Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Any person, including the head and other leaders, of non-profit or tax exempt entities MAY endorse any political candidate he chooses. He simply can do it in his personal capacity rather than speaking for the organization or entity that he leads.
Indeed, HaGaon HaRav Shmuel Kaminetzky shlita has endorsed President Donald Trump for re-election even though he also happens to head a tax exempt non profit organization.
“Care to source the Goan & R’ Ovadia?”
Moq –
I’ve sourced it. See above.
Also note, the non-Ashkenazim were never subject to Cherem D’Rabbenu Gershom, and had more than one wife even in recent times.
I also believe that Rabbeinu Gershom himself put an expiration date on the Cherem. Either it was the year 5,000 or 1,000 years from the date he implemented it. In either case, it would have passed already.
popa, the burden of proof ought to rest on those who say there is a heter for what is normally assur.
fabie –
Re: The Vilna Gaon, see Ma’aseh Rav Hashalem, page 276, where the Vilna Gaon is cited as saying reestablishing it would bring the g’ulah closer and that removing the ban was only one of two things he would interrupt his Torah learning and Tefilah, if he would be successful. (The other thing was to reestablish saying Bircas Cohanim every day — which his talmidim in E.Y. were successful in reestablishing.)
As far as Rav Ovadia, I’ve seen him quoted to that effect, but I don’t have a source offhand. You can probably google it.
The Vilna Gaon wanted to reinstate marrying multiple wives.
Rav Ovadia Yosef is also in favor of it.
“If you are a posek, you must break your anonymity and identify yourself.”
Fair enough.
But you should also be demanding who the posek is who “matirs” all that stuff, whenever anyone here (or on any thread) claims their anonymous posek says its okay.
Wow, ICOT, lets not get carried away here. Our good Doctor may not be a Zaide yet, but we aren’t talking a newlywed!
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/why-yidden-are-the-best#post-1181
Oz Vehadar Levusha is used in the Bais Yaakov’s. Today we suffer from a great machla of pritzus, that must be fought with all our might. You literally cannot walk in the streets of some of the frummest places, without running into “frum” pritzus. It is the Yetzer Hora of our generation.
gavra, I never heard anyone refer to any part of Brooklyn (if not all of NYC) as anything other than in-town.
A Godol once told me that he thinks the reason New York is the biggest Makom Torah in c’l, is because the Yidden of York (England) were moser nefesh their lives al pi Kiddush Hashem, when the goyim wanted to force them to convert.
Some Yungerleit move elsewhere because of the cost of living in NY or for other personal reasons. But I would venture to say, more people from OOT move into NYC (Yeshiva, Shidduchim, Business, etc) than the otherway. I’ve met so many former out of towners now living in Flatbus (as well as other parts of Brooklyn and the City), that I couldn’t begin to count ’em.
Re Jothar and chassidim and soulmates: in the Litvishe (pardon the expression but more yeshivishe) world, that’s not expected either. Men and women do pursue separate directions a good part of the time. Rabbi Avigdor Miller, zt”l would have some interesting input in that.
And frankly, I don’t feel that my husband is less than than my soulmate-soulhalf, etc. if he doesn’t accompany me everywhere, and the reverse is true too.
tzippi, Excellent point. Hagoen Rav Avigdor Miller (who’s not Chasidish) wrote in his book, Awake My Glory:
1095. There cannot be two kings. The marriage relationship is two-fold. 1) The wife is submissive. This is not only Jewish but natural. There can be no harmony when there are two commanders. Without this indispensable condition, the home is disordered. “Arrogance is unbecoming a woman” – Megillah 14B. For a man it is not an ornament, but for a woman it is as if she wore a mustache. 2) The second, but equally essential foundation: a man must always demonstrate respect for his wife. This is “the way of Jewish men that… honor and support their wives in truth” as stated in the Jewish marriage contract. “He honors her more than his own body” – Yevamos 62B, Bava Metzia 59A. He is the captain, but she is the First Mate whose counsel is respected. She cannot be made a doormat, she need not beg for money, she deserves some assistance in the house chores, and the husband sides with her against his kin. He must express frequent appreciation and give words of encouragement, and he should remember his wife from time to time with gifts, big or little. Husband and wife should always say “Please” and “Thank You” and never forget to be always polite to each other.
To an untrained observer, if not told the source, would possibly presume this is only a Chasidisha view; but in fact it is the Torah view and how we’ve succesfully practiced marriage throguhout our long history.
can anyone explain to me why it used to be perfectly ok for a man to have more than one wife? i have never heard a satisfactory answer to this and i would really like to understand this.
ames, To make it short and sweet, it is because the Torah says so. (I don’t think Sefardim have been mekabel Rabbeinu Gershum’s takana at least until in the last few decades. Some Yidden cane to Israel from Arab countries with more than one wife.) But this was the exception; most people had one. Its difficult enough affording one wife (hehehe ;-), how many people could actually afford more??
Jothar, which Chazal says that the ideal is one man, one wife. (It shtims, just want a source.)
(Mod: Apologies in advance for the length of this post; it is 100% Halacha discussion, and nothing else.)
Rav Bick ZTL, Rav Henkin ZTL and others all disagreed with Rav Moshe on many occasion, and they were entitled. But unless you are qualified to agree with one psak over another, and in the base sense of a prevailing halachic behavior in your family or community, you should follow whoever is the bigger posek (or poskim), and that often would mean Rav Moshe. However, that having been said, there is no such Halachic status as “Posek Hador”. Rav Moshe ZTL was great beyond great, but there is no reason to consider his psakim more authoratative than let’s say Rav Aharon Kotler or the Chazon Ish. There would be no reason, let’s say, to follow Rav Moshe’s shiurim for the Pesach seder than those of the Chazon Ish. In fact, Roshei Yeshiva and Poskim, such as Rav Hutner, Rav Eli Meyer Bloch of Telz, the Debreciner Rav, the Chelkas Yaakov and others, sided with the Satmar Rebbe over Rav Moshe regarding the obligatory size of a mechitzah in a shul, and/or the permissibility of artificial insemination, which were the two big disagreements that those Gedoim had in halachah. It was indeed Rav Hutner who approached the Satmar Rav asking him to write a refutation to Rav Moshe’s psak about the Mechitzos. You will not find the phrse “posek hador” anywhere in any meaningful way. The Tzitz Eliezer uses it all over the place in his titles, and, I believe, either the Teshuvos Maharshal writes it among the titles to the Ramah, or the Teshuvos Ramah about the Maharshal. But in any case, the title connotes no halachic status.
Unfortunately, many of those who use Rav Moshe’s psakim do so only when he is maikel. He permitted Cholov Yisroel (only b’shas hadchak – though they don’t pay attention to that part of the psak); he lowered the height of the Mechitzos — psakim such as these made life much easier for the Modern Orthodox, and even the out-of-town Orthodox communities. They believe they need Rav Moshe’s psakim to facilitate their mission as Modern Orthodox rabbis, or to be able to cater to the not-so-frum and do Kiruv. That is not a bad thing. A psak is a psak. However, when the same Rav Moshe prohibits Shabbos clocks (in most cases), or prohibits going to college, or paskens unequivocally that boys are prohibited m’doraisa to be “just friends” with girls, the same rabbonim with “Rav Moshe’s mechotzos” and cholov stam suddenly rely on “other poskim” (though in the case of boys being friends with girls, there are no poskim of anywhere near that stature who disagree with Rav Moshe). Part of it is due, too, to the fact that, at least in America, the other two personalities who were considered Gedolei Hador of that caliber were Rav Aharon Kotler and the Satmar Rav ZTL. Because of Rav Aharon’s stance on college and secularism in general, and the Satmar Rav’s stance on Zionism, there was no way in the world that those two Torah giants were going to be considered authoratative in what constituted the Orthodox community in America in those days. Instead, Rav Aharon was largley ignored, as it was predicted the followers of his hashkofo would become “mere tourist attractions” (thats a quote from Rav Y.B. Soloveichik in his “Five Addresses” about who he refers to as “seperatist Orthodox”. Rav Aharon was the leader of that Hashkafa), and the Satmar Rav was passed off as extreme by these people. In other words, it was “safe” for people to accept Rav Moshe and ONLY Rav Moshe because once you accept someone’s psakim in hilchos shabbos and kashrus, for example, you are forced to at least think about considering the fact that their stance against college or Zionism comes with as least as much authority. Of course, Rav Moshe Feinstein ZT”L deserved all the honor and respect that he received. He was a Gaon among Geonim and a Tzadik among Tzadikim, and one of the great Halachic authorities of our times. Thats not the issue. The issue is the fact that people pick and choose which Gaon-among-Geonim to follow when and because it is comfortable for them to do so.
The Gedolim in the days of the Shulchan Aruch and shortly thereafter have agreed to accept the psakim of the mechaber (and the Rema) as authoritative. The Shach writes that one cannot even claim “kim li” against a psak of the Shulchan Aruch. This is akin to accepting someone as your “Rebbi”, where you follow his psakim. This is the same thing that happened when, let’s say, Klal Yisroel decided that the period of Chazal has ended after the 7th generraiton of Amorayim (Mar Zutra, Mar bar Rav Ashi, etc), and nobody from here on in can add to the Gemora. There was no “halachah lmoshe misinai” that told us that the Gemora was sealed; it was the accepted reality told to us by our Gedolim. The same thign applies to accepting the Shulchan Aruch and Rema.
Because the Gezeirah was that a Jew has to supervise the milk, NOT that you have to have some kind of insurance that it is Kosher. Rav Moshe’s heter – however far one takes it – is to interpret the Gezeirah that any kind of insurance is sufficient to fulfill chazal’s gezeirah, which would make American milk cholov yisroel. But that itself is a matter of interpretation. If the Gezeirah was simply that you need a Jew supervising the milk, then even Rav Moshe would concede that even if you have reaosn to be comforatable that the milk is kosher, you still did not fulfill the gezeirah. In addition, even if you will accept Rav Moshe’s interpretation that the gezeirah is only that you need insurance not specifically Jewish supervision, who says that the laws are sufficient insurance that would satisfy chazal? If the penalty for violaitng the law is a fine, but the company will make more profit by violating the law, then how do we know that law is insurance? Very very often stores violate the Kosher Consumer laws. They put trief meat in the Kosher section etc, and they get fines that do nto deter them from being repeat offenders. Then there is the question as to who says the laws are being honestly enforced? As a certina godol said about the heter of the inspectors: “You give me two hundred dollars and I’ll give you four inspectors.” What halachic basis is thee to believe the inspectors are doign their jobs, being that Akum have no ne’emanus haalchicly?
Rav Moshe’s Teshuva (YD:5) says simply that the heter to eat cholov stam is “only b’shas hadchak”. Its pretty short and sweet. And this letter coincides with the letter to Rabbi Weinfeld of Monsey as well. Rav Moshe Feinstein ZT”L, in a letter to a Rabbi Weinfeld in Monsey, printed in “Hilchos Kashrus” by Rabbi B. Forst of Far Rockaway, explained what he meant with his “heter” for cholov stam. He says that even though there are rationales for saying that nowadays all dairy processed under government supervision has the status of cholov yisroel, it is still not proper to drink milk except under Jewish supervision, even if it is a bit more expensive or difficult to acquire. In a teshuva, someone – obvisouly not Rav Moshe – did put the titles on the teshuvos, and the title on this one says “Hidur l’hishtamesh b’cholov yisroel”, even though the Teshuva says it is indeed not merely a hidur but permissible b’shas hadchak. So the “yad zorim” did get in there, but its obvious they did not make up the Teshuva. In Rav Moshes subsequent Teshuvus, particularly the one in the last volume of IM, where he says his heter for Cholov Stam is only meant “bshas hadchak.” Thats a quote.
Rav Moshe’s heter is that it is possible that American milk is NOT cholov stam but cholov yisroel. if you hold that it is permitted, you don’t need a heter. CY is not a chumrah, it is a l’chatchilah, and there is a big difference. Everyone should be makpid on cholv yisroel halachicly, even according to Rav moshe – he says this clearly – unless there are dire circumstances. Rav Moshe sayus clearly in more than one place that unless there is a shas hadchak or some kind of dire need, it is not proper to drink cholov stam. Rav Moshe had his reasons for not making rules enforcing what he held to be correct. Perhaps he felt that not everyone was holding, yet, by doing the right thing. Who knows. Rav Moshe’s psak in his seforim that non Cholov Yisroel is not permitted except in strained circumstances. The last Teshuva, on this, in fact, is to a Yeshiva.
I probably would have interpreted Rav Moshe’s early Teshuvos – the statement “baal nefesh yachmir” is ambiguous enough to merit such an interpretation, for sure. But Rav Moshe himself, in two places – a letter that was first published NOT in Igros Moshe, but in other places (most notably Rabbi Binyonim Forst’s Pischei Halachah) and the latest Igros Moshe, printed not too long ago, Rav Moshe himslef interprets what he means – and he states clearly that he means you cannot drink Cholov Stam unless its a shas hadchak. In the last volume of Igros Moshe there is a teshuva on cholov yisroel where he explains what he means in previous teshuvos. Rav Moshe says – writes, rather, in a few places, that his heter to drink cholov stam is not meant to be used l’chatchilah, but rather ONLY B’SHAS HADCHAK!. Those are his words, not mine, and, in more detail, is reiterated by him in a second place.
The issue of cholov yisroel does not have naything to do with minhag. Whether your family does or doesnt use cholov yisroel, there is still a halachah in shulchan aruch that says you have to keep it. And Rav Moshe says that bshas hadchak, if you must have cholov stam, there is a heter. According to Rav Moshe, that heter (a) applies to all of klal yisroel equally, and (b) is halachic, not minhag-driven, (c) applies ONLY bshas hadchak – not a heter to buy Hershy bars, and (d) is still to be used only by non “baalei nefesh”, which he says should not rely on the heter. R’ Moshe Feinstein after hearing that he ate cholov stam – it sickened him such that he threw up.
As far as Utensils are concerned, the rule is, that when you cook something in a utensil, the utensil takes on the status of the item cooked in it. So if you coooked pork, the utensil takes on the status of pork, such that whatever you cook in it has the stats of pork; if you cook cholov akum in a pot, then whatever is cooked in that pot gets the status of cholov akum. Of course, the rules of Ben Yomo apply across the board as well – for the first 24 hours, the pot retains the status of the item cooked in it even bdoeved; afterwards, it is assur lchatchilah to cook in the pot, but bdieved the food may be eaten. That applies whether the food cooked in the pot was pork or cholov akum or whatever.
Dr. Pepper, I’m glad to have brought laughter to your family 🙂
I can’t pinpoint anything in particular, but probably your vast sum of mathematical genius played a role, as well as the sophistication of your other postings.
Dr. Pepper, I saw your post in the Funny Shidduchim Stories thread, about your ’89 camp days. I gotta say you’re a lot younger than I imagined. Embarassingly enough, when you hinted at your mazal tov a few months back (without saying exactly for what), I was about to say that you should have a lot of nachas with this einekel and all you einekelach! Thankfully, by time I got back to post you already indicated it was your child.
132, Yasher koach. (Thanks as well for pointing out the irony/contradiction in what some people posted.)
The Chasidisha system is how Klal Yisroel has succesfully done shidduchim for centuries and millenia. In fact, traditionally Klal Yisroel was even more “extreme”; the parents would make the shidduch and let the Choson know who his Kallah is!! (and vice versa.) And it worked very well for thousands of years.
Oz Vehadar Levusha is a Halacha Sefer with an appendix containing the mekoros.
Zalman was giving tochocho.
Also keep in mind that New York is the biggest Makom Torah and Chesed in all of Chutz L’Aretz! And you live in a city with many Gedolei Yisroel and Rabbonim Shlita (gezunt un shtark, ad meah v’esrim shona), as well as the access to them that is commiserate with it!
In my dating days the door issue was indeed telling. In Yeshivisha circles if a girl was particular about this, it was a bad sign. Stam for one party to open the door for the other is indeed mentchlich. But for the expectation to exist that particularly the guy do it for the girl, this idea comes from outside cultures (b’cholkoseihem).
To do it as a kibud, surely a husband and wife both have an obligation to honor one another. (Perhaps they should each open the others door!)
Well my wife doesn’t do the washing, as those stuff is mostly automated today with technology, but she does do the other things Rambam mentions, pouring the drinks, making the bed, serving me, etc. I lost the connection how this relates to the discussion here.
A husband and wife have different marital obligations and responsibilities. The Rambam here brought down some of the wife’s. Both Rambam and Shulchan Aruch bring down the obligations of both husband’s and wife’s.
Zalman, Yasher Koach for that beautiful Torah! All those Gemora’s, Poiskim, Meforshim.
intellegent, Thank you for your sane comments.
dd, It is truly disgusting that someone who claims to be a Jew would denigrate Bnei Torah who uphold tznius with irresponsible terms like yishmaelim, frummies, taliban, extremist, etc. You truly need to do some introspection. Yes, it very much does have relevance halacha lmaaisa, your inability to understand it not withstanding.
Rabbosai, the point of all the Shulchon Orach and Rambam and the Gemora’s is not that ladies cannot go out. If there is a tachlis and they must go out, they can. Even if they have a valid reason to go out every day. But they must minimize it to the times that it is a necessity and not stam to go out.
notpashut,
You are absolutely correct. And it is so predictable. The dd’s of the world spend their days looking for what they can grasp on and try to use to hit Bnei Torah with.
When the dd’s of the world start making letzonas and chozek of the Acheinu Bnei Yisroel for keeping tznius as perscribed by our Rabbonim, by calling us “extremists”, “Taliban”, “Yishmaelim”, “frummies”, etc. etc. we stand up proudly and say “Yes, we do still have emunas chachomim.”
gawker, firstly you are wrong about the Belzer Rebbem and secondly who is a pipsqueak like you to imply the Rabbonim are not “realists” for opposing the internet.
“it means adapting other things to fit OUR lifetsyle.”
No. It means adapting our lifestyle to fit the Torah, as espoused by the Gedolim Shlitta.
I am truly disgusted by the comment above complaining that its hard to have more than x number of kids. I understand it limits how many movies you can go out to, but fech. and to refer to the holy mitzvah of child bearing as “churn them out” and mocking our hold Jewish women for being “the moms are always pregnant every year, don’t even WANT to think about what that must feel like” is disgusting and unforgivable. THESE ARE OUT HOLY WOMEN IN KLAL YISROEL, BRINGING UP OUR FUTURE.
birth control borders on murder. the blood of the unborn cries out. all their future generations that were stopped cold by a would be parent who thought they are smarter than G-d.
the guy above who said they teach about birth control in the choson shmooze needs a few good petch for peddling such dangerous shtus. i know half a dozen chohsove kollel yungermans who give choson shmooze in lakewood and elsewhere and maybe a hundred guys who went to choson shmooze. they encourage chasanim to have bonim u’bonos, never chas v’shalom anything bordering on birth control.
whats wrong with putting your name to your comments?
what are you afraid of?
every wife should be following her baal’s customs. that is what shulchan aruch states.
asdfghjkl, hmmmm, are u really in ireland?? this is awfully suspicious.
asdfghjkl, do you like red milk or blue milk better? and do you get it for free on your job? what do you do for a living?
“very often it’s the people with a head on their shoulders who date more till they get married.”
au contraire. the smart ones (in the right way) get married quicker, usually. meaning they aren’t miss picky (the cause of the so-called great shidduch crisis.)
oy vey, we need dont have internet back! no one really knows who she is except one or two people.
000:
You are changing the facts (again.) ROB gave two opposing views. You then said regarding ROB’s preference “I think your right. Also could you post a mekor who holds of the more lenient view?”
So you decided that you like the more lenient view, and are then (after the fact) trying to find a mekor to support the leniency you want.
asdfghjkl, Yanky55 is another leitz. He too should take a look in Mesilas Yeshorim & the Sha’arei T’shuva regarding letzonus.
Feif, I don’t see any reason why he should respond to your letzonus. That is a factual description of you, nothing else. He doesn’t need you forgiveness, you need to ask mechila from all the ywn readers who you subjected to your letzonus.
Do you even KNOW the description provided in the Mesilas Yeshorim & the Sha’arei T’shuva?
Btw, the Gedolim allow usage with a filter that blocks bad sites. That is the requirement. And YWN is a Kosher site. According to your silly point, YWN is assur according to the Gedolim. (So what are you doing here, according to that incorrect logic?)
NOW I fully understand Rav Miller’s words. After illini attacked Rav Miller, I can see how Rav Miller was so confident in saying these people have lose their cheilek in olam haboah.
anon, the claim itself is lashon hara. It is assur to hear it or believe it.
illini07, who are these anonymous well-respected “Rabbis” who “disagree”?
anon, many people in this thread alone have borne witness that Rav Miller was quite clear and unambiguous and made the statement without exception. TV mean no olam haboa. How much clearer do you need?
Its an obligation upon every Jew to point out that someones statement is loshon hora, lest another Jew fall victim to believing it.
646, with tv you will be oiver just about every issur in the book.
Now that someone provided the mekoros, where are all the big shots who were yelling that they won’t do it since they don’t know of the mekoros?
loyalyid, you are 100% correct.
asdfghjkl, why not start it off by describing the extent of your problem?
yankdownunder,
You are mistaken. It does not matter if one is a black hatter or modern orthodox. Whether one is Chareidi or MO, if they have a television in the home they will both lose the same Olam Haboah.
Back to the issue at hand:
Who wants to roll the dice and find out acher meah v’esrim shona if that TV in the house will cost him a stint in gehenim??
mdlevine,
Thank you for the correction. My point is the you cannot believe lashan hora.
Being on the internet puts oneself in a compromising situation, and unless great care is taken along with a lot of siyata dishmaya, one WILL find themselves in hot water.
illini07,
Actually you are a hypocrite. Imagine if c’v Yanky55 said that he personally saw R’ Soloveitchik in mcdonalds? Obviously that would be both lashan hora and sheker (which all lashan hora by definition is). What yanky did say is obviously not on the same madreiga, but the point clearly runs along the same lines.
Lets put it as bluntly as it is: television = gehenim.
The Saga Continues…
Who will solve this mystery?
The greatest riddle of them all!
Wow torahis1, you actually unintentionally proved the exact opposite of what you said. Its the ultra-anti-chareidi extreme-left that fits your bill.
But I would prefer to continue this discussion on another thread, because you are doing exactly what Nobody is lamenting.
asdfghjkl:
Are you kidding around about that moderator stuff?
illini07, you are checkmated. whether you are courageous enough to admit as much, is yet an open question. if history is any guide, you’ll dig in your heels, close your eyes, and go back in circles repeating your disproven opinions in the hope no one will notice. But then again, they say past performance is no indicator of future results…
I wish everyone would stop arguing so much and start doing what is required in Hilchos Tznius.
Looking at suraschier’s opening post on this thread would be a good initial step. Its the basics, and if your Rov holds of additional stringencies, Kol Hakovod!