Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Now “Gavra” is a title with real Chashivus. As in “Hahu Gavra”. He is mentioned more times in the Gemorah than any other Tanna or Amorah.”
Not even close to true.
By the way Sam2 what does “meh” mean? I meant to ask you when you said it in the aruch hashulchan thread but I never got around to it.
“Some of PAA’s comments are tolerable.”
Such as…
I wanted to put it in my report card but it wasn’t said to me.
“Yiddishkeit isn’t only about debate, it’s about the truth, whether or not I can link to it on Hebrewbooks.org.”
(DaasYochid)
Similarly, R’ Herschel Schachter has said several times that on every page of the Mishnah Berurah there is an example of where the psak of the Mishnah Berura based on his methodology, was a change from the previous psak hamekubal.
From the introduction to “Minhagei Lita”:
“During the fifty years after publication of the Mishnah Berurah until the destruction of Lithuanian Jewery, communities did not adopt those decisions and reccomendations of the Mishnah Berurah that ran counter to the traditionally accepted minhagim. Not even in Radin, where the Chafetz Chaim had his Yeshivah, did the community change the traditional customs in favor of those urged by the Chafetz Chaim. Hence, many people today mistakenly assume that whatever the Mishnah Berurah recommended must have been the accepted custom in Lithuania.”
“Does anyone know why there is no published OH on some parts of Shulchan Oruch? In his introduction he writes that he is publishing on all 4 chalokim, yet some parts (eg Yayin Nesech and Hilchos Avodo Zoro) are unfortunately not available. Did he never write them or are they lost?”
They recently printed Hilchos Nedarim from manuscripts. So it’s possible that there are more manuscripts that may yet see the light of day.
This has nothing to do with Daas Torah. Earlier in this thread HaLeiVi mentioned living in Mitzrayim even though it’s “neged hatalmud”. So I saw an interesting pshat from the Ben Ish Chai. There is a machlokes Amoraim as to what Mitzrayim was like after the Jews ransacked it. R’ Ami says that they made it like a trap with no grain in it and Reish Lakish says that they made it like the depths of the sea with no fish in it. The Ben Ish Chai expains that they are actually arguing about whether the prohibition to live in Mitzrayim applies nowadays. He explains that the reason for the prohibition is that when the Jews left, they rescued all the ?????? ????? so now that there is no more tikun to be done there, it’s assur to live there. But once people went back and did aveiros, there is now more ?????? ????? to be rescued and therefore there the issur should no longer apply. Now R’ Ami spoke about a trap without grain, which is temporary – in the future there might be grain in the trap. So too, in the future when there will be ?????? ????? it will be mutar to live in Mitzrayim. Reidh Lakish spoke about the depths of the sea which don’t have fish and never will. Therefore it is always assur to live in Mitzrayim. (I hope I got the kabbalistic parts right.)
benignuman:
Neither Charlie nor myself disagreed with what you said. Charlie mentioned that there are some opinions and these opinions are quoted by R’ Broyde. Nishtdayngesheft promptly started ranting about R’ Broyde. I then pointed out that anything about R’ Broyde is irrelevant to the discussion – look up his sources and see whether the sources exist. The fact that they exist doesn’t necessarily mean that they can be relied upon, but that was not I was discussing. I can’t really speak for Charlie though – it could be that he was trying to legitimize not covering hair. Only he will be able to clarify what his intent was. And even if Charlie was trying to justify not covering hair, my objection to nishtdayngesheft still stands – if you want to dispute the position of not requiring hair covering then the way to do it is to either say that there is no source or that those sources cannot be relied upon for halacha l’maaseh. Attacking R’ Broyde (or Charlie for that matter) is not the way to do it and only distracts from the actual conversation.
Kiddushin 69a:
?’ ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?????
My humble beginnings:
“Patur Aval Assur has much ability but he must not blurt out answers”
“Patur Aval Assur is restless but still does well”
“Honor student but must improve behavior”
“Please call to discuss”
“Behavior and/or attitude affecting learning”
“Grade modified due to excessive lateness and/or cutting class”
“Disruptive”
“because Tannaim were notorious for talking in abridged ways, but not to a statement made by an Amora because Amoraim do not talk in the same abridged way”
Maharatz Chayes Sotah 2a:
???? ??”? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???’ ??? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ??”? ???? ???? ???”? ??? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ????? ??????? ?????
Whether or not you approve of R’ Broyde should not be relevant to the issue of women covering hair. If you think there is no source then it shouldn’t be too hard to read his sources and disprove them. If he has valid sources then nothing that he has done will change the truth. So debating about R’ Broyde is a straw man if there ever was one. (I personally have not [yet] read R’ Broyde’s treatment of the subject [nor the various rebuttals] so I do not [yet] have any opinion on the matter.)
The point of the story (which has no relevance to whether specific areas of halacha are more heter-worthy than others) is that R’ Yitzchak Elchanan came up with heterim in situations where others didn’t, BECAUSE he had more motivation since he was directly confronted with the tzaar of the agunos and he felt it strongly. This is a support to those earlier in this thread who were asserting that (in general) Roshei Yeshiva deal more in theoretics as opposed to the real world which would provide the motivation to find a heter. (Obviously it is problematic if the motivation leads you to come up with an illegitimate heter.) So for instance, someone writing a sefer on hilchos agunos might just say xyz is assur, whereas R’ Yitzchak Elchanan, dealing with the actual aguna, will find her a heter. The same structural idea can be applied to other areas of halacha as well. And this is one of the reasons why some poskim prefer the Aruch Hashulchan to the Mishnah Berurah.
Regarding poskim looking for heterim:
?????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ???????”? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?’ ???? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ?? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??? “?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ??????” ?????? ??”? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?”? ????
(Tiferes Dovid Perek 2)
edited
Just for the record I didn’t call Sam a kofer. He called himself a kofer and I was just upholding his psak on himself.
“If it makes you happy, you’re both kofrim”
If Sam’s views make him a kofer then I most certainly am a kofer, but it’s nice to have company. (Maybe we can start a subdivision of the Coffee Room called the Kofer Klub.)
🙂
“C’mon mods, it is far more likely that I call PAA a Kofer and believe it than vice versa.”
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/shmuly-yanklowitz-novominsker-and-oo-theology
We can probably come up with a whole list of things about which it was said that it is so pashut that even the tinokos shel beis rabban know it, yet are apparently not pashut to people nowadays. I think I’ll start a new thread about this.
“PAA: The Church made the Cheshbon that people cannot be good and righteous all year round, so Carnival is an “out” where you can do anything wrong and it is forgiven.”
Sounds like a good sevara. My expert opinion is that it is similar to the Rema but not quite the same. Chazal weren’t saying that guys need a “day off” so let’s let them have a “day off” on Purim (although I have heard some contemporary people [Rabbis maybe] conceptualize Purim as such). What Chazal were saying (this is all according to the Rema’s pshat) is that since they will be doing aveiros anyway, we may as well have them doing the aveiros in a “muttar fashion”. Think of it as kind of like Yefas Toar. In conclusion you are still a kofer (let’s see if this can get past the moderators this time).
OK, as long as we know it’s just a joke.