I don’t know about other states, but in NJ the math is limited to basic algebra and geometry – and they give you the formulas on the actual test! And there is no science, the rest of the test is all reading comprehension. That is, they might ask you to read a paragraph about a scientific topic and then give you a question with a multiple choice, but that’s it; you don’t need to have any prior knowledge.

Wolf-

I think that this is the answer. I do not know how contemporary poskim rule on the subject, but if you’ll look in Mesechta Smachos (a.k.a. Masechta Avel Rabasi, one of the ‘masechtos k’tanos’) it seems clear that one who commits suicide due to emotional stress is not in the category of suicides you mentioned who has the halacha of a mumar. Also, Tosafos in Avoda Zara (18a) says that it is mutar to kill oneself if he is afraid that otherwise someone will torture him to do something wrong and he knows he will not have the strength to hold out. And the gemara over there is clear that in extreme pain that will eventually result in death it may not be so bad if one commits suicide either. It seems apparent that the category of suicides you refer to includes only a specific type, namely those who are emotionally stable yet do not believe their life has a purpose. Not every murderer is making such a ‘lofty’ claim when he kills someone, because he may not be thinking that much. But someone of sound mind who makes the decision to kill himself must have thought long and hard and come to the conclusion that his life has no purpose, and that is why it is such a terrible act. It is a denial of everything the Torah stands for.

chesedname-

If they hold it’s mutar, why not? If you disagree, don’t go in.

Yanky R. and Wolf and everybody else-

The same place where it says the stopped the mei hamarim says that murder became so common that they moved out of the lishkas hagazis so they wouldn’t be capable of meeting out the death penalty. The argument that the Jews are a holy people and commited no crimes is very naive and misinformed, one only has to skim through the navi to know that the Jewish people weren’t exactly perfect.

Ironically, this is one of the arguments that the Torah and the words of the Prophets were, at the very least, divinely mandated, for, as R’ Yaakov Weinberg says, if that wasn’t the case it would have had to have been a vicious anti-semite who wrote it. Take a look, from the moment the Jews leave Egypt and throughout the entire navi you rarely find a good word said about the Jewish people. Why would a Jew make this up?

Back to the topic though, it is clear that there was a lot of murder, adultery, cheating, lying etc. among the Jews as well.

lesschumras-

That’s all fine when you respond that you are following your rav. Until then everyone has the right to speak up and voice their opinion and the opinion of their rav to say that what you are doing is wrong. That is the mitzvah of tochacha. But of course you have the right to respond that you are following your own rav. And she would certainly agree that you have that right. No one is out to get you here.

philosopher-

Today we get married later because we want more out of marriage than years ago and we need to mature before we realize what with what kind of person we want to be married to.

You are presenting your speculation as fact. Who says this is the reason? I think you are ignoring a very simple possibility. In the olden days, no one went to school the way we did. They were taught whatever they were taught as young children, and your average Joe was earning a living by the time he was 10. And they weren’t working in offices either. In a society where children are on the street at such a young age, of course they will develop a sense of responsibility for their actions earlier. Surely they will be prepared for marriage earlier as well. Nowadays, kids have no life experience at that age, for they are still in school and everything they need is handed to them. Therefore although the halachic status of bar and bas mitzva may not change, I think it is highly unreasonable and naive to expect the same level of responsibility from a 12/13 year old of 2010 as one from the old world.

As for your ‘proofs’, I can only echo what SJS and rebetzin said. There are arguments to the contrary as well, and refutations to every point you’ve made, which demonstrate, at the very least, that there can possibly be other explanations. I am only debating with myself whether or not it is worth playing devil’s advocate here.

sof davar hakol nishma-

I agree that there is a concept of emunah. But emunah is precisely where there isn’t perfect evidence, and therefore I think it is a big mistake when people claim that they have ‘proof’ for these things, because their proofs are refutable and when they are refuted they diminish the value of the claim being made.

philosopher-

There are VERY COMPELLING LOGICAL PROOFS OF THE TORAH’S DIVINE ORIGINS.

Maybe you need to learn what a proof is. A proof is something which cannot logically be denied. There is no such proof about what you’ve said. Yes, there are some very interesting arguments which may make it easier and even reasonable to make a leap of faith, but there is no absolute proof.

thank you mod

philosopher-

“The same challenges that Hashem put before each human as a stepping stone to grow, can be claimed by some as THE CAUSE for making them slip down the slippery slope of sin.”

So let me ask you: Does a child born into a family of highway robbers and murderers who knows nothing of wrong and right and certainly not about the Torah, for whom there is no contact with the outside world; does this child have the same bechira as you and me? I would not believe you if you said yes. Even R’ Dessler said there is no such thing as absolute, all-encompassing bechira. There is one point in which we have bechira, and that point varies based on our past experiences and our environment. Outside that we do not have full bechira. Who said everything that causes one to fall was a challenge he could have overcome? Hashem may not hold a person responsible for such a fall, and only hold him responsible when he falls at the point of his bechira. All we know is that there is bechira, not that is encompasses every choice a person ever makes. And the truth is, you can never, ever know for sure if a person did something with his bechira or not, unless you are a navi. It’s difficult enough to know yourself.

lesschumras-

I think emoticon613’s outlook is incorrect, as I have stated extensively. However, she has the right to her opinion. If she thinks it is wrong she has every right to argue that Eye of the Tiger should not be played at weddings. She has a chiyuv of hocheiach tochiach es amisecha. She’s not being selfish, she is doing what the Torah requires her to do. If you disagree, as I do, you have every right to argue with her and to disregard her position. But to badmouth her is wrong and probably intellectually dishonest as well.

no

Kasha-

I sincerely apologize for taking so long to respond. Things have been very hectic lately and I have not had the chance to be at the coffee room. At any rate, let me respond to your point.

The Halacha, from the standpoint of Torah Judaism since the time of the Ge’onim, always has it’s source in the Gemara. No one, not a contemporary posek, nor a rishon, has the power to institute new halachos. Sure, every community can make a takkanos, and a rav can issue a cherem, and a minhag can evolve and become somewhat obligatory, but Halacha per se must always have its source in the gemara.

Of course, the gemara is not so simple. There are various ways to understand many sugyas, and not only must one have good critical thiking and analytical skills, but to say pshat in one line of gemara one needs to know all of the related statements of chazal. This is what the rishonim spent their time with.

The Shulchan Aruch is basically a compendium of the halachos which come out of the gemara, based on the understandings of the rishonim, particularly the Rif, Rambam, and Rosh. It was not intended as a ‘final word’ on any halachos, but rather as a short summary to assist a posek who wishes to ascertain the halacha from the gemara. The mechaber writes this explicitly in his hakdama.

Accordingly, no posek truly has the authority to pasken solely based on his understanding of Shulchan Aruch, without knowledge of the sugya in the gemara, for perhaps his application of the SA is completely incorrect. And certainly no posek has the right to issue a psak which is grounded not in the gemara, nor in the rishonim or the SA, whether l’kula or l’chumra.

I have been taught by my rebbi and by my rav that when approaching a sugya I should learn it with the rishonim, and the Tur/Beis Yosef, and to come up with the halacha from that. If something stated by a later source seems to contradict my conclusion, the I should discuss it with my rabbeim and through pilpul chaverim, and if I still think it is incorrect then ‘ein l’dayan ladun ela ma she’einav ro’os’ – I must follow my own logic.

Not everyone is qualified to learn a sugya and pasken. One who does not have much background in gemara with rishonim should not even be discussing halacha, they should just follow their rav and not get involved in technicalities and reasons, because doing this with their severe lack of knowledge can cause much harm to the halachic system. This is why I consistently tell people on this forum to ask their rav.

When I actually debate a halacha on this forum, my intention is for those who are not simply following their rav. It is for those who wish to ascertain the halacha as though they are poskim themselves, though it is not proper in my opinion. As such, I will not back out of an argument because ‘this rav says this’ or ‘this rav says that’, no matter how great that rav is; even if it is someone I have the utmost respect and honor for. A source for me is a gemara, be it explicit, or implicit through the give-and-take of the meforshim over the ages. Blanket statements, even of gedolim, do not count here.

Everyone should follow the da’as torah of their rav. But that is not what truly determines halacha. It is a safety net for those who do not ascertain the halacha for themselves. We have the right to blindly follow a particular rav, and for the general public this is really the only thing they should be doing. For those who are qualified however, to ascertain it for yourself means to figure it out ultimately from the gemara, without specific regard for da’as torah.

As an afterthought, being qualified isn’t all or nothing. Once a person has reached a certain level of understadning he might be qualified to pasken a sugya that he knows even if he doesn’t quite know all of shas yet. That is something each person should figure out with the guidance of someone who knows them well enough and is qualified to make that judgement about them.

Regarding this particular case, I am aware of the sentiments expressed by many people, even rabbanim, about the inherent impurity existing in non-Jewish music. I do not know of a source for this in the gemara/rishonim, and on the contrary, as I pointed out the Sheilos U’tshuvos throughout the ages permitted the use of non-Jewish music by chazzanim. Therefore I maintain that there is no problem with it (obviously not including where there is nivul peh involved), and anyone wishing to refute this claim will have to do so with more than just the claim of da’as torah.

kasha-

I am not making an assumption. I am looking around and assessing the situation from a very clear vantage point – i.e. being a yeshiva bachur myself in the biggest yeshiva in America. I’m not a fool, and I’m not lying.

As for your second point, I will get too it later. I need to formulate my answer properly.

sofdavar-

I understand that this is your rav’s position. However the mehalech of my rabbeim is that if something is not mentioned than there is nothing wrong with it, because nothing was as you say ‘left unsaid’. There is only the law and its application.