Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
And even more amazing – is the silence of so many posters -who seem to have opinions about everything – how come they haven’t called you out on this?
Forgive me for having the audacity of taking off a week or so from the boards. I was not aware that it was my personal obligation to read every thread every day and object to whatever it is you feel I should object to.
Yet another sign that I’m a disgusting, horrible person who should be shot by the community at first sight.
The Wolf
I guess this is further proof that I am a rasha, because even if polygyny were permitted, I would not want more than one wife. I’m *very* happy with my wife and would not want another under any circumstances.
The Gaon said doing so would bring the geula closer.
I guess that means that according to the Gaon, I’d be putting my own happiness ahead of the geula. Further proof (this time from the Gaon himself) that I’m a despicable, selfish person who puts his own wants in front of the needs of the tzibbur.
The Wolf
Why somebody would want 2 shviggers is beyond me.
I don’t know about you, but I happen to love my in-laws dearly. If there were more people like my mother-in-law, the world would be a much better place.
The Wolf
I said you can extrapolate from the reasoning of that halacha. I stand by that.
Please explain how that was extrapolated. Humor the intelligence-impared like me. I don’t see how you make that extrapolation given the fact that both people in this example are males.
The Wolf
That is irrelevant to your assertion.
You made an assertion and I asked for the source, which you conceded does not exist.
No, hold on. My position doesn’t matter at all if there is no such halacha that a TC is saved first to begin with. So, show me that halacha and then, once that’s established, I’ll see if I can find a source for my logic.
The Wolf
How about the same halacha that you save a man before a woman. Extrapolate the reasoning of the halacha.
No, that’s not the same case. Please show me that a TC is saved before a regular person. A halachic source, as nisht suggests.
The Wolf
I think you mean “V’yiten L’cha,” no?
The Wolf
You cannot Assert that it is logic, if you have not considered the basis in Halacha. Until you understand the logic behind the Halacha you cannot extrapolate to other circumstances
I’ll tell you what? How about, before we possibly argue over a phantom, you point me to the source that states that saving a TC takes precedence over a regular person?
The Wolf
nishtdayngesheft,
Your lack of sincere apology for assigning positions to me that I never said is deafening.
The Wolf
In your recent post you wondered if the person will get a refund. Do you know the cheshbonos of HKB”H to aver that there is a refund due?
I never claimed to know. That’s why I asked. Did you see me *demand* that he get a refund? I asked, that’s all.
I see that you’re still exaggerating my positions again.
I am glad to see that you are on that madreiga, I do not feel I am that great to even think I could make such a cheshbon.
I never claimed any such thing — and you darned well know it.
But you know something, who cares? After all, I’m just a stupid apikores deviant pervert who deserves to be locked up and shot at dawn, right?*
The Wolf
* And no, I’m not stating that you ever said that or even implied it. It’s strictly my opinion (and fact).
Isn’t the translation of a niddah, any woman who a man is forbidden to? I assumed Niddah to be an adjective (that she is a niddah towards other men) but you just translated it as a noun (that it becomes her identity).
The word you are looking for is “ervah” if the cause is due to familial relationship. I’m not aware of a word (other than “forbidden” itself) to describe a forbidden relationship not due to familial relationships.
The Wolf
I didn’t see the mechaber inside, but I’m willing to bet “klal” doesnt mean “no females”, rather those females who you are forbidden to, you should not under any circumstance inquire about them.
With the exception of my nieces, all the people in the list I gave *are* forbidden to me.
The Wolf
What is your source for this? Halachic
Logical, not halachic. Again, as per my previous post, we don’t know whose life is more valuable. We can’t know, so we have to rescue the one who has a better chance of survival. All other things being equal, then go for the TC.
In any event, as I said, it’s irrelevant to the discussion at hand because, as I mentioned earlier, the case at hand is not comparable to two people drowning.
The Wolf
Sure. One of the guys involved is a mass murderer who got off on a technicality. Or one is a Rasha Gamur and everyone knows it while the other is a recognized Gadol Hador.
Ah, but you don’t know that and you *can’t* know that. A mass murderer may have done teshuva and the recognized Gadol HaDor could be doing horrible things in secret. Only HKBH knows the truth and the *true* value of a person. You and I don’t know and can’t know it.
The Wolf
If you want to delude yourself, go ahead. The rest of us (including the Neture Karta) know better.
Indeed. Last year, NK members protested in public about this, calling Rav Shteinman a “rusha m’rusha” and shouting “y’mach sh’mo” after his name over this very issue. You can still see it on YouTube. I took them to task (for all the good it does) on my blog.
The Wolf
But what if it’s clear as day that the S’vara doesn’t apply?
Care to give me a scenario?
The Wolf
Not long ago in a certain town, in the space of approximately 18 weeks, there were 32 divorcees. Rabbonim giving the wrong advice caused quite a number of them.
While I agree with you that rabbis who are not trained and qualified to act as marriage therapists shouldn’t do so, I find it quite a bit of a stretch to state that the blame 32 divorces in 18 weeks can be laid solely at the feet of the local rabbis.
The Wolf
Also, to the wolf who chastised himself for inquiring about the welfare of his wife and daughters, may I direct you towards the sfas emes on the mishna in avos (I don’t know if this is a stand alone perush on avos, or it is mentioned in another sefer of his, I’m sure searching the bar ilan CD or whatever these digital otzer hasfarim are called will find you the source) “al tarbeh sicha im haisha” where he explains the difference between the hebrew words sicha and dibbur.
That’s all nice and well, but I’m not talking aobut talking to the people in question (which is where sicha vs. dibbur comes into play), but even asking about their welfare through others. The Shulchan Aruch says very plainly — “Ain Shoalim B’shlom Isha K’lal” — no exceptions. I can’t ask how my mother is doing, my stepmother, my grandmother, my sister, my nieces or my daughter. The SA makes no such distinctions/exceptions to the rule and, in fact, adds the word “K’lal” — which (to me at least) emphasizes the fact that there are no exceptions.
And, since I’m going to continue to do so anyway (since I *do* love these people dearly and I *need* to know what’s going on in their lives and how they’re doing), then I’m clearly a rasha, a deviant and a pervert.
The Wolf
Since when are romantic relationships “immature”?
I wasn’t talking about (responsible) romantic relationships. Shlishi seems to think that it’s inevitable that if you say Good Shabbos, it’s going to lead to a full-blown affair. My point was that mature, reasonable adults know how to say “Good Shabbos” without taking it any further.
My comment there had nothing to do with romance.
The Wolf
Wolf: The Gemara’s S’vara for why you can’t kill someone even for Pikuach Nefesh. There are some cases where it really shouldn’t apply. What do you do then?
I still don’t get it. When does the rule of not killing an innocent (i.e. to exclude someone who *is* actively attacking someone) to save another life not apply?
The Wolf
Rambam:
There is no difference between this world and the next except in our subservience to the nations.
The Wolf
If a talmid chochom and a plain yid are drowning at the same time and you can only save one, you should save the T”C.
That’s NOT the same case at all. There, both parties are at jeopardy, and, therefore, if you can only save one, save the TC*. Furthermore, in that scenario, you are not actively doing anything to shorten the life of the fellow who is drowning… you are merely not helping him because you are already busy saving someone else.
Here, the other party is not at jeopardy AND you are *actively* doing something to save someone else. A better scenario would be this:
You see a TC is about to be hit by a car. You can’t save him directly, but you *can* save him by pushing someone else into him, causing the TC to be shoved out of the way, even though the other person will be killed.
There is NO WAY that such a scenario is permitted — no matter who the other person is — whether he’s a talmid chochom himself or the biggest rasha.
The Wolf
* and then, I’d say that you save the TC only if saving him is more certain or of equal chance. If, however, you have only a 10% of saving the TC and a 90% of saving the regular yid, you go for the regular yid.
Wolf: I once asked R’ Schachter that. The S’vara shouldn’t apply if a Gadol Hador is threatened unless he’ll kill an Am Ha’aretz. It’s a tough question.
I’m not sure I understand what you’re trying to say. Please explain.
Thanks,
The Wolf
Sharon Ventura
That was already after my comic-book reading days were over. I’m probably a fair bit older than you are. 🙂
The Wolf
It always starts with something small. First its a GS. The next time it includes a wink. Later its a shmooze. And before you know it, a full blown relationship.
No, not if you’re a mature, responsible adult.
Not only do I say “Good Shabbos” to people I see in the street, I also say “Good morning” and “Good evening” to the bus drivers I see every day when I get on/off the bus. Never once has it resulted in a wink, a shmooze or a “full-blown relationship.”
The Wolf
And to think I took Eeees home from our wedding in my 1979 Dodge Diplomat station wagon. 🙂
The Wolf
6 months of Rav Elyashev’s life is equivalent to more than a year of any of ours
Um…no. That was the whole point of the thread.
Are you going to judge that R. Elyashiv’s blood is redder than this person’s?
The Wolf
So, does the guy get a refund on the six unused months?
The Wolf
Rabbi,
You’re missing the point. I wasn’t judging the strength or weakness of your evidence vs mogold’s reply. I was simply pointing out that your reply wasn’t applicable since we do not adhere to strict courtroom rules of evidence in this forum.
When you said I only used the ‘ede mipi ed’ as a parable., that settles it for me.
That’s all, nothing more.
The Wolf
Wolf: But imagine if Derek Jeter was unable to join even the minors because they were full. That is why Kollels have to continue to expand.
Oh, come on… that’s the silliest objection yet. 🙂
If someone has talent,*really* has talent to be a superstar, he’ll find a way in. If he has the talent to be a superstar, plus the drive, determination and ambition, it’ll take a full blown conspiracy and collusion to keep him out.
Keep in mind, if a Derek Jeter-type player came to the Yankees and they said “sorry, kid, all our teams are full*”, then he’d go to another team. The competition between the teams would cause at least some of them to recognize his talent and give him a shot.
Likewise, there’s competition between kollels for talent as well. If someone *truly* has the talent to be the gadol hador, no rosh kollel, in his right mind, would turn him away. And, if by some chance he does get turned away by one, another one will snap him up.
I’ll say it again because it’s still true: increasing the number of kollel spots may increase the number of Rabbis produced, but it will NOT bring the next Rav Pam. If he exists, he’s not going to be waiting around on the outside looking in for a spot.
The Wolf
* Which, of course, if they recognize his talent, they’re not going to say, but hey, let’s pretend for a moment.
most random
How can any one thing be more random than any other? If asked to pick a number between 1 and 100, is 72 any “more random” than 28?
Please post the most random Thing you can think of
There’s only one Thing I can think of (with a capital T) — Ben Grimm.
The Wolf
wolfish-forgive me for disagreeing with you.
Never apologize for disagreeing with me.
When I have an actual written letter
Did I miss something? Mogold said a story. You countered with “eid mipi eid…” My response, very simply is that this is not a court and he is not giving testimony. “Eid mipi eid” doesn’t apply. You may believe (and it may well be so) that you have better evidence to the contrary, but that doesn’t change the fact that “eid mipi eid” has no place here.
The Wolf
Yes, but you have to be able to be a Minor Leaguer. You can’t play on the level of a high schooler and expect to last.
And you can’t stay in kollel if you can’t learn a daf gemara.
We don’t “cut” (to use a baseball term) anyone who doesn’t have “drive, determination, effort, perseverance and a genuine love and desire” to learn and tell them to go work. If we did, then we could reduce the number of slots needed and do better work with what remained. Instead, we allow them to linger, taking up the spot of the next Rav Pam. Therefore, we have to expand the Kollel and not miss out on “the next Rav Pam”.
The point of kollel is not produce the next Rav Pam, no more than the point of the Minor Leagues is to produce the next Derek Jeter. The point is to produce the next group of high-performing individuals who can “play” at the top level. A kollel should be deemed successful if it churns out qualified rabbanim even if none become a gadol of any stature, just as a minor league would be successful if it churned out major league players, even if they don’t go on to hit 500 home runs or win 250 games.
But adding more people is not going to bring you “the next Rav Pam.” If he exists, he is already learning in kollel. More slots may result in more qualified Rabbis, but it will never result in finding the “next Rav Pam.”
That was my point, nothing more.
The Wolf
mogold- “ed mipi ed mipi ed mipi ed……..” too many “i heard”…
This is not a court of law and this is not testimony.
The Wolf
When people will be complaining in the coffee room about being unable to find clients despite having a few years’ experience as a well-regarded Shalom Bayis counselor, then I’ll grant you that we will have reached a saturation point – at which point you can be concerned about dilution of talent.
I agree with you here. If you don’t have enough people to fill the positions, dilution of talent doesn’t really matter.
If someone decides in Bais Medrish of Kollel that they want to learn, they are given the option to do so. Furthermore, those who have no chance of “becoming the next Rav Pam” are not told to get a job, but are allowed to remain in kollel, expanding the number of positions needed.
Most kollellim have entrance standards. They do NOT take anyone who walks in off the street and announces he wants to sit and learn. This is because there are only so many potential kollel positions available. You cannot expand kollel indefinitely simply because at some point, we can no longer financially support them.
In addition, your rejoinder about Minor League ball doesn’t really stand up either. Minor League Baseball doesn’t turn away those who don’t have a prayer of being a Derek Jeter either. The minor leagues are filled with players who have no chance to play at the major league level, let alone be a superstar. True, you have to have a certain level of talent, but you certainly don’t have to have the potential to be a superstar.
Lastly, you missed what was perhaps the most important point — it takes more than talent to be the top at any field, be it baseball or learning or just about anything else. It takes drive, determination, effort, perseverance and a genuine love and desire to do whatever it you’re doing. Most people don’t suddenly wake up one morning with those qualities — they’re largely innate qualities that one often has or does not have. To be the “next Rav Pam” you have to have those qualities — and someone who has those qualities is *already* learning and striving toward the goal. He’s not a computer programmer or lawyer or accountant looking to quit his job. Someone who has that rare combination of qualities could probably do nothing else but learn.
The Wolf
It’s assur to publicly go against the minhag hamokem of the shul.
I’m not so certain that not saying “L’Dovid” is considered “public” (as opposed to Kedusha, which by its very nature, is public). After all, when I daven in a Sefard shul, I still say “Hodu” after “Baruch Sheamar” — no one knows the difference anyway, so it’s not public. However, by tachanun on Monday/Thursday, I will do nefilas apaim with the tzibbur (before V’hu Rachum) rather than after (as is the custom in Minhag Ashkenaz) because my doing it different would be very public.
In any event, walking out early (whether you say it or not) is disrespectful and should not be done. Likewise, those who daven Nusach Sefard should not do so by Ma’ariv at an Ashkenaz minyan.
The Wolf
There is not the same (disproportionately small) percentage of people with potential for good middos and ability to intervene successfully as there are superstar ballplayers.
I think there has been some confusion here because avhaben (perhaps mistakenly) shifted the focus of the conversation.
Originally, we were talking about rabbanim who are capable of giving effective marriage therapy. There, I grant you that you don’t need to be a statistical outlier to be successful.*
However, when you start talking about “the next Rav Pam” and “the next Gadol HaDor,” (as avhaben began doing) then you are dealing with outliers, and there my argument stands.
My apologies, as I went along with the shift of focus without realizing it as well.
The Wolf
* Even so, my point about dilution of talent applies here as well. By adding more students, you’re only going to produce (on average) lesser talents, not greater. Those with the temperment, desire and ability to be rabbinical marriage therapists are already training to do so.
That’s why we need many many Yeshivaleit and Kollelleit, so that we shouldn’t lose that one needle in the haystack who will be the next godol hador.
While not wanting to get into the argument of whether or not universal kollel is a good or bad idea, I do feel the need to point out that that’s not how things work. Increasing the number of people in kollel will NOT increase the odds of finding “the next Rav Pam.”
To use a secular analogy, consider major league baseball. There are 30 teams with 25 players per team (ignoring the disabled list and other such things). The number of players on those rosters represent the “cream of the crop” as far as baseball talent goes.
To help develop those players, the minor leagues exist. There are a number of minor leagues that supply players to the two major leagues. Currently, there are 19 leagues in minor league baseball (not counting independent leagues).
You might think that, in the hopes of producing the next superstar, there should be more minor leagues employing more minor leaguers. Alas, it wouldn’t work. The reason is because talent is distributed along a bell curve. Those playing major league baseball represent everyone in the 99.9th percentile or higher*. Those in the minors represent those in the 98th* percentile or higher. Anyone who was interested in becoming a superstar and had the potential is *already* playing ball. Adding more minor leaguers will simply add those in the 96th and 97th percentile, not those who are in the 99.999th percentile who go on to become the real superstars.
The same applies here as well. Adding more kollel students** will not cause you to find the “next Rav Pam.” The “next Rav Pam” (if he exists) is *already* in yeshiva/kollel learning. You can’t manufacture him by adding more kollel students, as any kollel students added will be of lesser quality, not greater.
Your argument might work if people attended kollel randomly. Then you can argue that the more you admit, the greater the chance of finding the next outlier. But people don’t attend kollel randomly. Those that have the necessary drive, desire and comportment to be the “next Rav Pam” will already be in kollel. If he’s not, then he probably doesn’t have those qualities anyway.
The Wolf
* No, that’s not the exact number — I’m just using it for illustration purposes.
** which, again, I’m not necessarily arguing is good or bad. That’s not the focus of my argument.
If I have a plan to finish the whole Shisha Sidrei Mishna and make a siyum then do I also make a siyum after I finish each seder?
I personally didn’t do it, but I don’t see any reason why you shouldn’t.
The Wolf
Bring up Yeshivaleit to be the next generations of Rav Pam’s.
Far easier said than done. You cannot simply produce “the next generation” of someone who was so far an outlier. You can hope to find the next version of that outlier, and perhaps help it along, but you cannot produce it on demand.
The Wolf
I apologize. As you so succinctly told us, you are the biggest anav around
An apology wherein you do the very thing you are apologizing for is no apology.
I never said that I was “the biggest anav around” or anything remotely similar. I don’t see why you seem to like saying that I say things that I never said. Saying that ga’avah is not one of my faults does not equal saying that one is “the biggest anav around.” That’s like saying that because I’ve never been drunk I must be the world’s greatest abstainer. In fact, I do drink, but never to the point of drunkenness.
Can you understand that there is lots of middle ground between those two position that I, like 99% of the population occupy.
Now, how about an honest, sincere and genuine apology.
The Wolf
I personally never understood the whole limo thing. I didn’t do it. But if others want to have it, then by all means, I have no argument.
However, hitting up the guests at the wedding for money is tacky and rude. This should be arranged and paid for beforehand — if not by the couple, then by their friends.
The Wolf
And it is not just a little ga’avah on your behalf and Wolf’s as well that you feel that only what you do is correct, any who does more is crazy.
EXCUSE ME??
I never said anything even remotely like that! I pointed out to RebRY that not everyone uses six braids and that other braid counts can be considered legitimate as well. That was it. Nowhere did I disparage anyone who makes a six-braid or any other count. Furthermore, I even confirmed to you that when I use three, it’s not out of any minhag but plain, simple convenience. NOWHERE did I say that “[my way] is correct and anyone who does more is crazy.” I challenge to show me where in this thread I made a remark even remotely like that.
Look, I love a good argument and debate. By all means, challenge me on anything I actually *did* say. But don’t go ahead and put words in my mouth and put forth arguments on my behalf that I never made.
Lastly, there are many horrible, negative things you can truthfully say about me — Lord knows I say plenty of them myself. But I think it can safely be said that ga’avah is NOT one of my faults.
I expect your apology forthwith.
The Wolf
wolf: You are frightening. Find yourslf a good psychiatrist asap.
You’re right, of course, but not for the reason you think.
Englishman has, so eloquently, proven the point (via his quote from the Igros Moshe) that one can take a halachic p’sak in a sefer at face value and that, if there are no qualifications and/or exceptions mentioned, the rule should be read as absolute.
I simply took that and applied it to the Shulchan Aruch. It says “Ain Shoalin B’shlom Isha K’lal.” One may not ask about the welfare of a woman at all. Not only are no exceptions mentions, but the word “K’lal” (translated by me as “at all” in this instance) is added. I believe the case could logically be made that there are no exceptions. This includes any woman — including close relatives (i.e. one’s daughter, mother, sister, perhaps even one’s wife).
However, I *want* to know what’s going on in the lives of my close relatives. I *want* to know how my daughter is doing. I want to know what’s going on with my sister, my mother and my grandmother. I *want* to know how my stepmother is doing and how my nieces are faring. However, according to the Shulchan Aruch, such things are strictly forbidden.
Now, there is a term for a person who *wants* to do forbidden things with close relatives. Actually, there are several terms — deviant, pervert, sicko, monster and lecher come to mind. I’m sure there are others that I haven’t thought of at the moment.
However, despite the fact that those terms can be applied to me, I still *want* to ask about the general welfare of these people. I care about them and love them, even if, perhaps, I shouldn’t. I *need* to ask about them and make sure they’re well.
Well, people who feel the *need* to do things that are sick and perverted need to be locked up and seen by a psychiatrist. So, you see, you are correct… but not for the reason you thought.
The Wolf
Sam: Igros Moshe EH 4:60 states quote “There is also a severe prohibition from the Torah in close friendships between a young man and woman.” end-quote It makes no exemptions.
Hey, that’s *exactly* the point I was making regarding the SA. “Ain Shoalim B’shlom Ishah K’lal” — no exemptions. Sister, niece, stepmother, daughter — there are no exceptions to the rule. And since I’ve asked about the welfare of all of the above, it’s obvious that I’m a disgusting pervert.
The Wolf
It is simple, you have no such minhag.
I never claimed it was a minhag. But that being said, I don’t believe it can be said that six-braid challah is the only “legitimate” type of challah.
In addition, the OP didn’t specify a number of braids.
The Wolf
Since,apparently you have a minhag to braid challah, and to use three braids, would you share the reason for your minhag.
The reason for my “minhag” is that three is easiest for me.
You seem to be offended by the reason offered by RebRy, perhaps you can afford a more profound reason, and not resort to the mundane.
Who said I was offended? I was merely pointing out that not everyone uses six braids.
The Wolf
6 braids on each = 12, corresponding to the lechem hapunim
Except that not everyone does six braids. When I make challah, I usually only do three braids.
The Wolf
R’ Chaim Ozer was not such a fan of Chassidus
What, exactly, do you mean by “not such a fan.”
After all, there are people who follow derachim that I am “not a fan of” but I still honor and/or respect them personally.
The Wolf
someone told my mother it’s because in the torah it says that Sarah Imeinu covered her head and not her hair.
I’m not aware of any pasuk that states such a thing. If you know of one, please provide a reference.
Furthermore, I believe that even if such a pasuk does exist, the fact that it does not mention hair cannot be used as proof that she did not have any.
The Wolf