Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Whatever, man.
Don’t forget qishka and qugel.
longarekel – An ashashis is a screen made of material; it is not transparent.
just my hapence – I’m not sure why you think anyone would care about your indication of your reluctance to get started on lo sasur.
just my hapence – I’m not sure why you think anyone would care about your warning not to get you started on lo sasur.
Glass is mentioned in mishnayos (especially seder taharos) and I have no reason to assume it was colored.
Ayin Google and Wikipedia. They had glass in the days of Chazal but it was opaque, not clear. Clear glass was developed in the 9th century and on, and even then it wasn’t the standard in windows until the last 200 years; really until 1902.
Why do you consider that lighting outside, any more than inside the house at the glass window? Also, more importantly, this is a new invention that didn’t exist in the times of Chazal (clear glass wasn’t really around until the last 200 years). Who says something they didn’t anticipate can turn the time from sha’as hasakana back to regular?
longarekel – You asked why I don’t light outside. Where I am located in the tri-state area, a candle lit outside will not remain lit for a long period of time. My answer is sufficient for the majority of CR members as well.
OneOfMany – True, no one really starts with a blank slate, as you explained. And you anticipated my response by saying, “even if you actively verify with conscious thought what you already believe all the way back to its foundation, you will eventually find that your reasoning must be predicated on some truth that you cannot validate.” However, I don’t accept your conclusion. For even if you find, as you say, that your reasoning must be predicated on some truth that you cannot validate; it is still your choice whether or not to accept that assumption which you cannot validate.
Here’s how I see things. Let’s divide up people’s actions into two categories; Day to Day Affairs and General Way of Life. Day to Day Affairs presents choices such as deciding between Walmart and Target. General Way of Life has choices such as deciding between Judaism and Zoroastrianism. In Day to Day Affairs I find it easy to accept that there is a realm of free choice which most people tap into. But in General Way of Life I find it difficult, mainly because I don’t think many people consider changing their way of life that you could say they ever made the conscious decision to stay. I do think that everyone has a “nekudas habechira,” but I think most people’s is limited to their Day to Day Affairs. But what is the significance of bechira in Day to Day Affairs when one’s General Way of Life is determined by the establishment and not by one’s own choice? What is the significance in the free choice one utilizes to wake up for davening when it is done only because of a premise one did not choose? Frumnotyehsivish is right; the Taliban fellow is no more a “bad” person than a frum Jew who never thought about his or her General Way of Life. Neither are bad; they’re both robots; utilizing free choice only when it comes to questions of apples and oranges.
I guess I am a bit confused about the concept in that the more I agree with it the more I fail to see its relevance.
OneOfMany – What you are saying is of course the ideal. We should be constantly seeking to renew our faith and make conscious decisions. But my (perhaps overly skeptical) observation is that most people are pretty complacent and don’t care to do so on a really conscious level. Furthermore, even among people who do constantly seek to renew their faith and make conscious decisions, it seems to me that a large portion of them only do so within the confines of the Matrix, so to speak, i.e. they allow their entire train of conscious thought to be controlled by preconceived notions which they never developed consciously at all. So even if there is conscious growth, it isn’t really the individual’s, but the system’s.
As for your second point: I’m not sure R’ Dessler would agree, and the questioner seems to be interested in his position. But leaving that aside, how does it really change things? Even if there isn’t no bechirah at all, wouldn’t you concede that the bechira of a conditioned person is negligible?
Rabbenu Perachia (Shabbos 21b) cites R’ Hai Gaon as saying that if the candles will go out due to wind or rain it is no different than sha’as hasakanah. The Ritva says the same thing. I haven’t seen anyone who argues.
Things merely labelled DE do not have ta’am chalav. Does anyone seriously have a safek whether or not that is accurate? So basically; you have a safek if it was hot, a safek if it was a ben yomo, a safek if it was a davar hapogem, and to top it all off you know there is no ta’am chalav regardless.
I assume since it has a “D”, that is must be made in milchig keilim which are ben yomo.
Dunno why you’d assume that.
frumnotyeshivish –
You have to decide that for yourself.
frumnotyeshivish –
I think that someone raised in a Taliban environment who goes and kills people for the sake of his religion is not a bad person. It is not his fault. At the same time, I wouldn’t really call him a person at all. He is simply a robot; a product of the system. There are people like that in every culture, perhaps far more than not. They’re not bad, but they’re not good either. They’re nothing.
+1
Yes.
hehe
ready now –
I never contradicted, nor do I disagree with that.
I am sure it is not difficult for you to understand the idea that certain things are more untzniusdig in more insular communities than they are in more integrated ones. Even the halacha recognizes this distinction to some extent. It is all about perception. If you are in a place where it is not normal for people to dress a certain way and you see someone dressed that way, it will probably make you react differently than if you see the same person dressed the same way in a place where it is normal.
That is analogous to what is going on here. Of course, parents and teachers have always been showing affection, and that is a wonderful thing. But each society has its own ways of expressing affection. If you express it in a way that is different from the norms of the society, your intentions might be to express affection, but it will not be taken that way. On the contrary, depending on the circumstances you could cause great psychological damage to the child by doing so. So stick to showing affection in ways which fit the societal norms.
Lol Syag, hi there 🙂
A person cannot be accused, tried, and punished without two simultaneous valid witnesses.
You should learn the second siman in Choshen Mishpat and the plethora of teshuvos in the rishonim which relate to it. If/since there is no better system in place to protect the community it is very easy to Halachically justify using the American justice system.
BaalHabooze –
Kosher.
yekke2 –
The Rambam doesn’t say what you said he does.
If you are proving from pesukim that Hashem hears, I have much better stuff. The pesukim say that Hashem has an arm, a back, eyes, and so on. It’s mefurash, Hashem has a body…
I quote from the Rambam:
“You, however, know that, strictly speaking, the condition of all the sensations is the same, that the same argument which is employed against the existence of touch and taste in God, may be used against sight, hearing, and smell; for they all are material perceptions and impressions which are subject to change… In truth, however, no real attribute, implying an addition to His essence, can be applied to Him, as will be proved.” – Guide 2:47
The Rambam is clear about his opinion in numerous places: Hashem’s existence cannot be described in any way whatsoever, and ascribing any of the senses to him is tantamount to saying he has a body. Accordingly, every pasuk which seems to contradict this is to be taken figuratively.
Whether you like it or not, to assert that Hashem hears is by definition a denial of the Rambam’s third Principle of Faith.
But if you can say he hears then you are saying that he is subject to your perceptions. The Rambam would probably call you a kofer for saying Hashem hears.
The hurricane came because of all of the people who think and act differently than me.
Good luck with everything. Utilize your strengths and vaks ois to be all you can be.
Wolf – note OneOfMany’s research here:
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/chazal-and-science#post-410258
Too many names for me.
Oy
To people quoting ???? ???? ??, way to quote out of context. Here’s a little more from that paragraph:
??? ????????? ????? ???????? ???????? ???????????? ?????????? ???????? ???????? ?????? ????? ???????? ????????????? ?????? ???????? ?????. ????????? ????? ???? ?????????? ?????? ?????????? ????????? ??? ????? ?????? ??????????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????????? ???????? ????????? ???????????? ???????????? ???????????? ???? ????? ????????. ?????? ?????????? ?????????? ???? ??????????? ??? ?????? ?????????. ???????? ???????? ??????? ????? ??? ???????? ??? ????????? ???? ????????? ?????????? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ????????
The context is that it is a curse, not a directive.
Would you also say that the Torah is against painkillers during childbirth? Or against technology that stops weeds and thorns from hurting plants? If yes then we have bigger things to argue about.
What is wrong with society reaching the point where they “fix” ???? ???? ?? as well? On the contrary, it would seem from the context that modern sensibilities in this area are something to celebrate!
OneOfMany – Nice work!
Sam – Good to know, thanks!
Sam – I’m not getting involved in this discussion but just FYI that is probably the most contested opinion of the Noda BiYehuda out there.
squeak –
For reference, in case you’d like to hone your argument:
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1525&st=&pgnum=239&hilite=
BTW what I wrote is a Rashi in Chumash (Shemos 22:21).
The laws of how to treat a an orphan and a widow are not really limited to them. The reason the Torah specifies the orphan and the widow is simply because those are the people who, having no one to protect them, are often subject to abuse more than others. But in truth, abuse is wrong no matter who it is directed at, regardless of age, gender, or marital status.
Popa, lol 😀
No, both were issur.
snort
The baked goods in any DD are chalav stam.
Nothing in DD is made from scratch in the store, it all comes from the factory. The muffins, for example, in the kosher DD are the same ones as the non-kosher one; the only difference is that the kosher DD only gets sent the kosher products. So any product containing milk will be chalav stam.
Anyone upset Madame Morrible lately?
Not that I care whether or not she is an atheist, but those words don’t imply atheism in any way. They simply state that she doesn’t believe God pays attention to her prayers, regardless of whether or not God exists. That might possibly be “kefira” (I am not getting involved in that argument) but it isn’t atheism.
When I took my permit test I believe they said 1 car length per 10 mph. For example, 5 car lengths for 50 mph.
I disagree with the notion that meditation is not a Jewish thing. Well I don’t really disagree with it per se, but with its implications.
Meditation is as much a Jewish thing as eating apples or doing exercise. It is a tool for life. If it speaks to you, doesn’t hurt anyone, and isn’t bad in God’s eyes (stuff Halacha defines), then it can be utilized for personal growth. As the popular idiom goes, whatever floats your boat. God wants you to be yourself; not someone else, and certainly not a robot. So if meditation speaks to you, then using it for personal growth is most certainly a Jewish thing.
Well then this Rosh Yeshiva should be passeled because he ignores the words of the Tanna; ???????????? ??????, ????????, ?????????? ?????????????, ??????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ???????? ????? ????????, ??????????? ?????????????? ????????? ?????????? ??????????, ????????? ???? ???????? ??????????.
Check out the book “Jewish Meditation” by Aryeh Kaplan.
so it’s solely a communal issue
can’t believe i didn’t catch that… snort :p
Toi –
First of all, ???? ???? has nothing to do with anything when we are discussing how we deal with things. This entire discussion is about public policy, not on how Hashem should deal with people. Second, the Chasam Sofer (brought in PT to YD 185:9) writes that even ???? ???? there is no such thing, and the Chazal you refer to is only talking about special times when there was a gezeira that everyone should die, such as the dor hamidbar.
the little i know –
What I wrote is correct. You are mistaken.