had some very good arguments that he could use about Yitzchok, first, Yitchok was a tzaddik, not like the anshei sdom; and in addition, Avraham could say my whole life I have been preaching against child murder in the name of religion like the Ovdei Avodah Zara do to molech and other gods. I have taught that G-d wants menschlachkeit. Now, by telling me to offer Yitzchok, you are making me look like a fool and a liar, when my G-d also wants a child sacrifice. All my converts will now leave me in droves.
But we do not find that Avraham argued or davened in any way. But what is very interesting is that in the end, the RBSH was maskim to these unargued points, and taught us that he does not want child sacrifices, only menschlachkeit, like Avraham had been teaching all along. So possibly, Avraham thought that had it been somebody else’s child, he would have argued his head off. But for his own child, he had no right to, as it was a personal test. Nevertheless, in the end, the maskana seems to clearly be like I have been writing here all along, that menschlachkeit is the ikar.
I admit this is still very confusing, but that is how I understand it.
RebDoniel, the shaver on that site seems to be more of a trimmer than a shaver.
RebDoniel, I bought a Remington 4130 a while back because I lost my Remington 850. The newer one is shlocky plastic and doesn’t do nearly as good a job. I can’t imagine how the 4130 could be worse halachically. Now every time I shave, it takes me so long that my skin is completely irritated and red. I would give anything to get back the 850. I tried a 950 for a while, and that was even worse. The motor was so slow, you could barely hear it and it barely cut. I think they realized you can’t cut costs and quality so much and still have a working product.
Rebdoniel writes:
“According to R’ Dovid Feinstein, the only shavers ok to use without any adjustemtns are the Norelco Rotary Lift and Cut, after the adjustments have been made. “
Am I missing something, because this is a setira minei ubei. First you say there is a shaver which is OK to use without any adjustments, and then you say it is OK after the adjustments have been made.
Please explain. Also why is it that Remington shavers which used to have a long list that were OK, are now no good. I don’t think they have changed much.
Josh31, I agree with that, that we are defined primarily through our actions (maasim tovim) not what goes on in our minds.
I have a chiddush in the definition of an apikorus, which I see justification in the language of the Rambam in Hilchos AZ (2:5). He says apikorsim are those who stray after the thoughts of their hearts in the foolish matters we discussed (earier in chapter) until they end up violating actual prohibitions of the Torah lhachis, with a brazen soul, in a strong hand, and they say there is no sin in this. Later he says the machshavah of an apikorus is for avoda zara.
In other words, the Rambam seems to be saying that an apikorus invents his philosophy to be porek ol, and to rationalize his desire to violate the Torah which he then proceeds to do with a strong hand. My understanding of this is that a tnai in being an apikorus is actually carrying out the throwing off the yoke of Torah. The things he says or claims to believe are only to enable his real intentions of becoming hefker with no rules.
However, one who sincerely and fully keeps all the mitzvos, cannot be an apikorus. A yid is judged by his actions. One who acts like an ehrlicher yid is an ehrlicher yid. If one has trouble believing in something, but nevertheless says, although I can’t understand X, Y or Z which we are supposed to believe, but I fully intend to keep all the mitzvos which Chazal have taught us, that is not an apikorus.
Note similarly in the story of the Gerim who came to Hillel one said I believe in Torah Sebichsav, but not in Torah Shebal Peh. Hillel converted him anyway. Rashi says, shelo haya kofer, rak shelo hayah maamin, and Hillel was confident he would convince him of the authenticity of Torah Shebal Peh.
Rashi seems to be saying that not believing is not at all the same as denying something. One can be a Jew with sincere questions, as long as one does not use the questions to throw away the Torah or its Mitzvos.
Therefore, to call a sincere, learned, baal midos and prince of a man like Rav Kook an apikorus is beyond preposterous. He was one who never said a bad word about anybody and always saw the best in everybody, and tried to develop a warm relationship with even the most distant Jew. Reb Aryeh Levine followed in this derech, and was the Baal Tefila on the Yomim Noraim in Rav Kook’s yeshiva Merkaz Harav for many years.
Beautiful words from Rav Kook (lose something in translation):
The pure righteous do not complain about evil, rather they increase tzedek.
The pure righteous do not complain about heresy, rather they increase emuna.
The pure righteous do not complain about ignorance, rather they increase chochma.
Arpilei Tohar p. 39
Over yontof, I happened to be in a shul which had a set of Tzitz Eliezer, and pulled out a random volume, since I do not have one. I was pleasantly surprised to find in Chelek 7, Siman 48, p. 222 beautiful quotations from Rav Kook. He refers to him as Hagaon HaRav Avraham Yitzhak Kook, and freely quotes from his article Kedushas Haaaretz in sefer Chazon Hageulah.
In this teshuvah the Tzitz Eliezer says it is absurd to believe that the geulah can’t happen through the Zionists, even though some were not observant. He says it is mefurash a story in Navi Melachim Beis 14:23-27 that King Yeravam ben Yoash was thoroughly wicked, yet the Jews at the time were severely oppressed, and so Hasehm saved them and brought about a geula for them, and expanded their borders through this wicked King.
He also deals with the 3 Shevuos and says they do not apply to the current situation. He says that Me’az pakad Hashem osanu ltova litein lanu shem vshearis b’eretz kodsho lihyos adonim bah, vnasan blev haumos haolam hameuchedes (the UN) kilichoreh bshayto (like in the time of Koresh) lhashiv lanu hagezeilah bchelek martzeinu (to return to the land which they stole from us), and the gates of Israel are wide open to all Jews of any types with no limitations, and everybody is welcome with open arms and simcha nafshis (the deep heartfelt happiness of one Jew welcoming another to Israel)…. and furthermore the nations of the world approve of this, so the Shevuos are rendered null.
Another point he makes (quotes a teshuva of another acharon) that if this happened through frum people, one could not say for sure that Hashem was behind it, as maybe the people took it upon themselves to try to do the mitzva of yishuv EY. But since the RBSH mysteriously put it in the hearts of Jews who seemingly were far away from Torah, and so many upon so many of them suddenly got interested in Zionism all at the same time, clearly it is a Ruach Mimarom that entered their hearts from Above.
All this uplifted my heart on yontof, seeing many of the things I had written here on YW over the years are actually the words of a big gadol. The Derech Eretz he has for Rav Kook, as well.
This is the hashkafa of optimism and simcha I have been trying to convey over the years here on YW. Which is more uplifiting, seeing the Yad Hashem in all this, or convincing oneself that Zionism is all an evil plot of the sitra achara (whatever that means)? Take your pick.
BTW, the opening post here cites examples of mitzvos done for the wrong kavana, but doesn’t make any mention of the sugya of mitzvos tzrichos kavana. Note that the Rambam paskens Talyuhu vachal matza yatza. (One who was physcially forced to eat matza does fulfill the mitzva, I believe, so mitzvos einan tzrichos kavana.)
MW13, Time is very short now, more after yontof. Just a brief comment:
Another source of the primacy of bein adam lachaveiro is one I read on one of the frum sites in the name of Rav Shteinman. I looked it up, and it is in the Peirush haRosh on the extreme left of first page of Maseches Peah in the back of the big shas Brochos volume. The last lines read “Ki HKBH chafetz yoser bamitzvos sheyeaseh bahem gam ratzon habriyos mibamitzvos shebein adam lekono.”
This is the anivus of the RBSH. Unfortunately, I believe that many are taught an incorrect hashkafa that the RBSH is an angry ego-maniac.
Part of this incorrect hashkafa is that it is better to do mitzvos only because Hashem said we should, and to get schar. If we do a chesed out of the goodness of our heart, we are doing it shelo lishma or because we are weak people. But that contradicts the maamar chazal Al tehei keved hameshamesh es rabbo al mnas lekabel pras. I think the ultimate purpose of the Torah is to make us into fine and caring people who realize the magnitude of the contribution of the RBSH and everybody else to keep this world functioning. The farmer, the milkman, the truckdriver, the storekeeper, everybody.
Yes, it is menschlach to treat the RBSH with hakaras hatov, but it is the good midos He is trying to teach us which apply both to people and to the RBSH. He wants shalom and ahava to prevail throughout the world.
My friend writes:
“1) Birkei Yosef 243:3 – It is forbidden to learn Torah or listen to psakim of any Talmid Chacham that causes a Chilul Hashem.
“2) Responsa Bais Shlomo YD II:101 – Any rabbi who misleads the public into sinning is forbidden to be a rabbi, and if he is a rabbi must be removed.
“3) Chasam Sofer CM 163 – Any Min (i.e. Apikores), it is forbidden to hear any Torah from him.
“4) The Gemora (Shabbos 116a) says that a Sefer Torah that is written by a Min must be burnt, even if the Sefer Torah is 100% proper with nothing changed in it. The reason, says the Rambam, is because we do not want and remnants of the acts of Apikorsim.
“So since the Satmar Rav held that Rav Kook was an Apikores, and certainly that he mislead the masses with his Zionist teachings, he is in the category of all of the above.”
I just wanted to ask mechila from Rav Kook ZTL for not being mocheh earlier.
These points are so far off the mark.
#1, Rav Kook never caused a chilul hashem, but lived a life of kiddush hashem and bringing back people to Torah. Just remember the beautiful Mercaz boys who were murdered, who were his products. Each was a big masmid and baal midos.
#2, Rav Kook never mislead the public into sinning. In certain of his piskei halacha, he was more machmir than the norm. See a story in Guardian of Jerusalem how he paskened the Rabbanim must daven at home, rather than go to a shul which had the bima in front, on their tour.
#3, Irrelevant, as he was a bigger maamin than any of us here.
#4, Ditto.
Reb Moshe writes that one who shaves a few times a week is allowed on Chol Hamoed, certainly for business, and even just to look nice.
The reasoning is simple. Chazal only forbid shaving on chol hamoed so that people would shave before yontof and look nice. Otherwise they would put it off until Chol Hamoed and enter yontof as menuvalin.
But since today, even when one shaves before yontof, he will still need to shave again afterwards, it is OK, as he always shaves a few times a week. Chazal did not make the takana so that people would look shlumpy, they did it so they would look nice.
MW13 writes: “While the pashtus of this certainly seems to imply like you said, I find it difficult to believe this statement was meant to be taken literally. After all, there are plenty of halachos that have nothing to do with menchlichkeit: avodah zora, emunah, etc. These are obviously fundamentals of Yiddishkeit, and yet they have nothing to do anybody but you and Hashem. Therefore, there must be more to the Torah then just bein adom li’chavaro. Remember, there are two luchos, and they are both equally important.”
Yes, that is a good point, but this is how I understand it. To deny the existence of the RBSH is terrible from the standpoint of menschlachkeit. He created the world, and gives us food and our health and our brains and worked very hard to supply us with our needs, and wants us just to say thank you, and have hakaras hatov. Just like if we turned our backs on our parents after all they did for us, and all their hard work, and staying up late when we were sick, and feeding us and driving us everywhere it would be the most despicable and ungrateful behavior there is.
In other words, the RBSH doesn’t want us to praise him because of his own ego trip, but he wants us to praise him because that is what makes a person a mensch, and the person will then use the same midos to show hakaras hatov to other people, as well, and this will cause ahavas habriyos and shalom in the entire world.
BTW, in the haftara of Yom Kippur it emphasizes that the purpose of the fast is to feel what hunger is like, and then understand what the aniyim feel, and to give them tzedaka. Halo paros lraev lachmecha vaniyim merudim tavi bayis….zeh tzom evchareihu. I don’t remember the exact words. (Heard from my Rav).
Simcha613, One thing that always used to give me chizuk was to see the Steipler’s gematrios on Rashi in his sefer Birchas Peretz.
I believe that if you look at the introduction to sefer Maharsha HaAruch, it quotes a source that all chiburim up until the time of the Maharsha were written Bruach Hakodesh.
However, doesn’t it give a list of qualities of Tannaim at end of one masechta and say Mishemes one of the tannaim, batlah ruach hakodesh?
So while the klal over the generations has accepted and cherished the concept that gedolei Torah have Ruach Hakodesh, what upset me was that to start labeling people apikursim because of it, is going over the line, especially since there is no way to prove it and the concept is not even well-defined. Would we punish somebody for chillul shabbos if we had no way to prove it? The Rambam lists quite a few things that might make a person an apikorus, but saying that a sefer after the time of Tanach is not written bruach hakodesh is not in the list.
As far as definitions go, I just happened to see in a local publication that they will be enforcing an anti-drinking law on Simchas Torah that adults allowing the use of alcohol by minors on their premises will be subject to penalties. The law contains so many definitions as to exactly what circumstances constitute allowing the use of (aware of, or should be aware of, in addition to actually serving), and exactly what their premises are (house, yard). I do not remember the exact terminology or even the name of the law. But it is an example how any law must be crystal clear as to what is meant, and what exactly is a violation.
LessChumras writes: So, an Apikores is someone who disagrees with the Satmar Rav on Zionism?
Myfriend responds: “No one said that. See the 4 enumerated reasons from Teshuvos Divrei Yoel for the reasons of that determination.”
Hmmm, I am almost certain that the Teshuvos Divrei Yoel was written by the Satmar Rav…
“Once again, I quote: “Ruach HaKodesh does not mean that everything someone says is right. Even Chazal were disproven, which is why we have “hava amina”s in the gemora. It means that they get a certain level of siyata d’shmaya.” Please, take the time to read something before you blast it!”
1) You have not given an operative definition of the word Ruach Hakodesh. Please tell us exactly how to tell the difference between a sefer that was written bRuach Hakodesh, and one that wasn’t.
2) Your statement “they get a certain level of siyata dishmaya” does not help very much. How can we tell what level they received?
2A) Did Isaac Newton get Siyata Dishmaya when he wrote down the 3 laws of motion, or was it a case of kochi v’otzem yadi. Assuming it was the former, are you saying he had Ruach Hakodesh? I hate to hock, but there is a reason one needs to carefully define terms in any argument. Certainly, in a case one is using the term to label somebody an apikorus, it is all the more necessary.
3) I assume from your other statements that writing Bruach Hakodesh does not literally mean G-d told him every word, as you say it can even be wrong but still be Ruach Hakodesh.
“Considering that you claim to know “the purpose of the Torah”, would you care to bring a source?”
MW13, I’ll bring more than one. Hillel: Mai dsani lach lchavrech lo saavid, zehu kol hatorah kula.
Also Rebbe Akiva: Vahavta lreacha komocha zeh klal gadol batorah.
In addition other chazals like: Mutav lhaamid tzelem bheichal v’al yarbeh machlokes byisroel. (Quoted in the Rabbi Scherer book).
Two more proofs that the Torah’s permitting something does not make it right.
The story with Rebbe Yehudah Hanasi in the gemara where a calf escaped from shechita and ran to him. he told him, go back because this is what you were created for.
The gemara tells us that as a result, Rebbe was punished with 20 years of excruciating yissurin because he did not have rachmanus on the calf. We see that although shechita is permitted, still one is sometimes expected to go to a higher madreiga.
Second, the gemara says Lo necherava yerushalayim ella al sehemidu divreihem al divrei Torah. Yerushalayim was destroyed because people went by the letter of the law in their court cases. The RBSH expects people to go above and beyond the minimum. If a poor person loses a case, and you can well afford it, let him win or at least give him money to live on in some other way.
The entire purpose of the whole Torah is menschlachkeit.
BTW, the entire thread is completely out of place, anyway. It is not our job to judge other people’s religious views. That is the RBSH’s job.
Suppose a holocaust survivor says my entire family was slaughtered right in front of my eyes. I do not believe in G-d, because no benevolent or just G-d could have let this happen. I challenge anybody here to go up to him and call him an apikorus. In addition, the gemara says that when somebody is btzaar and complains about the RBSH, He does not hold it against him.
Why not let us focus on our job which is to be kind to each other and let the RBSH focus on his?
Not at all clear that the Torah disagrees. Just because the Torah permitted it, does not mean that one who abstains because of Tzaar Baalei Chaim is not a big Baal Madreiga. There is some halacha regarding the lung of an animal that was collapsed in a certain way, because the animal was in great fear, such as if its fellow animal was shechted in its presence. So clearly animals do not enjoy the shechita process. Why the Torah permitted it may be like the Yefas Toar.
We are also permitted to be gluttons and eat all day. Nevertheless, the higher madreiga is to eat only enough to be healthy.
The Torah also permits a man to withhold a get for huge sums of money.
So just because the Torah permits something does not mean it is giving its endorsement.
Again, the highest madreiga is menschlachkeit.
It is funny, but lying in shidduchim goes back a long way. The Rambam brings that in certain places, the number they promised for a dowry or as a gift in the kesuva was sometimes magnified by about 50% or so. Everybody understood what the real number was, despite what was written. Do not quote me on this until I can find the actual source.
BTW, if one is an apikorus for not believing that a certain perush was written bRuach Hakodesh, it would certainly help to have a definition of Ruach Hakodesh.
But I will give you some proofs that even the Avos did not have knowledge of everything, only what the RBSH wanted them to know.
1) By the Akeidah, if Avraham knew the outcome that he would not have to sacrifice his son, then what was the nisayon?
2) The pasuk says vYaakov lo yada ki Rochel genavasam. Yaakov who cursed the one who stole Lavan’s terafim, did not know it was Rachel, and that she would die young as a result.
Furthermore, the Rambam writes certain scientific facts that we now know are not correct, such as the existence of hard spheres in which the planets are embedded, the sizes of the Sun and Moon, etc. Does this lessen the Rambam in my eyes? Not at all, because he would be the first to say go with the science of your times, not of mine. (Remember that he writes in Kiddush Hachodesh 17:24 that any scientific or mathematical fact which has been proven even by a non-Jew, carries the status of Divrei Neviim.) The intellectual honesty of the Rambam is overwhelming.
So please define exactly what you mean by Ruach Hakodesh.
One further thing, if you mean to equate Ruach Hakodesh to Nevuah, then we are allowed to test a Navi by making him predict the future multiple times. (This is a halacha in the Rambam). Do you know of any gedolim today who would want to undergo such a test?
Hmmm, so Rabbanim have the right to call other Rabbanim apikursim. Who decides who has the last word? Many thought the Rambam himself was an apikorus. They organized massive book-burnings of his works. I guess we should not learn Rambam any more.
Somebody disagrees with Rav Kook, so that makes Rav Kook an apikorus? Let me guess the rule, when one on the right calls one on the left an apikorus, it is true, but when one on the left calls someone on the right an apikorus, it is not.
Note that Reb Aryeh Levine himself was once pushed down into the mud by some kannai, because he associated with Rav Kook.
The Netziv writes that the Bais Hamikdash was destroyed because people went around calling each other an apikorus.
There have always been machloksin about crucial points in the Torah, and Eilu vEilu.
Maybe one day we’ll wake up and realize that the whole purpose of the Torah is menschlachkeit, and nothing more, and that day Moshiach will come.
I am so humbled whenever this topic gets revived.
While I am not one who normally encourages full-time learning, except for yechidei segula, I think if there was an agreement here, she may be required to honor it.
There is a mishna which states that if a girl promises a certain dowry to her chosson, and she goes back on it (pashta lo es haregel), then she may remain an agunah for the rest of her life (teishev ad shetalbin rosha). In other words, he need not marry or divorce her, but leave her in limbo (kiddushin but no nesuin). However the Rambam says that if the promise was made by the girl, then this applies. However, if the promise was made by her father, and he dies, then she can say, what can I do, I tried my best. Either marry me or divorce me so I can marry somebody else.
It seem that if the situation changes, like the boy was receiving a certain kollel income, but he no longer is, and they are starving, then he must reassess and possibly make up for the money in some way or another. But if the circumstances have not changed, and the girl just wants a higher standard of living, then she may not be entitled to it, if she promised to live on the lower income, which continues.
Just my thoughts. Of course if she absolutely can’t take it, then maybe she should divorce, but that would be a tragedy for the child.
The moral of the story is that people must not make deals before they understand all the ramifications and are sure they can keep them. This is true of buying a house or car as well. One can’t decide a few months later that he wanted a blue car instead of red, and now wants to skip the payments.
Anyway, here, the best advice may be Ann Lander’s sage wisdom, are you better off with him or without him?
In addition, two generations ago there were quotas and bans on Jews in many colleges and organizations, even here in the USA. They didn’t let black kids go to the same schools as whites. They had separate baseball leagues. Blacks had to sit in the back of buses, and I think they even had to give up their seats if a white person needed one. Today, the world at large understands that that stuff was cruel and wrong and indefensible.
WIY, I respectfully disagree. It is not just labels. Go to a Camp Sternberg and see how much love the healthy campers give to those who are not well. Go to a Camp HASC. Schools have chesed programs to take care of the elderly. Tomchei Shabbos is staffed by young wonderful kids who work many hours after school packing the boxes. Then, there are many young adults who drive and deliver.
Today there is much more awareness of loshon hara. There is more of an awareness that good things are a matanah from the RBSH rather than kochi v’otzem yadi. There is an awareness that we must take care of the poor and unfortunate, and not think of them as lazy bums who dare not enter my home.
Where I live, a certain young giyores had no money to make a wedding. A (modern) school took it upon themselves to host the wedding in the school and make all the preparations so the chosson and kalla wouldn’t have to worry about a thing.
There are bar mitzvah kids who donate all their gifts to needy children in Israel or to victims of terror. Some give up their big seudah altogether to give the money to those less fortunate.
In my kids’ school, there are children who wheel their handicapped classmates the entire day and make them feel a part of everything that goes on.
Somehow or other, the lesson of menschlachkeit seems to be getting across.
In some ways, our generation is much more respectful than the previous generation. Back then, one might refer to the handicapped in many hurtful terms. Today, we use physically challenged and devlopmentally disabled among other examples. Same with various terms to describe other races.
Note today, many adults do not want to be called Mr. so and so, because it makes them feel old and out of it. For better or worse, youth is in these days, and first names are definitely much younger sounding.