Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Joseph quoted R’ Elchonon Wasserman HY”D: “Kovetz Shiurim II:47: If you must learn books that contain apikursus, it is prohibited … needless to say even to make money or to prevent a loss thereof… If you learn secular studies in order to know a skill to make a living, it is permitted, and it is a Mitzvah. However, this is only in general. But if a person sees that his son wants to learn Torah and he is prepared to be a Gadol B’Torah, in such a case R. Nehuray said: “I will forgo all skills in the world and teach my son only Torah.”
R’ Nehora’i was referring specifically to his son. He was not prescribing this for everyone. This Tanna knew that his son has the capability and the passion to become a scholar, and he stated that he would guide him that way. Not needing our endorsement, that is completely rational, and is not only good for him but for the Klal, as well. What about the father who knows that his son lacks that capability or passion or both? Should he push him to remain in learning? This quote from Reb Elchonon suggests that not.
The dilemma that is faced in threads such as this is the confusion of what is appropriate for an individual and what should be cast as the community standard. And we will never get the massive percentages of full time, career learners that the yeshivos try to boast. Should we push English studies or should we ban them? That’s a community question, not what a specific individual needs.
Just to throw a wrench into the mechanism, I propose we revisit the definition of “secular studies”. Is mathematics secular? There are many examples in Torah where math is used heavily, with notable notes from Baalei Tosafos that discuss geometry, and gematria that uses exponents and higher math functions. Learning the language of the land was done throughout the generations, and one may refer to the Oruch, and countless situations in which Rashi, both in Chumash and Shas uses contemporary language referring to it a “b’laaz”.
Can we examine the definition before volleying the opinions here?
apushatayid:
“The sellers are selling what the buyers want.”
And buyers buy what the store sells.
The volley goes both ways. The blame game turns into a ping pong game, and is completely useless.
When we leave the messages about tznius as restrictions, we get pushback from all angles. That’s how the yetzer horah works. The approach to tznius that is more effective in the long run and short run is based on the cherishing and protecting the dignity of the Bas Yisroel and something sanctified and not for public exposure. When we see things that way and pass along this message, we accomplish much more. Meanwhile, our chinuch system and much of the street is obsessed with measurements for hemlines etc., tznius buttons, and other small issues. That shoves the matter back to the yetzer horah’s domain, and things become challenging. No one is looking to demean or bypass halacha. Chas veshalom. But the approach matters.
The college of a few generations ago was focused on a curriculum that involved philosophies that were incompatible with the life of a Torah Jew. It was an exception that participating in such programs was without damage. This trend died out, and the college environment was more focused on the specific educational programs that the student attended. However, there was a different risk that became quite strong. The lifestyles of college students involved relationships that are illicit for us, and tznius dipped to new lows. The environment had its toxicities. Those who darshened about college wasted their time, because they addressed dangers that no longer existed, and bochurim and girls heard these empty speeches about obsolete issues. The darshanim failed to be up to date and focus on those issues that were the real risks.
There were several large, mainstream yeshivos that allowed bochurim to go to college, and these yeshivos required specific approval of which college and specific to the bochur. Often permission was not granted. The bochur needed to maintain regular sedorim by day, and only allowed to attend night classes. This had the added advantage of lowering the risk of sharing classes with the riff raff that contained the bulk of the non-tznius dress and activity. At least the philosophy matter was recognized as obsolete.
Today’s college campuses have reverted back to pushing ideologies on the students. The average campus is a cesspool of activism for political correctness, gender fluidity, absence of tznius, and legitimizing things that initially sound praiseworthy but are actually decrepit. Fortunately, there are a few college environments that are safer for our young people, but just a few. Some of the higher levels of academia, where only highly motivated students with a track record of performance make it in, are actually a bit lower risk.
I am not afraid of apikorsus in college today. But the sheer level of stupidity in completely corrupt value systems is alarming, and this is coupled with the tznius issue. One needs to know the risks and how they would affect a specific bochur or girl before giving the approval to attend college today. There is no general answer, not a heter, not an issur.
RebYidd:
It’s a womanican with a gender identity issue.
Actually, the word is mannequin, and the word itself is not gender specific. Obviously, they are sold to reflect different sizes, different figures, and are usually gender specific.
As for what we teach our girls, if you are hooked on appearance like the display suggests, you will have the non-living existence of this hunk of plastic and metal.
Alligators are ugly, too.
Supporting yeshivos and many other causes are certainly praiseworthy and great mitzvos. However, these have no greater connection to Purim than any other day of the year. The only form of tzedokoh that is connected to Purim is Matanos Loevyonim. There are causes that fit within the rubric of Matanos Loevyonim, at least the spirit of it.
While I challenge your assumptions, as properly expressed by ZD and Wolf, you do pose a valid question. There may be cases in which the halachic Jewish ancestry is problematic. Knowing many shluchim and those who go on mivtza’im, I do not see any verification or investigation being done. I have no clue what the numbers might be, but it is something that should be explored.
Now, let’s assume there is a halachic non-Jew here. Is there an issur involved in putting him on tefillin? I doubt that. Anything wrong with providing this individual with Shabbos candles? Another doubt. Intermarriage – that is a great question. This question is relevant to the large population of Baalei Teshuvah and not specific in any way to Chabad.
Bullabus34:
Your contribution to Klal Yisroel is appreciated. I do not need to quote the countless psukim and divrei Chazal that support your position. If you were unable to make your career as Klai Kodesh, then go to work, fulfill the huge number of mitzvos in that environment, and remain a dedicated ben Torah.
Now for some personal experience that might be useful to you. I have yet to meet someone that can manage to maintain learning without a structure. The Yeshiva environment provides that, by way of many elements, and you need to know yourself to recreate those forms of structure for yourself. Among these are the location, as in the beis hamedrash. Aside from the access to seforim, you have a place that is less likely to be filled with distractions. No doorbells, hopefully no cell phone, and a Kol Torah that is motivating. Another is schedule. The hour (or whatever length of time works for you) that you reserve for learning has been sanctified. Knowing that the hour belongs to Torah and not the many other possible responsibilities (or entertainment) can help anchor you to the sefer. Another is a chavrusah. Knowing that the time belongs to someone else is another deterrent from abusing it.
Making your home a place where learning always occurs is a useful ingredient to your home. This is additional to the learning in beis hamedrash. Setting benchmarks, such as a time limit by which a certain amount of ground will be covered (to finish a perek or mesechta by a deadline) is often helpful. Setting a goal to complete a mesechta has many benefits, besides contributing to structure.
Know yourself, and experiment if needed to determine what motivators work best for you. As long as the will to maintain yourself as a Ben Torah doesn’t waver, you will find the method by which to succeed. HKB”H should give you hatzlocho in all you do.
kollelman:
You are arguing with those who believe that the Biur Halachah (Chofetz Chaim), the Meiri, the Chayei Odom were meikil. These same people feel that drunkenness is a chumrah. Would you tell someone to abandon chumros for Pesach, or for kashrus all year round? Would you tell them to be meikil with zmanei tefiloh or kriyas shema? I am on your side, but you are looking to cite the poskim on whom we base much of our lives. Purim allows these people to consider these great chachomim meikilim. Don’t waste your time.
Conservatives are not against charity or helping the downtrodden. There is a huge chasm between charity which is voluntary and public welfare. The Torah is not against either of these, and each has its appropriate place. Liberal thinking trashes voluntary charity, and makes everything public welfare. That means the government can impose on everyone a mandatory tax to subsidize these downtrodden. This was the Machatzis Hashekel to build the Mishkan, etc. But these were far and few between. Maaser Oni was only the third and sixth year of the Shmittah cycle. Where liberal thinking went loco was the open enrollment into the category of “victims”. These now include those who are upset that they can’t enter the other gender’s rest rooms, those who are unwilling to work, illegal aliens, minorities, and lots of others. Those truly deserving of my charity should get it. Those just lining up for free money are the creation of liberal thinking.
Whoa. It is undeniably an asset to marry a bas talmid chochom. That’s clear from divrei Chazal in multiple places. What I suspect is generating some angst in this thread is that the Chazal did not instruct not to marry a girl whose father was not a talmid chochom. It was not the aim of Chazal to brand these girls as poriahs, to be unsuitable for marriage. In terms of what the Chachomim did express as a warning, it was the marrying of one’s daughter to an am haaretz. But not the other way. Please correct me with a citation if I missed it.
The Gedolei Yisroel of our generation and recent ones were clear that our judgment of who is a “talmid chochom” is not a reliable standard to use for this. And the judgment of character is equally as critical, though far more difficult to assess. So we do have huge hurdles to overcome, especially when we make decisions that are intended to last for life, and have a small sample of contact and data on which to base them. Perhaps that’s why the role of tefilloh for shidduchim is stressed by Chazal so many times.
DY:
Great question, and great reference.
One can sip wine all day and fulfill what this sefer suggests. I offer a few points to help understand why it is included in SA under the halachos of Seuda.
According to the Megillah, there are FOUR mitzvos on Purim, not 5 or more. They are reading Megillah, Matanos Lo’evyonim, Mishloach Manos, and Seuda. The Megillah, written by Mordechai and Esther, al pi Ruach Hakodesh, did not specify others. There are many things that became part of the celebration mood of Simcha, including the dressing up in costumes, etc. And the Chachomim proposed חייב אינש לאבסומי. These are not additional mitzvos, but are characterizations of the existing ones. This is not its own mitzvah, but an aspect of seuda. Whether this means even not during the meal, as suggested in this sefer, or not, is irrelevant. It remains a part of the seuda, and is not its own mitzvah. And I can repeat my position that if someone is looking to be “machmir” on mitzvos of Purim, begin with the ones spelled out in the Megillah.
Next, the drinking that is done on Leil Purim is not part of the mitzvah of Seuda. It can be Simcha if it remains within limits. The drunken revelry that often fills the streets is not a mitzvah at all, and is against Torah value. I am not against imbibing to celebrate in a manner that is a source of pride to HKB”H. Yelling in the streets ain’t it. Making a night of drinking risks being unable to respectfully fulfill the mitzvos of Purim by day. And the sefer you referenced here speaks openly about how drinking never exempts anyone from mitzvos, except after the fact, and bringing oneself to that state is an aveiroh.
RebYidd:
I am not against drinking. I am against the shikrus that is incompatible with fulfillment of mitzvos. Someone noted earlier that if one’s drinking renders them unable to remember to daven Maariv and recite Kriyas Shema properly, then it is not a mitzvah at all. Ad delo yoda does not mean incapacitated or unable to function. Returning to the OP, teenagers that have the capacity to stop before approaching the status of risk, fine. Those that cannot do not get the dispensation that they are fulfilling a mitzvah and are therefore exempt. I cannot speak for generations ago, as i obviously was not there. But most of today’s teens lack the maturity of judgment to handle this well. The tragedy stories are told afterward, but are outdated in preparation for the following Purim.
Do you know how to set an appropriate limit for drinking among teens so that no one gets near danger? I do not profess to know the answer, and a standard one won’t really do. So someone needs to exercise that judgment and create the needed boundaries. And the Poskim are clear that one who cannot drink without danger should not.
RebYidd:
I am fatigued from the constant barrage that drunkenness is somehow a chumrah. You choose to define ad delo yoda as smashing drunk, in disagreement with the overwhelming majority of poskim, including the Ramo, and all the way to the most contemporary, including the Mishna Berura. The mitzvah is not the drinking, and it is ignorant to proclaim it as such. The mitzvah is simcha, as stated clearly in the Megillah. The Chachomim instructed us to achieve that with the aid of drinking. You are confusing the medium with the goal, and that is irrational, dishonest, and simply wrong. Even the Ramoh did not say anything about passing out, just sleep. And your efforts to try to be “frummer” than the Ramoh and the Mishna Berura are frankly revolting.
I am not saying that bochurim above 13 should not drink at all. i am saying that the idea of ad delo yoda, as some commenters here in the CR wish to define it, is a threat to the safety of teens whose judgment is poor enough without the BAC.
LOTR92:
You wrote: “. I agree that isn’t he point of purim, but the reality is, to a lot of teens, that is what they look forward to.”
The problem is that this is backwards chinuch, and gives an opposite message. We are supposed to fulfill mitzvos to ascend in kedusha. Purim is such an opportunity, a precious gift. It is sacrilegious to allow Purim to be a time when the disgusting and abhorrent behaviors are considered acceptable. Drunken revelry is never a part of Yiddishkeit. Wine is gladdening, and that’s the drinking of Purim. Being permissive or dismissive of revelry is not consistent with Purim, and conveys a completely opposite message. Mistakes here carry risks of terrible consequences.
LOTR92:
You wrote: “People get drunk every once in a while, purim is a good time to get drunk. Let teens be teens, they get drunk sometimes whether you like it or not.”
Whoa! Firstly, stating that it’s acceptable to get drunk is disgusting, and is NOT at all what Purim or anything in Torah is about. You are relegating Purim to be a zman when boundaries are lifted, as if we feel some internal pressure to get bombed, but suppress it because it’s not nice. Come Purim, these limitations are lifted. Sorry, but you will find a real difficulty in finding a single talmid chochom who can condone such an attitude as consistent with Torah value. Drunkeness is called to’eyva by the Rambam, and he states that any avodas Hashem done in a drunken state is not only not a mitzvah, but is to’eyva. Teens will be teens, and they can be expected to do some really stupid things. But when these actions involve risk and danger, there is no heter to dismiss it as teens will be teens. And it is far worse to suggest they are performing a mitzvah. Yecccchhhh!
1:
Don’t be foolish. You surely have enough saichel to know that anyone that cannot drink safely should not. Our Chachomim never instructed us to do dangerous things. We do not question whether a boy past 13 is obligated to fulfill all mitzvos. But only if it can be done without risk or danger. There is a margin of risk that adults take because they can handle it. Teens cannot. And I bet you have met a few adults who also cannot take such risk. Then they should not. Would you be happier to see the discussion by a posek on that? The contemporary poskim have published their tshuvos on this. And they all state openly and boldly that danger is not part of the mitzvos of Purim.
Food (or drink) for thought:
If someone has no clue about the difference between Arur Haman and Boruch Mordechai, is there an obligation to drink? He is at the state of ad delo yoda without ingesting anything.
Sifsei:
You wrote: “But suddenly when it comes to Purim, after we made sure we heard every single word of the megillah, and we gave tzdakah to many many ani’yim, suddenly we can rely on the most meikil shita in achronim.”
That’s completely ridiculous, and I would hope you have the intellect to understand that. You have fabricated your own standard, and based on that, you are judging the Ramo, the Mishnah Berurah, and countless other poskim from many generations to be “meikil”? They are not addressing kulah or chumroh, just the etzem hadin. You are a mechutzaf for calling them meikil. You are free to engage in the dialogue about what the chiyuv of ad delo yoda is, and you can quote whomever you wish. These are not Shu”t that are engaging in pilpul to respond to a questioner. These are the poskim that lead Klal Yisroel explaining to us what the halacha entails. And when they tell us that it is preferred to sleep, that’s halacha, not kuloh. Yes, there were poskim who stated differently. This is a disagreement in halacha. Not kuloh or chumroh.
Reb Yidd:
Come on. The prescribing physician (whether psychiatrist or other) needs to prescribe the best medication for the condition, considering the specific needs of the patient. A generalization that has close to 100% accuracy, is that medications (of any kind) and alcohol don’t mix. Either there is the blocking of the effect, the synergy effect, or other interactions that can vary from the ho-hum to the fatal. One can always fulfill obligations for kiddush etc. with grape juice, or to be yotzeh with someone else. I would not limit a doctor’s ability to prescribe to preserve the option of drinking, especially heavy drinking. That constitutes severe confusion between an ikar and a tofel.
The poskim address the situation of the individual who cannot drink safely. This includes someone on meds, and also includes someone recovering from alcohol or drug addiction. Pikuach nefesh is not overridden by Purim. The entire holiday of Purim is about the preservation of life, that Haman wanted to exterminate all of Klal Yisroel, and that we were zocheh to be saved. To “celebrate” with risk to life is antithetical to the entire holiday.
rofeh:
Good point. But I ask for a source that the drinking on Purim involves anything with the outside? It is part of seudas Purim, or for some one should be sipping wine all day. Since when is the loudness outside with the yelling, off-tune singing, etc. part of the holiest day of the year, Purim? I grant that the solemn demeanor of Yom Kippur is not the model for Purim, but the kedusha is right up there. How can one consider the “vilde chaya” behavior a way to achieve and internalize kedusha?
DY:
Thanks for the citations. Some are accurate, others not quite.
Aruch Hashulchan when addressing yy”sh seems to be referring to drunkenness in a very general sense, and is not talking about Purim. He is not very supportive of the “chumroh” of getting drunk.
Mikdash Yisroel is quite clear that use of other intoxicating beverages is not part of L’ivsumai bePuriah. Read it again. He notes that some people do it, but does not agree with it.
Rivevos Efraim states that other intoxicating drinks are not part of the Purim drinking.
The source for L’ivsumai referring to wine is Rashi in Gemora Megillah.
Many poskim translate ad delo yoda as “ad velo ad bichlal”, meaning that the drinking should not reach that level but just before it. If you read them carefully, they are not being meikil. They are claiming that the drunkeness is a detraction from the fulfillment of mitzvos, and is a state that we should not reach.
On numerous threads in the CR, there is intense discussion and debate about the entire subject of ad delo yoda. From the appearance of it, there is far more noise about being “machmir” on this than on the true mitzvos of the day spelled out in the Megillah, which are reading the Megillah, mishloach manos, seuda, and matanos lo’evyonim. The ad delo yoda appears as a statement in the gemora, and is included in Shulchan Aruch. I am not minimizing its importance. But it is NOT one the main 4 mitzvos of the day. Rather, it is to be viewed as a subset of the existing mitzvos, not one of its own. So the concept of being “machmir” is misapplied.
The fact that something becomes commonplace is not grounds to call it a minhag nor a mitzvah. There is no halachic source (if you find one, please share it) for imbibing any other form of alcohol besides wine on Purim.
Observing the “chumros” about getting drunk paired with extreme “kulos” in many other areas of Yiddishkeit, the contrast is remarkable, and one must question whether the drinking is being made into a goal of its own.
The wild behavior observed in the streets on Purim night (after megillah) is completely antithetical to the true simcha of Purim. It seems that there is a controlled desire to reach intoxication, behave loudly and wildly, without regard to the chilul Hashem factor, nor the disturbance it creates for people who are forced to tolerate it, Purim simply lifts these rules of decency. Sorry, but I have yet to find a Torah source that makes such behavior virtuous. It defies the midos that a Yid is expected to follow.
DY:
You wrote: “I’m addressing your statement implying that all learning is equal, I quoted a gemara saying that’s not true, and the gemara of הרבה עשו isn’t very relevant to that point.”
The OP was inquiring about leaving his parnosoh job to finish shas. In reality, that is an individual question, pertains only to him, and should be brought to someone equipped with the knowledge of his situation to answer. When that question is posted here, it gets the response that addresses the issues as general subjects, not a psak halacho for the OP. So it becomes a discussion of whether one should forgo or leave gainful employment to “finish shas”. I pointed out that employment and finishing shas are not mutually exclusive. Others point out that the pursuit of parnosoh is also a Torah requirement. I am saying that the individual who pursues what he is capable of achieving is performing what HKB”H gifted him to do. That might be full time learning, it might be business, chinuch, professions, etc.
Upon arrival in BD Shel Maaloh, no one, including Gedolei Yisroel, will be given a farher on Bava Basra. From countless stories from the greats of Tanaaim and Amoraaim, and from the many generations that followed, we see that the Olam Habah is not predicated on the “full time learning”, but rather on the fulfillment of mitzvos as per the potential the individual had. The question asked of the neshomoh at the BD Shel Maaloh is קבעת עתים לתורה, not “Did you learn in kollel”, or “Did you send your wife to work”. The הרבה עשו is directly relevant to the OP question. Obviously, someone who knows him needs to guide him whether he among the הרבה עשו that flunked, or is among the minority who needs to be busy learning. Unless you see behind the screen name and know the OP, you can’t answer the shailoh with a psak, and neither can I. All I claim is that full time learning is great, but the person not mesugal to succeed at it, should be among the many of us that have jobs, provide for our families, and value learning to do it when we can, be קובע עתים, and support Torah. Ultimately, the significance of the learning is judged by HKB”H, and includes far more than a time ticker or a data assessment of how many blatt have been covered.
Send out all kids to raise funds. Younger ones with pushkas on street corners or in large Jewish groceries. Without kids in the classrooms, you can save oodles on heat, A/C, teachers, and lots of other staff.
Principals and menahalim can use time otherwise used for faculty supervision and meetings to clean the rooms, wash floors, and refill paper towel dispensers.
Mammele:
You wrote: “According to whose minhagim should they teach alef-beis and kriah? Leave it to the parents to teach? Maybe pick the supposedly most mesora based Yemenite version, that’ll satisfy everyone – not…”
Schools teach according to the way they read. A different הברה does not make a different Yid. I never once winced when my Rosh Yeshiva spoke with a different הברה than I did, nor did he. Since when does this issue become priority, enough to block one from being a mechanech or talmid? Can you cite a precedent in Shas anywhere? Sorry, but that will not become a barrier for me. You need to find another example.
Shopping:
Having Chassidim, Litvaks, and Sefardim in one class, one beis hamedrash, etc. is actually quite an advantage. That happens to have been my experience, and we are all richer for it. It’s been many years, and many of us are still connected. But there was a factor involved that should be the envy of all. Our Roshei Yeshiva treated each and every talmid as an only child, establishing a bond that continues into the present. There was an open approach where every talmid brought their mesorah from home, and the respect given to it was noteworthy. When each talmid was connected at the top, the achdus was established, and the differences accomplished proving color to the fabric of the yeshiva. The opposite situation, when the achdus is permitted to develop without the common connection, carries a risk. These various heritages become flash points for competition and friction.
The yeshiva’s role is to provide the chinuch, not the minhagim. Values come from הורים and מורים. One should follow the minhagim of their family, and be the link in continuity. I have direct guidance on this from both Chassidishe and Litvishe that directed or modeled the following of family minhagim as essential to one’s obligation in developing their personal derech of Avodas Hashem.
bk613:
You wrote:
“The attributes you mentioned take years to properly develop while emulating their dress is much simpler.”
So what is accomplished by emulating their dress?
Let’s return to the question of the OP. “Why does wearing a white shirt make you more frum in the yeshivish world? Simple answer – it gives such an impression, based on a belief system (quite a faulty one). In reality, the color of shirt matters more to the one doing the laundry.
Rebbetzin********:
You wrote: “(BTW these Gedolim that only wear white shirts do not c”v conform to “our” (or anyone else’s) standards, rather, they are the ones that set the standards and it is we that try our best to emulate them).”
I’m glad you invoked the word emulate and the concept of emulating the Gedolei Yisroel. What is catastrophic is that we have gotten stuck in emulating the things which are truly quite low on the ranks of what makes them Gedolei Yisroel. Have we considered first to emulate their hasmodoh? Maybe their midos? Maybe their strong emunoh and bitachon? How about their humility? We flipped things upside down, and are more concerned in dressing as they do, while the other things are expected to follow automatically. That’s not even funny on Purim.
Can you picture a matzeivoh that speaks of the virtues of the niftar buried below as someone who wore a white shirt? Do you recall a circulating photo, allegedly of a sign posted in a Lakewood beis hamedrash stating that the chometz was sold to a “real” goy who wore a colored shirt.
Have we really sunk that low?
I personally hold from chitzoniyus. But making it the symbol of the internal is inaccurate, and misleading.
ZD:
I assume you grasped my point. It was not about basic living expenses, but the luxuries that most people recognize as such. One might “need” a car, but that doesn’t translate to the latest model with all conceivable perks. Yet, someone whose work involves considerable time driving, this luxury model may have the features needed to fulfill basic work responsibilities. I guess we are addressing the expenditures that are not basic necessities, and there are times when this is a grey area.
Anon and ZD:
The scenario described was actually addressed by Gedolei Yisroel several years ago, and perhaps other times after that. At a Torah Umesorah Convention, the question posed to a public forum of Gedolei Yisroel concerned a talmid or talmidoh that was asked not to attend mid-year because the parents had an outstanding balance. There was unanimity that stopping attendance mid-year was unacceptable. One of the Roshei Yeshiva stated that such questions are posed to him often, and he was only agreeable one time to allow a yeshiva to withhold attendance. That instance was family that pleaded poverty regarding tuition, but had taken the family to Eretz Yisroel for Pesach (around 7-8 round trip tickets plus hotel), purchased a new car (new, not a used car old enough to smoke), and were suddenly poor! This Rosh Yeshiva stated that they could refuse registration for the following year, but cannot dismiss mid-year.
I believe that there is a recording of this in the TU archive.
It is ludicrous to expect a yeshiva to audit a family’s budget. And most times, the reports from the parents will be accepted at face value. But there are times when parents run out of funds to pay tuition out of irresponsibility or by prioritizing other expenses before the child’s education. Not an easy situation. I am grateful that i am not in that position.
Joseph:
Wrong impression. I have zero compassion for any expulsions done for financial reasons. There are a variety of reasons for that. If the parents are deadbeats, the expulsion punishes the wrong person. The child is not responsible. If the parents encountered financial difficulty, they should not be handed an expulsion for their child. That is plain cruelty. The student who is being expelled is a direct responsibility for the yeshiva, and needs to be referred to an alternative placement. The dumping of the kid into the street is unacceptable, and a disgrace to the yeshiva and the hanhalah that does it. I am saying that this is being done for business reasons, and I can at least understand the faulty logic.
The kid that is creating a toxic environment in the yeshiva (which the Gedolei Yisroel convened and stated that this is the only excuse for expulsion) truly needs to have a change. That yeshiva cannot keep him. Still, help in another placement is an obligation. What saddens me is that branding the yeshiva kid as a “rodef” requires substantial investigation and clarity. Yet, it is too often a knee jerk reaction that speaks more to the anger of the hanhalah. I have trouble accepting that. Most often, these behavior problems are the challenges in chinuch, and need to be addressed within the system. Dumping them for someone else is rarely the answer for the kid, and often makes matters worse.
Do not get the idea that I am easy on the expelling issue. I am not.
ZD:
You wrote: “A Yeshivas goals are not the same as other places. If a yeshiva was properly run, then students who cannot pay would be kicked out”
It would be foolish to ignore the business aspect of a yeshiva. It needs to have a budget, take in money, and pay its expenses. But a yeshiva is more than a business. Just listen to the proclamations made about it at their fundraising events. The speaker typically heralds the public role of the yeshiva, that accounts for its performing a public service. A grocery only receives money from its customers. In the case of yeshivos, the customers are the attending students (with parents paying). I have yet to met a yeshiva that could survive on only tuition. They are nearly all out there (I refer to those “in town”) collecting donations or raising funds in other ways. Watch Purim, where bochurim and young boys are everywhere with their hands out. Why should I donate money to a grocery store where I don’t shop? Reason is, that yeshivos are performing a public service, and must provide education to students who cannot pay. Grab any menahel, and you will hear of incidents where a student without capacity to pay anything was accepted. Yeshivos are community services, not just a private enterprise. That’s why they fund raise.
There is also a reality (deserves its own thread – and there already were several) that many yeshivos throw out students whose parents do not pay. It’s a complex issue, and has been discussed in many parts of the frum media, aside from frequent discussions at Torah Umesorah with Gedolei Yisroel. Of course, we hope that expulsion for financial reasons should not be done, and I am one of those who protests that practice. But the business reality cannot be ignored any more than the community and public service should.
DY:
Exactly. The tragedy is that while Klal Yisroel is extremely generous, the needs are also great. The limitations are also there, and the casualties of this leave many in the red. Yeshivos are among those who cannot maintain their budgets. So the struggles continue.
#1-2 are frightening. There is no better way to dilute education than to wreck the ratio of student to teacher. For many years, the invisible cap was 25, and that was a challenge. That seems to have become obsolete, at least in the concentrated populations. And there is fallout that is apparent. If solving a financial problem means cutting back on real chinuch, thanks, but no thanks.
This is absurd as suggesting that you save on tissues by using one only every third time you need to wipe your nose. Get real.
Something seems missing from the entire discussion here. We all seem to recognize the desperate need that yeshivos have for more funding. The abolishing of quite a few such sources from government subsidies made a bad situation worse. Challenging the efforts to correct this is that our communities are overwhelmed with charitable needs, and there are hundreds of organizations created to handle many of these. Shall we address the needs for medical and mental health care? How about infertile couples? How about families that are stricken with disabled parents? The pages of all of our frum media are filled with stories of tragedies coupled with desperate needs for funds. One doesn’t need to look beyond these pages to see the tragic variety of needs. How about the collectors who flood our shuls collecting for various individuals and organizations. Amcha Yisroel tzrichim parnosoh. Yet, anyone on the prowl for funding is apt to view his own cause the only one, or at least more deserving than another. That may be sad, but it is understandable.
Now, when people’s parnosoh suffers from limitations, will they cut their donations to yeshivos, their shul, other community needs, the collectors from elsewhere, the organizations for medical care funding, those addressing and helping couples with infertility, hachnosas kallah, etc? This can play on people’s emotions, and the efforts to control that are close to futile.
With all this, the implication from discussions about yeshivos is that these come before any other cause. I do not need to voice a position, just to note that there is a huge range of feelings about this. And this element seems missing from this discussion.
Try this statement. “It is more important that you donate your big bucks to yeshivos than to support families that need to marry off their children.” Does that go over well? Don’t take sides. But consider this.
DY:
You wrote: “If you cut teachers’ salaries, you end up with unqualified teachers.”
Good point. What is so painful to us all is that this is not just a prediction. It has been happening everywhere. There are many who look to enter the chinuch field, having spent their most productive years (for training in a potential job skill) in kollel, which contributed little to nothing for classroom management or curriculum development. These young men (and women) may have all the dedication of the Yidden who contributed to the building of the mishkan. However, the psukim there spell out that the tasks were completed by those with the specific talents and skills. Check that out in this week’s parsha. But without the skills, these wonderful people cannot function well, and are stuck resorting to discipline and crowd control strategies to manage a classroom, where the majority of the task needs to be education.
Yes, we already have too many unqualified teachers and rebbeim. The situation has improved noticeably (while salaries did not) by virtue of several training programs for mechanchim and related resources. One must credit Torah Umesorah for leading the way, with several other programs that accomplish a lot. But we are still far from doing the job that needs to be done, and our children are at risk of paying the price.
Even if we insure that all entering mechanchim are duly qualified, there will still be inadequate pay, and the problem won’t go away by fixing the qualification problem.
Azoiy:
You addressed parents “paying tuition on time”. I do hear you. The yeshiva/school is expected to make weekly or bi-weekly payroll. However, not all the parents you speak of have employment that brings in regular, steady income. There are many whose work has significant seasonal variation, and there are times when the money comes in nicely plus other times when it slows to a trickle. These parents are not withholding. Nor is it fair to accuse them of making other priorities (which is a known problem). I know many such parents, and they never end a school year with an outstanding balance. But their tuition payments cannot follow a schedule to accommodate weekly or biweekly payroll.
I would expect that there is administration that understands this. It is possible to work with parents whose income is adequate but irregular. Some yeshivos do that. I am aware of a few who make such agreements with the parents that will tolerate this situation, but then renege on that commitment, sending nasty letters, withholding report cards, and other consequences. I agree that parents can be part of the solution, but there are many exceptions. hence, don’t build a solution around the parent factor.
Common Sense:
You wrote: “P.S. I always met my commitments for tuition bills even when my wife lost her job. Other parents can do it.” Are you for real? You have no idea who I am, what my employment status is, no clue about my expenses, other earners in my home, but your ability to meet your commitments means that I can do the same? Sorry, but that comment is pure silliness. I do hope your wife found another job, and even that you got a raise in your salary. But your financial status will never translate into that of anyone else. Do you really believe what you said?
DY:
You wrote:
“but if the school doesn’t have the money, they don’t violate the איסור of לא תלין or the עשה of ביומו תתן שכרו.”
Can you please provide a citation that this is true. I might understand a dispensation of אונס, but you imply that there is no issur. Please reference.
Neville:
You wrote:
“For one, they’re protected by mesirah and they know it.”
Not only that, but it is extremely rare to find a beis din that will ever accept a case involving a yeshiva/school. They cannot face a consequence in a secular court (actually the issue might be better termed arka’os – mesira implies a criminal report), nor are they at much risk of a psak beis din against them.
I work, I learn in my spare time, and I learn quite a bit B”H. I wear a white shirt by choice, not to tell anyone about myself, not because I believe it means anything special. I have several friends who wear colored shirts, and they learn a lot more than quite a few white-shirted acquaintances. Their davening is also quite a bit more sincere. No, I’m not judging what occurs between them and HKB”H. But you can detect seriousness in someone’s tefilah, as opposed to the rote, habitual, robotic practice that allows for daydreaming, talking during davening, etc.
I am scouring whatever literature there is about white shirts to see what Torah value it really means. Haven’t found anything yet. The only reference to any white clothing is the Ari Zal who stated that it is appropriate to wear 4 white garments on Shabbos. Anything I missed? Please enlighten.
DY:
The reason the low pay, which is unfair, is an issue in the described case is because it is the sole income for a family of 7 children. If it was a supplemental income, the picture would be different. I guess you just don’t get it, and are beholden to the party line of Kollel or Bust.
Short enough for you?
ZD:
I agree 100% that the crazy high wages because of unions are unfair and a drain on society. i also agree that our morahs, rebbes, and the bulk of our mechanchim are seriously underpaid. But I take issue with your argument. Having 7 kids is not the school’s responsibility. Nor is the husband who is sitting in kollel.
The notion of sitting in kollel is already subjected to notorious abuse. The obligation on the husband/father is to support his family. The כל כבודה has been trashed in order to prop up the kollel myth. No, I am not anti-Torah, nor do I minimize the learning. It is the culture of dependency and entitlement. Sorry, but that’s a socialist value, and I cannot embrace it. The bnei kollel should be the ones whose future is to return the favor to the community, as klei kodesh, for which they should be properly compensated. They should not be on every government handout known, and their wives should not be running around to feed the family.
Full time learning is either a communal responsibility – one has the capacity to pursue a Torah career, or it is an escape from the responsibility of supporting a home and family. Sadly, the latter is true way too often, and it is displayed as some holy venture when it is not. We have deluded our young boys into believing they will all become gedolei hador without applying themselves to the effort, just by remaining enrolled for a bunch of years and by not accepting jobs anywhere else. We have tricked our young girls into the holy mission of marrying someone who will forever be on the receiving end of entitlement programs, for which they must work at often unfairly low wages. Yes, we have goytes raising the kids, and this is a holy mission.
The tuition crisis is made ever more challenging because the schools have been receiving less and less government subsidy, and they are only a few of the takers in a tzedokoh market that is crammed with competition. Now that many of the previous generation who went to kollel are the parents of the young families, the ability to share tuition with parents and in-laws ain’t what it used to be.
We cannot choke the ones who need to be breadwinners by proclaiming them holy when they avoid the workplace, and placing the burden on the נשים צדקניות who need to be home, כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה, raising the children.
I am not looking to make this thread a debate on kollel life, for which there are many others. But to address in completely outside of that context is irresponsible.
I am personally disturbed from my work countless times a day at work with these calls. Because of the nature of my work, I try to answer calls unless I already know they are spam. I am comforted in knowing that there is a G-d, and that the pain they inflict on me for disturbing my work will get paid back, with brochos to me to compensate me for my losses, (and costing them for their lack of consideration).
When there is a live person on the other end, I politely tell them that I NEVER ever pledge on line, I will NOT give them my credit card, and to NEVER again call this number. I get all of those calls at home, and can respond to them as I see fit. Disturbing my day’s work is not excusable.
If any “mekubal” needs to advertise………
I was observing that some threads were being opened with titles that mimicked others, perhaps to draw away attention. The most recent one was “Should parents imitate their children?” I had a passing thought to start one “Should parents immolate their children?”. I was scared some of the potchers might actually take that as a serious idea and consider it. Considering that two states are on record as legalizing infanticide, this is not just a bizarre fantasy that gets dismissed as psychotic. A thread like that should be removed, not just blocked from comments.
klug:
Your use of the posul ולא יזידון עוד is wrong. There is no trace in that posuk of the word or concept of chinuch, and it is your own concoction to put it there. I stated it earlier. Discipline produces compliance, not chinuch. It is incorrect and irresponsible to confuse them. That posuk was addressing compliance, and that was the dire need at that moment.
Everyone today recognizes that hitting is a tool in the arsenal. None of the contemporaries say it has no place. But if we allow it to be something it isn’t, we produce destruction, and it is impossible to say that this is a Torah value or direction. There is wide recognition, as per some of the quotes I shared, that today’s children are not the same ones as earlier generations. Applying the tools that were effective then that backfire now is foolish. I don’t think that shomer peso’im Hashem matters here.
My premise about what chinuch is stands tall, proud, and valid. Go back and study that posuk again.
klug:
You wrote: “Nothing has worked, does there ever come a time when you hit them? ”
I do not have the specific answer for what to do that gets the kid to school. But the question that some here fail to address is whether the potch works. It is likely to allow the parent to feel as if he/she did something. But is it really effective? It might even get the kid out of bed, and perhaps he will enter the school building. But is it actually bringing the child along the direction of becoming a true shomer mitzvos? Or is it giving him a negative, painful association with yeshiva? You have to know the kid. No, I am not saying to never potch. But I am drawing attention to whether it accomplishes anything more than pleasing the parent. If that is the case, it is flagrant violation of חנוך לנער על פי דרכו. It represents chinuch according to the derech of the parent, not that of the child. And Shlomo Hamelech was a whole lot smarter here.
Often, parents and mechanchim seek to intervene with discipline because “you have to do something”. NO! You intervene with discipline because that is what the child needs to proceed along the way to responsible adulthood as an Oveid Hashem. The rebbe or parent that uses discipline to gratify themselves is irresponsible. The rebbe who potches out of anger is referred to, in several of the references I provided earlier, as a בעל עבירה.
It is all about the net result. And compliance without passion in Yiddishkeit is not the result we want.
DY:
There is no one-size-fits-all. Shlomo Hamelech stated that very openly – חנוך לנער על פי דרכו. Many of the seforim that I consult specify that the same disciplinary tactics that are effective for one talmid might be deadly for another. Being mechanech children is not about following a recipe printed on a package. The use of greater force was once okay, but even then there were kids that could not be victim to such practices. What changed is the resilience of children, and we have an absolute chiyuv to adjust our interventions accordingly. That’s what Joseph doesn’t want to hear. Let him start his car by looking for the crank under the front bumper.
I noted that I was not re-interpreting anything, nor was I looking to be innovative. I am just interested in seeing the strategies applied to chinuch being focused on producing an adult who will have a passion and thirst for Torah and mitzvos. Creating someone in constant fear of punishment is not a Torah goal. This message permeates Sifrei Mussar and Chassidus, and is universal to Klal Yisroel and the Torah world. To distort it and paint another picture is dishonest, and borders on the creation of a custom religion. Phooey.
Joseph:
My excuse for דע מה שתשיב here is that it is an honor to review what the poskim of our generation and a few previous ones stated. Here are quotes:
ריבוי עונשים – נכון שאין להרבות להכות, רק לעתים רחוקות, שאל”כ מאבד בזה את כל ההשפעה של המכות…….וכן אין להכותו חזק וכמ”ש (ב”ב כא.) כי מחית לינוקא לא תימחי אלא בערקתא דמסנא וכו’ (לחנך בשמחה – הרב יצחק זילברשטיין שליט”א – ממשנתו של מרן הגר”ח קניבסקי שליט”א)
העונש אינו מחנך – מכה, חזקה ככל שתהיה, תשמש אולי כגורם הרתעה לעתיד, אך אין בה כדי להחדיר ערכים בתודעתו של ילד ( כבדהו וחנכהו – הרב אהרן פרידמן שליט”א)
בענין הכאת התלמידים בזמננו – כתוב חנוך לנער על פי דרכו, צריך לחנך בדרך הטובה ושלא יהיה ח”ו לרועץ, ובדור שלנו, למעשה, המציאות שבדרך כלל ההכאה גורמת למציאות הפוכה. פעם הילד היה כפוף למבוגרים, היום הילד הוא עצמאי, ופעמים שגם ההורים אינם מבינים את הדבר ואף פועלים נגד הת”ת ויכול להגרם חילול ה’ ח”ו, לכן יש למצוא את הדרך הנכונה. (תשובתו של מרן הגאון רבי יוסף שלום אלישיב זצ”ל – מובא בספר מלאכת ה’ הלכות מלמדים להורים ולמחנכים – הרב ישראל יוסף ברונשטיין שליט”א)
ה’מקל’ של זמננו – “מקל נועם” – והנה אמרנו לפרש בזה וגם הצענו הדברים לפני גדולים וטובים, כי אם מלפנים זאת בישראל היה דרך ההורים והמורים לייסר הבנים והתלמידים במקל ובשבט חובלים. אולם בזמננו שנתמעטו הלבבות והכוחות, נשתנה אופן ייסור הבנים וחינוכם. ואין להשתמש אלא במקל שונה הוא “מקל נועם” כדכתיב (זכריה יא, ז’) ואקח לי שני מקלות לאחד קראתי נועם ולאחד קראתי חובלים. (ארחות אהרן – הרב אהרן הכהן אדמו”ר מפינסק קארלין זצ”ל)
שכר והענשה בחינוך – כל הספר – בפרט פרק שישי – סוגי ענשים (הרב אליהו הכהן מונק שליט”א)
דרכיה דרכי נועם – בפרט בימינו שהילדים מפותחים, אם האב ירים את ידיו עליהם יתריסו כנגדו וידברו עליו, ובכך גורם להם שילכדו בארור, שנאמר ארור מקלה אביו ואמו ואמר כל העם אמן, כל עם ישראל נידו את המקלה אביו ואמו, כדתנא ארור – בו נדוי, בו קללה, בו שבועה, ששים רבוא מישראל ענו אמן אחר ארור זה. והאב שנהג עם ילדיו בחוזק יד גרם לכבודו שירד בעיניהם. לכן ילטף אותם, יקח אותם בטובות בלשון רכה, יאהב ויחבב אותם, כבר בגיל שמונה ותשע הילדים מפותחים בעלי שכל, ואין להתנהג עמם בעריצות וביד חזקה. (מעדני המלך חינוך ילדים – מרן הראשון לציון הרב עובדיה יוסף זצ”ל)
Just a few and small sample. I must say that they were (or are) certainly aware of the alternative explanations for psukim that you are pushing to support your agenda of hitting children. None of these Gedolim are incarnations of Dr. Spock, nor do any represent the counter culture of political correctness or other moral deviations. All of these seforim include lavish haskamos of the greats of our generation and their predecessors. If you would just consult with sources such as these without having drawn your conclusion in advance, you would see that they said it all, and I have added nothing.