The little I know

1:

Stop the defensiveness about smoking. It is assur, and will always be, despite how much smokers enjoy the experience. There is no comparison at all with your example of stuffing your face at a restaurant. I hope you possess enough intellect to grasp that. But I’ll make it really simple. Just because overeating carries its risks and dangers, is that a reason to declare food assur? Not an exact parallel, if wearing 5 ציצית would be prohibited because of בל תוסיף, would that render wearing 4 ציצית a problem, too? Now let’s make it even simpler. Food is requirement. There are boundaries and guidelines to follow, and certain foods are indeed assur. Likewise, those things that carry danger and risk are also prohibited, and this includes overeating (whether at restaurant or at home). Smoking has not a single benefit, and only danger. Even if you minimized the danger statistically, the balance weighs in against permitting it. So there you have it. Simple enough?

Multiple wives? It is challenging enough to manage with one. Why would someone think he could handle two?

Joseph:

You wrote: “It is impossible for the court to be blind ………”

Incorrect. It is not IMPOSSIBLE. You would be correct to say it is incomprehensible, or perhaps unacceptable. Today’s culture of political correctness places these ideologies that trash observant religions on a pedestal. Secularism is cherished, and a sort of affirmative action is tacitly supported that gives these lifestyles preference over religion. So the radical change that you recognize as drastic and radical that would likely have negative effect on a child would be alternatively welcomed as some form of enlightenment. I strongly agree with you that this approach is immoral and should have no place in any system that subscribes to a system of high values. But that is the churban that we are observing today, where one can defy biology and self identify as any of tens of gender states. Yes, it is bizarre. But that is what courts get away with today. So you think the court would find the other parent who shleps a kid into anti-orthodox lifestyles a problem? I wish yes, but a sadly predict that PC culture will win.

RebYidd23:

Statistics show that of all people who die, more than 95% have eaten pickles.

Doomsday:

I beg to differ with your inference. There are many people who buy into the conspiracy theory that the vitamin/supplement industry circulates about scientific medicine, who die of treatable illnesses that they refuse. Yet, the industry is in total denial of this. There are also numerous adverse reactions to these products together with interactions among them that are potentially dangerous, even fatal. These are not studied (there is no financial support for research), so there are never warnings. As for natural vs. synthetic, there may be differences for certain items, but no known difference for others. It is sad that there is so little reliable data about vitamins.

yitzchokm:

Are you providing guidance as per Reb Moshe ZT”L to anyone who had already begun smoking prior to 1962? If not, his teshuvah from then stated clearly not to start. That does not sound like “not ossur”. He was not obligating those who already smoking to stop, though he states that this would be advisable. As Reb Dovid shlit”a stated, the teshuvah was based on the data available and provided at that time. With today’s data, the psak is clearly ossur. You comment is still misleading by implication.

This statement by Rav Miller ZT”L was made in 1978. We are now 40 years later, and we must examine whether the facts on the ground are the same as when he made this statement.

At the present, there is a large and growing number of heimishe Yidden who enter the fields of mental health and counseling. Yes, they have most attended classes and read textbooks. And יש חכמה בגוים. And they are primarily Torah observant people, whose primary dedication is to Torah and its values. The ones I know do not push divorce. The ones I know are busy repairing marriages, not breaking them. The statement that the marriage counselors and certainly professional therapists are only book schooled is not true today.

From the opposite end, the average Rov, who may be a huge talmid chochom, may be completely clueless when confronted with an existing marital problem. Most rabbonim should not pasken shailos without having undergone שימוש in the subject, and counseling or guiding a couple in crisis is one of those complex areas in which experience needs to be a prerequisite to paskening or providing guidance. The painful reality is that the Rov, with the noblest of intentions, runs a significant risk of causing great harm to a couple that is struggling. I have seen some wonderful successes of rabbonim who get involved. I have also observed some seriously tragic results from bad advice (again from great people with the best intentions).

There are marriages that should not be saved, and the Rov who tries to keep them together is doing a disservice. There are those than can be saved, even in the conflict ridden situations, that should not be considered hopeless. Should college education be the requirement for this? Perhaps not. Then what kind of experience? What kind of training? Can a Rov be approached with a problem and say, “I don’t know?” In reality, not every Rov should be expected to provide every conceivable service to a kehila. It is quite difficult to be a jack of all trades. There should be no stigma to a Rov forwarding a complex issue elsewhere where there is expertise. This is actually legendary. In generations past, poskim would write their teshuvos on shailos, and refer them to additional rabbonim for concurrence or disagreement. Many of the historical greats would conclude a teshuvah with the instruction to only implement their psak upon agreement of others. And others refused to accept shailos in certain areas where they considered themselves inexperienced. A perusal through the archives of shu”t will show this.

There is a valid point that the consequences of divorce are too infrequently considered in the process. Divorce nearly always involves significant negative emotion. This blocks one from applying the best of intellectual processing in which one would make the consequences part of the consideration of how to resolve a problem.

It is told of the Ohr Someyach – Meshech Chochma, that a couple approached him about an amicable divorce, where the two were unwilling to remain together. In passing, they reported they had a son, perhaps 8-9 years old. The Rov asked to speak to the son in their presence. he asked the child how he would feel to see his father once a month, have no one to take him to shul, no one to review his learning in cheder, etc. The child’s bitter tears were only matched by the tears of the parents, who decided to return to marriage and learn how to be happy in it. Yes, there are consequences, and this gadol simply added that consideration to the formula.

frumtd:

Nice try. The problem is actually different. The couple was not court ordered to raise the children as frum. The parting couple agreed to that and signed a contract to that effect. Raising the children differently is a violation of that agreement. What this decision suggests is that this issue cannot become a point of agreement, and that one can change their mind on such an issue as quickly as the Obama administration allowed someone to change their gender identity. And one can change back in the same blink of an eye. Well, that’s bizarre to me. Either we can agree to these issues, and that agreement is binding, or religious upbringing can never be included in a divorce agreement, as it can be nullified in a moment, and upheld by a judge. To me, this is assault on religious freedom.

CTL:

No clue where you hang out or go to weddings. I have been at virtually hundreds of chassidishe weddings, and quite a number of rebbishe ones, too. I do not always come for the seuda, and often come later to give my mazel tov wishes. But there is always a decent meal on the table. Perhaps the huge ones serve on plastic/disposable plates, but these are not ones on sale at the bargain store. The seuda is respectable, though perhaps not the fancy dinner you might get at a high priced restaurant. Food volume tends to be quite decent, and there is generally a flow of people (waiters, etc.) to replenish the drinks and supply cups.

As for the photos, they may represent the hours after the tables have been cleared to facilitate dancing and the mitzvah tantz. All that are usually left seated are the dignitaries and mechutanim. And your observation that there is no food is accurate, as they have concluded the seuda and benching/sheva brochos prior to that. A picture says a thousand words, but not words might be factual. Check the context.

Asking this question for a general response is plainly foolish. With medical issues, there is a judgment to be made by an appropriately trained professional who is able to make an accurate diagnosis and recommendation. Whether medication is required or not cannot be judged by you or me. Even a professional who would read this thread has not evaluated the patient, and cannot render a judgment. Medication is great for those who need it, and a problem if being used by someone that doesn’t need it.

MM:

Reread my comment. It was directed at Joseph, not you. You are reaching out looking for someone. The way I read Joseph’s comment, it sounded like any Rov would do fine. I find that dismissive of R’ Ronnie’s gadlus. I hope I read it wrong.

MW:

I harbor no jealousy of those whose weddings are bigger and fancier than mine. I am quite satisfied with the norm. The issue at hand is whether this extravaganza is a positive thing for Klal Yisroel or not. I do hear that some should have these large scale simchos. I may not agree, but I do get it. There is a point of extremes when we witness the sheer number of paid advertising on YWN for chassanim and kallahs who are in positions of poverty, destitute, orphaned, etc., who are unable to fund their weddings. So they are sentenced to their tzuris while huge volumes of money are spent on pomp. The disparity here is begging for attention.

The other point is that Chassidus, from its earliest days, involved a considerable amount of פרישות, where the indulgence in the physical world was greatly minimized and limited, while there were large amounts of generosity to insure that the poor were supported. Today’s picture appears opposite of that.

Do we notice the photos (particularly of Chassidishe Rebbes) that include large silver objects, fancy tablecloths, signs, etc.? Did the Baal Shem Tov live this way? Did any of his talmidim live like this? No, I am not preaching austerity for all. But the opposite extreme stands out, and is in sharp contrast to the heritage that the Rebbes’ ancestors passed down from their ancestors.

We have moved from the Klal Yisroel that is invested in Emunah, Bitachon, Taryag Mitzvos, Midos Tovos, to where we prioritize our hero worship. That does not have the precedent for Klal Yisroel that shines a candle to Matan Torah. It may be worth a glimpse, but cannot be allowed to become an עיקר for us. That’s a dangerous road.

As with anything in the health realm, there is valid information that has scientific merit. There is also a lot of lore. Buyer beware. There is very little accumulated knowledge about many of the supplements, whether they are effective in doing anything, whether ingesting them orally, and what kinds of side effects and interactions they have with other supplements and with medications. Similarly, there are many manufacturers whose products are not regulated in any way, making the labels on the packages close to meaningless. Consumer Reports studied this years ago, and this comment reflects their findings. Have things changed? If yes, how would anyone know?

GH:

Not so fast about custody. NYS law, for instance, disallows arbitration agreements regarding custody, and every BD knows that. Batei din might make recommendations, but these have zero legal standing. There are other features to divorce agreements relating to children that can be argued to be considered part of custody. These become issues when the couple proceeds in BD and these issues are put on the table. The matter is not simple.

The Get Law in NYS was rewritten, with its first version having been thrown out by court as a violation of church-state. There are even poskim who consider today’s version an automatic “get me’usah” and will not perform a second marriage to any woman that has a get/divorce in NYS. Radical but reality. Nothing is simple in this arena.

GH:

The matter at hand is not the recognition of a psak beis din al pi halacha. The beis din does not have legal status as a court, and that is ancient history. The matter here is the role of the beis din as an arbitration panel. There are many other forms of arbitration besides beis din. And there is no reason that BD cannot serve as one, even though there is a religious aspect to it. Various states may have laws that limit the authority of an arbitration panel. Just as relevant is that there are often agreements that are not the result of “litigation” by either a court or BD. If two people agree on something, they should be held to it. These agreements, often mediated by toanim or other negotiators, are filed in court, and become legally binding. Can these agreements include commitments in how to raise the children regarding religion and lifestyle? From the report in the OP, it seems that a judge is stating that this cannot be done. I question that (I am not a lawyer). I would not be surprised to see another court overturn this ruling on appeal.

A religious court has no standing as a court in American law. But it does have standing as an arbitration panel. And agreements are not arbitration outcomes. They are agreements that the two sides reached, that were not imposed on them. I fail to see how a court can block that. Waiting for round two.

NCB:

The omissions of the GRA and Baal Hatanya were not necessarily because of the forgeries, though some were. I can cite specifics if you wish. More importantly, they were both extremely entrenched in Kaballah, and they applied their Torah knowledge to nusach.

The reality is that the prevailing Nusach Ashkenaz is considerably closer to “most accurate” than the common Nusach Sfard. It is more directly based on Rav Heidenheim’s siddur, and is much closer to the Ashkenazic foundations in halacha. The Ari Zal was far closer to a Kabbalistic based nusach, and there are variations of the mesorah from the Ari Zal among various talmidim of his. Many of his established nuschaos were codified By Rav Chaim Vital, his most prolific talmid. The Baal Shem Tov adopted many of these mesoros of the Ari Zal, and these are seen in the common Nusach Sfard. Tragically, the fact that these were not codified properly, there were different mesoros, and hence the variations seen in minhagim of different chassidim who recite Nusach Sfard with specific additions or omissions of certain words. Publishers followed this chaos, and each rendered decisions of what to publish in their siddurim.

One can access a huge number of Siddurei Ha’Ari Zal, whether in seforim stores or online. The variations are interesting, and many instances of these are based on different kavanos al pi kabbalah.

As for the “most accurate” nusach, the only reaction to that is to redirect the concern to the kavanah involved in davening. HKB”H will understand what we say, even if words are omitted or mispronounced, much as a father understands his child whose speech is not fully developed. It is wise to spend time studying siddur to have a better grasp of the content of tefilah, so that our experience in standing in the presence of the Shechinah is a wholesome, emotional process, as opposed to the completion of a chore that is required to move on to whatever is next in the schedule.

The question is actually manifold. According to the Divrei Chaim (Shu”T) each shevet had its own nusach of tefiloh that was specific to that shevet. Over the years of golus, these nuschaos were lost to us, and we adapted to a prevailing nusach according to region where we lived. There were nuschaos (with some variations) for Edus Hamizrach – Sefardim. In Ashkenaz, there were also several nuschaos. One of the leaders in compiling nusach was Rav Wolf Heidenheim, a talmid of Rav Nosson Adler, and chaver of the Chasam Sofer. He published his siddur in Roedelheim, and it went through about 8 revisions during his lifetime, with changes and improvements each revision. The reason for some of these revisions was a sefer published by a left leaning maskil in which there were fabricated nuschaos that were becoming accepted by an innocent population who were unaware of these forgeries. Slowly, several of these were excluded from the Roedelheim siddur. (Some of these forged nuschaos still exist.)

This siddur became the accepted base for all nusach Ashkenaz. Today’s published Nusach Sfard (not Edus Hamizrach) is a publisher driven composite of Ashkenaz, plus aspects of Nusach Ari that were accepted among Chassidim. This Nusach Sfard has become user friendly, and includes many bracketed words that some say, as per their minhag, while others do not.

While some publishers (notably Artscroll, Avodas Hashem – Belz) choose to have everything in a single size font, others alter the sizes of font to make the siddur more comfortable to use and easier on the eye. And this may lead to an implication that certain paragraphs are more important, which is incorrect.

Nusach is actually a fascinating subject, and it is sometimes easy to discover that the intended tefiloh is different according to a different nusach. Far superior to the subject of nusach, or the publication of the siddur, is the kavannah and emotional/intellectual investment that comprise the main aspect of tefiloh. We can all use some chizuk and growth here. May we all be zocheh to daven with full emotional involvement.

As usual, the commenters here, hiding behind their screen name anonymity, are creating halacha standards. No one here is posek enough to make determinations, especially to create an issur that is not contained in our Shulchan Aruch or the recognized poskim. One may quote any of the “issurim” that have been stated by contemporary poskim, but the proclamations as appear in earlier comments are plainly irresponsible. They are no better than the medical advice shared by lay people waiting at the grocery checkout.

A smartphone is a device that has great and wide variety of capability. Some of these can be used for things that are clearly assur (no, not my statement, but the pasuk of ולא תתורו אחרי לבבכם ואחרי עיניכם). Inasmuch as the access to these temptations is effortless, the risk of falling into traps is great. That issue must be addressed. Halacha refers specifically to the prohibition of entering a מקום סכנה. Having stated that, there are many things that are Torahdig and praiseworthy that can be accomplished with a smartphone. If these are needed, then one can consider the ways to reduce and eliminate the risk. To rely on oneself to avoid the dangers is foolish. However, a properly filtered smartphone can be perfectly safe of the dangers.

The other feature that was alluded to by Shopping613 is the addictive aspect that can easily rob us of countless hours, even not schmutz. This is true for many things, not just smartphones, though devices seem to be quite adept at capturing attention.

And my personal experience with rabbonim is that many do have filtered smartphones. The reality is that many people, by nature of their activity and career, have a real need for the “kosher” features of a smartphone. I know of many individuals who posed their shailos about having a filtered smartphone to poskim, and were advised to do so. The blanket “issurim” that are proclaimed by non-poskim here and elsewhere are suspect, and more often than not, just overstatements without proper halachic support. I understand the negative side quite well. But that is not the universal halacha for all. Just check with TAG.

Joseph:

I will stop responding to your ridiculous baseless accusations towards me in your comments. You have demonstrated a propensity to put words into my mouth, then challenge them with the implied accusations of my being anti-halacha. That is pure rubbish, and you should be ashamed of yourself for such gibberish. I am not, not have I ever been, a proponent of secular courts over beis din. I am not soft about mesira and arkaos. I only listen to your accusations with the words of the gemora where the Tanna or Amora states יהא חלקי בין מי שחושדין אותו ואין בו.

Yes, those cases that are ajudicated in courts as per Shulchan Aruch are exceptions, not the rule. I have abserved many cases going to court, and only support that when there has been a direct psak beis din or poskim. Other cases get there with heter via Shulchan Aruch. While these are exceptional, many are not rare occurrences.

Have I ever discussed you scenario of a bounced check? Or did you concoct that to insinuate that I would run to court, and then complain about my anti-halachic behavior? Come on, a bit of honesty here. There is white collar crime that can qualify as מצער את הציבור, and could warrant intervention of the secular courts. personally, I have never had any such involvement, neither directly or indirectly. But it has happened, and I was privy to discussions among poskim on the subject.

So your efforts to paint me on the wrong side of halacha are both dishonest as well as foolish. I will not engage in further dialogue with you on this. My time can be spent on things with real value.

LB:

Chessed? ithout a question, that would be a wonderful thing. But the physician, or other health care professional, entered the field in order to provide parnosoh for his family. To establish himself in a manner that cheats on the bottom line, offering his services for far less than they are worth, might provide much less income than planned. I am not talking about doctors going on expensive vacations or driving fancy cars. I am talking about paying tuitions.

I cannot judge the doctor who calculates that he can fill his practice with patients whose reimbursements are greater than what Medicaid offers. His obligation to do chessed might lie elsewhere, not in his decision about how to run his practice. I know of doctors who extend their services far beyond the billables, and are huge donors to the finest tzedokos in the community. Are we to judge just how someone should do chessed? That does not lie in my domain, and I strongly believe that us commonfolk lack the insight into Divine calculations that would be needed to judge here.

Joseph:

Your message sounds holy. But it is patently inaccurate. The secular courts are supposed to do their job. The Mishna of הוי מתפלל בשלומה של מלכות implies that. The halachos that mandate reporting (misidentified as מסירה) for serious crimes also expects this handing over of these serial criminals to the goyishe authorities also expect their courts and law enforcement systems to do their job. There is nothing about the secular courts that needs to follow the dictates of haloacha regarding testimony, witnesses, etc.

I may not be referring to all forms of crime, but certainly those that require, al pi halacha, the reporting to authorities, do not assume innocence once proven in the court. The halacha requires serial criminals (מצער את הציבור) appropriate for reporting to secular authorities. This includes molesters, thieves, murderers, etc. I defer to the Gedolei Haposkim to clarify the specifics. But I will share that the question about drug dealers has been posed to poskim many times before, and all say the drug dealer is a rodef. There is no halacha that obstructs the requirement to report to authorities, and actually requires it.

In summary, courts need to follow their mandate, and batei din their own. No one claims that a secular court that failed to follow the halacha based rules used to convict results in a conviction that is against halacha. It simply does not need to comply.

RebYidd23:

All the cubicles I have seen in shuls have numbers and keys. I’m no locksmith, but how do expect the phones to be stolen? The location might not be a central area, but it is certainly not private and without traffic. Who would be picking at a lock to find a phone of questionable value? What’s the risk of being stolen?

On airplane mode, the phone can vibrate in your pocket. If the goal is that the phone not disturb anyone, this vibration in the pocket makes that goal unattainable. Why is that preferred? Are you a doctor on call?

Joseph:

You missed my point. I am not dictating what they should do in E”Y or in America. The two regions are very different, and each has its own norms and issues. It is common that the Gedolim of E”Y defer the standards for America to be determined and guided by the Gedolim there. It is likewise common that the Gedolim in America refrain from guiding or paskening about E”Y deferring to the Gedolei E”Y. It’s not about assessment. The facts on the ground are very different, and all the Gedolim have referenced that at some point in time.

In America, the consequence of denying admission to yeshivos, or expelling kids is a death sentence. Using this as a method of control is problematic. Rav Vosner ZT”L advocated this over the hookup at Citifield Asifa. Later that week, he publicly retracted that statement, and stated that he could not recommend this as a consequence for having internet access, and that the Gedolim in America would need to make determinations for America. It seems he recognized the risk of this as different from E”Y, and could not push to impose that for America.

I am privy to other shailos that were posed to gedolim in both places, and the tendency is to withhold anything close to a psak, stating that E”Y and America must follow the specific direction from its own Gedolim.

Spices should be kept in airtight containers. Exposure to the air allows the aroma to dissipate. When using besamim by havdala, cap the bottle once it is no longer being used, and it will last much longer. Same goes for spices used in cooking. It is unwise to leave the bottles open to the air, as they lose their potency with exposure.

chugibugi

I would love to hear some statistics to support your contention that there are fewer truly frum boys compared to truly frum girls. Please cite some sources.

Meanwhile, the attention of the street to OTD kids focuses on boys, not on girls. This is not because of any statistical differences, but because there are more askanim available to deal with them than with girls. Furthermore, creating yeshivos for struggling boys who would otherwise be on the street and in everyone’s faces is more luring for support than girls who struggle. Yes, this is according to many who are on the front lines working with these youth and their parents. With all the attention to this issue, there is no real dent in the availability of boys or girls, so this is not statistically meaningful.

I would urge you to make calls to some of the organizations who are involved with this issue, such as MASK and Amudim. See if they detect any differences in numbers between boys and girls.

litvishechossid:

I must differ with you. Bank accounts do not create marriages, and the lack of them do not break them. In marriages that struggle, finances can be factors of disagreement and argument. But pouring money into the bad marriage won;t save it. Putting it into a forming marriage will not dictate the connection between the couple. It might pay bills, but there’s plenty else to fight about. Just ask anyone who counsels couples in trouble. There are fools who discuss money before entertaining a shidduch prospect. I have my bone to pick with them, as they are not true maaminim in the Bas Kol, and they can easily miss the bashert for a form of greed that goes not a baby step beyond perception. Books are loaded with stories of hashgochas Hashem in shidduchim, and becoming a gatekeeper with monetary criteria is a potential for huge trouble. I know the obsession with the “learning boy” implies that the boy will not earn a penny, while the girl will support (either rich parents or she goes to work until the children enter the picture). Yet, this is close to universal, when it should not be so. But let’s not divert focus to that debate. Money is not the real issue.

There is an explanation from R’ Shloime Kluger in his sefer חכמת התורה – פ’ יתרו where he states that Har sinai no longer exists. It was hidden until the final geulah, and that efforts to locate it are futile. It does sound radical but his greatness speaks for itself.