Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@KnPanel: I was taught by my rebbe z’l, that a Jew has no right to judge another person’s belief system.
(a) If you mean “judge” in terms of blame, or holding accountable, you are correct. But as far as tolerance and acceptance is concerned, “live and let live” is by no means a Jewish policy.
(b) Supposedly, the correlation of Pakistani men involved in this crime is nothing to do with their belief system, but more of a cultural issue. Terrorism can be rooted to religion, and then you could [incorrectly] say that we have no right to judge their belief system. Abusing children has no source in religion [other than the fact that Muslim religious leaders from day one were pedophiles].
Accusations from the English Defence League? Perhaps take a look at the news. Take a look at the mugshots of the convicted abusers, and see if you can come up with your own conclusion.
Women, on the other hand, should always wear black out of tznius concerns – even at night. This definitely overrides the safety concerns, because אבוזרייהו דגלוי עריות is Yeharoh ve’al ya’avor.
In the shoplifting thread there was debate as to whether stealing from nonjews is theft
There was no such debate.
It was unequivocally agreed (as per explicit Gemaras to this effect) that stealing from non Jews is prohibited. The discussion was whether there is an obligation to return a stolen item when stolen from a non Jew, which seems to be a debate in the Poskim, and depends on the exact classification of the prohibition to steal from a non Jew.
If you don’t like the fact that a non-Jew can have different halachos to a Jew, there is nothing I can do to help you. If you want to deny the fact that non-Jew can have different halachos to a Jew, I can happily prove it to you.
I find it interesting how some posters feel the need to misquote or misinterpret other posts into something they can ridicule. This is a problem in posters of both extremes, unfortunately.
Highly relevant point from Professor Umbridge:
The Ministry for Magic has always considered the education of young witches and wizards to be of vital importance. The rare gifts with which you were born may come to nothing if not nurtured and honed by careful instruction. The ancient skills unique to the wizarding community must be passed down the generations lest we lose them for ever. The treasure trove of magical knowledge amassed by our ancestors must be guarded, replenished and polished by those who have been called to the noble profession of teaching. Every headmaster and headmistress of Hogwarts has brought something new to the weighty task of governing this historic school, and that is as it should be, for without progress there will be stagnation and decay. There again, progress for progress’s sake must be discouraged, for our tried and tested traditions often require no tinkering. A balance, then, between old and new, between permanence and change, between tradition and innovation because some changes will be for the better, while others will come, in the fullness of time, to be recognized as errors of judgement. Meanwhile, some old habits will be retained, and rightly so, whereas others, outmoded and outworn, must be abandoned. Let us move forward, then, into a new era of openness, effectiveness and accountability, intent on preserving what ought to be preserved, perfecting what needs to be perfected, and pruning wherever we find practices that ought to be prohibited.
Who said these modem special ed techniques are effective and/or appropriate?
Why shouldn’t they be appropriate? To defend inaction because proposed techniques are inappropriate needs to be backed up with a reason to believe them wrong for whatever reason.
As to their effectiveness, there are two points: (a) They are worth a try, because the current system is failing far too many kids. (b) The people developing these techniques are those who are noticing the issues in the first place – aka, the people who care.
Why do you have reason to doubt their effectiveness? Me thinks the key word in your post is ‘modern’. And the rest of your point loses it’s touch, I’m afraid.
לא תסור מן הדבר אשר יגידו לך ימין ושמאל – New interpretation :- Do not stray from what they tell you to the Right or to the Left.
“Thank G-d for Hashem”
RebYidd23 – There is a chiyuv to rebuke at all times, before, during and after the sin.
Where the source of the obligation to prevent a sin taking place comes from is a matter of debate in the Achronim. Many say the source is הוכח תוכיח.
Gavriel613 – For that price, you could have quoted Kiddushin 49b.
If the motive for the crime is religious based, then the crime is connected to the religion; the religion calls for them to commit this crime. And if the motive for the crime is because of biological differences between man and woman, then obviously this is relevant to prevention.
A basic common denominator does not show causality. And if there is no reason to say that people of one ethnic minority should have more taivah, less control, more opportunity or more motive to commit the crime, then the observation means nothing.
Goodness, Joseph, you do ask for trouble.
So – you’ll probably agree that a huge green and purple knitted Yarmulka is better than a velvet black one, right?
That thread involves a pretty lively debate regarding the interface between Da’as and asking Shailas, which is what the OP asked about.
Britain has a problem with black haired people exploiting white children. Let’s face the facts, its true!! Most of the convicted abusers have had black hair, not brown, blonde or any other color. This is an issue, and we must deal with it. What? It doesn’t make any sense that a hair color can play a role in defining abusers? Well, those are the facts.
There.
I said it.
[#CRDSYAG]
???????????? ??? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????. ???? ?? ??? ??????
????
Even if they are atheists?!
Why do you daven for daas if you already have it?
I once had a different question: In the entire Shemoina Esrei (with the obvious exception of the First Three and Last Three), we start every brocho with a direct tefillah/bakashah. This is the only brocho which begins with an intro: אתה חונן לאדם דעת. Why is that so? We don’t start ברך עלינו by acknowledging that Hashem is the Source of all Parnassah?
I think the answer is based on your question. Everything else is [relatively] easy to recognize – with a little emunah and betachon – that it comes from Hashem. Health, Wealth, Redemption, Spiritual Connection. There is one thing which is harder to acknowledge – Intellectual Capacity, Understanding, Wisdom, Knowledge. It is very easy to think – hey, this is a natural talent. Yes, thank You Hashem for deciding to give me the talent when You chose my genetic makeup, but now, I am what I am – I’ll manage on my own, thank You very much. This is why we preface the brocho with “אתה חונן לאדם דעת – You bestow wisdom upon Man” – the word חונן is in present tense. Everything comes from Hashem, and our success in intellectual endeavors no less than anything else.
To those of you who keep quoting from Rabbi Kook – I think he has a famous quote about Yiddish. Anybody know it?
You asked a specific question that was way outside of the gray zone… suggesting that she does not care about halacha.
I didn’t read the question that way. To me, he was asking whether there would be any scenarios today which would constitute Mesirah, not whether she believes the Torah came down including a parshah of Mesirah. There is plenty mokom to say that nowadays Mesirah is no longer an issue – or at least, is not as chomur as it ever was. Not because the Torah changed, but because the legal system has changed.
I don’t understand what you are quoting from the Meiri. If you quote his loshon, or provide a link, or explain in your own words what he says, I’d be happy to respond.
Please correct me if I’m wrong. Rav Akiva Eiger was the Chasam Sofer’s second wife’s father. The CS may have had children from his first wife who are therefore not RAE einiklach.
You are correct that Reb Akiva Eiger’s daughter was the Chasam Sofer’s second wife. But from what I understand, the first wife died childless. He had 10 children from the second marriage.
The idea of Yichus is to appreciate the fact that if you are descended from _____, it means that you have a certain potential as a result. Being the descendant of the Avos means that we have inherited the greatest potential possible and it is much more deeply ingrained than the potential one has as a result of being descended from more contemporary Gedolim.
I am not a yachsan; I do not descend from any famously prestigious lineage; I always found it quite childish to boast of Yichus. Nevertheless, it isn’t just boasting, there is some sort of maaleh, although I don’t know what it is (I don’t think zchus avos is the correct answer). Are you saying that as long as you descend from the Avos, having other gedolim along the route is irrelevant? Or are you just decrying the condescending attitude of Yichus?
For that matter, they are all the descendants of Yaakov Avinu. Why don’t they mention that? What greater yichus can you have than that?
I imagine that was said in jest. It is obviously very different – people announce Yichus as a sign of pride or prestige; it involves having lineage that others don’t. Whatever the ma’aleh of Yichus is, you trace yourselves to someone special. My question was why they all stop at the Chasam Sofer, but don’t continue one extra generation to his shver, R’ Akiva Eiger.
Please cite your source for your contention that the thief does not have to return the object he stole from a goy. How else would he do teshuva?
He must return it because of Chilul Hashem. There is no obligation MiHilchos Gzeilah, though. See Nesivos 348 for further explanation. The mitzva of והשיב את הגזילה אשר גזל doesn’t apply.
(I don’t remember the whole sugya, nor do I have time to look at it now. There is definitely a discussion to locate source for the issur to steal from a goy – whether it is the regular לא תגזול (Rambam), whether it is a דרבנן (I think the Maharshal holds it is אסמכתא, and the Achronim are medayek that Rashi Sanhedrin 57[?] holds like that too), or if it is an עשה (See BB”K 113). It will make a difference whether you have a mekor for a chiyuv Hashavah. See the Nesivos, who compares it to הפקעת הלואתו.)
See the Rema here.
Although, the Rambam seems to pasken that you must return it, although it might be because of Chillul Hashem. Not sure.
I agree with you, actually. In my high school, we had a rebbi who tried to teach in Yiddish, and I walked out of class in protest, because I didn’t understand a word he was saying, and we were officially an English speaking school.
I agree, you haven’t been following this thread
Guilty as charged.
https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/calling-cops-on-frum-beighbor/page/2/#post-1337320
There are a few reasons why you should protest the shoplifting, but they each have different ramifications:
1) Hocheach Tochiach es Amisecha: You are obligated to rebuke your fellow when he contravenes the Torah laws. Regarding something which is “mefurash baTorah”, we don’t say מוטב שיהיו שוגגים ואל יהיו מזידים, and you must rebuke him, even if you think it likely that he will not listen. This would obligate you to rebuke him privately.
2) Chillul Hashem – I think the earliest source for this is Rabbeinu Yonah, and it is brought by the Mishna Berura – you must speak out when someone publicly transgresses the Torah, so that it doesn’t look like you consent to what he does. This would obligate a public comment. However, if nobody else saw this, you cause more Chillul Hashem by saying anything publicly than by ignoring it.
3) Lehafrish Me’Issurim – You are obligated to stop a fellow Jew from transgressing any Issur. You may/must use necessary physical force to enforce that nobody transgresses a commandment (BB”K 28a). There is a discussion in the Poskim if this obligation extends to enforce positive commandments or only to prevent transgression of negative commandments (originally Ketzos v. Nesivos 3). If you have the capacity to stop him stealing, you must definitely do so. However, the moment he picks it up with intention to take it, he has already transgressed the prohibition; now there is only a chiyuv to return it.
I am not sure what the halachah would be regarding the obligation to return a stolen item – would that be classified under positive commandment (in which case it would be a machlokes Ketzos and Nesivos) or is it the same as a negative commandment because it is a תיקון of לא תגזול in the form of לאו הניתק לעשה.
Also, if the owner is a Goy, then although it is prohibited to steal, there is no obligation to return the item once you have taken it. Therefore, once he picked it up, he is allowed to keep it, unless there is an issue of חילול ה’ (which there won’t be if you are the only guy who has seen it and don’t plan on trumpeting it).
The Halachos of Macha’ah (which cases require a protest, what constitutes a protest, whether to protest publicly or privately) are discussed by the Mishna Berura in the beginning of Hilchos Yom Kippur. If I remember correctly, he is not consistent with his policy in Chafetz Chaim (question mark).
Wow, how condescending. Is this supposed to be an intellectual insult or a hashkofik one? How about i ask you instead; do you believe there’s something called kashrus? If you’re hungry does it still apply? If you have good reason to be pretty certain the mashgiach is a fraud do you close your eyes and call it mesira?
Not sure what planet your question fell from but it sure is a head scratcher(and not the first time you’ve pulled that on me either)With respect, Syag – it may not have been you who spelled it out, but others have mentioned the possibility (stated as fact, as is the way of ‘debates’ on the CR) that Mesirah is not relevant in todays day and age – something which is highly logical, actually, seeing as the legal system works entirely different and lives are no longer at stake. [It is, of course, a debate in the Poskim] I haven’t paid enough attention to this thread to know whether you do or do not support this position, but others who are rallying on ‘your side of the argument’ have mentioned it. I think it is a perfectly valid question to pose to all those who threw any mention of Mesirah out the window – when do you think that it would be relevant?
Avi K – I have never asked them; and it is almost irrelevant to this discussion. If you are discussing the advantages of knowing or understanding Yiddish, the fact that you need it to communicate in some of the worlds best yeshivas is good enough for a ben Torah.
Why they don’t speak English? Most of them don’t understand it at all. If you are brought up in a totally isolated community in Yerushalayim by parents who come from Poland, the likelihood is that you don’t speak English. Some of the hierarchy have picked up a bit of English (one of them married a London girl), but the way they learn is in Yiddish. If you want to ask a question in Yiddish, you can. Nobody will complain or say a word. But many feel uncomfortable doing so. You can speak to them in Ivrit, surprisingly.
mw13: I wish people would be half as concerned about the spread of sinas chinom as they tend to be about the spread of political ideas that they disagree with…
The truest post on this thread.
If you are a ben Torah, knowledge of Yiddish is highly useful. Most of the advanced world-class (Yeshivish or Chassidish) Shiurim available today are in Yiddish. Most yungerleit are learning in a blend of Yiddish, Aramaic & English (#YeshivisheReid).
To be in the Yeshivish system without knowing Yiddish puts you at a disadvantage. You won’t understand the Shiurim, you won’t understand the Shmuzen.
When I started Yeshiva, my rudimentary Yiddish was enough to tide me through; I could listen and understand most Shiurim (the shmuzen were more of a challenge at the beginning), but I couldn’t speak it. I was zoiche to listen to chaburos from a fantastic Talmid Chochom, back when I started Yeshiva. I used to “ding in” in English, and the Maggid Shiur couldn’t understand a word. In the beginning, I used to ask the guy next to me and he would ask for me; that doesn’t work if you’re going to continue an interactive discussion. Eventually, I would write down my questions and break my teeth in Yiddish afterwards, in private, when it was less embarrassing.
In the Yeshiva I am in now, most of the hierarchy either don’t or won’t speak English. If you want to discuss a sugya with the Maggidei Shiur or Rosh Yeshiva, you have to discuss in Yiddish. And if you can’t, you’re at a major disadvantage.Who said otherwise.
Have you ever heard anyone introducing themselves as a Reb Akiva Eiger Einekal? It never happens. The first introduction is “I’m a Chassam Sofer EInekel”. It doesn’t even come into the same sentence.
Once you’re here anyway…
All “Chasam Sofer eineklach” pride themselves for being the progeny of the great Chasam Sofer – why don’t we ever hear you calling yourselves “R’ Akiva Eiger Eineklach”? Aren’t all Chasam Sofer eineklach automatically from the progeny of R’ Akiva Eiger?
There are three possible answers:
1) Yes (this is how I understood the OP)
definitely call the police. (Is there anyone, besides for Joseph, who disagrees in this situation?)I agree that you must do whatever necessary to prevent the danger. If you must, you definitely call the police. But calling the authorities – while often the most comfortable approach – isn’t necessarily something you have to do. If you can burst into the room and stop the danger yourself, you may be obligated to do that rather than reporting.
Unless you are certain that there is danger, and that you would classify the abuser as a Roidef. In that case, you can probably לכתחילה call the authorities.
Syag versus the Psak Halacha of the Rov of the shul both the OP and the neighbor with the raised voice (that the OP clearly stated in multiple comments that he’s unsure if anything untoward is occurring.)
Who do you choose? Syag or the Psak of the mutual Rov of both the neighbor and the OP?
I’d probably side with Syag over many “Rov of shuls”. As you are hopefully aware, being a Rav of a Shul means not much; in some places it means that you have a basic grasp of the Hebrew Alphabet (and perhaps the ability to blow a Shofar) and arrange the minyan; in some places being a Rav automatically qualifies you as a Ba’al Koreh. Not every “rov of a shul” has the knowledge, understanding or comprehension necessary to pasken shailas. Something which is in the Kitzus Shulchan Aruch? Sure. Something in the Magen Avraham? Maybe.
Something which needs a שיקול הדעת? Maybe not.
Anonymous Rabbanim are pretty worthless. I trust Posters who show (albeit anonymously) sound emotional depth, common sense and understanding of people to weigh up these situations. (Again – Everyone agrees that calling the authorities on someone who is in danger is a MUST; most agree that calling the authorities on someone who you know not to be in danger is WRONG. The question is how to classify this scenario. And if there is reasonable suspicion to think that this is even SOFEK SAKANAH, then you are obligated to report)
It’s expected that almost all men go to work. They learn to the point and don’t waste their time with mental gymnastics in the kollelim.
That is an unacceptable comment. It is an insult to the Torah and Bnei Torah worldwide.
It seems like you’ve [apparently] never had the opportunity to taste the sweetness of לימוד התורה בעיון. I pity you for that, and I wish you would have and hope that one day you will get the opportunity to experience for yourself the beauty of it.
Whatever the case is, you have no right to call לימוד התורה “wasting time”.
No Rav is needed to say that if there is danger, you must take action.
No Rav is needed to say that if there is no danger, you must not report anyone about anything.A Rav is needed to define the situation – which is difficult, because it is all based on your perception and conclusions. You need a reliable competent Rav to judge how to classify this case, and follow the psak. The Rav will tell you whether your evidence is enough to constitute safek sakanah, vadai sakanah or no sakanah.
Not every situation warrants reporting to the authorities. If you have a way of dealing with it which doesn’t involve mesirah, you probably are not permitted to report. If that involves you getting involved personally, then לא תעמוד על דם רעך will obligate that, and mesirah will still be forbidden.
Don’t take chances with other people’s lives and do nothing.
Don’t take chances with other peope’s lives and report them to the authorities.Ask a Rav.
Denial, more likely.
So would you call that the elephant in the skirt?