Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Reb Eliezer, the same thing that Yaakov Avinu will do regarding Rochel Imeinu and Leah Imeinu.
Reb Eliezer, the same thing that Yaakov Avinu will do regarding Rochel Imeinu and Leah Imeinu.
Philosopher: Do you have a source that the husband and wife relationship is broken in Olam Habo? Because we know that the relationship remains active even after Techiyas Hameisim.
“that takes no breaks for yom tov, weddings, or clock change.”
Not necessarily. Many Daf Yomi Shiurim do take breaks for Yom Tov, etc. And catch up afterwards. And some people, individually, take off from the Shiur for chasuna, simchas, work and other family or organizational events.
Other choices:
Manchester, England
London, England
The Samsung and Motorola flip phones are fully functional Android smartphones. No different than their regular Android phones.
Who is gonna cook the food and do the laundry after Moshiach?
Why are people these days too “weak” to fast and instead seek to replace it with tzedaka?
In the entire Chicago their are only three such groceries?
TLIK: “I wonder the source of your Torah. Firstly, tell me where it says to give petch? It is not included among the 613 Mitzvos, not according to the Rambam, Ramban, Sefer Hachinuch, and Shulchan Aruch does not give any such mitzvah.”
Is this pasuk missing from your Tanach (Mishlei 13:24)?: חוֹשֵֹ֣ךְ שִׁ֖בְטוֹ שׂוֹנֵ֣א בְנ֑וֹ וְ֜אֹהֲב֗וֹ שִֽׁחֲר֥וֹ מוּסָֽר:
Is your Shulchan Aruch missing Orach Chayim 551:18? The Shulchan Aruch makes a special point to say not to hit children during “the three weeks” between the 17th of Tammuz and Tisha Bi’Av. This makes clear that parents and teachers, when appropriately hitting the rest of the year, is to be for the purpose of education. The Shulchan Aruch says not to hit like an enemy nor to hit cruelly; the adult should hit the child with a small strap (Yorah Daya 245:10). Pischai Tshuva on this expands further on how to hit a child.
Ashkenazim do permit hitting a child till the age of twenty two. However several complex issues enter the question after the child is bar/bas mitzva [Yora Daya 240:19-20, Rama, Pischay Tshuva and Birchay Yosef and Rambam Dayos]. Hitting a child over bar/bas mitzva would be a possible option only if it is for the pure sake of chinuch. The parent must make an objective evaluation of the child’s nature. The hitting is not allowed if the child is married.
Many flip phones have a fully functional and unfiltered web browser. As well as numerous other apps that can access any number of sites and services.
Yes, they must be filtered. And have various inappropriate apps permanently disabled.
Once that is done, is would be tagged as kosher.
You can generically teach children that other Yidden have varying minhagim on different points in Yiddishkeit. You needn’t get granular by specifying and teaching customs that aren’t your own.
“Then they should have put out a kol korei that all nice shaitels from the last 20 years should be thrown out.”
Five major poskim issued a psak a few short years ago forbidding any natural-hair sheitlach:
Rav Chaim Meir Halevi Vosner, Rabbi and Head of the Rabbinical Court, Zichron Meir
Rav Sariel Rosenberg, Rabbi and Chief Rabbinical Justice, Bnei Brak
Rav Yehuda Sillman, Rabbi and Head of the Rabbinical Court, Bnei Brak
Rav Shimon Baadani, member of the Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah
Rav Moshe Mordechai Karp, Dayan and Posek, Southern Hill, Modiin
K-cup: They claim to be that; but they are far from it. They promote liberal religious ideas under a so-called chareidi or right cover. They repackage MO talking points in more palatable language.
As they say, don’t judge a book by its “cover”.
YO: I know, right? Just like those nasty Jews broke Greek law in the Chanuka story when they learnt Torah against the law. And those nasty Soviet Jews broke the law by having secret synagogues in contravention to the law. Just like those nasty Australian Jews.
Learning about customs, minhagim, hashkafos and/or mesoras other than one’s own is not something properly taught to children, for the many risks you outlined in your OP. As such, such education and becoming familiar with others practices is appropriately left to be learnt once a person is older.
Esav Soneh L’Yaakov.
Why is that so hard (for some) to understand?
It’s run by two liberal Orthodox Jews. One is more religiously leftist than the other. But don’t tell them this. They like to pretend they’re on the right.
The Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 552) writes that, while according to Halacha Kiddushin can be performed with any marginally valuable item, the custom is to utilize a ring. The reason he gives is that it serves as a “constant reminder” to her status.
All the moreso a sheital or hair covering, which is halachicly obligated and thus expected to be found on a married woman’s head must be noticable.
My Torah says to give petch. My Shulchan Aruch paskens to give petch. Both are bfeirush.
Does anyone have a different Torah or Shulchan Aruch??
Rabbi Wallerstein.
Avira, off topic, how and when did you learn Yiddish?
RebDovid, it isn’t 2011 anymore.
Whadya expect when you’re living in the boondoggles?
WB Dr. Hall, for your biannual visit.
Mods, please move this thread to DECAFFEINATED. TY
אם פגע בך מנוול זה משכהו לבית המדרש
The Halacha is that a married woman may give a small amount of her husband’s money to Tzedaka without his knowledge. We can assume that the husband allows her to do so. The size of this donation depends on the financial standing of the household.
However, if the husband specifically said that he does not want her to make any donations, then she can’t give any money to Tzedaka. (Shulchan Aruch 248:4)
Aruch Hashulchan (YD 248: 11, 13) rules that in a society where Bais Din is unable to compel people to give an appropriate amount of Tzedaka, a wife (of someone who gives less than halachicly required) is permitted to be the one to force her husband to give by doing so without his knowledge. However, Aruch Hashulchan emphasizes that this can only be done based on the directive of the local Rav, who determines that according to this person’s wealth we would force him to donate this amount.
Shevet Halevi (Vol.5 132:7) disagrees with this ruling. He references the Halacha (YD 148:1) that even when Bais Din forces a person to give Tzedaka, they may only take his property in his presence, with his knowledge. Surely the wife, even if she is acting on the directive of the Rav, has no more authority than Bais Din.
The Halacha is that a man is obligated to support his wife financially. In exchange, Chazal decreed that whatever money the woman earns belongs to her husband. (However a woman has the option to waive her right to be supported by her husband, in which case she retains whatever she earns.) The question is if the husband does not actually support her, does he nonetheless acquire his wife’s earnings?
The Chazon Ish (EH 70:6) rules that even if the husband supported his wife only at the very beginning of the marriage, he still retains ownership of all her subsequent income. Since he was providing for her when she earned her first paycheck, he acquired that paycheck. When he uses that money to support her, he has provided her needs with his own money. That entitles him to acquire the next paycheck. This cycle repeats itself, causing the husband to perpetually acquire his wife’s income.
What attractions require proof of vaccination and which do not?
“Then they should have put out a kol korei that all nice shaitels from the last 20 years should be thrown out.”
You should address your criticism of these Gedolei Poskim to them, rather than to the public.
Why would it be “chas v’shalom”? There’s nothing wrong likening one mitzvah to another mitzvah.
“But the poskim who are assering now didn’t asser 10-15 years ago!!”
Oh, yes, they did.
DY, do you imagine that the poskim you’re claiming would be mattir a shaitel where the length of the hair reach her ankles?
“Okay. That has nothing to do with whether lace shaitels are assur.”
Sure it does. A person can be completely untzniusdik even if technically any single aspect of their attire isn’t a direct written violation. Same with lace. In addition to whatever other halachic objections there are, it’s also untzniusdik based on the presentation alone, even absent other written objections.
Philosopher, Yasher Koach. You’re able to express the point much better than myself.
“A married woman with the appearance of being bareheaded is just as inherently untznius as that other appearance.”
A married woman actually going in public bareheaded is untznius, as I’m sure you’d agree. As such, the comparison is spot on, since her appearing as bareheaded is comparable to her appearing in that full body dress/suit.
“Silly comparison, because that appearance is inherently untznius, whereas uncovered hair isn’t”
A married woman with the appearance of being bareheaded is just as inherently untznius as that other appearance.
DY, why can you not name any contemporary (choshuve) poskim that specifically discuss lace, and are mattir?
Zionists never apologize for their multitude of crimes against the Jewish people over the last 100 years.
Additionally, DY, you’re grossly misapplying Rav Moshe in a manner Rav Moshe never indicated, implied or said. Rav Moshe mattired a wig that looks like real hair or even is actually using real hair (as opposed to synthetic hair, which was what must sheitels used then.)
But Rav Moshe in no shape, manner or form implied, indicated or stated that a wig that doesn’t look like the person is wearing any head covering, and rather appears bareheaded, is permissible. That is a completely different creation/metzius/product than the natural hair wig Rav Moshe ruled upon. The wigs he is referring to can be seen as a wig, not appearing as bareheaded, by the public.
Whoever’s contemporarily mattir lace wigs (who are thus far unnamed, for some reason), how would their logic to be mattir give them any room to assur a full body dress/suit that makes the wearer look naked (even though they’re actually covered)?
Or would they actually be mattir??