ujm

CA: What kind of disability?

The Zionists kidnapped the frum Yemenite children and put them up for adoption with irreligious families.

A machlokes over whether maintaining a given belief makes one an apikorsus? Personally, I wouldn’t want to have a belief that many shittos would deem the person an apikorus — even if according to another shitta he wouldn’t be deemed an apikorus.

As far as the rest is concerned, I’d cite Rav Chaim Brisker: “Fun a kasha shtarbt mir nisht… S’iz besser tzu bleiben by ah kasha vi tzu zugen a krumer teretz.”

Are either of you disputing the Gemora regarding the Shichvas Zera of a Nochri?

ZSK: It seems to me that you missed my point. I was pointing out that their are significant differences in pronunciations of Loshon Kodesh between Ashkenazim, Sefardim, Teimanim, Litvaks, Chasidim as well as some additional variations.

Are you arguing that some of those are incorrect and/or that
between the varying pronunciations of Loshon Kodesh between Ashkenazim, Sefardim, Teimanim, Litvaks, Chasidim, etc. only one is correct and the rest improper and problematic for use in Tefila?

Kuvult: The Gemara suggests that the Shichvas Zera of a Nochri has different properties from that of a Jew, since the Nochri eats non-Kosher foods and is physically affected by his diet. The Chasam Sofer (Teshuvos YD 175) writes that this Gemara is relevant in practice. He rules that we cannot assume that a medical treatment that was tested successfully on a Nochri will also be successful on a Jew.

What that means is that you can’t automatically assume how a Goy reacts to a treatment will also be how a Jew reacts to it. It doesn’t necessarily either automatically imply that it won’t work for a Jew.

Rav Elyashev pointed out that the Chasam Sofer writes that the physical characteristics of a Yid are different than a Goy, and that what applies to one may not apply to the other. Therefore, said Rav Elyashev, how much more so regarding the mind/soul?

HaKatan: How, then, do you account for and reconcile the differences in pronunciations of Loshon Kodesh between Ashkenazim, Sefardim, Teimanim, Litvaks, Chasidim as well as some additional variations — both historical and contemporary?

Square: ujm didn’t present a logical argument. ujm simply pointed out a fact and asked a question.

It proves the lie that it is somehow discriminatory or sexist to have gender separation.

Just as women are permitted to demand sitting only next to another woman for being concerned about the small chance of being attacked, so too members of either gender ought to be permitted to demand to sit next to a member of their same gender for reasons of holiness in order to avoid unintended contact with a member of the opposite gender.

We see that Chazal learned their science from the Torah. Rav Breil, the Rebbi of the Pachad Yiztchok, teaches us that we do not even entertain the possibility of a scientific statement in Chazal not coming from the Torah. This we see from Rav Briel’s answer to the Pachad Yiztchok’s question regarding the killing of lice on Shabbos. The Gemora permits it, based on a scientific fact. The Pachad Yiztchok asked his Rebbi that due to the possibility that this scientific fact is incorrect, perhaps we should be machmir and not kill lice on Shabbos, just in case.

Once we establish that the scientific knowledge that is incorporated into Torah Shebal Peh is derived form the Torah, it has the same status as all of Chazal’s interpretaitons of the Torah — they are binding:

The Gemora in Sanhedrin (100a) tells that R. Yochanan derived from a posuk that when Moshiach comes, the gates of Jerusalem will be made of jewels 30 amos long and 30 amos high. Some student said that such big jewels do not exist – “we do not even find jewels as big as doves eggs,” he said. Then, one day the student saw angels (!) cutting such big stones, and he asked them what they are for. The angels answered: “They are for the gates of Jerusalem”. When next he saw R. Yochana, he praised his qualifications for expounding the Torah, based on his “scientific observation” that confirmed the Rebbi’s interpretation.

R. Yochanan responded, “Bum! You only believe because of what you see? You dishonor the words of the sages!”, and the student died.

The Ran (Drashos #13) points out that the statemnt of R. Yochana had no halachic relevance at all – it was merely an Agadic interpretation, and the disagreement was regarding a scientific fact, yet the student was punished for not believing in its truth. Therefore, he concludes:

“Just as we are commanded to follow their opinions regarding laws of the Torah, so too are we commanded to follow all of what they say from tradition in Hashkafa (“Deos”), and medrash on Pesukim. And someone who veers from their words, even in something that has no relevance to any Mitzvah, is an Apikores and has no share in the next world.

Particularly interesting is a statement on this topic in the Aruch Hashulchan (EH 13). Quote:

“I will tell you a great principle: Chazal, besides their holiness and wisdom in the Torah, were also greater scholars in the natural sciences those savants (“mischakmim”) who would argue against their pure words. And someone who disagrees with them testifies about himself that he does not believe in Torah shebal peh, even though he would be embarrassed to admit it outright.”

Chasam Sofer (Beshalach) writes that this is the meaning of the posuk “Ki hi chachmascha ubinascha l’einei ha’amim” – Chazal were great experts in the secular sciences and disciplines. In fact, you need to know much secular knowledge in many areas in order to properly understand the Torah – and he gives several simple examples. However, since we are supposed to be busy learning Torah – not secular science – all day and night, and Hashem has no “nachas ruach” from us learning secular studies at all, how would Chazal have known all the secular wisdom that they clearly knew, as we see they did from all of Shas?

Answer: They know it from the Torah, since the entire body of secular wisdom is included in the Torah, for the Torah is the blueprint of the world. And so, when the Goyim see that we do not study the secular science books at all – and we even disagree with them! – yet we derive all the secular knowledge, in the most precisely accurate form – from only the Sefer Torah, they will exclaim, “Am chacham v’navon hagoy hagadol hazeh!”

A similar explanation is given by the Raavad-ibn Daud. He says that the posuk refers to the philosophical truths that it took the nations centuries to develop, we knew all the time via tradition from Har Sinai.

RW/OP: Why do you think Harris will win against Trump?

IDF Needs Chareidim? 50K Reservists Have Not Been Called Up Since Oct. 7

Does anyone care to explain or define what “fade no Peyos” is or means?

HaLeiVi: I apologize for my last comment addressed to you in the other thread. I didn’t think you’d be too upset, since I deliberately cloaked (or so I thought) my reference to what only you/mishpacha would understand. I felt your prior comment to me, as well as a number of previous comments you addressed to me, were designed to annoy — for reasons I understand where you’re coming from, though I know your premise to be incorrect. As much as I wish to communicate to you why that is so, this medium won’t allow that. In any event, I shouldn’t have referenced what you’ve objected to and for that I’m sorry.

Rabbi J.B. Soloveichik in his Five Addresses clearly states that “separatist Orthodoxy” (Chareidi) would disappear and only MO will survive. “Tourist attractions” he says Chareidim would end up being. Clearly, he was 100% wrong. And it was that which he said justified “Modern Orthodoxy” – survival, nothing else. If these words seem a bit difficult to understand today, you must appreciate them within the context of the prevailing secular social attitude during the time they were said, the early 1960’s. Many people were dazzled by the “new social and economic order” and even frightened about the future of Torah in America. The typical alter litvishe water carrier didn’t seem to fit in to the picture of what they imagined to be the technologically fueled, fast-paced, high-educated America. Once a Rebbi in Yeshiva University, a super chareidi of the Brisker school, who did not even speak English fluently, who was vehemently opposed to Modern Orthodoxy, was asked why he left MTJ (Rav Moshe Feinstein ZT”L’s Yeshiva) to accept a job in YU. “[Rabbi Soloveichik] convinced me that the future of Torah in America depends on YU”, he said in Yiddish, shaking his head in disbelief at his own decision. This was in the mid 1980’s.

Rav Shimon Schwab (Selected Essays pp. 90-91):

“And now we address ourselves to our chaveirim bedeah, our achim bemitzvos of the Rabbinic Council of America. Ad masai? How long do you want to remain a branch, without becoming part of the tree? . . . We say to our achim b’mitzvos, “have Rachmonus with yourselves, and lemaan Hashem, part company with those who have given obscene semichah to to’evah clergymen” . . . Have rachmonus with yourselves, and break off your professional relationship with those who, for instance, consider Yishu HaNotzri merely a failed moshiach . . .We implore you . . . to part company with those gravediggers of Torah. I know it is a painful subject but it is unavoidable . . . We call on you to join us, the true modern Orthodoxy [Rav Schwab is referring to previous statements of his that MO is today outdated and “anything but modern”], which is a generation of sincere mevakshei Hashem”.

skripka:

1. Regardless of what family size is or isn’t representative of, what is your explanation for the huge differences in family sizes between Chareidi and MO families?

And it is certainly representative of materialism; the reason some “choose” a smaller family size, against Hashem’s decree to be fruitful and multiply, is to live a more comfortable life by reducing expenses incurred by having more children.

2. The point about getting drunk was simply a response to another poster’s canard that getting drunk on Shabbos was more prevalent among the more religious. The entire crisis of this vice famously began in the more modern communities.

That being said, I’m very happy to read your report that listening to, respecting and and adhering to the instructions of one’s Rabbi is becoming more normative in the MO communities. Unfortunately this was less the case in the past. May they continue moving in that direction. But what you’re certainly incorrect about is the canard that this is becoming less the case in Chareidi circles. In fact, this remains very much the practice today as it has been traditionally.

3. The only thing the higher tuition rates in MO schools versus Chareidi Yeshivos represents, is increased quantity and quality of secular studies in MO schools. The quantity and quality of Limudei Kodesh has always been, and remains, indisputably on a much higher quality and level in Chareidi Yeshivos; and the resulting quality of Torah knowledge between their students clearly demonstrates this among elementary and high school graduates.

4 and 5. I’ve been down all those avenues. The fact remains that MO communities have proportionally many more fancy homes than found in Flatbush. The material standards of living is higher in MO communities than in Flatbush. That said, I certainly agree with the notion that standards of living in frum communities, in general, have gone way way up over the last 30 years.

Dofi: You can’t get any more dopee than taking a freak incident, something that never previously occurred in the 80+ year history of the Chareidi community in Lakewood (or anywhere, for that matter), and pretending it is some kind of example of things that happen every now and then, when in your dishonest you know good and well this is a virtually unprecedented non-example of anything.

Of course you conveniently forget examples that don’t fit your false agenda, such as the story all over the news about ten years ago of the Modern Orthodox husband in Staten Island that murdered his wife after she advised him she wanted a divorce.

Regarding suicide, I can’t argue with you that suicides have never occurred in the Modern Orthodox community. They must be a special class that’s exempt from such stuff. I’m sure a Lexis-Nexis search will turn up nothing.

I’ll address to the other points in a future commitment, but DaMoshe, how many Jewish kids in Teaneck would even be bothered if a Jewish owned book shop in Teaneck was selling adult entertainment (vhamaivin yovin) material to the Jewish community?

Not too many would be bothered. And certainly not bothered enough to shut them down.

And there’s the difference.

Why does anyone need to know? There’s no need to know this story. It’s better for everyone to not know or talk about.

“If you’re making 60k, then no, you’re not paying the majority of your income towards tuition.”

DaMoshe: Do you really believe that Kushner will reduce their $21,400 per child, per year, tuition cost to under $3,750 per child, per year, for a family earning $60k with eight children in school?

DaMoshe: Chareidi Yeshivos, despite having a significantly lower tuition than MO schools (which are more often than not co-ed), provide a far far superior Limudei Kodesh Torah education than any MO school. Everyone sees and knows this very clearly and unambiguously. The extra money put into MO schools goes towards secular studies.

And, still, 50% of the MO students end up OTD; a statistic coming directly from eminent MO Rabbi Steven Pruzansky of Teaneck. In the Chareidi world, the OTD rate is in the 1% ballpark.

It is clear who is doing things right — and who is doing things wrong.