Timeline for Eating in a restaurant that is not under the beth din
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2015 at 20:21 | comment | added | Shoel U'Meishiv | @DoubleAA see Rema (Even HaEzer 1:10) התקנה במקומו והגזרה עומדת. See judaism.stackexchange.com/q/23299/5514 | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:44 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 217 characters in body
|
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:38 | comment | added | Shoel U'Meishiv | @DoubleAA hebrewbooks.org/… | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:37 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 217 characters in body
|
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:36 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @Mefaresh by whom? in any event, the specific example is irrelevant. | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:36 | comment | added | Shoel U'Meishiv | Takanas RG is binding, it was renewed | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:35 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @Mefaresh Some are and some aren't. Takanas RG is not binding and is now a minhag. Probably so is Kitniyot, if it ever was a Gezera. Chalav Akum is a Gezera of Chazal, not a local community's takkana. Am I obligated to give 5% of my sheep's wool to Shemrel's descendants because that's what they did in Yehuptzville? | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:28 | comment | added | Shoel U'Meishiv | @DoubleAA why do you presume its not binding? is takanas Rabbeinu Gershom not binding? is chalav akum not binding? is kitniyos not binding? is the myriad of takanos established throughout the generations not binding? | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:25 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | Even if they did intend it to be for all time, who says we have to follow it? Am I bound by local Gezeros of communities I don't live in and don't even exist anymore? | |
| Apr 30, 2015 at 19:21 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 62 characters in body
|
| Mar 25, 2015 at 20:38 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Mar 24, 2015 at 19:15 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Feb 25, 2015 at 0:54 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 137 characters in body
|
| Feb 25, 2015 at 0:39 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 17 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 20:42 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 20:34 | history | edited | Isaac Moses♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
bare link -> hyperlinked text
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 20:10 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 19:37 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 160 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 19:32 | comment | added | Shoel U'Meishiv | But anyways as I mentioned above its a dispute if it is something nogeah bzman hazeh | |
| Feb 24, 2015 at 19:31 | comment | added | Shoel U'Meishiv | The vaad was the defacto head body of rabbinical law at that point. See the wikipedia page as well as the teshuva posted above | |
| Feb 24, 2015 at 19:29 | comment | added | Yitzchak | By what authority did the va'ad arba aratzos do that? Especially if there were times and places since the enactment when the tzibur as whole did not follow it? | |
| Feb 24, 2015 at 19:25 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 19:20 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 18:28 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 34 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 18:11 | history | edited | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 187 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2015 at 18:04 | history | answered | Shoel U'Meishiv | CC BY-SA 3.0 |