Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sam4: No need to apologize. I reread it and realize it can be ambiguous. I will restate it. The only issues come up if it was a wall of the Beis Hamikdash. This was an assumption for many years (in fact, many storybooks and every Chabad camp I have ever heard of still say it is) which is just plain not true. The Kotel is one of the retaining walls of Har Habayis. There is a discussion in the Poskim that that may have certain Kedushos as well, but Lema’aseh almost all of the Poskim say there are no issues whatsoever.
Sam4: I think you misunderstood what I wrote.
PM: Those Shittos (Satmar and Toldos Aharon) are for separate, non-Halachic reasons. And many of the Brisker Chumros pertaining to the Kotel are based on the aforementioned mistaken assumption that it was a wall of the Beis Hamikdash.
Toi: It’s not a problem. All of the issues of M’ilah and Bi’ah B’tumah assume that the Kosel is the wall of the Beis Hamikdash and not Har Habayis. Unless you want to call it Kishuf or something like that there should be no issue at all.
RR: ? The Gra never went to Eretz Yisrael and the Ramban only did when he had to flee Spain for his life (though both very much wanted to their whole lives).
That’s not Mesirah. If the guy is stealing something then it’s not Mesirah to tell the person he is stealing from or the government (so long as the penalty will not be more than Halacha would require).
Hello: See the Rambam Ch. 12 of Rotzeach Ushmirash Nefesh that touching things that a Metzora has touched is considered unhealthy. Presumably there is also a physical danger involved in Tzara’as.
Also, if it was really a Sakana issue then don’t Poskim assume that the Shiur is not Shishim but rather at whatever level it’s still unhealthy? I know it’s a Machlokes Acharonim so perhaps everyone you quoted holds that things which are Assur due to danger is still Batel B’shishim. I would be interested to see though if anyone who usually holds that Sakanta Chamira Me’issura applies to Bitul also yet was still on your list of those who require Shishim by meat and fish.
Even if we say this is all an allegory/mystical/metaphysical interpretation, the fact remains that far too many people read Gemaros like this literally. Either it’s literal and Chazal relied on the science of their times and therefore are inaccurate/need to be reinterpreted, or it’s metaphysical and not relevant to anything physical. It cannot be both metaphysical and still accurately portray reality as it is read.
Shmoel: As long as it was written by a Kosher Sofer with good Eidim then their Gittin should be okay as well.
Different people are different. Some women feel the need for a different type of intellectual stimulation and some don’t.
I don’t understand. What is wrong with saying that she had laudable qualities that we would do well to emulate? I don’t think saying that is an endorsement for everything she ever did.
Bezalel: Unless I missed something, Hillel came long before Rav.
Shmoel: Why is Ervah Assur? Because it’s attractive. Does it make any sense to say that some hair is attractive and some isn’t? The issue with married women and hair is that because it’s usually covered, it’s an Ervah when it’s uncovered. If this woman’s hair is now normally uncovered then it probably isn’t an Ervah and certainly shouldn’t be inherently attractive to him.
Shmoel: There are certain rules for which Parshiyos have to be when and the doubles follow that. What we are worried about now is finishing by Simchas Torah. Since there is only 1 Shabbos with a normal Parshah left in the year this had to be double. And no, our current listing of the Sidras presumably comes long after Hillel established the calendar.
We are missing a whole point here, by the way. There is more than enough reason to say that we don’t consider women’s hair the same level of un-Tznius as anything else, namely from the fact that unmarried girls leave their hair uncovered. I would honestly be surprised if no one says that the Halacha by hair (as long as you don’t have Kavanah for Hana’ah, obviously) is a special Din by Devarim Shebikdusha and would not apply in everyday interaction. Why would he be perfectly allowed to see the (never-married) girl next to her’s hair but not the divorcee’s?
Shmoel: I would agree. But far-be-it from me to call anyone a Mamzer. If R’ Moshe wanted to say that we assume there is no validity to these marriages at all to avoid Mamzeirus issues then of course that is the Halacha. I still have no idea why, in theory, what I said is incorrect (I don’t think it is). And I don’t know why we would make a couple remarry, unless it would just look strange to say that some of these marriages have no validity whatsoever and that others are fine.
I see no reason why that would make you meat.
And the fact that it’s not permissible to look at them doesn’t stop us from walking in the street. Why would having her in the office be any different? Especially if she’s not a secretary or someone that he would have to interact with on an overly-consistent basis.
Shmoel: Abelleh is absolutely correct that the majority of Rishonim assume that Chazal relied on the science of their times. And true, he is asking a very legitimate question on the Maharal.
No. Assuming I understand your case correctly, you would be Parve. They were not cooked in the same pan, only placed together while at room temperature?
It depends. A Rabbi doesn’t make the Kiddushin. It is possible to have Kosher Kiddushin without a proper Rabbi presiding over it.
Josh: It’s a Mefurash Gemara that you should go to the farther one.
Shmoel: I’m gonna make a stupid request, because the proper answer should be it’s common sense. But do you have a source?
PM: There are other Heterim used that are more Meikil than R’ Moshe’s. To answer your question, if hypothetically a woman got a legitimate Heter to wear a miniskirt in public, then, while I would not personally look at her, I would have no right whatsoever to try and force her to wear longer skirts.
Even better: what if the boss finds himself attracted to a woman? She is perfectly Tznius and follows Halacha to the letter (or past). Is it her fault? Should he fire her or realize that since this problem stems from him he has to find a way to fix it without affecting her?
Rov oranges in America 20 years ago were used for orange juice. The Chazon Ish also thinks that all drinks from citrus fruits should be Ha’eitz. And there is no reason on earth that real chocolate should not be Ha’eitz. However, apparently not all chocolate actually comes from cocoa beans. Synthetic chocolate will be Shehakol. Coffee is also interesting.
PM: Chas Veshalom. Just because your Posek does not accept a Heter or you would not do it yourself does not mean that as far as you are concerned the Heter doesn’t exist. You can’t use it; as long as it’s legitimate it still exists.
And I meant that it’s possible there are reasons to be more Meikil on hair than anything else with Tznius. See the Shulchan Aruch (don’t have the precise Siman in front of me, somewhere in that 75-80 section).
Is Chazal always relaying the Torah’s science? This Gemara clearly proves that, at least on some level, they held of the scientists of their time.
Is he breaking Halacha if she has a legitimate Heter? I am not positive about that.
PM: Granted. The fact is that she has a legitimate Heter (assuming she does) and does absolutely nothing wrong by keeping her hair uncovered. Why should she be forced to do something that she may find uncomfortable or embarrassing to satisfy what, to her at least, is someone else’s Chumra?
If she has a Heter to do so, why is she obligated to adhere to his Chumra? If someone holds that woman need to cover until their ankles, does that mean that every woman who goes past him has to wear ankle-length skirts? Or does that mean that she can cover her knees like she holds and that if he has a Chumra he has to find his own ways to meet it?
That part of the Gemara never bothered me. Chazal were just trying to explain why underground water sources get warmer overnight. So either the explanation why is an allegory or we’re misundetsranding what the Rakia is.
On a fun note, my Chavrusa and I did some cool calculations about getting the previous (following?) Gemara about the size of the sky to work.
M80: If I recall correctly they put one on a Concord for 24 hours straight and flew it around the world and left the other still. It was like a difference of 40 nanoseconds.
Itche: No, but there are probably a few thousand whom they would consider “Kosher”.
Shmoel: That’s not for me to decide. It is most likely a societal and communal issue.
Peacemaker: That is generally assumed to be true, but there are Matirim, especially if she is looking to date again.
I am suggesting that maybe nowadays there are some jobs (in which I would probably include laundry) that are considered to be either men’s or women’s jobs and not specifically just a job of one gender.
What are you trying to claim skiaddict? They don’t hate Jews but want all Zionists (which includes every Jew who doesn’t think almost exactly like them) to be killed? Okay, so I guess we agree. If you only define “Jews” as a select few thousand people who hate the Medina almost as much as they do then you are correct, they do not want to harm “Jews”.
Maybe split them up into 30-Daf segments?
How do you determine what is a men’s job and what is a woman’s job? 150 years ago everyone on Earth would have said that earning money was a man’s job. Now if you say that in Lakewood… well, you can finish that sentence yourself. So obviously what is considered men’s and women’s jobs can change with time. So why can’t who does the laundry or who fixes the car change too?
Hello: If something is Vadai Chayav in bentsching then you are not Yotzei B’dieved with a Me’ein Shalosh.
Popa very much wins. Vesu Lo Midi.
I don’t like that so much. Goyim have a right to defend themselves as well. See the beginning of Avoda Zara (daf 3 or 4).
Depends on what type of wrap it is (not what’s inside, but how the wrap itself is made). If it’s very thin and crunchy then it’s probably Mezonos. Usually (at least most that I’ve seen) are Hamotzi though.
We did that with the Yartzeit for those who were killed in Merkaz Harav. Everyone took a Daf or two and worldwide Shas was learned 8 times in the few months before their Yartzeits.
There is no reason not to be on a bone marrow donor list.
A technical detail that few people realize: There are actually two Mitzvos involved in what we call “Kibbud Av V’eim”. Most people are very good at the Mitvah of Kibbud. The issue everyone seems to have is with the Mitzvah of Mora.
A technical detail that few people realize: There are actually two Mitzvos involved in what we call “Kibbud Av V’eim”. Most people are very good at the Mitvah of Kibbud. The issue everyone seems to have is with the Mitzvah of Mora.
Zahava: There are a lot of stories like that. There is also the guy with the red bandana. And check out the Youtube video about “the man who predicted 9-11”.
Shmoel: MichaelC and Skiaddict very much just implied that.
It seems logical. Do we need a Halachic basis to determine who died Al Kiddush Hashem? There are 0 Nafka Minos in this world. Hakadosh Baruch Hu will decide what their deaths constituted and what they earn because of that. It makes sense to me that Hashem will consider them Al Kiddush Hashem. If you disagree, I can’t say anything otherwise.
They were killed because they lived somewhere that allows people to live freely. Now, some people may abuse that freedom but it seems obvious to me that America is one of the most righteous countries we have ever had in world history (not saying it’s perfect or even close). I would assume that even the non-Jews who were killed died Al Kiddush Hashem.