Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Eliezer8687:
Rabbonim and other community leaders are not just burying their heads in the sand. They suffer from a dramatic level of ignorance. Most cannot repair automobiles, so we are fortunate that most people don’t ask for eitzos about engine trouble. If we would, the damage from these pieces of advice could be costly. If these rabbonim would learn a bit about what drugs are, as well as the nature of addiction, they would be better equipped to respond. But the microscopic knowledge they have on the subject leaves them feeling highly experienced and expert, when in reality they know nothing of the subject. That is not a put down. Every one of us is ignorant about something. As long as we refrain from advising on the subject, we are fine. But if we claim to be capable of guiding someone in a matter where our knowledge is limited, there is a problem. The denial is not only failing to recognize the problem, but believing that they understand it when they really don’t.
yehudayona:
You listed true opiates. The list should contain the popular codeine. They are commonly prescribed for pain. Many are also used for cough suppressants. They all have abuse potential.
It is worth noting that doctors who legitimately prescribe these medications tend to over-prescribe. They may intend for it to be taken 3 times a day for a week, which would require 21 doses. It is common practice to prescribe more than that, perhaps if a pill falls and gets contaminated or lost there is a replacement. Regardless, there is no hesitation to prescribe more than is needed, and these medications are rarely discarded even after the condition or symptom has resolved. The pills laying around pose a risk and should be discarded.
With the focus on opiates, attention is diverted from other habit forming medications that are abused just as easily. The barbiturates, often prescribed for anxiety, pain, and seizures, carry abuse potential and are addictive. The same goes for a host of anti-anxiety drugs. Older ones that were popular include Valium and Librium. Newer ones include Ativan, Xanax, and the like. Anything used for either sleep or anxiety should be suspected of having these risks (most do). Many of these meds are often used for chronic conditions, and the liberal prescribing of them makes them risky, not less than the opioids. The dangers of overdose exist with these medications similar to the opioids.
Throw away the medications you no longer need.
apushatayid:
Who taught you how to interpret statistics? You are way off with your math about the 25 being treated in Utah. Firstly, there are hundreds of rehabs around the country. Only a fraction go to Utah. Secondly, these rehabs are only a piece of the picture of available treatment. There are outpatient levels of treatment, and all insurance cases must begin there and fail before being allowed coverage for a residential rehab. Thirdly, the greatest percentage of kids refuse to go to any treatment at all. I’m not sure of numbers here. But to infer percentages on a limited piece of data is grossly irresponsible and erroneous.
Lastly, when there are more cases coming out every single week of serious addictions requiring referral to treatment, and overdose reports are hardly worthy of news coverage (dog bites man), we have a problem. As I noted earlier, I am unsure that designating opioids is of much value, as problems with other drugs is just as bad. Trends with ups and downs are expected.
The return of this thread to the front page of the CR is unfortunate. There is no obligation or benefit to being a gadol hador. Noach did not merit being the survivor of the Mabul because he was the gadiol hador. He was saved because Hashem considered him a tzaddik. HKB”H even makes an oath at birth with every individual to be a tzaddik and nor a rosho. Never, ever is there a guidance from Torah to become a gadol hador. There is a myth that by making yeshivos exclusive that one produces gedolei hador. To date, no one has seen this as the outcome of the exclusivity.
Next, the question implies that one’s success is the result of specific parenting experiences. Sorry, but I gotta laugh. It is absurd. Everyone has their own endowed Divine gifts. We are each commissioned with a period of time on this world where we are to utilize these gifts to our potential. If I cannot sing, it is unfair to me and others to send to the amud for a tefiloh on Shabbos or Yomtov. To dictate to someone what their future must be is something a human cannot legitimately do. There is much that parents can do, and to defocus onto a societal position is plainly stupid.
There is the famous quite from the Rebbe Reb Zusia who noted that “When I will be called in front of Beis Din Shel Maaloh, I will not be asked why I was not the Rambam or Rabbenu Tam. I will be asked why I was not Zusia.”
P.S. There are many versions of this quote, with varying names in place of Rambam or Rabbenu Tam. Let’s not get hung up on this minor detail.
JJ2020:
Statistics are irrelevant. To the person who is addicted, it is 100%.
Opioid are medications that are used for specific conditions. The common ones are pain and cough. It is widely recognized in the medical field that dependency is a problem, and there are supposed to be efforts made to avoid that. It is certainly an issue that someone that begins to use opiates legitimately has a risk of developing dependency. There are cases in which this unfortunate development is the lesser of the evils (or at least judged so), and the approach is to maintain the person on these drugs to avoid the alternatives. There are also medications available today that are used as maintenance drugs, that fill the body’s need for the “fix” while hopefully decreasing the other risks of overdose. Long shpiel, and outside the scope of this thread. But the other implication is that the prescribing physician that ignores the risk of addiction is plainly irresponsible.
Joseph:
You wrote: “JJ, it’s expressly prohibited for a Beis Din to use secular/non-Jewish laws instead of using Halacha/Shulchan Aruch. They can’t say even though halachicly this is your asset, since non-Jewish law says to award it to the other party, that’s what we’ll do.”
Your armchair Monday morning quarterback stance is not flattering. I would agree with you that there is too long a list of complaints about batei din, and that the system is broken. But you insinuate that batei din abandon clear halacha and base their piskei din on secular law. That is absolutely untrue. Are there rogue batei din? Absolutely. These are comprised of self-serving baalei aveiroh who exploit the public and justify their rogue behavior. But that is found everywhere else, too, and batei din are not unique. Such is the yeridas hadoros that we observe today. But as a generalization, this is a vicious lie, and you know that.
There are sometimes valid reasons, sanctioned in halacha, when to apply a standard that has its source in secular law. Usually this occurs when there is no clear direction in Shulchan Aruch. You will ask for an example. What is the halachically determined standard for visitation? Shulchan Aruch does not address visitation at all. There is normative practice, and this directly or indirectly references to the secular standard. Similar to secular law, there is no connection between child support and visitation, and denying one because the ex-spouse is non-compliant with the other has zero merit in halacha or secular law.
It is correct to note that the beis din situation is poor. But the accusations you imply are outrageous and dishonest.
Rav Miller was not addressing the need for leisure, recreation, or relaxation. It is clear that he specifically addressed the environment. And it is also clear that he was speaking in general about that subject, not only pool halls. How about the places where people congregate to eat chulent of Thursday nights? Is the environment one of Torah, or is it about hedonism, gluttony, olam hazeh, and allowing social interactions to deteriorate to mockery and degradation? It is necessary to recognize the message in the words of the Baal Mussar. If we miss the message, we may take it is psak halacha, which is a greater challenge to ascribe to core values, rather than a specific instruction or prohibition.
I know some people who are really stupid. But I do not share my environment with them. They are somewhere else. Stupid – sure. But not annoying me at all.
You don’t really mean that. No.
I’m not a mod. I’m just old fashioned.
Health:
“In our generation, it’s PC to look Frum, but not really know what Yiddishkeit is all about!”
Brilliant assessment of the current status of Yiddishkeit. As a generation, we have managed to utterly fail to build individuals to achieve their potential as עובדי ה’. We seem to do quite well at all the externals, including levush, standards of tznius, chumrah of the week, kashrus chumros unknown to our ancestors, insularity, publicity, bans, kol korehs, allowing a court of public opinion to dominate the direction of the frum leadership, etc. The simple עובד ה’ whose heart is true, but lacks the “picture perfect” image is something once cherished and a source of pride to the Gedolim of earlier generations. That same person today is derided, ignored, and considered someone unworthy of basic recognition. The follower of the Torah dictates of being a יגיע כפיך כי תאכל is shunned, despite the solid קביעת עתים לתורה and whatever other achievements he may have to his record. Yes, we are all obsessed with looking Frum. We are so busy with that that our lives are controlled by this. So sad that the real Yiddishkeit is abandoned. מי לה’ אלי?
Joseph:
Sorry, but my experience guides me to make observations about what is occurring, you know, reality. Division of assets is not so simple, and batei din do not dismiss matters with the slight of hand that you imply. No two cases are the same, and generalizing leads to mistakes. I could give you several examples, and if you want them, I’ll jot them down.
Custody is complicated, as you note. But Hilchos Gittin does not address a lot of it. Let’s examine this. Shulchan Aruch (Even Ho’ezer 71) speaks about child support. It states that this ends when the male child is 6 years old. However, the Rema specifies that this is culturally determined, and that chachomim of the generation establish the norms for this. Today, this varies between 18-21. Tuition expenses for boys are completely the father’s responsibility, and there is no reference that caps an age limit. I do not recall a reference in Shulchan Aruch regarding visitation, yet it is normative halacha to set a schedule for this. A major complicating factor is that batei din do not have legal authority to pasken matters related to custody, and in many states, they have no input on child support either. I don’t know whether it is the letter or the spirit of the law, but batei din seek to comply with the legal authority they have. That is why they try hard to make their psak halacha based on an agreement, which can sometimes be more binding that the arbitration decision from a BD.
So nothing is simple. Hilchos Gittin includes a great deal of vagueness with regards to “halacha lema’aseh. Engaging in the process of determining what is the best settlement requires skill, patience, and the ability to balance many issues, halacha among them.
Let’s give an example. Batei din and rabbonim often permit a side in a marital dispute to take the matter to secular court (I am not addressing those who go without a heter). There can be a number of reasons for this. Not everyone complies with psak beis din. Not every matter belongs in BD either. We can blindly jump up in protest, “How dare you go to court!” But that is infantile if the facts are not known. I say the same about your dismissal of the complexity in divorce cases, based on Hilchos Gittin.
When you’re done with the modern thought process and subscribers of modern western philosophy, we can address our views of reality. A husband must willingly give a get. With few and rare exceptions, the wife must willingly receive the get. That is the nature of it, just like the process of conception involves each gender contributing what it is created to do. The bias issue enters when the terms of the termination are being set. The agreement must include division of assets, the co-parenting of children with the financial support issues, the legal status of the parents’ custody, etc. Yes, the batei din are apt to take sides, and many differing reputations exist. It is often that this division of assets involves complexity, so the drive in beis din for the get becomes the exception, not the rule. The common pattern of volleying accusations is typical, and dayanim are accustomed to this. However, they are human, and can easily be swayed to one side. And certain BD’s have a tendency to sway in one direction.
Where the unfairness enters the picture is not in the ritual of the get, but in the way the respective (usually not respectable) parties deal with the children and money. Each uses their plus as a weapon against the other, and this impedes the process of ending the marriage and allowing the two to go their separate ways. The only creatures that benefit from this are what we might call the “get industry”. This includes toanim, lawyers, batei din, and sometimes the frustrated mediators.
GH and Joseph:
Bias from batei din is a reality. I cannot speak to the reduction of this. But experience indicates that it is live and well, and may depend on many circumstances. What may be correct is that a broad brush assessment of this may be less than accurate. And the same BD that has a reputation for being biased towards men may adopt the opposite perspective in a specific case. I have observed this a number of times.
Hilchos Gittin is not biased at all. There are specific roles that are designated for each gender. These are not biased. The halachic discussions on the brocho of שלא עשני אשה are complex, but do not suggest that men are “better” than women. Each gender has its strengths and weakness. In the infinite Divine Wisdom, HKB”H wanted marriage between these two different species of humanity so they would together comprise a complete neshomoh. Each one without the other is incomplete. neither is better or worse. The husband that is required to give the get is not better or stronger. The wife must be agreeable to it (as per Rabbenu Gershom), and this is normative accepted halacha. Each has their own contribution to the process. That is not bias. Is a right handed person inherently biased because he cannot write or throw a baseball with his left hand?
GH:
Go back to sleep. Your comment is pure fantasy. In reality, the beis din side of gittin is ugly. No one goes to BD to settle matters amicably. They go to fight. The only question is how vicious the battles are. Instead of expressing these nice ideals, speak to people who have hashed matters out in BD. Ask toanim how’s business. The reality is alarmingly different. When the OP inquires about how to prevent divorce, it is a serious question. How does one avoid or prevent a personal holocaust. I do not use these words lightly.
In reality, men withhold gittin and women withhold children. Each one uses their best weapon. But it is war. The false accusations of infidelity, domestic violence, child abuse, etc. are everyday occurrences. There are prevailing myths that these are mostly men committing these atrocities. In reality, the responsibility is balanced at close to 50-50. There are about as many evil men withholding gittin and support as there are evil women not allowing children to see their father, or having him arrested for crimes that were never committed.
There are mediators in the frum community who are passionate about resolving the matters in dispute to enable the couple to proceed peacefully to a beis din. Their failure rate is high, as one or both sides is bloodthirsty and will simply not compromise on anything. Those couples that succeed in resolving matters amicably (yes, there are plenty) rarely use professional mediators. These mediation experts have experience and are good, well meaning people. The fault lies with the pained individuals, whose love has turned to hate, and are bent on revenge and causing as much trouble for the other.
Beis Din has a mammoth task, to force the two sides to accept a psak, and comply with it. Even after a psak is given, compliance is a serious problem, and this often involves the only recourse, one which is universally dreaded – going to secular court.
GH:
You correctly pointed out a social effect of this protesting. I choose to focus on another angle. I mourn the role that Torah learning should occupy for Klal Yisroel. It is being exploited and fashioned into something that it isn’t. There are so many aspects of Torah that are being not just ignored but trampled. For instance, דרכיה דרכי נועם. How about אל תעשה אותה קרדום לחפור בה? We can go on and on with specific psukim and words of Chazal that are being literally trashed. And this is being done in the name of Torah? I shudder when I think about the Mishna in Pirkei Avos (6:1) אוי להם לבריות מעלבונה של תורה.
There is a video clip of Rav Shach ZT”L speaking when the Degel party was launched. He emphatically stated that אלימות is not acceptable, and that all behavior needs to be like bnei Torah. He also said openly that anyone engaging in אלימות should be reported to police. And he was addressing his own agenda for politics, clearly a “just cause” for him, yet he admonished against sinking to the level of behaving violently and offensively.
It might be a good idea to locate the clip and post it on YWN.
MTAB:
I appreciate articulate comments that reflect thought and the skill to express it. You’re a breath of fresh air. I disagree with you, but there can at least be a dialogue that is level headed.
You noted that the military draft is an outdated process. Well, maybe so. But the approach to that is to understand its origin, and to work with the system to modify it to where it is rational. Arguably, a broad based draft was a dire need in the earliest days of the medina. Perhaps that is no longer true. But even in the earliest years of the IDF, there was recognition that there needed to be yeshivos with full time talmidim, and there were deferments to accommodate. What changed?
There are probably several factors here. One is the growth of the population. It is an assumption, though I have yet to see statistics on this, that the growth of the young population in the chareidi community is far greater than the secular community. The appearance is alarming to the secular population, and the politicians representing those factions will respond to their constituents’ call to rectify the imbalance. Not to reduce the chareidi population, but to have them proportionally represented in the military.
The growth of extremism is notable. Wherever one looks, the activists for extremes are prominent. Causes are just that, with those who are pro or con, but the attention is grabbed up by those voicing and doing extremes. That drives media, and that drives societal trends. America has its movements, well represented by MSM, such as BLM, Antifa, etc. They grab headlines all the time, and there are enough people with limited knowledge to accept anything they say, fake or exaggerated. We have a vocal NK, a serious cancer to Yiddishkeit, without a legitimate claim to the shitos of gedolim who were against the medina. Activism is being hijacked to extremism, and the result is colossal chilul Hashem, failure, and negative backlash.
Are yeshivos today truly institutions of solid learning, or are they refuge spots for those who seek to avoid responsibility? There were yeshiva bochurim in America that were known as the “4-D’s”. That was the draft classification for students who were deferred from the draft. I knew many of them. Yeshivos need to be places of learning, and a ben Torah should be recognized by his behavior outside the beis hamedrash, as well. Sadly, we see too much of the opposite. Yeshivos are not producing the gedolim they once did. There is an obsession with kavod, glamour, publicity, and a frummer-than-thou mentality. There is a spectrum of this, and not all are alike. But the extreme ones get the attention, and get the publicity engine to push their agenda, of which too big a percentage is questionable if it is leshem Shomayim. When the public observes bochurim busy with anything but learning, there is reason to question whether this is valid grounds for deferment.
Lastly, your opening line, “There are many ways to serve one’s country.” speaks volumes. If there was not such a virulent and toxic reaction to the chok hagiyus, there could have easily been a compromise to work with the system and arrange for some form of public service. Certain yeshiva bochurim should qualify to be exempt from even that, as their learning excels and should be supported. Others need to support the public, and can certainly do so without compromising any values or halachos. However, Peleg has opted to work against the system, and the futility of this approach is only overshadowed by the sheer disgust over the extent of violence, chilul Hashem, and damage to countless innocent victims.
jakob:
One clarification is critical. Make your family – that refers to your spouse and your children. It does not refer to your parents and siblings. In fact, it is so vital that one make every effort to consider the in-law family equal that I would spell that out as a measure to prevent divorce. Anyone hearing their spouse value only their own family is apt to feel distanced, and there can be an early split that can doom the marriage.
Joseph:
Aside from the fact that protesting politely is far more consistent with Torah (דרכיה דרכי נועם), let’s even say there is some sort of dispensation for being less polite. But it is criminal to victimize someone else. I did not have a thing to do with the giyus, the politicians, the arrests, etc. There is absolutely no heter to inconvenience or damage me. BTW, civil disobedience implies that the disobedience is civil. Spitting, setting fires, impeding ambulances and innocent citizens is anything but civil. The trigger for their rage is not an excuse to be an animal or to damage others.
Joseph:
You wrote: “TLIK: As I explained at length a number of times in this thread, Civil Disobedience is acceptable under the circumstances.”
I do not think you get my point. You may protest against the government – that’s who you have beef with. Yell, scream, have fun. But the blocking of the streets is not protesting the government. It is throwing a tantrum that harms others who are not the target of the rage. Maybe some here are claiming the rage is unwarranted. I’m not saying that. But if you harm me by stopping me from getting to the doctor or to work, you are חייב. The right to be disobedient is not the right to damage others. If you think you have that right, get a psychiatric evaluation, ASAP. It is very distorted thinking. Choose between between being immoral, or psychotic. Professional help is needed for the latter.
Joseph:
Blocking streets, even without spitting, is an act of aggression against the public. It is totally unacceptable, and should be judged as such by anyone with a smidgen of morals. The right to demonstrate exists, but it cannot involve the crime of being a public nuisance or causing damage to others.
By the way, those getting arrested are probably draft dodgers themselves, and there should be an effort to increase the number of arrestees from 2 to whatever.
Yiddishe Kop:
Your are terribly wrong. One does not need to side with tziyonim to find the protests disgusting. I don’t take their side, and I am not too thrilled about what happened with the giyus issue. And as many have said here, there is a right to protest. I am not against that. The violence is not just extreme, as you noted, but it is abhorrent, and antithetical for bnei Torah. But the issue here includes the damage caused to countless others who are perfectly innocent. These bochurim, who should be in the beis hamedrash, are busy stopping average people from getting to work, shopping, doctors, etc. Their passion for the subject does not excuse the damage they inflict on others. And whether I agree with Rav Shmuel Auerbach in his position is irrelevant. If he is the Gadol for which he is recognized, I cannot accept that he is in favor of the damage being done to innocents.
I continue to be puzzled by the idea espoused by some here that disrupting the lives of the innocent public is permitted if one is hot-headed enough about a just cause. I disagree with this, and consider this to be a prime example of אדם המזיק. There are more than enough ways of protesting without victimizing anyone else. You can have beef with your government, and you can protest all you want. Blocking streets is public menacing, and there is plenty in Shulchan Aruch that addresses how to deal with those who cause pain to the public.
If every yeshiva, chassidishe rebbe, etc. can arrange for bleachers to stand and watch whatever performance it is, let them set that up in a stadium or some other open area, invite the politicians to be their spectators, and preach and chant all their messages. Let them publish whatever fliers and materials they wish. But stop damaging others who are not the targets of the rage.
Lastly, violence is not consistent with Torah. I will never negotiate that. The disgrace this brings upon the Torah observant world is inexcusable. There are so many precedents of how to deal with these issues peacefully, that are being totally ignored. Such a shame.
I reject anyone calling for the closing of roads. This is not protest. This is taking violent/offensive action that damages others who are completely innocent. I unequivocally disagree with anyone who claims that this is a derech of Torah. We are taught דרכיה דרכי נועם. I understand there is a basis to protest. But this stops others from getting to work, doctors, ambulances and fire fighters. It is plainly ossur, and I do not need to ask Daas Torah such obvious things. If Rav Shmuel and his followers are angry, that is okay. But I am purely innocent and uninvolved. Why do they have the right to stop me from getting to work or to the doctor’s office? They need to find other places to protest. If their leaving the bais hamedrash for this is permissible (I’m not confident of that), then protest away. But to me מצער את הציבור is unacceptable. It is not condoned at all. Who is this Rav Karmel?
DovidBT:
I omitted the aspect of rehabilitation. That is correct. But I did not include it because it is a fantasy. We would like that to be true and work. But it is the rare exception. For a political opinion, it is noteworthy that prisons employ counselors to perform this miraculous service of reforming and rehabilitating the inmates. Alas, there is a success rate of close to zero. The released prisoner rarely knows how to do anything else except the profession that was mastered before the conviction. Furthermore, little tends to be learned on the inside except how to avoid getting caught. Rehabilitation is a great idea, but it does not exist in reality.
Consequences for committing a crime need to qualify as one of these:
* Deterrent. When people see what happens to those who get caught, they are more likely to not commit the offense.
* Punishment. It is a fitting payback for someone who violates the law.
* Public safety. Implementing the consequence will prevent the offender from being a risk to others. It is easy to see why incarceration (or death penalty) would prevent the public from being exposed to the risk of the criminal re-offending.The deterrent factor makes a nice argument, but the two sides cannot be easily resolved. Many criminals do not learn anything from the negative consequences suffered by others. This is a common feature of the career criminals, and is attributed, at least conceptually, to the antisocial part of the individual’s personality. The addict also fares poorly in learning from others’ consequences. They may observe others die of overdose or get arrested, yet they continue their risky and criminal behavior.
Punishment is a tough subject. Who gets to determine what is ultimately the best form of revenge? In practical terms, this is done by legislatures and courts. But if one is looking for the objective, absolute truth, there is no easy answer. Torah consequences are not exactly punishment either, but are rather, as per the Baalei Kabalah, the appropriate tikun for the neshomoh of the offender. That comes from the Divine Wisdom of HKB”H. Our leaders and dayanim can try to mimic that, but it is mimicry. We may need to follow their psak, but that does not mean it is the absolute truth, except that there is a Torah commandment to follow that.
As for public safety, that seems easy. Putting a criminal in prison means that the public is at lower risk. Death penalty accomplishes that with greater permanence, and with the 2 sides of the issue about death penalty.
No. Final. Period.
iacisrmma:
Mishlei does not say מגלה פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה. That is a mishna in Pirkei Avos 3:14. My statement is that Shlomo Hamelech gave us the guidance, and the clear translation is not to make the “shevet” the לכתחלה of chinuch. Rather, its complete absence is the problem. He did clearly guide us to use mussar – direction.
I urge you to examine what our Baalei Mussar said in interpreting this posuk in the practical manner of its implementation. You may refer to any of the above references in my later comment. There is also a wonderful sefer that I omitted from the list: שלום בניך – הרב דוד לוי – ירושלים תשס”ז.
Lastly, שחרו מוסר might refer to awakening him with mussar, not necessarily about early.
Joseph:
You want citations. Here you have them. And I do not have animosity towards yeshivos. I just wish they would do their job.
שכר והענשה בחינוך – הרב מאיר מונק – בני ברק תשמ”ה
ארחות אהרן – משנת החינוך – הרב אהרן מפינסק קרלין – ירושלים תשס”ח
זריעה ובנין בחינוך – הרב שלמה וולבה – ירושלים תשנ”ו
כבדהו וחנכהו – הרב אהרן פריעדמאן – ירושלים תשס”ב
לחנך בשמחה – הרב יצחק זילברשטיין – בני ברק תשע”ד
טיב החינוך – הרב גמליאל רבינוביץ – ירושלים תשע”ב
מסורת החינוך – הרב אלעזר מנחם מן שך – בני ברק תשס”ה
חנוך לנער – הרב יוסף מגיד – א”י תשע”ה
מלאכת ה’ על הלכות מלמדים – הרב ישראל יוסף ברונשטיין – ירושלים תשס”א
נתיבות שלום – אדמו”ר מסלונים – ירושלים תשנ”א
החינוך המיוחד בראי היהדות – הרב יואל שווארץ – ירושלים תשנ”ו
מעדני המלך – הרב עובדיה יוסף – א”י תשע”ו
לחנך – הרב אליהו שלום ברקוביץ – א”י תשע”ב
There are also quite a few seforim that are ליקוטים in which there are countless quotes from many of the Gedolei Yisroel of recent generations. This short list here is not a library collection that is simply copied and pasted here. It is a sampling of the seforim that I have used, mostly cover to cover, and have reached opinions based on the guidance of these holy resources. If you have some to share that “compete”, and brandish the whip as an essential part of chinuch, please share, and we can volley some educated dialogue. In any case, forms of chinuch that are not effective, regardless of what it says in any seforim, become problematic. Shlomo Hamelech gave perfect direction in telling us חנוך לנער על פי דרכו. This can mean many things. Without doubt, if a child is not amenable to accept the “chinuch” of the potch (or other form of discipline), then it is not chinuch for this child and should not be administered. What works is determned by how the child accepts it, not how the mechanech prefers to deliver it.
Joseph:
You’re trolling. You are absolutely not speaking from a position of knowledge. חושך שבטו is the basis for any discussion about corporal punishment. That is a posuk in Mishlei. Can you finish that posuk without looking it up? Most mechanchim and menahalim can’t either. Let’s just stare at this first half of the posuk for a moment. Does it suggest hitting? That, my friend, is actually מגלה פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה. It refers to the “shevet” as a last resort, never a לכתחלה. Next, your reference to Tanach and Talmud are similarly inaccurate. Moreover, the purpose of any form of discipline is to teach, never to punish. Do these forms of discipline work to engage the talmid or do they reject? Today, the metziyus is that they reject. And our leaders for the past several generations have stated so consistently. The Brisker Rov stated that the first potch can be permitted under only very limited specific circumstances. The second potch is categorically ossur, as it is חובל בחבירו. The rage of the rebbe is not an excuse at all. The first potch can never be delivered out of anger.
Next – humiliation is NEVER permitted as a form of discipline. It crushes; it does not teach. No rebbe is hired to crush talmidim. If a yeshiva were to hire a rebbe to crush talmidim, I would make that public so quickly that it would need to close down. Have you ever met a rebbe that apologized to a talmid for shaming him? It might happen, but far less than 50% of the time. That is a black eye for chinuch, that has become numb to the dignity of the talmidim. Oh, you may ask, why should a rebbe respect a talmid? Isn’t the direction of respect from talmid to rebbe? If you don’t mind discovering the stupidity of this question, just cruise on over to Pirkei Avos 4:12.
Lastly, what makes punishment unreasonable is not the magnitude of it, but whether it teaches or punishes. Punishment has no place in chinuch. That is reserved for a court, where there is a prosecution and a defense, with an unbiased psak. Consequences in yeshiva MUST be educational to fill the mandate of the yeshiva. Otherwise, it borders on רשעות and is good reason why the menahalim of such institutions should change to another career. Any form of punishment is not part of chinuch, but of control. What is the true mission?
The very concept of punishment in yeshivos evokes feelings of disgust and dread. It is alarming that there are typically pages and pages of written (or unwritten) policy about how to punish, while rewards or individual attention to assist and guide are last on the list. This is not how Gedolei Yisroel address the subject of chinuch. There are a few shelves of seforim on the subject, all derived from Torah sources only, and NONE of them advance the approach of bullying kids into compliance. Before anyone attacks me with the posuk of חושך שבטו, I ask that these seforim are consulted first. I am far more comfortable with taking a strong stand against the stupid, rejecting practices of today’s generation (all the menahalim that advocate this) than the Gedolei Yisroel who openly spoke against it.
Just a few references from seforim that are contemporary. There are seforim on chinuch from Rav Yitzchol Zilberstein shlit”a, Rav Aharon Friedman shlit”a, the Nesivos Sholom ZT”L, Rav Shlomo Brevda ZT”L, and countless other seforim of likutim from generations of Gedolei Yisroel. After perusing these, comment to challenge me.
I don’t know about the shoe thing, but the attitude towards talmidim is stinky, and speaks volumes about the general approach to chinuch.
RebYidd23:
Sorry to disappoint you. Food addicts are not addicted to food. Well, if you insist, every form of life is “addicted” to food. None can tolerate continued existence without it, and all will find a source somehow to get it. But, as explained quite clearly in my comment above, that is not addiction. There are dependencies we all have. Can you walk around outside barefoot? Not that other places and cultures do not, but we are quite dependent on footwear. Addiction? No. Sorry, but the only true form of a food addict would be someone that compulsively ingests a particular food that results in negative consequences.
I located a comment I wrote in an earlier post from several years ago. Copy and paste is much quicker.
Here is the main reference to the issur psakim against smoking. The sefer is called “Chaim Lelo Ishun” written by Rav Yechezkel Aschayk, published in Eretz Yisroel several years ago (publication date is missing). The letters of haskamah are open and specific. The haskamos are from: Rav Shteinman, Rav Moshe Shmuel Shapiro, Rav Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz, Rav Shmuel Halevi Wosner, Rav Nissin Karelitz, Rav Yerachmiel Gershon Edelstein, Rav Boruch Dov Povarsky, Rav Matisyahu Salomon, Rav Shimon Bedny, and Rav Yitzchok Zilbershtein. The other names listed in my previous are quoted in the text of the sefer. Most include the exact language. There is also a letter (dated Menachem Av 5764) that concerns the issur to begin the smoking addiction signed by Rav Moshe Shmuel Shapiro, Rav Michel Yehuda Lefkowitz, Rav Aharon Lein Shteinman, Rav Shmuel Auerbach, and Rav Nissim Karelitz. Rav Elyashiv added his signature to that letter. It is true that this letter addresses the issur to begin smoking, but it also states clearly that smokers must wean themselves off of it, and should never smoke in public places where it can bother others. However, in contrast to an earlier comment, this letter does NOT state that it is muttar to continue smoking because it is a tzorech. I request a reference to such a statement from Rav Elyashiv.
I also call attention to an earlier sefer “Pe’er tachas Efer” that addressed the issur against smoking.
There is also a lengthy psak about the issur against smoking issued by the RCA. This psak discusses all earlier teshuvos from poskim on the subject, including the parameters of “Shomer psoyim Hashem” which was mentioned in one psak from Rav Moshe Feinstein. This RCA psak is available online.
yekke2: There is a serious problem with your logic. Basically, the smoker needs to recognize a psak halacha that conflicts with his personal desire, and their negius is that it should be muttar. There is absolutely no excuse to make conclusions that account for negius. That is called מגלה פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה. That is why a dayan who accepted a bribe is guilty even if he paskens in favor of the other side. You cannot create a halacha, then look for excuses to justify it.
Reb Moshe’s famous tshuvah is misrepresented so easily and so often. He NEVER said smoking is muttar. He only stated that if someone can’t stop, it is not an issur of לפני עוור to give him a light if requested. That is also dated, and obsolete (according to Reb Dovid), as the information of health risks at that time (very early ’60’s) was much more limited than what we presently know. Now, today’s smokers probably began smoking sometime after the psak from, Reb Moshe, when he openly stated that no one should start (not just בעלי נפש).
Lastly, the fatty foods and coke you mentioned are only problematic if ingested to excess. Otherwise, our bodies are well equipped to handle these things. And there are issues with anything to excess. Every single cigarette shortens life, and inflicts medical damage to the body. That is documented in the scientific literature. That is why poskim have specifically dealt with the “single cigarette” issue, and proclaimed the issur as extending to that, not just the regular smoker. Refer to the sefer חיים ללא עישון referenced above. In fact, find the sefer and study it. After that, the naysayers about smoking will no longer appear to be addicted to ambiguity.
RebYidd23:
You wrote: “If food addicts who are accustomed to eating food every day can stop for Yom Kippur, why can’t they go without food constantly?”
Aside from the sarcasm in this statement, you do allude to some points that deserve to be articulated. Food is a necessity. Starvation is eventually fatal. There is absolutely no need for smoking. The human body never, ever needs tobacco, and can survive quite long without introducing this life shortening element.
Food addicts are NOT addicted to food. They are dependent, however, on eating patterns that are unhealthy and carry various risks. Anorexia and bulimia are two commonly recognized eating disorders, the former abstains from eating while the latter indulges in bingeing. Overeating may be an eating disorder, but it might not be more than a bad habit that can be unlearned. Eating has the goal of providing nutrition, and Hashem gave us the experience of hunger to drive us to eat. If we eat because we are nervous or upset, we have taken eating outside of the G-d given purpose. We are supposed to enjoy food. Indulging without proper limits is problematic. The various eating patterns that have negative consequences comprise the “food addiction” label we use, which is an inaccurate label. I am glad you brought up your comment to help clarify this.
As an addiction, it bears many similarities to others. But there are many differences, too. Here’s a big one.
THERE IS NO REAL PLEASURE FROM SMOKING. In contrast to other addictions, this has no bearing on the brain’s pleasure center. But the pleasure that smokers report must be explained. here it is.
Once dependent (it takes about 4 cigarettes to be hooked – as per the research of the tobacco companies), one begins experiencing withdrawal symptoms when the body craves the next cigarette. The range for this to occur is about 18-23 minutes after the last one. Most people manage to delay the next cigarette for a while, but it eventually becomes easier to undergo whatever bother there is to smoke than to tolerate the discomfort. Well, the removal of the discomfort is experienced as if it were pleasure. So it is pleasure by association.
The addiction to smoking is primarily a physical dependence on nicotine. Yes, there are “oral” habits, and these can be satisfied by chewing on a pencil, toothpick, gum, etc. But on the whole, this is the least significant part of the smoking habit/addiction.
For those who smoke, be aware that the issurim involved in terms of incurring health risks are as serious as chilul Shabbos. The poskim have spoken about this. No sooner than one would brazenly be mechalel Shabbos, or eat chazzer, should one light up a cigarette. This is straight from the poskim. I have commented in other threads on the subject with detailed lists of the poskim. I find it hypocritical for someone to be machmir on anything and still smoke.
Since we are during Sukkos, it is necessary to add an additional note. The heter that is used to smoke on Yomtov is that it is similar to eating, and is considered דבר השוה לכל נפש. In America, it does not qualify, as smoking is still a rather small percentage of the population (considering the majority needed to qualify). In Eretz Yisroel, the poskim are still debating the issue, which has become more relevant as fewer people are smoking.
GH:
My point precisely. When the “bein hazmanim” concept developed, the halachos of Chol Hamoed were long in place. In fact, that Mishna is not the source for the halacha. It is just another reminder of the severity of these halachos. It can be argued that the relaxation during leisure time can become part of the mitzvah. We find that HKB”H also allowed רווח בין פרשה לפרשה, sort of a breather for Moshe Rabbeinu. Our sleep can also be a mitzvah if it invigorates us to be able to fulfill mitzvos. Staying up all night learning (sleep deprivation) and fasting have their places. But halacha keeps these to a minimum, as the Torah recognizes these as needs that facilitate our doing mitzvos. But to use this “free time” to experience חירות מן המצוות is absurd.
Anyone wish to weigh in on the message of the Mishna in Pirkei Avos on המבזה את המועדות? I would check the Bartenura first, and many others as well.
There are two issues implied which are separate questions, requiring separate answers.
1. What time should a bochur daven bein hazmanim? As was answered eariler in this post – before the end of zman tefilah.
2. How should a bochur budget his time during bein hazmanim? Long answers needed, and will vary greatly among bochurim. There should always be learning time. Some helping around at home. Some leisure time. The formula (I may have omitted some things) is unlikely to be identical between any two bochurim. But there does need to be responsibility. Humans are not driven by instinct, but rather by saichel.
Guns? You’re worried that they know about guns? There’s a lot of information that is so inappropriate for frum kids to know, or have been exposed to. This is the least of the battles, now that we are well into the information age. Our children are not confined to cocoons, and there is more than enough that is challenging that is endemic to our homes and communities. One does not need a smartphone to know about a whole lot of stuff.
I find this question comical and primitive.
In reality, we cannot successfully shield our kids from everything without actually suffocating them. Our responsibility, once we have done our best to fulfill the mitzvah of והי’ מחניך קדוש, is to build our children’s cheshek to want the derech of Torah and Yir’as Shomayim. Sadly, this is not very popular. Even the מחנה stuff is not faring well either. But we are at least obsessed with it.
There is a fundamental error, rather common, much more so since the internet became nearly universal. Chilul Hashem is NOT defined by publicity. If something negative does become public, the chilul Hashem has just been spread. But the issue exists regardless of whether it is public, private, or top secret. If anyone wishes to question this, I refer to the Mishna in Pirkei Avos (4:4):
המחלל שם שמים בסתר נפרעים ממנו בגלוי.Clearly, the chilul Hashem can occur without others knowing. If it was secret, how did it qualify to be chilul Hashem? If something negative can be discussed, the forum or amount of attention is immaterial. Does anyone wish to disagree with this Mishna?
Several answers to this question, and they appeared in earlier comment – I am not being mechadesh anything.
1. Ask anyone who built a mikva in their shul. The expenses for construction are not simple, nor are the details that relate to the halachic requirements. Until the actual construction gets done, there have already been numerous consultations. That is a capital expense. In reality, anyone who attempts to build a mikva is most likely to be doing so on a donation – hefty one. Yes, there are cost overruns, too.
2. The maintenance expenses of a mikva are huge, often a bigger undertaking than the original investment in construction. Water, boiler, showers, soap, towels, basic housekeeping and maintenance for the operation, all cost. These expenses must be borne by the users. Most mikvaos that are used daily have “chodesh gelt”, where there is a flat fee paid monthly. This cuts down on the cost for the user, and helps the mikva only towards breaking even for their expenses. Having the money up front is useful, as this would in any other business.
3. There is a perspective change needed here. Instead of seeing the prices rise with Erev Shabbos, Erev Yom Tov, and Erev Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, look at the rest of the year as discounted.Modesty:
You wrote: :Another point that will help us improve on tznius is that the frum publications should allow pictures of women and girls.” I do not disagree, that the banning of pictures from publications is a misdirected energy that would serve Hashem better elsewhere. I disagree with your comment, as it is an agenda item that should not be part of this discussion. I believe your premise here is wrong. Let me explain.
Pictures glorify image. That is what they are intended to do. There is a place for this in Avodas Hashem. But that mandates restrictions and limits. I propose that this gets taken too far when Chassidic communities make issues of the photos of their Rebbes. I also frown on the use of photos as נויי סוכה. No, I am not among those that is against photography. We all have pictures of our children, families, simchos, and those of Gedolei Yisroel. But, again, there is a form of hero worship that can focus on pictures, and that is a perversion. I believe the mitzvah of לא תעשה לכם פסל וכל תמונה that is in the עשרת הדברות addresses this perversion, not that it prohibits cameras.
The beauty of a woman is referenced in Torah as a virtue. From the אשת יפת תאר to the descriptions of שרה, אסתר המלכה, as well as numerous mentions in שיר השירים, this concept is not strange to Torah. But to glorify the image is to detract from the other, far more important qualities that we need to have. I suggest that role models of tznius would be at home and school, as well as at simchos. The photograph is more likely to tease one’s value system that the appearance is priority. That is actually dangerous.
Again, I am not opposed to photos of women in the above mentioned magazines. I would sooner oppose lots of other things that are problematic to the community. But putting them in with high hopes ignores the other risk I described. Still, I do commend you for addressing this issue in a problem solving manner rather than just shouting someone down.
ubiquitin:
You implied that nicely asking someone to move out of your makom kavua might be assur. I said nothing of the sort. All I did was introduce the element of midos into the discussion, and that stooping to a lower level of midos to fulfill the inyan of makom kavua is questionable. You continued to describe a beautiful manner in which you would retrieve your seat with extreme politeness in getting the guest to move. I like that. I do not pasken shailos, and gave no such implication. In fact, I strongly doubt that other commenters on this site are capable of paskening shailos either. I would prefer to understand the issues, and introduced that to other readers here.
While many things including this one have a halacha aspect, there is another element that cannot be justifiably overlooked. MENCHLICHKEIT a.k.a. MIDOS. In the absence of this, one should inquire whether the davening has any value at all. Let’s just touch on a few of the issues at play.
הקובע מקום לתפלתו אלקי אברהם העזרו. What is meant by קובע מקום is discussed by the poskim, whether it means the same shul or the exact spot in that shul.
The seforim expound about the need to make tefilo something which includes Klal Yisroel, and exemplifies achdus. There are many examples of this. Nearly every tefilo where we ask for Hashem’s help is worded in plural, we/us, not I/me. Giving tzedokoh before davening is heralded as a great seguloh, as is tzedokoh during tefilo. If we behave narcissistically, our tefilos suffer. There are loads of halachos that address the concern for another Yid during tefilo. We cannot cross in front of someone who is davening Shemoneh Esrei as it may disturb his concentration. There are tefilos that are recited quietly so that one does not disturb the other. Just as a father is contented by the unity of his children, so, too, is HKB”H seeking the togetherness of us, His children.
If one wishes to question whether the Midos issue takes priority over the halacha aspect of Makom Kavua, just look for examples how Gedolei Yisroel behave in such situations.
jakob:
You are to be commended for taking ignorance to a new height.Facebook is not a universal cause for divorce any more than it was the cause for the Vietnam War. Divorce always existed, and the cultures of the times offer a minimum of explanation for any trends in this area. Meanwhile, you may survey therapists, rabbonim, dayanim, and divorcees to find a trace of validity to your assertion. i am categorically opposed to social media, and staunchly refuse to use it. But it does not cause divorces at all. It can be used by someone misbehaving in the wrong way, and become a contributing factor. Years ago, these forms of communications were managed via telephone and personal contact. Schmutz always existed, and it is ignorant and primitive to blame it on current developments. Yet, one can use technology the wrong ways and for the wrong reasons.
I have yet to discover an instance in which someone contracted HIV via technology. Our own community has cases of seropositive people. Facebook?
Perhaps the pursuit of the criminal element in destroying marriages will never yield anything that we can address to fix the situation. I propose we examine what makes marriages work, and direct energies to promoting that. It should require some changes in how we raise our children, as parents, as mechanchim, and (as I noted many times here in the CR) better preparation for marriage with professional guidance and direction. Chosson and Kallah teachers – are you paying attention?
DY:
Absolutely correct. The greatest ingredient in the preparation for marriage is a healthy role model from one’s parents. I wish we all had it. However, among the crowd of younger couples (in older ones, too, but a bit less so), there are many whose role models were either absent or unhealthy. Similarly, the messages from one’s community and culture have a profound effect, and there have been many such messages that are negative.
So the role that chosson and kallah classes play today is far greater than in generations passed. Years ago, nearly all such preparation was done by parents. It is comparatively new that this has become an outsider giving hadracha. But today, the concentration on halacha is still the main focus (no one would minimize its importance), and too little attention is given to the cardinal rules for how to manage relationships. We are all aware of someone whose parental role models were clearly impaired, while they themselves chose to behave very differently. When the entire culture values entitlements, marriage fails to succeed if such attitudes are brought into the home.
Approaching marriage as a sport is a fatal error. How many people seek marriage because their peers are getting married or because they turned that magic age of whatever? These are poor motivators, and they divert the focus to midos that are not conducive to the forming of a shlaimus of a couple.
Yeshivos and schools are notorious for either being obsessed with academic excellence, with midos being nearly ignored. Or the mussar that is promulgated in the yeshiva and school is academic, as opposed to practical. I do believe that yeshivos and Bais Yaakovs could do more here. But these are supplements to a healthy upbringing at home.
In מיכה the posuk says, “והצנע לכת עם אלקיך”
While much of the subject of tznius that we discuss is relevant to the interactions of people, the true tznius is actually a subject that is בין אדם למקום, not only בין אדם לחבירו. I think a sticking point that makes these discussions difficult is that the matters of tznius are no longer the individual following their responsibility to HKB”H, and living a lifestyle of being צנוע, but the rules and halachos have been relegated to requirements that are imposed, not just followed.
It is not even about men making the rules for women (a gender issue that smells of feminism), nor is it about how men are affected more than women from visual stimuli (which is true). People are increasingly resistant to having restrictions placed on them by any outsiders, gender being irrelevant. The Lakewood school that got shmeared in the media, here on YWN, did not indicate that there were men involved at all.
If all this stuff is to get resolved, the community needs to return to norms that have long been obsolete, where people did their best to be Yir’ai Shomayim, and follow halachos to the best of their ability, without the rule setting and impositions being made by various facets of the community.
Joseph:
You wrote: :Divorce is a Mitzvah in the sense that it’s a Mitzvah to follow the correct Halachic procedures in carrying it out when unfortunately necessary. Just like the Mitzvah of carrying out a Misas Beis Din.”
That comment is appreciated, and is very accurate. The reality is that marriages are seldom terminated over a minor spat. If you ask therapists, it is close to universal that the opening issues brought into the process are ho-hum and trivial. However, the true issue is that they have chosen a microscopic issue to haggle over, and the underlying conflict is me against you. The untrained third party will easily get sucked into the right versus wrong issue relevant to the subject of the argument. But no one comes to the professional to resolve the argument. They come to seek an ally, to be the “right” one and to make their own position two against one. That alone is terribly divisive. The trained professional redirects the process to core issues and away from the nonsense that was the subject of the latest fight. The more solid relationships are not swayed by these arguments, and there is no investment in winning or losing.
Most rabbonim have zero training in shalom bayis guidance. If anything, they are taught to pasken shailos, and they focus on the subject matter of the argument. Suppose the couple discovers that they differ in terms of holding from the local eruv. Halacha directs the wife to follow the minhag of the husband. There can easily be an argument that holding from an eruv that is against halacha is not a minhag, and that a wife need not follow a husband in that matter. Yes, this is a real point of conflict. The average Rov will address the technical aspect of the conflict, and is most likely to be oblivious that the eruv is not the real issue at all. They can pasken the eruv issue, perhaps the matter of the wife following the husband’s accepted psak halacha. But they will nearly always miss the real point of conflict, and their well intentioned efforts will be useless to the couple.
Back to the crux of the comment. The laws of gittin are not there to seek its fulfillment. It is a tragic end to something that all wish could have been full of enjoyment, hatzlocho, and simcha. I know it is the obvious, but the cavalier attitude that has crept into our community mandates that we reiterate that divorce is a last resort.
Having observed many more divorces than I am happy about, there are multiple causes for it, and it is rare that two cases are the same. There are many factors that enter into the equation. Some are grounds for therapy, modification, and change. This includes either or both of the individuals (referring to needed individual work) as well as re-education on how to handle marriage (communication, learning to respect and cherish each other, etc.)
There are other matters that are not so simple. Here are just a few examples.
Family interference. One cannot blame a young recently married man or woman from sharing their issues with their parents or other family. However, this is often a tragic step. The tendency is that family takes such information as a battle cry, rather than a cry for help. Instead of helping the couple reconcile differences, they often take oppositional stances, and introduce a level of conflict that may not have been in the picture before. This triggers a counter response, and we now have a war where the issues might have been reconciled. Once at war, it is a very steep climb to convert the situation to something manageable.
Either of the couple may have some latent issues that were not known before the marriage. More often than not, this is a condition that was not disclosed during the shidduch phase. I have known of this involving medical conditions and psychiatric disorders that were simply kept secret. On occasion there was rabbinical support for this, which is hard to fathom. I do not take to a hechsher on dishonesty very well.
There are more ways than cheating than the most commonly understood one. While I am not the one to blame technology for everything, it does become a tool that makes communication easier, and it also has addictive qualities. These can push the spouse away from his/her priority status, and this can become such a wedge that restoring a marriage is almost impossible.
Dishonesty and secret keeping are horrible ingredients to a marriage. If one cannot trust their spouse, there is no basis left to feel safe, loved, or valued.
Support systems can be lifesaving for many people. But they can also be toxic. When a couple hopes to restore a loving relationship, but either has a group of peers who are convincing them to do divisive things that undermine the repair of a relationship, the match of forces may be a recipe for disaster. Therapists often complain that their best efforts are thwarted by these support systems.
Bottom line – no one gets divorced for fun. It is not recreation, and it provides pleasure for no one (except the therapists, toanim, lawyers, and dayanim who can milk the two parties for their personal gain). The decision to end a marriage is because it is assessed to be the lesser of the two evils. Perhaps it is true that some reach that decision in haste. But the wrong helpers contribute much to the overall problem.
It is also its own dialogue – are our chassanim and kallahs properly prepared for marriage? If someone wishes to open a new thread on this, it might elicit some useful ideas. I would say that the best efforts of those engaged in teaching chassanim and kallahs are still wholly inadequate.
Yes. And women can be stuck in a marriage, too. There is no gender issue with this – there are people who just won’t end a marriage, for any of a variety of reasons. Haimy noted quite accurately that there is only a little discussion of this topic in general terms that is worthwhile. It will not accomplish much for someone reading and wondering about him/herself, or someone close to them who may be in such a situation. I am no fan of medical advice on the internet, but this has even less value.
There are marriages that linger on in misery. Discussions don’t help much. And many don’t progress in therapy because of the deep resistance that some may have to change. And there are marriages that just cannot succeed because of the chemistry. Some people learn to live with adverse situations, while others cannot tolerate it.
People consult with rabbonim all the time, and some are capable of giving advice in this area while others (with the best of intentions and massive scholarship in Torah) are unable to be useful. There are times when the status quo won’t budge until there is the equivalent of brute force. One party moves out, consults with a beis din, takes a lawyer, etc. The result is most often a more bitter situation than before, and the sparring over kids, money, etc. can escalate. Sooner or later, these marriages do end, after lots of money has been spent on the haggling (beis din, toanim, lawyers, etc.)
Here are a few generalities. Specific advice or direction needs to come from a thorough picture of the case from someone experienced and trained.