Reputation
12,575
Top tag
Next privilege 15,000 Rep.
Protect questions
Badges
1 26 57
Impact
~74k people reached

Jul
14
comment What level of understanding is required in “learning” for purposes of making a siyum?
@SethJ The Magen Avraham (quoted above) says you can't make a siyum on something you didn't understand. Obviously there are many possible levels of understanding. But let's say a person was supposed to learn a masechta for a siyum: If he tried unsuccessfully to make heads or tails of one mishna, he can't make a siyum on that tractate. Of course his attempt gets credit for "Torah study," but he didn't succeed at completing that mishna in even the most basic manner, and he therefore can't make a siyum according to the Magen Avraham.
Jul
14
comment Is one allowed to be Machmir against a psak?
Although of course you could find legitimate of examples of individuals exhibiting sinath hhinam in either direction (though I question the examples you provided), the point is that the nebulous remarks about certain haredi groups are both irrelevant to the question in the OP and also unfair and one-sided.
Jul
14
comment Is one allowed to be Machmir against a psak?
1. Neither Toldos Aharon nor the Eida supported spitting on the girls in Beit Shemesh; the protesters there were a few wackos acting on their own volition and not representing any group. 2. I've never heard of this reported statement by the Brisker Rav, but it doesn't sound authentic to me (unless there is some missing context?). | I wasn't accusing you of castigating all Charedim; I was saying that there are as many non-Charedim who have blanket sinath hhinam against Charedim (including for non-observance of stringencies like not learning in kollel) as there are vice-versa.
Jul
14
comment Is one allowed to be Machmir against a psak?
I also have a great deal of experience with people from all segments of the religious world, and I totally disagree with the notion that this is more of a problem in the Haredi community than in other communities (there are just as many people who castigate Haredim as vice-versa). Regardless, it is unnecessary to include this type of tangential vitriol in your answer (and other answers, such as the final paragraph here). The fact you have included these sort of extraneous remarks makes your perspective seem biased and your accusations unreliable.
Jul
14
comment Is one allowed to be Machmir against a psak?
Although it is rare for someone to be so vehement as to hate someone else with a different practice, this problem does not exist exclusively in the broader Haredi community; it exists among just about every religious subgroup, and it is symptomatic of a human flaw that any sort of religious or non-religious person could have.
Jul
14
comment Is one allowed to be Machmir against a psak?
No such "groups" exist, to the best of my knowledge. There are (at most) scattered individuals with this mindset, and they do not constitute a "group." And these scattered individuals have diverse religious backgrounds and persuasions; one person might favor a stringency in הלכות שבת, another in הלכות צדקה, another in הלכות תפילה, another might be stringent in opposing people who study in kollel, another might be stringent on wearing תכלת, and yet another person might be stringent against praying at gravesites...
Jul
14
comment Is one allowed to be Machmir against a psak?
Is it necessary to malign certain haredi groups with the accusation that they treat good religious Jews who are not 'avaryanim as though they are because of their "humroth"? Could it be that this will only lead to sinath hhinam?
Jul
14
comment What should a community do if they missed a Parsha?
The Rama (OC 135:2) indicates that they read both portions on the following Shabbos.
Jul
13
comment Source of non-verse in Selichot
...Or maybe it's the Rokeach's version of M'nachos 87a.
Jul
13
comment Source of non-verse in Selichot
It seems like the Rokeach (Peirushei Siddur HaT'filla §96) may have a version of the Midrash Rabba (Sh'mos 18:5) that says the shom'rim in Y'sha'yahu 62:6 (cited in Aryeh's answer) are the angels Michael and Gavriel who beseech HaShem with this formulation.
Jul
12
comment Is it forbidden to teach Torah to non-Jews on Mi Yodeya?
Highly related (duplicate?): judaism.stackexchange.com/q/7260 and judaism.stackexchange.com/q/33964. Meta: meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/q/42 and meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/q/1436.
Jul
12
comment Quote from Chazal
@mevaqesh Probably true (though it's not a guarantee). This explanation of the pasuk most likely does not trace all the way back to Chazal, but I do often hear it associated with this idea. Anyway, I often see contemporary books cite "Chazal" for a concept that originated later, so maybe that's the case in the OP.
Jul
12
comment Is the Gemara (Shabbos 116b) quoting the New Testament?
+1. I suspect that the corrupt "philosopher" judge in the story was basing the first quote on Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female..."
Jul
12
comment Where does the Taz say that beer gives us life?
The Taz meant that this was a staple of their diet, not that they had to drink beer because the water was unsafe (which seems to be a myth: history.stackexchange.com/a/12755).
Jul
12
revised Where does the Taz say that beer gives us life?
added 53 characters in body
Jul
12
answered Quote from Chazal
Jul
12
revised Hebrew document found in grandfather's attic—what does it state?
made translation more precise (AFAICT, fix if necessary) - previous was copied from my paraphrasing; fixed bride's father's name per WAF's comment; added info
Jul
10
comment Please explain anomalies in phrasing of Succot sacrifices (B'midbar 29:17-39) - Part 3
This comment applies here, too.
Jul
10
comment Why the use of the plural form in describing the mincha for the 7th day of Succot?
See Ta'anis 2b, where R' Yehuda ben Beseira uses this as part of an allusion to the water libation.
Jul
10
comment Please explain anomalies in phrasing of Succot sacrifices (B'midbar 29:17-39) - Part 2
Sort of related: Ta'anis 2b, regarding the significance of the anomalies in verses 19, 31, and 33.