???? ???? ??????

Dr. Seuss-

if a man saw a non-tznius women he must remove her from within his eyesight

Who says? He’s just not allowed to gaze.

Chacham – I believe the Gemara in Avoda Zara says that halacha. Though I don’t believe it has to be ???? only ?????.

Sam2 – If you’re not trying to say anything, then ???? ????? ??????.

I must say, for someone having had no formal education in English, you are pretty good.

A rav is certainly the right person to ask about this, and I encourage you to do so.

It’s a good question. I do know that the Lakewood Police Department is supposedly prepared for such situations.

He is editor of at least one of the Artscroll siddurim (the RCA version maybe?).

But the point is it’s a matter of pragmatism and common sense, nothing more. One doesn’t become a zaken mamrei for arguing with the rishonim. Just a fool. I choose to make this clear because otherwise we run the risk of turning halacha into something monolithic, in which I say that my rav is the ultimate decisor of Halacha and everyone who follows someone else is a kofer, and you say the same, and everyone ends up hating each other. But it isn’t true, someone could theoretically be a bar hachi and argue on the greats of his generation and even those before him. But one needs to be makir mekomo, and one who isn’t is a reckless fool and is ???? ???? ?? ????.

Not to be overly contentious here, but what exactly is the concept of a Gadol Hador and how does it play out in the Halachic discussion?

Pain is hollow

Grief is sure

Speak your mind now

Tell your friend

In the end

In a dream

Sing it slowly

Ride the mean

Do you listen?

Do you hear?

Words are finite

Meanings share

Saunter on now

Be yourself

Love is in there

Trust yourself

Chacham – I think it was more explicit than that. Although I thought it was R’ Yochanan, so maybe this is indeed what I was thinking of. Shkoyach!

MDG-

The head is not ervah, and the requirement to cover the head is not primarily because of ervah. This is a common mistake.

See my posts on the thread I linked to above. Also see my lengthy post here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/how-tznius-are-todays-sheitels

You can’t.

The halacha is primarily that a woman cover her head, not her hair.

The prohibition is for a woman to go out ???? ???? – “her head uncovered” (this is the translation of the Rishonim). The Gemara in Kesubos which introduces this halacha does not mention the word hair.

See my posts here: http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/hair-covering-and-married-women

Sam2-

I agree.

However, the statement is very ambiguous.

In regards to what is it d’rabbanan?

In regards to speaking ????? ??????? why would you say it’s d’rabbanan? Even if it’s an ?????? and ???? in societal norms, at any rate, if in a particular society it is something which can be called “ervah,” then the pasuk of ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? applies. Which would make it d’oraisa, unless you tell me that drasha is an ??????, but you would have to show your basis for saying that. And if in a particular society it is not called “ervah,” then it would be mutar, as the Aruch Hashulchan paskened and numerous other poskim.

In regards to covering it, I have already noted here and on a lot of other threads that I don’t believe this halacha primarily has anything to do with ??? ???? ????.

To everyone saying there is a problem with attractive sheitels: Please see my first post.

????? ? ?”?

There is no such thing as a neder not to eat. As Popa succinctly pointed out, in general, a neder is only an issur on a ????, i.e. had you said for example, “this bread is forbidden to me today,” that would be a neder.

Whether or not the statement has any validity in any case, is the subject of discussion.

The Ran (Nedarim 2b) brings brings a Yerushalmi that has a disagreement about this question; ?’ ???? and ?’ ???? say it’s nothing, while ?’ ???? argues. The Ran says it is mashma that the halacha follows the majority – that it is nothing.

The Ran’s own opinion is also that it is nothing, and he cites Rabbeinu Chananel, the Ri Migash, and the Rashba who accord with this view.

However he mentions that the Ramban disagrees and holds that it is something. The Ran explains that the Ramban means to say that it is valid as a shevua, and the statement used works as a yad.

L’ma’aseh, the Shulchan Aruch (YD 206:5) brings both shitos but concludes that even according to the Ran you need ???? anyway: ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??????.

There is one more possible way out that I can think of according to the Ramban, and that is that on Erev Yom Kippur there is a mitzva to eat, and if what you said indeed counts as a shevua, well, the Mishna (bottom 16a) tells us that a shevua doesn’t work against a mitzva (though you would get malkos for shevuas shav though…). However this is not so simple, because the Ran (8a) is of the opinion that something learned from a drasha is not included in this, and a shevua would work against it. I do not know how we pasken in this shailah.

I know the question is not nogeia anymore; this was just stam hocking. In the event that a real shaila should occur just go to a rav he should have no problem being mattir your neder/shevua.

Beis Hora’ah 732-363-1616

Sam2-

I don’t understand. Aderaba, from that Gemara it should come out like me; the Gemara has a hava amina that only by achilas matza you are yotzei and Rashi explains with the reasoning I gave, and comes out that by tekias shofar it’s also that way, because ???? ??? ?????? ????? (Agav, now I realize where that idea floating around in my head came from). It would therefore seem that even if we pasken ???? ?????? ????? you could be yotzei matza without kavana. Furthermore, even if you should tell me that by matza we wouldn’t say such a thing, I could still hear that eating on Erev Yom Kippur is better, because over there the Torah gives us a specific reason, so one could say that the Torah was makpid on more than just the hana’as achilah (Doesn’t someone say this by sukka?), ???”? here where there is simply a mitzva to eat, drink, and be merry.

I hear your dichui of the raya from Kesubos.

I heard that the Gra brings a raya from the Gemara in Kesubos (5a) that the mitzva is only by day. The Gemara says:

?”? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ?? ??? … ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? ?????

And Rashi explains:

??? ??? ????? – ????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????

??? ??? ??? ????? – ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??????? ???

Btw I would just like to give public recognition to ???????? from which I copy and paste most times I wish to quote from Shas. It is an invaluable resource.

chanie T.-

While Rabbi Sherman may argue, the Radak understands it plainly:

?? ???? ???? –

?? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?? ????, ?? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ????.

?? ??? ????? ??? ?? ??, ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ????? ?????, ?????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???, ??? ?? ????? ??? ????, ?? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ????, ??? ????: [???? ????] (???????) ??? ??? ??? ????, ?? ???? ????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??????, ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ????, ???? ?????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????, ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????.

(copied and pasted from http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/olam_hatanah/mefaresh.asp?book=27&perek=22&mefaresh=radak)

And nobody caught you till now? Ha! Look, now you’ve started a whole bunch of new legends.

Wasn’t it because he had to much blood on his hands? To chanie’s question I mean.