Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Lol health, youve rebutted nothing.
Youve made false claims and backed them up with dishonest rambling. That doesnt coaunt as a rebuttal.
As mentuioned before Agreements dont last forever especially when governments are involved. (read the Senator’s leter to Iran for a modern day example)So sorry to have to burst your uninformed bubble (again).
Health youve said that already.
Ive pointed out why that claim is absurd for at least 3 reasons
See here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/im-anti-zionist-now#post-559653
Health, sadly as usual your post isnt accurate.
You say “the Gedolim Only agreed to the Medina if the Frumme can’t be drafted!” Nope! The medina was made with or without the Frumme. The draft issue was only discussed after the founding to keep charedim in the ruling Labor party’s coalition where they remained through 1977 (I have to double check the date)
The Laws of the Torah never change, even if time does! (sort of true, there are parts that fall out of favor for one reason or other, but this is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.)
For arguments sake, the draft could be wrong halachicly, even Yharog Veal yaavor and your first post regarding the dishonety of NRP vs original zionists is still absurd
Health you are not telling the truth.
you now say “I claimed that you can’t call yourself religious – if you make laws that most religious Jews oppose!”
This is NOT what you claimed, nor is it what we have been discussing.
We have been discussing this silliness: “You said the religous zionists were more dishonest than the founders of the State because the religious Zionists went against an earlier agreement”
As idenitfied in the last post. Which you said was “True!”
As to who says the agreement was made forever, you said “me and most Charedim” Well we have already identified that you are not an honest individual, and I have never heard anybody else claim the agreememtn was made forver. As asked before (and ignored) do you have a source to this end, or is this more of your dishonesty?
The Goq
It may or it may not, There is no way any of us can possibly know. It is completly up to the owner. They can extend till you step out of the store, all day, all month or every year on that same date as long as it isnt a Wednesday. You have to ask him/her.
The Goq
You have to ask the restaurant owner, he may not necessarily check ywn coffee room.
I’m curious what he says, please let us know
Health
i didnt follow your response to my first point.
I’ll bring you up to speed since I think you may have gotten lost:
You said the religous zionists were more dishonest than the founders of the State because the religious Zionists went against an earlier agreement
Among Several absurdities in the above, i pointed out that agreements dont neccesarily last forever.
You then brought up the U.S. Constitiution, and said somehtin along the lines of, why would we follow it if agreements do’nt last.
among Severla absurdities in THAT comparison, I pointed out that the U.S. Constituon has in fact been changed (“ammended”) 27 times.
To which you replied “It can’t be changed, just amended. Do you know the difference?”
I asked you for definitions instead you supplied synonyms. I provided definition any of which apply equally to the Constitution and any agreement regarding draft.
After that you lost me.
As to your other points:
“The terms were forever, even though it wasn’t enforceable!”
a. Says who?
b. Even agreements made forever can be changed in ways. See The U.S constitution, for example.
instead of replying to my next point you said “You’re playing lawyer again! The agreement is valid because they wrote the law that way –
exempting Charadim.”
a. Of course I’m playing lawyer, Arent we discussing a law?
b. They wrote the law that way then wrote it another way. Laws much like constitutions change (see above).
“I didn’t say early Zionists were Tzadikim. In previous generations people were generally honest. They kept their word.”
Beseder so Ben Gurion was honest I can live with that.
Lol Health, I think you made up that definition. source?
Here is what Webster’s says
” Amend:
to change some of the words and often the meaning of (a law, document, etc.)
: to change and improve (something, such as a mistake or bad situation)”
Both of these can easily apply to any “Agreement” you say was made. Even if you believe it WAS binding and enforceable, which obviously it was neither, who knows the terms? What if I said it was made for one generation, there is no way to disprove my made up contention which is why verbal agreements are worthless.
As an aside, easy on the Am haratzos, with out a kinyan a verbal agreement is halachicly worthless and unenforcable. Of course there is an inyan of Lo yachel divaro, but a. Ben Gurion is dead, there is no reason to uphold HIS divaro. and b. I dont think he cares.
Oh as to your third silly point that early Zionists were honest, Peres is still alive and he supports the draft too!
Health
Agreements not in writing are worthless.
I do not know the difference between ammend and change. Please enligten me.
I find it surprising that you consider Ben Gurion honest. But ok we can let that one go, I can live with it.
My Response is the same as that of ywn, the vast majority of frum Jews and for that matter the general pulblic:
meh
ROB
You are making less and less sense.
A. The U.S. constitution is in writing
B. It has been amendended 27 times to date! Sure it cant just be changed wily nily, there is a legislative process. But just becasue an “agreement” was made 200 years ago or even 60 years ago. Does not make it binding for all enternity. As relaities change things change
C. “Previous generations were honest, no matter what their religious belief was!” So kidnapping yaldei Teiman was honest?
ROB/ Health (that makes more sense)
“hey made an agreement. Who says they wouldn’t abide by the agreement, even though it’s 2015?”
In writing? what kind of agreement do you think was made? You think it lasts forever no matter what changes? You have a childish/imaginative view of history
“Herzl’s followers would Not renegade on their agreement, like the “so-called” -“Religious Zionists”!”
Lol! if you beleive that you are a bigger zionist than I am
Happy Purim
ROB
Was your comment supposed to make sense? With Purim so close its hard to tell.
The Herzl Zionists compromised that frum don’t need to go to the army based on realities at the time. Times change. Are you saying Ben Gurion liked the idea of Long term learning for all then ? Are you saying he would still support it now? What on Earth are you talking about?
Of course if you meant it as a Purim post apologies. Some posts are so silly it is hard to tell see Poe’s law
I’m curious if anybody knows of any Gedolim whether in America or Israel who have seen it
I only put down 10 pieces of chametz and found 11
Lior/joseph I’m not sure I would be proud to be the OP of this post. You claim “on a point that I was aware but slipped my mind – the horror” But the elementary statistics “slipped your mind” isnt a side point, it is the thrust of your OP
-ubiquitin
MArkblik. So Dovid Hamelech was a zionist too. Nu?
Fantastic DY Thanks again
Thanks DY
I think the Shoel umashiv held the copyright ceases after death
ZDad after the War of the Roses the Families of York and Lancaster merged to form the Tudors. Both of which were direct descendents of William the Conqurer. Considering all the inbreeding in that family, Elizabeth is a direct descendent among several different lines (Obviously not “ben acher ben”)
DY, Why do you need two Minim?
As I commented on this thread
“Lior bagels (plural) are two items. You dont need to berachos or even two minim (though lol DY) You need two manos = portions. Assuming a bagel is a portion, two bagels is a perfectly valid shaloch manos. See Mechaber 695:4 where he identifies “shtei manos basar” as a kosher Shalach manos.
That being said, as discussed in the kezayis thread, generally we dont try to fulfil mitzvos to the bare minimum, as the mechaber explictly says in this case “vechal hamrbeh lishloach lerei’eim harei ze meshubach” “
Sounds like one portion to me.
You need two Manos, two ice cream cones should be ok.
Lior, your opening post shows a profound lack of understanding regarding statistics
“Isn’t it amazing? If you flipped a coin ten thousand times the odds are unlikely that there would be within a small margin roughly the same number of heads as tails.”
If it is an even coin the odds are extremly likely that the spread will be close (not exact) 50/50
As PAA points out over a short period you will get a wider distribution, and this is in fact the case (OF course short period is relative given an infinite number of coin flips 10,000 is a VERY short period)Though short period isnt the best term, few number of “flips” is better and this is the case. Consider a couple that has 2 children over the course of a year (or so) it obviously is not unusual if both are boys or girls, we see that often. But as the number of flips grows the closer to 50% you’d expect as in fact occurs. Even every year the number of “flips” isnt small in the U.S. alone it is around 4,000,000. And as expected it is near 50/50. But if you break down that statistic by State/County/City/Neighborhood/Block etc… You will find a wider spread in some areas (like the couple that had 2 children both boys) that “even out” over the long run.
Lior, be very careful. Your definition needs some tweaking. See Remah O.C. 554:17 and M”B there
Google is your friend
“Self-hating Jew is a pejorative term used to allege that a Jewish person holds antisemitic beliefs” (Wikipedia)
what happened last year at 14, did he ask you if he can get dressed up? Did you help him make a costume?
If yes to any of the above, I think it is time to loosen (not cut) the cord
OOmis To be clear I love michael savage. I listen to him whenever I get a chance I heard both the MBP and autsim discussions live (I never heard him on the IDF as OP mentioned, thats why Ive left it off.
As Goofus correctly points out he is there for entertainment I find him very entertaining. Stupid and uniformed but entertaining nonetheless.
That being said I second Goofus’s point to you
Lior bagels (plural) are two items. You dont need to berachos or even two minim (though lol DY) You need to manos = portions. Assuming a bagel is a portion, two bagels is a perfectly valid shaloch manos. See Mechaber 695:4 where he identifies “shtei manos basar” as a kosher Shalach manos.
That being said, as discussed in the kezayis thread, generally we dont try to fulfil mitzvos to the bare minimum, as the mechaber explictly says in this case “vechal hamrbeh lishloach lerei’eim harei ze meshubach”
OOmis he did in fact say that verbatim. You can hear him on youtube if you’d like.
you say “then he shows an abysmal ignorance of what autism is. OK.”
So that is at the very least MBP and Autism that he is ignorant about, and yet doesnt hesitate to forcefully and assuredly share his opinions on the subject. This is not the sign of an intellectual.
you then try to reinterpret waht he was saying. He said nothing of the sort. He said (quote) “…I’ll tell you what autism is. In 99 percent of the cases…” He was not referring to a few brats who have a diagnosis that is rushed on them.
(Although of course afterwards he claimed it was “taken out of context” Though the only context his stament would be ok in is had he said “Only an ignoramus would say Now, the illness du jour is autism. You know what autism is? I’ll tell you …”)
Ive often wondered about this. My theory is that the Jewish market isnt big enough for a small niche establishment. Subways is limited to subs (obviously) they also have a “healthy” flair thus no cole slaw no french fries etc, their simply isnt a big enough market for this. There are very few truly niche kosher restaurants consider: Chinese stores arent truly “chinese” they usually carry sushi for example.
Just a theory.
OOmis
This is Michael Savges view on Autism:
“Now, the illness du jour is autism. You know what autism is? I’ll tell you what autism is. In 99 percent of the cases, it’s a brat who hasn’t been told to cut the act out. That’s what autism is. What do you mean they scream and they’re silent? They don’t have a father around to tell them, “Don’t act like a moron. You’ll get nowhere in life. Stop acting like a [edited]. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don’t sit there crying and screaming, idiot.”
Ive never met him in real life. On the radio most of what he says is gibberish. You recognise it when it is about a subject you know a lot about, ask yourself what kind of person would speak so assuredly about a topic he obviously knows little to knowthing about and if you really think he only did it that one or two times that you recognised his ignorance.
To be fair if I had to speak for 3 hours straight every day no matter what whetehr or not their was anything new to report, I doubt I’d be able to speak inteligently for even an hour, obviously the bulk of what he says on any topic is ignorant gibberish.
Ironicaly while he does not believe in the existance of Autism (see above). I recently heard him say he thinks there may be somehting to the vaccine/Autism link. (I dont have the exact quote). A perfect example of what I refer to in my second paragraph. Not only is he an ignoramus, he is an ignoramus who disagrees with himself. And again, to be fair, if I spoke for 3 hours day in and day out on any topic no matter how little I knew on the subject, you can bet youll find self contradictary stamnets, as well.
DY
Ive heard I forget from whom, (Ive heard it on a few occasions)the line between MO vs charedi being primarily over 3 things:
1) Zionism
2) Secular education (outside of parnasa)
3) Daas Torah
A fourth which is probaly less than the the first three, but is probably evolving
4) Role of women
To me this seems like a good line though obviously not absolute.
Golem Gorilla
“if Michael Savage were to run4prez he would win the presidential election hands down. “
Do you really think so or are you egging Health on?
(As an aside, You do not need to copy/paste entire conversations in your thread. To respond to a specific poster please just call (i.e type) their name. To respond to a specific point copy that point and that point only, not the entire back and forth exchange. Thank You)
Heres anothe Pesach related minhag that makes (and always made) zero sense:
Some avoid using any utensil that fell on the ground over Pesach.
Should those who have this minhag abadon it as a “minhag shtus”?
DY, Granted. My point was “a valid reason” is partly in the eyes of the beholder (I realize that is not what my previous post says at all).
Was it a real concern that somebody would ask for carrots and his friend though he menat yeast? Seems doubtful.
Or take a much better example. Kitniyos, the standard (unviersal?) minhag, among Ashkenazinm is to avoid Kitnioys at all. We treat it stricter than the chameshes minim which we do eat, obviously, as long as follows certain guidlines. Yet the minhag is to avoid rice cakes even if it just had rice and water, was shemira meshas nitiyaysan etc etc. This makes absolutly no sense.
I’m sure you or somebody else will come up with a “rational” explanation that it is a gezeira or a geder of some sort. which brings me back to my point. Rationality of minhagim is (partially) in the eyes of the beholder to me treating kitniyos as more chamur than wheat is completely irrational, to another it might make sense
What I meant with my original post was that minhagim based on a specefic societal concern, are (arguably) by definition irrational as minhagim (in the sense of the elevated status we give the term MINHAGIM as oposed to say mere cultural custom). Or put another way they arent really minhagim. LEt’s take a made up example. The town of hutzenplotz was very muddy so the minhag was to wash of their shoes before stepping into shul every day regardless of season. Should hutzenplotzers keep washing of their shoes even during a dry summer in a modern environment. I could hear a case made either way. and that is precisely my point.
DY
Arbitrary with minhagim is hard to define. Consdier PEsach, Some avoid Carrots becasue the yiddish word mehren rhymes with yehren (old word for yeast). Should their descendents who dont speak yoddish practice this minhag in a day and age where even (most?) Yiddish speakers dont call yeast yehren. And even if it rhymes so what?
Many minhagim in practice today no longer have or never had a ratonal reason. We follow them becasue minhag avoseinu beyadeinu.
OOmis, he knows as much about politics as about Judaism. Yet he is equally confident in his knoledge of both. The difference is YOU know more about Judaism than politics so you can call out his ignorance in one and not the other. He should stick to nutritonal ethnomedicine MAYBE he knows what he is talking about there (I don’t know enough to judge)
KJ chusid you say:
“you have to understand that Zionism caused the total secularization of millions of Jews it happens to be that individuals within there state which became frum not due to the state at all but due to private efforts your forgetting if not for Zionism millions of people wouldn’t have been become frei in the first place”
This is a myth. The haskalah started before zionism. Assimilation was in full force well before zionism. In fact Zionism was a shift TOWARDS an embrace of (a form) of Yidishkeit. Herzl was compleyl secular he favored a complete rejection of Yidishkeit. A first. However asfter Dreyfus he changed his mid and favored an acceptace of a form of Judaism. Granted a very watered down cultural/nationalistic form. But Zionism wasnt a rejection of Jewsih Religion, quite the opposite it was a rejection of assimilation. The evil Neturei KArta misleadingly passes off Herzl’s prezionist writings as his view all along. This is not the case.
Lior simchas torah 2005 was particulary leibidig
I’m confused As a KJ chusid dont you agree with PBA?
I know it is a bit early, but I wanted to share some marei mekomos I came across last year in the Mesifta Hagada.
first a recap, the discussion began about size of a “kezayis” and somebody brought the obligatory kvetching about how hard it is to eat modern day “kezaysim”.
I pointed out strictly mesevara that the discussion regarding size of “kezayis” always struck me as starnge, since a kezayis is the MINIMUM amount needed to be considred an achila. It isnt a goal to strive/struggle towards. There is something wrong with the sizing if eating a kezayis is a struggle for a normal person.
I maintained that the Mitzva is eating matza period. As all mitzvahs there are techinical (sometimes critical) halachas, minimum shiur: kezayis, maximum shiur: Achila Gasa, time frame: Kedei achilas pras etc etc.
I didnt bring any rayahs since this seemed obvious to me. There is no Gemara that brings a limud how much Matza needs to be eaten, like any achila (both mitzvos and issurim), any less that a kezayis simply isnt called eating.
DY and Sam2 pointed out that the implication of my statment is that there is a mitzva/hidur of some sort to eat more than a kezayis a notion they disagreed with.
Here are some marei mekomos:
Rambam 6:1 is mashma this way. He says “there is a mitzvas aseh to eat matza period (literaly)…once a person has eaten a kezayis he is yotzeh yedei chovoso” He does not say There is a mitzva to eat a kezayis matza.
(Diyuk brought in moadim uzemanim)
Bach brings besehm Maharl that all eating matza leshem mitzva is part of the mitzvah.
Kehilas Yaakov kidushin siman 34 brings the same idea besehm the shiltos and brings many raayas (Its actually a very nice read, though I dont own a kehilas yaakov so i havent seen it in a while now)
mamale please dont eat windex
Lior just so your question.
Yes absolutly. Grownups should act like grownups and not spend on kiddushim they cant afford. THat is what the takana should be, I have never heard that shmooze, the shmooze is always the way you describe, that is backwards.
BMG = Beth Medrash Gevoah NOT Gevoha
If we are bringing Gemaras I can also play the Gemara game. B”K 27b.
bottom line is my comment was to Goofus who said “”if you feel wronged you shoudl go to the courts” Al pi Halacha this is not correct In fact the very lashon of the siman in Shu”a where this is discussed is “Keitzad Oseh Din Leatzmoi” or “How a person can make judgment for himself”
In my first two scenarios there is no question the fellow can take his item back. The last case is arguable. Rema in the above siman bring Mordechai in Hamaniach as a yesh omrim that would arguably assur Lior’s action, (I only say arguable because I’m not clear on the difference between taking the item and another item. I will have to see Mordechai inside, it may be the case that in a store with an ssigned value to the item, it would be allowed)
However the first two scenarios are without doubt alowed. and Goofus’ assesment, and your blanket disagreement are wrong.
flatbusher
“I say limit the kiddush to cake, schnapps and soda like the old days.”
No way I say add more!
to be clear: I am not forcing you too, if you dont want to Gezunterheit. I dont either.
Don’t limit what other people do though, that isn’t nice
DY
Arguably.
In this case, In a store where everything is for sale the items lying around all have a monetary value.
Put my wallet case aside for a second. Say Lior was shortchanged $5 which he watches the cashier slip into his pocket. Can he tiptoe around the cashier and pull his $5 out?
Can he take a different $5 from the cashier’s pocket?
I think most would agree Lior can do both and there is no need to “go to courts”
Do you disagree? Does anybody?
Taking a different item, say the cashier’s sunglasses that Lior estimates at $5 is trickier. So we can leave that aside.
Now in a store, say he watches the cashier slip the $5 into the register.
Can he take his $5 back out?
Can he take a different $5 bill out?
So far it is no different than the above. The only scenario that could be different is if the cashier is ripping of Lior and Lior is taking money “back” from the storeowner. I am assuming that isnt the discussion at hand (Either the cashier is the storeowner or the cashier seems to have made an honest mistake and isnt pocketing the disputed $5)
Again I assume we agree that Lior can take his $5 back from the register or a different $5.
Do you disagree? Does anybody?
Now in a store i would argue that Lior can take the sunglasses that have a $5 sticker on them. There is no estimation of value that is the value that the storeowner is assigning the sunglasses. Lior IS taking $5 back
Do you disagree?
This thread Reminds me of the old joke:
Guy puts up a sign “Fresh Fish sold Here”
Somebody walks over to him and says obviously there Fresh saying Fresh seems like your hiding something.
So he changes it to “Fish Sold Here”
Someone else says of course they are here where else would they be?
So he changes the sign to “Fish Sold”
To which somebody says, ofc ourse you are selling them who would think you arwe giving them away
So the guy changes the sign to “Fish”
Finnaly sombody says No need for that, everybody can smell it.
So he gets rid of the sign
Goofus
If I grab your wallet from you and claim it is mine. Do you really think you have no right to grab it back, that “if you feel wronged you shoudl go to the courts”
Why is this different?