Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
About Time; this is a nice story but I doubt it happened,unless you show it to me in actual print. Couets in the US would not get involved in such a dispute- it would breach the First Amendment.
scroller: interestingly, the Amorah who takes a cacalier attitude to feeding one’s children is “ROVOH+ and this is the samew “ROVOH” who is the only Amoiro in Kessubos who takes the attitude that you can allow a father to let his kids be reliant uopn tzedakah. He is consistent but all other Amoroim have different views on that.. However, as you noted, that is aggadata and we are bound by “halacha pesukkhoh”. Rambam, Tur , Shulchan Aruch, all say that there is a full obligation for fathers to feed their small children-till six- and the “takkono’ is for children until they grow up.
I am not sure whether I want to repeat the arguments pro and con kollel on this thread. The gemoros that you mention and the Rambam are for very special and unique people,not for the klal.
scroller: you are being disingenious about the sugya in Kessubos. It is a long gemoro where clearly virtually all amoriom believe you must feed your kids. As a matter of fact, they say that it became a “takkanta” made in Usho. Rovoh’s words are only his and actually, tosfos says that one can force someone to feed other kids with verbal pressure and/or a specific set of payments.
But all this is irrelevant. The Rambam (and Tur and Shulchan Aruch)paskens clearly (hilchos Ishus 12-14) that it is an obligation to feed one’s children until they are six and, if you have any money, till they grow up.
AS far as Rav nehoroi- this is a ‘daas yochid” and the gemoro in berachos (35B) is the definite word on this- saying clearly that only a very few people can live without working.
I don’t want to start another of those threads about kollelim. People have their positions on this. I do want,however, to point out that the gemoro that “scroller” points to is one aggadata and not even the last word on this matter. The gemoro in Kiddushin (29A) on the other hand, is halacha and obligates a father to teach his son a trade.And the gemoro in brachos (35B) clearly tells us that that way of living is just not possible for normal human beings.
DaasYochid, HaLeive and Sam2; to be called a closet “tsedukki’ and not having a chelek le’olam haboh qualifies (for me) as pretty important wrath. But to central matter- Rav Huna did live many years later, so is it wrong to ask how he came to that conclusion? I have said pretty consistnly that, in matters of halacha, clearly Tannaim and Amoroim cannot bd challenged. All i have said is that in other matters (aggadata, science) there is no clear evidence that the Chazal were infallible.
DaasYochid: in my original posting, I used two words that may cause you a problem. I wrote “disturbing” (about the jerushalmi) and I also said that it was difficult to understand the punishment.
I looked up synonyns for both words and there is a wide variety of meanings, many of them referring to it as meaning inexplicable. The jerushalmi about Tur shimon is indeed difficult to understand. I am not sure how my words brought upon me your wrath and other’s wrath.
DaasYochid; we will have to stand on our respective positions. All you see from those gemoros that- at times- A Tanna and/or Amora has insights that come from HKBH- and this – i beleive- happesn even today! Whether this translates into every position that chazal takes is problematic- see science,medicine,astronomy…etc
As far as “hashkofo” goes, we seem to have different understandings. Also, my comments on “Tur Shimon” were that it is difficult to see how a fairly small infraction broguth about such destruction, not that I know better.
DaasYochid : I checked both gemoros you mentioned and, please forgive me, but I am rather underwhelmed by your sources. First of all, the “Sod Hashem’ answer in those instances is the third of a possible answer and secondly, in Ben Azai’s case (see Sotah 4B) if indeed, he had specific knowledge of that matter(the duration of a specific act), how come there are many other versions of this answer by a multitude of other Tannaim? Weren’t they worthy of “sod hashem”?
In any case,these examples deal with a very specific instance where the Tannah/Amorah would not have had personal knowledge of something and hence, “Sod Hashem” , so that he would know that.This is a very far cry from saying that, everywhere and every time, every Tananh and Amorah knew everything because of “Sod Hasem”.
As far as your assertion about “hashkofo”, please explain what you mean by hashkofo? I can quote you numerous examples that are labeled today as present-day “hashkofo’ and must be accepted by us,yet are in direct opposition of “maamorie chazal”. What is ,indeed, “haskofo” in your eyes?
HaLeivi: I am not sure why you mentioned in your recent comment- although I venture to say that you maintain that the disucssion of playing ball on shabbos (and the subsequent quote fro mthe jerushalmi) have nothing to do with the subsequent discussion of believeing in “mmamaorei chazal”. I agree totally- these are quite differetn subjects that, somehow, were mixed together.
As far as responding to DaasYochid- I agree with you the Tannoim and Amoroim have a special authority. The question is whether this extends to science, astronomy, medicine,etc. I dont’know whether “sod Hashem lejereiov” covers that.
DaasYochid: How far do you extend your blanket assertion that Gedolei Yisroel cannot be wrong? (This is what you are essentially saying). Geonim too? Rishonim too? how about today’s generation?
DaasYochid: form the questions of Sam2 and the words of HaLeivi–even though they may differ from what I said- you can see that there is plenty of questions on “maamaorei chazal” that do not deal with halacha. As I said, halacha clearly cannot be challenged- on other matters,such as medicine and science, I differ from whay you say.I am not even sure if chazal themselves suscribed to your view that all what they said was infallible. The grey areas are “hashkofo” and -at times- aggadata. On that ,you see that many rishonim differed on the gemoro’s and midrashs interpretations. (see Rabbi Avrohom ben HoRambam in this week’s parsha on Yaakov Ovinu’s struggle with the angel..).
Where do yo udraw the line at fully accepting a previous dor’s views? (not in halacha). Gemoro? Geonim? Rishonim?
DaasYochid:I know very little and would never question a maamar chazal. However, it is difficult for anyone to pinpoint why there are punishments. This is why I never suscribed to the satmarer shittah on the Holocaust.I am not sure why using the word “disturbing” is so…disturbing! Nonetheless, when you say we can never challenge matters of “hashkafa’ coming from chazal- no one can challenge matters that deal with “Ikrey hadas” and certainly not on halacha. Yet,even you may admit that what is written about science, animals, physical functions are not always accurate. Is that “hashkafa”?
Sam2- we are bound rigidly by certain clasifications when it comes to halacha. Mishneh, gemoro, geonim, Rishonim and acharonim. But this is for halacha. When it comes to so-called hashkafa, we see that the Rambam’s views were not accpeted by his contemporaries and even acharonim (see the Gro, for example) and you would be very surprised when you see what some perushim al hatorah by various commentators (Ibn Ezra,Rabi Avrohom be Horamabam, Abarbanel)say. Very drastcially different than the accepted versions.
To ask questions about matters of logic, hashkofo, physical matters is permissible. To dispute matters of halacha of previous rishonim is out of bounds.
dveykus613: EXACTLY. this is what I wrote.
well, I sent a constructive reply to Sam2 but the it has not been published. Cannot bother to repeat it.
Sam2- you will have to show me which part of torah I transgressed to claim that I lost my chelek in olam haboh. Torah shebaal peh extends throughout all generations-including ours, my point is that it only applies to halacha, not any other matter. There are numerous examples that midrash and agaddata are not to be taken literally.
DaasYochid- if you feel we are worlds apart- so be it. I don’t see where I ‘challenged’ chazal. Actually, all I originally said that it was a very harsh penalty for “Tur Shimon”, as the trasngression was (almost) minor and the Jerushalmi needs elucidation. Actually ,I believe that “Tur SHimom’ did exist and was destroyed (please not ,Sam2) and I only questioned the assessment of the punishment. And clearly, a new halacha (ball playing0 cannot be learned fro mthat.
SO, to both of you- you will have to explain how my understanding of agaddate differs from many other rishonim and acharonim who clearly said that agadatas are no to be taken literally.
DaasYochid: well, we are a lot closer in thought than originally expounded. Of course, we learn from our Rebbeim and other Gedolim-whether in behavior or learning, it is part of our DNA, (Aseh lecho Rav). I was responding originally to Sam2’s assertion that all of torah shebaal peh is infallible. On that, I think there is a difference between halocho- clearly, we accept the dinim of the mishne and gemoro, although this gets diluted as we descend the generations- and between hashkofo (still, a very imprecise and nebulous subject) and aggadata- with all its pitfalls in understanding what is being said and its relationship with reality.
DaasYochid and Sam2:I specifically excluded halacha from the question we were discussing. I always thought that “lo sossur” (upon which this whole discussion is based) is only about halacha, and not about “hashkofa’ (a very nebulous concept) or aggadata. By expanding “lo sossur’ to virtually every aspect of life, we have come to the situation that we have today, that we have to follow every word of a godol and never think for ourselves. So- called “daas torah’ of today is modern invention.
Sam2- too late to respond to you now in detail- too close to shabbos. However, you are wrong in claiming infallibiity. Aggadata is not binding and has nothing to do with the acceptance of Torah shebaal peh ,which is limited to halocho. Not to allow to ask questions means accepting infallibility-very distinctly a non-Jewish trait.
gut shabbos
WIY: It is very close ot shabbos here on the East Coast and I will be brief. Note that I am of chassidic stock and therefore am very familiar with many stories of rebbes and the wonders surrounding them. I wish that the so-called litvishe world would accept these too.
I did not say- by the way-that the story CANNOT be true but that it has a very familiar ring and that, therefore, it may or may not be genuine.
There are,indeed, many stories of “shelo kederach hateva”, many of them very unusual but most of them unverifiable. I believe in my “rebbeim’ but I don’t have to make them infallible or having ruach hakodesh.
Where you and I differ markedly is how to accept a Godol’s words. I maintain they are not infallible and are human beings with human failings. You are entitled to follow their every word but I am entitled to be more skeptical.If this makes me an apikores-then there are many more around. You may think differently. And,btw, I do not know the story of the grasshopper. And, of course, no one questions the hasmodo of some gedolim. Does that make them infallible?
gut shabbos.
WIY: thank you for the compliment. I prefer to be such an idiot rather than accepting every “buba maaseh”.
DaasYochid: Please explain what your remarks mean. Are you saying that we must accept every Aggadata verbatim- never questioning and never trying to understand?? Have we come to that point where Judaism accepts infallibilty??
Sam2- I must disagree with your post. Clearly, the spirit of this story is the essential part (akin to the gemoro and the Poroh adumoh story)but attributing this to a speciifc person without pointing out that it may just be a “moshol”,contributes to the “hagiographies’ of Gedolim ,that imbues them with supernatural powers, never to be questioned.
The erudite posters are debating the “yerushalmi” in connection with playing ball. I,however, find this yerushalmi very disturbing for other reasons .Clearly, “Tur Shimon’ were great “baaleiu tsedokoh”-giving bread to multitudes of poor people- yet, they were destroyed (if it was during Betar times, it is well after the churban) for what is seemingly a very minor infraction(evem the part of licentiousness only concerns one person). I find this inexplicable- so much ‘zechus’ and yet being destroyed for a very small infraction? As a corrolarry, Rav Huna (who is quoted) lived many , many years after this event- where were his sources?
I and OOMIS are of the same generation and I can attest -for sure- that people played chess on Shabbos in past years. I have never heard it should be ossur,although one has to be careful about keeping the pieces separate, once they are off th board, so as not to have a problem of “borrer”. As far a bycicles, pretty much most acharonim maintain it is an “uvdo dechol”, with the added proviso that it might bring to be “mesaken kli” if a chain falls off or the like. Ping pong (table tennis) ,however, may very well be easier because it is clearly not a psik reisha if it breaks. These balls are very sturdy.
to WYI; i don’t know the publication “Revach.net’ from where you got the story about R”aaron zz,l’s father,but this the same story ,in slightly diffretn versions, have been around for centuries…so i really wonder whether it is an urban legend or a true story.
who is the “shem jechezkel”? I never heard of this theory,including the fact that Dovid Hamelech was there. I don’t think this ma’amar makes any sense.
There is a more concrete connection between Dovid hamelech and Adam Horishon in that Dovid was supposed to be born and die right away ,so Adam gave seventy of his years to Dovid and therefore only lived to 930 years and Dovid lived seventy years.
anonymous (and oomis): actually, the pictures in wikipedia are rather complicated but clearly, the femur cannot extend “below” the knee, as the knee is the patella and is not part of the upper bone ,otherwise we could not bend our legs! and see the tesyimony of oomis, ref. knees!
anonymous251: the femur actually ends at the top of the knee (courtesy of wikipedia)and if this is “shok” then, ipso facto, the knee is not part of it. Others maintain-if I remember correctly- that “shok’ is the actual lower leg (jerech being the thigh) but then one would have to cover the whole leg- which we do not.
mdd- This wil be my last posting before yom tov so first, I wish you (and everyone else) a gut yom yov!
Second= you are sadly mistaken if this a “krum American hashkofo” (yout words) I just mentioned the chazal and I can bring you multiple examples of limud zechus, not only in chazal ,but also in recent generations- did you ever hear of the barditchever?
anyway- I am humble enough not to be judgmental of anyone. I have enough sins of my own- wich-I hope-were forgiven a few days ago!Gut yom tov!
mdd: chazal say ; “al todin es chaveircho at shetagya limkomo”.
You are living in a time and country when it is physically very easy to be a shomer torah umitzvos (there are spiritual challenges but this for another day). How dare you even criticize anyone of previous doros when you have no idea what they were facing? You never lived in poverty, you never lived in europe filled with anti-semitism, you never had to flee for your life. SO,PLEASE, spare me your sanctimoniuosness!
mdd- look back at your comments. You spoke very dismissively about previous doros without taking into account their circumstances.
“tefach” refers to “tefach be-isha ervah”.
the point about knees (and stockings, for that matter) is that it is not part of the “ervah’ that we know of and was only inserted recently.
interjection: you are putting the cart before the horse. The only reason why a woman has to cover certain parts is because of the possibility of a man seeing her. there is no chyuv for her (unless very zechusdik) to cover her hair- for example- in the house. I would even venture that, if she is only in company of women, many of the prohibitions do not apply.
so, you are erroneous in saying that the chyuv starts after the mans stopped looking. That obligation on the woman is clearly a function of the possibility of men seeing her.
mdd- first, i retract my “no respect’ comment fo you, as you have gone through a very tough evaluation in your life. To be a “baal teshuvo” is difficult and certainly trumsp my upbringing and my zechusim.
However, I totally disagree with you on your evaluation of past generations. Whether here or in Poland, Russia ,etc… in past centuries, it was a major struggle to keep shabbos because parnossh was so difficult. It was a majot struggle to keep kashrus properly because real kosher food was scarce. It was a major struggle just remaining jewish because the prevailing winds were so dangerous to jews. Contrast our lives to our ancestors in Spain, Portugal, Poland (Chmelnicky), Germany (Enligthement) etc… and you will see that our nisyonos pale compared to theirs. So, if they relaxed their standards just a bit but remained true to yiddishkeit, I, for one, would never criticize them.
mdd- to get back to halachic discussions is refreshing- You have a point of “se-jog” as far as knee or above. However, because the borderline is so unclear, it is not right to attack women who do not strictly confirm to your expectations.
Your point about wearing opaque tights without a skirt is valid. Yet, I wonder whether it circumvents the issur of “tefach be’isha ervah”.Don’t get me wrong- it would be very provocative but does it fit the requirement of covering the “tefach”?
mdd- I take major exception to your insulting comments about Jews of years ago. You live in your cocoon with no “nisyionos” in your job, your kashrus and other areas and you beat your chest how frum you are. Your ancestors had major “nisyonos” in every area of yiddishkeit , did the best they could do and succeeded in giving you the opportunity to be a frum Jew. You don’t come to their ankles (“lekarsulehem”) and you don’t deserve any respect.
This conversation is , in many ways, totally erroneous. One can be on both sides of the divide! I know many chassidim (wearing bekeshe or frak) who are ardent Zionists. They also avail themselves of hetterim on some issues. What are they? Th examples given (covering hair, going to movies)does not put you into one camp specifically. Every so-called MO Rov will tell you that, lehalocho, you should cover your hair and avoid movies.How about beethoven in a concert? how about a youtube about syum hashas? As you see, you can do certain things and never be established in one side or another
mdd- I know about “shoik”- this was not my question. the knee clearly is not “shoik”,because if “shoik’ is the part from the knee to the hip, itb still does not include the knee , and if “shoik” is the lower leg , then the whole lower log should be covered, till the ankle, and, obviously, we don’t pasken like that,otherwise the ankle should be covered too!
It is also irrelevasnt whether some people have their senses provoked by something- it is the majority we are following and I still don’t see the knee as the most provoking part of the body. Lastly, if a ‘sheitel’ covering the hair takes it out of ‘sa-ar beisha ervah’, why isn’t covdering the legs (stockings) do the same for legs?
Can someone enlighten me and tell me where do we find that knees have to be covered? I know about hair and I know about “tefach megulah’ but knees? Additionally,if a woman is wearing stockings (and I presume most of BoroPark is), why is the knee so inportant? I am asking this in a genuine quest for the truth.
I am only posting now because mdd brought me into this= as I have not posted for a while. Incidentally, I posted a response to mammele and leyzwer a long time ago but it was not posted so I cannot be bothered to write it again.
However, I fully concur with oomis that the parameters of “tsenyis” are fairly confusing but the rabbonim of this generation have decided to go “lechumro”. So be it- but ,as oomis writes, there are many.many grey areas!
I am going to get criticized for my comments but my question is simple: why this preocupation, bordering on the obsession ,with the way women dress? is there anyone in the orthodox world who dresses like a “shikse”? I bet you that even the most so-called “untsni-us” dress in the orthodox world is miles ahead of anything that goes on in the real world. And lastly, who tells the men to look? Why should the poor women suffer and have to wear a sack of potatoes because some men cannot close their eyes? This obsession with minutia is making me sick.
gavra at work: Tssk! tssk! and this before yom kippur ! (I know you meant it sarcastically!)
As far as Rav Feldman’s letter- the facts are that Rav Feldman lived in Eretz yisroel for well over thirty years before being to be Rosh Hayeshiva in Ner Ysroel.I venture to say that his view is NOT what the yeshiva means or ever meant. Obviously, people have the kovod not to contradict him ,but his comments do NOT square with the practices of Ner Israel for the lasy sixty years. Lastly, Rabbi Lipman is a genuine musmach and he has done nothing to merit the insults of the posters. He has a point of view on learning and working and secular studies that is the NORM in the US and in many yeshivos in Israel. The chareidi world is desperate to keep its subsidies and present structure (jobs, jobs, jobs!)- a structure that is bound to fail! So, attack the messenger, a lot easier than responding to the challenges.
The letter that is quoted has been retracted by Rav Feldman himself, by the way. And the content of the letter itself are also misleading. Ner Israel has produced hundreds and thousands of musmachim who are college graduates in the past half century, so Rav Feldman’s comments are of very recent vintage and not in line with reality. The fact is that Rabbi Lipman is a genuine musmach of Ner Israel and the ones who keep on insulting him= “asidim leekable es hadin”
Where does the fiction of bennet being “married to a frei woman”‘ come from? I think this is just a ruse to discredit bennett.
nisht: I am sorry for having written something that could be misinterpreted. I ask mechilah from HKBH and promise to be more careful next time.
OK??
gavra
It took me some time to decipher your reference to a sem girl’s date and then I could not stop laughing!! Absurdity indeed!wolfish- thank you! You have been the voice of reason on this website for years now!
[hitting one’s head against the keyboard]
nisht- If we would all be culpable (and misinterpreted) for what we wrote, rosh hashana could not come soon enough!
And since when does Freund occupy such an important place in the Chareidi pantheon? oops- G-d (see, I follow the program!) forbid that I mention something so heathen on this website! They would soon brand me as a follower of the pantheon’s inhabitants….
Just Emes : your comments are commendable but allow me to point out that you ignore many sources for this discussion, which might change many of your assumptions. I will only comment on a couple of your points:
1)you write (2) that the temptations of previous generations during work was NOT as intense as now. Not true. Every generation has its own “nisyionos”. Do you realize how difficult it was to keep shabbos in the US in the early part of the past century? Do you know how difficult it was to get jobs in the nineteenth century unless you declared yourself (chas vesholom) A X-ian? today’s generations have their own nisyonos but don’t underestimate what our ancestors went through.
2) Possibly, after the war and its fearful destruction, there was an argument to develop the Poskim of the new generation (1). We are well beyond that and ,nowadays, it has become a major burden, rather than a mission.
3) Permanent learning is for individuals and not for the klal. This is undisputed by all Poskim, not only a majority (3).
nishtdayngesheft: HUH? Can you please explain what cynicism there is in mine (or gavra’s) comments? All we did is shake our communal heads at the rather ridiulous chumros that sprout up every day. To write Hash-m is most ridiculous and makes no sense!
gavra at work-_ thumbs up for your remark on chumro creep! Hash-m is ridiculous!
As I am not presently living in Eretz Yisroel, I am reluctant to join this thread. However, one thing must be pointed out. Governments all ove the world are struggling with the size and scope of welfare payments,that have grown to huge amounts everywhere and are being abused.The present Israeli government is trying to cope with this-as is the Us gvt, the british govt, etc….It is not a measure directed at chareidim at all- although, as chareidim have larger families, they may bear the brunt of this. One simple solution; do not rely on the govt. find work!