JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Yerusha on November 06, 2014, 08:45:15 PM
-
(http://www.realmatza.com/uploads/6/6/8/7/6687170/7414453_orig.jpg)
https://www.facebook.com/daniel.pinner.1?fref=tl_fr_box&pnref=lhc.friends
"Machon Shilo's Rabbi David Bar-Hayim's wife continues to be in critical condition and is unconscious. It is not clear what caused this to happen.
The rabbi appreciates everyone's prayers.
Please daven for Sharon Bat Yitzchak Michael VeChana. The Rav recommends saying Tehillim (Psalms) 41, 88, and 130."
-
It was said that it was possibly food poisoning.
-
It was said that it was possibly food poisoning.
Huh? How could "food poisoning" cause that? Do you mean actual poison? Like attempted murder?
-
Unfortunately R.Bar Chayim's wife was niftar on Shabbos
http://machonshilo.org/en/eng/component/content/article/34-featured/793-baruch-dayan-haemeth-rabbanit-sharon-bar-hayim-ztzql-was-niftereth
With the pro-Kahanist R.Bar Hayim hors de combat for the duration at this critical moment when the zechussim of his Torah are badly needed, this is a major loss
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/bde/393
-
How sad. I feel for the Rabbi.
-
How sad. I feel for the Rabbi.
Same here. I don't know what to tell him.
-
Same here. I don't know what to tell him.
Hashem tortures those he loves.
-
R.Glick is taken out of action just as he was starting to make waves on the Har Habayis.
R Bar Hayim is out of action just as he was about to film tonight an important clip giving the Kahanist Halacha permitting ascent to parts of the Har Habayis.
Is this a hint from Heaven not to force the Har Habayis issue at this time, as the Vilna Gaon warns in Kol HaTor on the verse:
"I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, By the gazelles or by the hinds of the field, That you do not arouse or awaken my love until she pleases." (Shir Hashirim 2:7)?!
-
We don't go by "hints from heaven" we go by halacha
-
R.Glick is taken out of action just as he was starting to make waves on the Har Habayis.
R Bar Hayim is out of action just as he was about to film tonight an important clip giving the Kahanist Halacha permitting ascent to parts of the Har Habayis.
Is this a hint from Heaven not to force the Har Habayis issue at this time, as the Vilna Gaon warns in Kol HaTor on the verse:
"I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, By the gazelles or by the hinds of the field, That you do not arouse or awaken my love until she pleases." (Shir Hashirim 2:7)?!
Wow, you need medication.
-
Let's all say a prayer for his family
-
Blessed is the True Judge... (Baruch Dayan HaEmet)!
I cannot believe the lashon hara which is spoken even in a thread like this.
I don't know why someone can't say something we don't agree with (so long as it is not completely wicked) and we let it go without speaking harshly about the other. Sometimes Yerusha says things I don't agree with but that doesn't make me lash out at him and say things which are derogatory.
I hope that the Rabbi has good friends at the Shiva who can comfort him.
-
The fact that R.Bar Hayim was able to deliver his wife's hesped is a sure sign that he will bounce back and remarry and that modern Kahanism will not be denied its most learned posek
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10421195_852883051429205_9216680956450900588_n.jpg?oh=2cbd447335f6c60fec520c12c89f986e&oe=54D1DBAB&__gda__=1427584631_ba93fe0e3336191022ae0b0db97af8f4)
-
Blessed is the True Judge... (Baruch Dayan HaEmet)!
I cannot believe the lashon hara which is spoken even in a thread like this.
I don't know why someone can't say something we don't agree with (so long as it is not completely wicked) and we let it go without speaking harshly about the other. Sometimes Yerusha says things I don't agree with but that doesn't make me lash out at him and say things which are derogatory.
I hope that the Rabbi has good friends at the Shiva who can comfort him.
I guess it never crossed your mind that it's possible people are hurt by the offensive things he says. And they should not be said. I guess you also don't consider the damage it does to the forum when someone spouts nutty things and if no one says anything it gives the appearance that we all agree, and are therefore also nutty. But thanks for hitting my knuckles with the ruler anyway.
Not everything is a shita.
-
he will bounce back and remarry
Remarry? His wife just died days ago.
Baruch Dayan HaEmet. This is absolutely terrible news, I feel for the rabbi as well.
-
I guess it never crossed your mind that it's possible people are hurt by the offensive things he says. And they should not be said. I guess you also don't consider the damage it does to the forum when someone spouts nutty things and if no one says anything it gives the appearance that we all agree, and are therefore also nutty. But thanks for hitting my knuckles with the ruler anyway.
Not everything is a shita.
Ramban's Letter to His Son
Let your words be spoken gently; let your head be bowed. Cast your eyes downward, and your heart heavenward; and when speaking, do not stare at your listener. Let all men seem greater than you in your eyes: If another is more wise or wealthier than yourself, you must show him respect. And if he is poor, and you are richer or wiser than he, consider that he may be more righteous than yourself: If he sins it is the result of error, while your transgression is deliberate.
In all your words, actions and thoughts - at all times - imagine in your heart that you are standing in the presence of the Holy One*, Blessed is He*, and that His* Presence rests upon you. Indeed, the glory of the Almighty* fills the universe.
Speak with reverence and awe, like a servant who stands in the presence of his master. Act with restraint in the company of others: If one should call out to you, do not answer with a loud voice, but respond gently - in low tones, as one who stands before his mentor.
Take care to always study Torah diligently so that you will be able to fulfill its commands. When you rise from study, ponder carefully what you have learned; see what there is in it which you can put into practice.
Review your actions every morning and evening, and in this way live all your days in repentance.
Cast external matters from your mind when you stand to pray; carefully prepare your heart in the presence of the Holy One*. Purify your thoughts, and ponder your words before you utter them.
Conduct yourself in these ways in all your endeavors for as long as you live. In this way you will surely avoid transgression; your words, actions and thoughts will be flawless. Your prayer will be pure and clear, sincere and pleasing to G-D*, Blessed is He*.
Read this letter once a week and neglect none of it. Fulfill it, and in so doing, walk with it forever in the ways of the Almighty*, may He* be Blessed, so that you may succeed in your ways and merit the World to Come that lies hidden for the righteous.
Every day that you shall read this letter, heaven shall answer your heart's desires.
-
We learned in last weeks parsha that our father Abraham, after the passing of his beloved wife Sarah, remarried with her maidservant Hagar (who was renamed Keturah) after he had buried and eulogized her.
-
We learned in last weeks parsha that our father Abraham, after the passing of his beloved wife Sarah, remarried with her maidservant Hagar (who was renamed Keturah) after he had buried and eulogized her.
Not everyone agrees to that. it says Keturah and not Hagar. Not everyone agrees it is Hagar. I personally do not as well.
-
Not everyone agrees to that. it says Keturah and not Hagar. Not everyone agrees it is Hagar. I personally do not as well.
Could you provide some sources. It is pretty much universally accepted that this is the case... Rashi himself brings that Keturah is indeed Hagar:
1. And Abraham took another wife and her name was Keturah.
Keturah: (Gen. Rabbah 61:4) This is Hagar. She was called Keturah because her deeds were as beautiful as incense (קְטֹרֶת), and because she tied (קָטְרָה, the Aramaic for“tied”) her opening, for she was not intimate with any man from the day she separated from Abraham.
It is clear that Ishmael did participate in the burial of Abraham...
Chayei Sarah 25:8-9
8. And Abraham expired and died in a good old age, old and satisfied, and he was gathered to his people.
9. And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the Cave of Machpelah in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which faces Mamre,
-
The original source of this is Medrash Rabba...
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/2636/jewish/The-Return-of-Hagar.htm
And Abraham again took a wife, and her name was Keturah
Genesis 25:1
Keturah is Hagar. Why is she called Keturah? For her deeds were [now] as pleasing as the ketoret.
Midrash Rabbah on verse
Hagar was the Egyptian maidservant of Abraham's first wife, Sarah. When Sarah had failed to conceive a child after many years of marriage, she implored Abraham to have a child with Hagar. Hagar did give Abraham a child, Ishmael, who turned out "a wild man, whose hand is against everyone and everyone's hand is against him" (Genesis 16:12). Sarah then demanded of Abraham that he banish Hagar and Ishmael from their home. When Abraham hesitated, G-d instructed him, "whatever Sarah tells you to do, hearken to her voice." Hagar drifted back to the paganism of her homeland, and found an Egyptian wife for Ishmael.
Years later, however, we find Ishmael back in the Abrahamic fold, accompanying Abraham and Isaac to the akeidah. And then, three years after Sarah's death, Abraham remarries Hagar. The reconciliation is now complete--indeed it is Sarah's son, Isaac, who brings Hagar back for her marriage with his father (as per Midrash Rabbah on Genesis 24:62).
"Everything that happened to the Patriarchs," say our sages, "is a signpost for their children. This is why the Torah elaborates on... the events of their lives... for they all come to instruct the future" (Nachmanides on Genesis 12:6). The same is true regarding the shifts in Abraham's relationship with his "barbarous" wife and son: his expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael and their subsequent readmission into his family represent the different stages in our history of dealing with the "Hagars" and "Ishmaels" in our lives--the raw and unruly elements in our nature, society and environment.
See also:
http://www.jewishpath.com/gematria/bereishis/and_again_avraham_took.html
http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/760986/jewish/Hagar-Transformed.htm
-
Could you provide some sources. It is pretty much universally accepted that this is the case... Rashi himself brings that Keturah is indeed Hagar:
1. And Abraham took another wife and her name was Keturah.
Keturah: (Gen. Rabbah 61:4) This is Hagar. She was called Keturah because her deeds were as beautiful as incense (קְטֹרֶת), and because she tied (קָטְרָה, the Aramaic for“tied”) her opening, for she was not intimate with any man from the day she separated from Abraham.
It is clear that Ishmael did participate in the burial of Abraham...
Chayei Sarah 25:8-9
8. And Abraham expired and died in a good old age, old and satisfied, and he was gathered to his people.
9. And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the Cave of Machpelah in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which faces Mamre,
No it isn't universal. Tag pointed out that fact. Disbelieve him all you want and ask for sources all you want, there's no harm in that. But why do you assume that because you saw Rashi, you've therefore seen it all?
When you make a claim that something is UNIVERSALLY held while someone else is saying it isn't, the burden of proof is on You to provide every source proving it's a universal belief. Saying it is in a midrash and rashi quoted that midrash, does not come anywhere near your broad claim.
-
The contrary view (that Keturah was someone other than Hagar) is advocated by Abraham ibn Ezra,[11] Radak, Rashbam, and Ramban. The Second Temple Book of Jubilees (19:11) makes it clear that Keturah is not Hagar and explains that Hagar died a few years previously.
-
Ramban's Letter to His Son
Your point being what? Please spell it out. Please directly address the points I made.
Plastering the forum with long articles as demonstrations of piety, is not a means of articulating an argument. Especially when the source you post, as in this case, covers a wide range of topics and it is unclear how it is even related to the ongoing discussion.
-
And before you even begin, don't bother making an argument that it's ok for one person to say hurtful things but it's not ok for someone else to respond in kind. We're not going to just sit back and let such people rampage the forum.
-
Who is Ketura?
We know something about Abraham's two previous wives. Sarah was his cousin while Hagar was of Egyptian origin. About Ketura, however, the text is silent and gives no explanation[1], leaving it to the commentators to express their opinion.
Rabbi Judah says in the Midrash (Bereshit Rabba 61, 4): "She is Hagar". This is the opinion of the Zohar as well (133b) and of Targum Jonathan. As we saw above, Rashi agrees with them.[2] However, the commentators who explained the text in its literal sense (peshat) did not accept this. Rashbam states in short: "According to the peshat, this is not Hagar", without providing any explanation of his opposition. The difficulty might be as formulated by Rabbi Nehemia in the Midrash (ibid.): "Behold, the text reads va-yosef, literally 'he added'. [Gen. 25:1 reads: Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah. The Hebrew actually says "He added on another wife".] If Hagar were identical with Ketura and Hagar was already his wife, there would have been no need to say about her that 'he added' her to his wives.
Ibn Ezra raises another difficulty: "Ketura is not Hagar, because it is written: "But to Abraham's sons by concubines" (25:6). In other words, the text is not talking about one concubine but about two, at the least. So we must understand that Ketura was added to Hagar. For Rashi this does not constitute a problem, because in verse 6 he wrote: " 'and for the sons of the concubine' [pilagshim is written defectively, without the second yod]- defective spelling, as there was only one concubine, who is Hagar who is Ketura".[3] But in the Massoretic Text of the Bible as we have it today the word is actually written pilagshim, with plene spelling which indicates the plural.[4]
If Ketura is not Hagar, as many of the commentators maintain, we would like to offer a possible identification. G-d's last promise to Abraham in His first revelation was: "And all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you" (12:3), and apparently this was the most important promise. What is its significance? Does venivrekhu really mean 'bless', as understood by some commentators (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Radak)? According to Rashbam (on the parallel verse, 28:14) the meaning that comes to mind is 'to graft' a branch, and the connotation is 'to bless by combining', in other words the families of the earth will intermingle with your family.[5]
If we accept this second meaning, we find it to be the exact opposite of he commandment of G-d to Abraham to "Go forth from your native land and from your father's house" (12:1). That commandment pointed Abraham in the direction of separation and withdrawal from other men, while this blessing points to renewed connection. Hence the entire experience of severance from his society and from his father's house had only one purpose - to make it possible for Abraham to crystallize and shape his personality.[6]
If indeed Abraham was destined to once again maintain contact with all the peoples of the world, we can now consider the possibility that Abraham's three wives - Sarah, Hagar and Ketura - represent his connection with the three families of the earth, for it was through the three sons of Noah-- Shem, Ham, and Japheth-- that humanity was again established after the flood.
And we indeed found the following words in the midrash anthology Yalkut Shimoni for Job (903): "Abraham married three women: Sarah, the daughter of Shem; Ketura, the daughter of Japheth; Hagar, the daughter of Ham". And in fact he married them in the order in which the "fathers" appear in the Bible (6:9) - first the daughter of Shem, then the daughter of Ham, and finally the daughter of Japheth.
By marrying these three women, the blessing that G-d bestowed upon Abraham, that "all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you", was fulfilled, and similarly when he produced offspring from these three women, the blessing that he would be "the father of a multitude of nations" was also fulfilled.
http://www.biu.ac.il/JH/Parasha/eng/chaye/sha.html
-
The contrary view (that Keturah was someone other than Hagar) is advocated by Abraham ibn Ezra,[11] Radak, Rashbam, and Ramban. The Second Temple Book of Jubilees (19:11) makes it clear that Keturah is not Hagar and explains that Hagar died a few years previously.
Thank you. I was aware there were differing views but I consider the Medresh Rabba, Rashi, and other commentators on the topic to explain who Keturah was. Of course nothing is absolute and there are alternate opinions but as I have learned from many sources the identity of Keturah as being Hagar seems to be the predominant opinion.
Here is a good explanation according to semantic analysis of Rashis opinion:
http://www.rashiyomi.com/rule1510.htm
-
Your point being what? Please spell it out. Please directly address the points I made.
Plastering the forum with long articles as demonstrations of piety, is not a means of articulating an argument. Especially when the source you post, as in this case, covers a wide range of topics and it is unclear how it is even related to the ongoing discussion.
When you talk with endless insults and take offense to everything, it's low class.
-
When you talk with endless insults and take offense to everything, it's low class.
Kindly point out the insult contained in this post: "Your point being what? Please spell it out. Please directly address the points I made.
Plastering the forum with long articles as demonstrations of piety, is not a means of articulating an argument. Especially when the source you post, as in this case, covers a wide range of topics and it is unclear how it is even related to the ongoing discussion."
I don't see it.
-
When you talk with endless insults and take offense to everything, it's low class.
The offender is the troll of this forum who posts insanely offensive comments (not to mention, nutty comments). You and Muman are defending the troll from "retaliation" - You're like the EU.
-
" Not everyone agrees to that. it says Keturah and not Hagar. Not everyone agrees it is Hagar. I personally do not as well.''
agree ^^
We learned in last weeks parsha that our father Abraham, after the passing of his beloved wife Sarah, remarried with her maidservant Hagar (who was renamed Keturah) after he had buried and eulogized her.
Does anyone knows for sure that Abraham really had had a son with her maidservant Hagar actually could have made it with anyone else passing near by and spread a lie to blackmail Abraham into accepting her child as any Arab would have done to gain a prominent position in the world then eventually didn't do anything to refute it.
-
" Not everyone agrees to that. it says Keturah and not Hagar. Not everyone agrees it is Hagar. I personally do not as well.''
agree ^^
Does anyone knows for sure that Abraham really had had a son with her maidservant Hagar actually could have made it with anyone else passing near by and spread a lie to blackmail Abraham into accepting her child as any Arab would have done to gain a prominent position in the world then eventually didn't do anything to refute it.
I think the Torah specifies them. They were given gifts and sent out.
-
I think the Torah specifies them. They were given gifts and sent out.
It show that his maidservant had lied and turned out that her chantage failed.
-
It show that his maidservant had lied and turned out that her chantage failed.
Not sure what you mean?
They were from a Shivha (concubine) to begin with. To begin with they were not to inherit anything.
-
" Not everyone agrees to that. it says Keturah and not Hagar. Not everyone agrees it is Hagar. I personally do not as well.''
agree ^^
Does anyone knows for sure that Abraham really had had a son with her maidservant Hagar actually could have made it with anyone else passing near by and spread a lie to blackmail Abraham into accepting her child as any Arab would have done to gain a prominent position in the world then eventually didn't do anything to refute it.
You have read the Torah, haven't you? It is as clear as Black and White in the story of Abraham and Sarah that Sarah herself asked Abraham to have a child with her maidservant Hagar.. There is no question about this as the Torah spends several paragraphs describing the conversation.
See Chapter 16 of Genesis (Lech Lecha)
1. Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had not borne to him, and she had an Egyptian handmaid named Hagar.
2. And Sarai said to Abram, "Behold now, the Lord has restrained me from bearing; please come to my handmaid; perhaps I will be built up from her." And Abram hearkened to Sarai's voice.
3. So Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her handmaid, at the end of ten years of Abram's dwelling in the land of Canaan, and she gave her to Abram her husband for a wife.
4. And he came to Hagar, and she conceived, and she saw that she was pregnant, and her mistress became unimportant in her eyes.
-
The offender is the troll of this forum who posts insanely offensive comments (not to mention, nutty comments). You and Muman are defending the troll from "retaliation" - You're like the EU.
Again with the offense. I already said he's a creeper, but if you're going to talk to him, do it without sounding like a trucker complaining about his hot dog.
Kindly point out the insult contained in this post: "Your point being what? Please spell it out. Please directly address the points I made.
Plastering the forum with long articles as demonstrations of piety, is not a means of articulating an argument. Especially when the source you post, as in this case, covers a wide range of topics and it is unclear how it is even related to the ongoing discussion."
I don't see it.
That's the offended part. Are you really going to pretend I can't bring up insults from you?
If the Satmar Rebbe came here and argued, there would be no argument, no advancement, just angry terms thrown around.
-
KWRBT,
What in tarnations are you all up in a tizzy about again?
Who said what to offend you this time? That Yerusha proposed that perhaps rabbi Bar Chayim may get remarried? Is that what you think is such an insult or offense? If you are not just trolling please explain yourself?
-
And before you even begin, don't bother making an argument that it's ok for one person to say hurtful things but it's not ok for someone else to respond in kind. We're not going to just sit back and let such people rampage the forum.
If he discusses his opinion, which you may or not find hurtful, but it has no personal reference to you, don't be insulted, or insult; attack the statement and not the man. That encourages healthy debate, and grants the conversation legitimacy, and attacking the person demeans everything that is said, in the current conversation and thereafter.
If someone made a comment at a funeral that he would get remarried, yeah, I'd sock him in the kisser: what kind of a sociopath is that? If you insult the argument, there will be a learning experience, and if you defame him for it, others that see it will not want to participate in the conversation, at the risk that venom is spit out at them. What reactions are logical in real life are not always so here.
-
Plastering the forum with long articles as demonstrations of piety, is not a means of articulating an argument.
I posted because it was interesting, and I'm glad you thought it was worth something. I'm not pious, though. I can't pull off 1/100 of the mitzvot, and I'm about to go run away from Judaism forever, even though I know it's right because I'd rather make 100k than 20. Most intentional and accidental sins, I've mastered. I'm not attacking you, or saying I'm better, or even close to someone who is religious and can keep everything. I'm just giving you what little I have of worth in me, because it might be of some benefit.
Nothing I say is personal, and no comment I make implies that I don't make the same problem, and worse.
-
As a matter of fact, in a week and five days I'm gone forever, so lets not leave on sour terms.
-
KWRBT,
What in tarnations are you all up in a tizzy about again?
Who said what to offend you this time? That Yerusha proposed that perhaps rabbi Bar Chayim may get remarried? Is that what you think is such an insult or offense? If you are not just trolling please explain yourself?
Read the post I responded to, and then you will know what comments I was responding to. It is not about remarriage. But there is no confusion because I quoted him in my reply. So please stop obfuscating.
Accusing me of trolling is just stupid. Plain stupid. Don't play stupid.
-
I posted because it was interesting, and I'm glad you thought it was worth something. I'm not pious, though. I can't pull off 1/100 of the mitzvot, and I'm about to go run away from Judaism forever, even though I know it's right because I'd rather make 100k than 20. Most intentional and accidental sins, I've mastered. I'm not attacking you, or saying I'm better, or even close to someone who is religious and can keep everything. I'm just giving you what little I have of worth in me, because it might be of some benefit.
Nothing I say is personal, and no comment I make implies that I don't make the same problem, and worse.
The comment you quoted here about plastering forums was directed at muman, not you. I quoted him, not you. What is the source of this confusion exactly?
Edit; oh, my mistake. That was you! You have really adopted muman's style because that had me fooled.
-
R.Glick is taken out of action just as he was starting to make waves on the Har Habayis.
R Bar Hayim is out of action just as he was about to film tonight an important clip giving the Kahanist Halacha permitting ascent to parts of the Har Habayis.
Is this a hint from Heaven not to force the Har Habayis issue at this time, as the Vilna Gaon warns in Kol HaTor on the verse:
"I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, By the gazelles or by the hinds of the field, That you do not arouse or awaken my love until she pleases." (Shir Hashirim 2:7)?!
KWRBT,
Was this the message you were upset or offended about? I still don't see how this is so offensive.
It seems like a question ('Is this a hint from Heaven...') rather than an assertion. And the question doesn't seem so offensive to me. I have heard rabbis refer to the Shoah as possibly a response by Heaven toward the reform movement which originated in Germany. I am sure such an assertion may be offensive to some (especially those who may have survived) but it is a valid thing to ask...
-
The comment you quoted here about plastering forums was directed at muman, not you. I quoted him, not you. What is the source of this confusion exactly?
I posted nothing other than what was required sources for the opinion I was posting. Im sorry if you have a problem with that, but there is nothing for me to be ashamed of. And it seems you have an inferiority complex (if you think that my posting sources for Jewish ideas is meant to make me look pious).
-
And KWRBT, you are factually incorrect.... You responded to LKZ's post with the following.
Your point being what? Please spell it out. Please directly address the points I made.
Plastering the forum with long articles as demonstrations of piety, is not a means of articulating an argument. Especially when the source you post, as in this case, covers a wide range of topics and it is unclear how it is even related to the ongoing discussion.
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,78736.msg651336.html#msg651336
Are you capable of apologizing for your errors are are you too arrogant for that?
-
KWRBT,
Was this the message you were upset or offended about? I still don't see how this is so offensive.
It seems like a question ('Is this a hint from Heaven...') rather than an assertion. And the question doesn't seem so offensive to me. I have heard rabbis refer to the Shoah as possibly a response by Heaven toward the reform movement which originated in Germany. I am sure such an assertion may be offensive to some (especially those who may have survived) but it is a valid thing to ask...
Now you're equating reform with going up on Temple Mount or even just giving a shiur explaining the halachas involved?
It is offensive and insulting to take two individuals, both victims, one the victim of a crime and one the victim of a tragedy, and blame the victims by suggesting God is punishing them for their sins. That is an uncalled for personal attack. In this case, the supposed "sins" are actually righteous acts by any sane definition, so it is disturbing on whole new levels to make these kind of comments. There are 100 reasons why this is not a comparison with what you referenced.
I am surprised that I had to spell that out.
-
Now you're equating reform with going up on Temple Mount or even just giving a shiur explaining the halachas involved?
It is offensive and insulting to take two individuals, both victims, one the victim of a crime and one the victim of a tragedy, and blame the victims by suggesting God is punishing them for their sins. That is an uncalled for personal attack. In this case, the supposed "sins" are actually righteous acts by any sane definition, so it is disturbing on whole new levels to make these kind of comments. There are 100 reasons why this is not a comparison with what you referenced.
I am surprised that I had to spell that out.
I don't see it as blaming the individual, rather blaming the entire Jewish people, for the time not being right.
And I am not equating one and the other, just bringing an example of something which could seem offensive but is a question which may be asked.
I don't believe Yerusha (although I am not speaking for him) believes that the Rabbi deserved it. I will let him answer that if he wants to.
-
Accusing me of trolling is just stupid. Plain stupid. Don't play stupid.
That's so cute.
The comment you quoted here about plastering forums was directed at muman, not you. I quoted him, not you. What is the source of this confusion exactly?
Edit; oh, my mistake. That was you! You have really adopted muman's style because that had me fooled.
The comment you quoted here about plastering forums was directed at muman, not you. I quoted him, not you. What is the source of this confusion exactly?
Edit; oh, my mistake. That was you! You have really adopted muman's style because that had me fooled.
This here post is one source of confusion.
-
I don't see it as blaming the individual, rather blaming the entire Jewish people, for the time not being right.
And I am not equating one and the other, just bringing an example of something which could seem offensive but is a question which may be asked.
I don't believe Yerusha (although I am not speaking for him) believes that the Rabbi deserved it. I will let him answer that if he wants to.
He said they were "taken out of action" for being involved in matters relating to the Temple Mount and that it's a sign from Hashem that we should stop. That is a ludicrous claim, it is blaming the victims, and it is implying they deserved it. (Unless you're saying that Hashem isn't just, so he punishes when they don't deserve it?! Clearly not what yerusha is saying).
It's a clown comment. Quit trying to kasher it and turn it into a shita by giving it some kind of religious cover just because I reacted negatively to it. Many times a negative reaction is justified. You are not the forum policeman and you are not the arbiter of what is proper speech and what isn't.
"And I am not equating one and the other, just bringing an example of something which could seem offensive but is a question which may be asked."
They are two things which have nothing to do with each other, so saying "there are questions which can be asked" has nothing to do with this particular question (which to anyone with reading comprehension is not a question but an implication).
-
And KWRBT, you are factually incorrect.... You responded to LKZ's post with the following.
http://jtf.org/forum/index.php/topic,78736.msg651336.html#msg651336
Are you capable of apologizing for your errors are are you too arrogant for that?
Why do you constantly respond with insults and ad hominem, but then you project your own failings on to me by accusing me of using ad hominem when I'm not?
Do you truly believe that this:
Are you capable of apologizing for your errors are are you too arrogant for that?
is an appropriate comment to make to me?
I did figure out that I was mistaken in thinking I replied to you when actually I was replying to LKZ. I literally said, "my mistake" when I realized.
Where is the arrogance involved? Another stupid claim.
-
That's so cute.
It is trolling for you to make comments like this.
"that's so cute" ?
But your buddy is calling me a troll for no reason and says not a word to you because you can do no wrong in his eyes. Makes a lot of sense.
-
Again with the offense. I already said he's a creeper, but if you're going to talk to him, do it without sounding like
Again with you defending the forum troll from replies to his insane and creepy comments. You could be employed at the UN.
-
It is trolling for you to make comments like this.
"that's so cute" ?
But your buddy is calling me a troll for no reason and says not a word to you because you can do no wrong in his eyes. Makes a lot of sense.
It will cause you distress if you ego feels hurt. Psych 102. A big ego will think that statement is denigrating the great intellectual achievement put out (don't let ego exaggerate or under-exaggerate here, it was a witty statement), a small one will think that I was offering a compliment, and if you stop taking yourself so seriously for a second, you'd see how utterly irrelevant that was and move on. It's only trolling when I do it to you.
Btw, you're great at copying my tactics, so learn a bit from this one too. How important do you think you are?
-
Again with you defending the forum troll from replies to his insane and creepy comments. You could be employed at the UN.
Did you just equate the word again with the letter t? How could you do such a thing? You should be employed at Baskin Robin's.
-
It will cause you distress if you ego feels hurt. Psych 102. A big ego will think that statement is denigrating the great intellectual achievement put out (don't let ego exaggerate or under-exaggerate here, it was a witty statement), a small one will think that I was offering a compliment, and if you stop taking yourself so seriously for a second, you'd see how utterly irrelevant that was and move on. It's only trolling when I do it to you.
Btw, you're great at copying my tactics, so learn a bit from this one too. How important do you think you are?
Whenever you get into these long convoluted statements, I cannot understand what you're saying. I don't think they are coherent. I'm pretty sure others also struggle to understand you.
As for my ego, I don't have one. I see it as bad for the forum that you and your buddy gang up against anyone who challenges the resident troll. He needs to be challenged. Muman's attempt to "kasher" everything he says is very counterproductive and comes from a place of ignorance. ("He sounds 'religious' so I have to defend him." - NO).
'
The accusations thrown at me of ad hominem - I am well aware it is just projection on the part of both of you, so how would it affect my ego? Much more importantly, it's bad for the forum because it stifles real conversation.
Did you think I was hurt by your comments? Come on, bud.
-
R.Glick is taken out of action just as he was starting to make waves on the Har Habayis.
R Bar Hayim is out of action just as he was about to film tonight an important clip giving the Kahanist Halacha permitting ascent to parts of the Har Habayis.
Is this a hint from Heaven not to force the Har Habayis issue at this time, as the Vilna Gaon warns in Kol HaTor on the verse:
"I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, By the gazelles or by the hinds of the field, That you do not arouse or awaken my love until she pleases." (Shir Hashirim 2:7)?!
I just realized Y-----a interprets that pasuk as "do not stop the sex slaving, axe murdering and Torah [law pertaining to Eretz] violating until maybe the moshiah comes or some other time. Until then, let her sleep with an axe and an Arab in her back"
Y-----a is the Saint Mary rebbey.
-
You sneaky saint maryim what are you doing on the internet.
-
I just realized Y-----a interprets that pasuk as "do not stop the sex slaving, axe murdering and Torah [law pertaining to Eretz] violating until maybe the moshiah comes or some other time. Until then, let her sleep with an axe and an Arab in her back"
Y-----a is the Saint Mary rebbey.
Lol that was the comment I took issue with from the beginning. Took you long enough to catch on! I'm very happy to see you are not justifying his comment.
-
"blue clouds above"
:::D
Mityavim yavim
-
It's a good omen to see from this clip that R.Bar Chayim has bounced back so soon from his wife's passing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cLtrOAdBag&list=UUqk83uZegoML7cEnXlXYZ4A
-
Once more I suspect Shabak.
-
Lol that was the comment I took issue with from the beginning. Took you long enough to catch on! I'm very happy to see you are not justifying his comment.
I took issue with it from the beginning. I'll repeat myself in this for the third and final time, I always understand exactly what everyone means. I had a problem with you to take care of first.
-
Once more I suspect Shabak.
At 7.33 in this clip David Haivri and David Bar Chayim can be seen dancing together in the Jewish Idea Yeshivah with R.Kahane in 1989
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfmQQ98hj4I
What makes you think that Bar Chayim is GSS?!
-
Haivri is slime.
-
"What makes you think that Bar Chayim is GSS?!"
He meant that his wife passed away (by their hands).
And anyway in that video one can also see R Bar-Hayim teaching as well, as he was at the Yeshiva.
@ 2:05
-
Haivri is slime.
I don't think Haivri even claims or pretends to be a Kahanist anymore. He's irrelevant.