Law School

[skyguy918]

u make a pretty good point re the baker case, except that there there is no animus assumed, as opposed to the no handshake, which sometimes may lead to more animus (altz mysogeny and/or basic social requirements, dietary restrictions are always more complicated).
- re the hug/kiss paralegal, again, halacha pretty much comes down to cost/benefit analysis (except for the big 3), and kissing/hugging is a real big line that we generally wont give up on. i have had that from my secretary, and i told her i just cant do that and she took it well (because i give her money).

I'm not saying anyone else is wrong, im saying after i thought about it and consulted with my swammy, i came out this way and went machmir on what i consider might be a chillul hashem. sorry if i implied otherwise.

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but you've yet to give a coherent explanation of why it would be a chillul Hashem - in the context of how it's defined in halacha. When you spoke it over with your Rov, he told you one of the reasons to be matir was because of chillul Hashem? I'd be shocked if the answer was yes, and even more interested in a source if you can get one.

[lunatic]

Let's take a different scenario for a second, that isn't so contentious, and I actually had yesterday. A co worker is an avid baker, and she offered me, all excited, a piece of something she had baked.
Her, all excited, in front of several others: Want to try a piece of this cake I made, it's really good, and I never made it before
Me: I'd love to, but I'm restricted to kosher. But it looks awesome!
Her, very deflated and confused: but cake doesn't have to be kosher?
Me: Actually it does
Her: well let me tell you what i put in, just...
and so on.
As gracefully as possible I extricated myself and hopefully no lingering hard feelings.
Now, I don't think anyone here would tell me that I should have had a bite, even though:
Malbin pnei chaveiro
darkei shalom
kavod habriyos
deracheah darkei noam
hedoshim tihyu
ruach habrios nocha heyemeno
etc.
And I could make the argument that there wasn't more than an issur derabannan, especially if there were no overtly non kosher ingredients. for gelatin you can be meikel. etc.
Now, on to another case. You're a lawyer in Santa Monica (Silicon Beach) and the office has a informal atmosphere. Your attractive paralegal says good morning by throwing her arms around you and giving you a peck on the cheek. In those circles that would be equivalent to a warm handshake in NY. Same as shaking hands? I think not, even though all the above 'clashes' apply.
Those considerations are considerations that were applied by Chazal in extenuating circumstances, and yes, occasionally even on a deroysa. but if you peruse centuries of responsa they weren't willy nilly applied to every scenario where the argument could be made.
Again, I'm not coming to knock anybody, or say anyone's doing the wrong thing. It's a very difficult call each time. But to say that one who is machmir is wrong is also not right.

I had a similar situation (not as bad)  and I asked the coworker for the recipe

[shiframeir]

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but you've yet to give a coherent explanation of why it would be a chillul Hashem - in the context of how it's defined in halacha. When you spoke it over with your Rov, he told you one of the reasons to be matir was because of chillul Hashem? I'd be shocked if the answer was yes, and even more interested in a source if you can get one.

better to beat a dead horse than a live one (that would be a bigger chillul hashem). No iirc my rebbe did not say it would cause chillul hashem, but this was one of the factors i laid out in my considerations on the point. Again, we all have very different streams of orthodoxy going on here, and i know growing up in a more charedi-ish environment i was always told chillul hashem is only among jews and is essentially an add on to aveiros done in public. but there is a lot more there (see e.g. Rambam quoted nicely here: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/33866/is-it-ever-a-chillul-hashem-to-discuss-torah-principles)

[Freddie]

Re: the "anti-keli" (took me a while to figure out what the heck that means!) it is helpful to learn the maamar in Derech Mitzvosecha of the Tzemach Tzedek entitled "Taglachas HaMetzora." There it speaks about the difference between effort that is bonafide hishtadlus and effort that actual gets in the way.

If anyone would like to learn that maamar, please as Achas v'Achas.

[Aaaron]

Must've hit a raw nerve there. It's alright, I'll excuse you for your lack of comprehension due to the late hour of your post.

There are two ways to understand your initial post.  I also thought you meant that it's standard in MO homes to not wear a yarmulke all the time.  Reading comprehension isn't the issue; descriptive writing is.

[skyguy918]

better to beat a dead horse than a live one (that would be a bigger chillul hashem). No iirc my rebbe did not say it would cause chillul hashem, but this was one of the factors i laid out in my considerations on the point. Again, we all have very different streams of orthodoxy going on here, and i know growing up in a more charedi-ish environment i was always told chillul hashem is only among jews and is essentially an add on to aveiros done in public. but there is a lot more there (see e.g. Rambam quoted nicely here: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/33866/is-it-ever-a-chillul-hashem-to-discuss-torah-principles)

It seems clear to me that the discussion of whether something is a chillul Hashem or not can only be had once you know whether an action is a mitzvah, an aveirah, or a 'mundane' action. If you disagree, once again, I'd love to see a source. Your link seems to agree with my approach. (The Rambam lists mundane actions, that are neither mitzvos nor aveiros. His point is that it's not just aveiros that can be a chillul Hashem - it can even be non-mitzvos.)

If that fact has been established, then you can't say "I decided to be meikel partially due to the issue of chillul Hashem", because it's only even a possibility of an issue once you pasken that it's muttar, and therefore a 'mundane' action.

[skyguy918]

There are two ways to understand your initial post.  I also thought you meant that it's standard in MO homes to not wear a yarmulke all the time.  Reading comprehension isn't the issue; descriptive writing is.

I think your reading of his comment requires inserting a comma that wasn't there:

...It's also one thing if a guy grows up in a MO family, where sometimes they wear Yarmulke's and sometimes not.

(In case it's hard to see, the comma would be inserted after 'family'. That would cause the second half of the sentence to be descriptive of the term 'MO family' instead of being descriptive of the specific family the person grew up in.)

[henche]

I think your reading of his comment requires inserting a comma that wasn't there:(In case it's hard to see, the comma would be inserted after 'family'. That would cause the second half of the sentence to be descriptive of the term 'MO family' instead of being descriptive of the specific family the person grew up in.)

Which is why you should use "that" and "which", instead of "where"

[skyguy918]

Which is why you should use "that" and "which", instead of "where"

Lol, I didn't do either, and I agree. But it's hard to argue that the reading that should require a comma is more appropriate for the sentence as written.

[Ergel]

Lol, I didn't do either, and I agree. But it's hard to argue that the reading that should require a comma is more appropriate for the sentence as written.

If you're interpretation is correct than the 'MO' part of the sentence is completely unnecessary. It should say

...It's also one thing if a guy grows up in a family where sometimes they wear Yarmulke's and sometimes not.

[mb1]

If you're interpretation is correct than the 'MO' part of the sentence is completely unnecessary. It should say

Unless he was implying that........
 

[Dan]

Re: the "anti-keli" (took me a while to figure out what the heck that means!) it is helpful to learn the maamar in Derech Mitzvosecha of the Tzemach Tzedek entitled "Taglachas HaMetzora." There it speaks about the difference between effort that is bonafide hishtadlus and effort that actual gets in the way.

If anyone would like to learn that maamar, please as Achas v'Achas.

Didn't realize "Anti-Keli" was that tief.
Time to relearn Kuntres U'mayon?

[Freddie]

Didn't realize "Anti-Keli" was that tief.
Time to relearn Kuntres U'mayon?

Yes, Kuntres U'mayon is one source. Taglachas HaMetzora is really the main source. The vort there of the TZ"TZ that is brought many times by the Rebbe is about a garment that is so long that you trip over it.

Maybe we should start a Kuntres U'mayon shiur in Youngstown, you know, convenient location for everyone.

[henche]

Didn't realize "Anti-Keli" was that tief.
Time to relearn Kuntres U'mayon?

I'm utterly confused about it at this point.

[thaber]

Didn't realize "Anti-Keli" was that tief.
Time to relearn Kuntres U'mayon?

Have some rachmonus on those who didn't grow up with the same verbiage as you
I'd like to learn the maamar, can I handle it on my own? where can I find it?

[henche]

Yes, Kuntres U'mayon is one source. Taglachas HaMetzora is really the main source. The vort there of the TZ"TZ that is brought many times by the Rebbe is about a garment that is so long that you trip over it.

Maybe we should start a Kuntres U'mayon shiur in Youngstown, you know, convenient location for everyone.

Youngstown DO?

I'm out.

[thaber]

Maybe we should start a Kuntres U'mayon shiur in Youngstown, you know, convenient location for everyone.

Is there more water than CLE? Dan is still melting snow to get his. http://forums.dansdeals.com/index.php?topic=18685.msg1137673#msg1137673

[Achas Veachas]

Have some rachmonus on those who didn't grow up with the same verbiage as you
I'd like to learn the maamar, can I handle it on my own? where can I find it?

It's more than just a Maamar, it's a whole Kuntres.

http://www.amazon.com/Overcoming-Folly-Chasidic-Treatise-Heritage/dp/0826607438

[Dr Moose]

Youngstown DO?

I'm out.

lol

[Dan]

Have some rachmonus on those who didn't grow up with the same verbiage as you
I'd like to learn the maamar, can I handle it on my own? where can I find it?

Anti-keli is my own invented term..

But basically on RH/YK it's decided how much you'll earn, how healthy you'll be, etc. But that's stuck in the higher realms of the world (Atzilus, etc)

On every day we draw down a portion of that koach into poel (from Atzilus into asiya gashmi) through keilim, by being a good jew, davening, mitzvos, having a job that lets you serve hashem, etc.

By not being a good jew that koach remains stuck above.  Or if one has a fixed income it can still be affected negatively (catastrophic event) or positively.

I just find it immensely ironic that one can believe in a Gd that runs every aspect of the world and yet believe that wearing a yarmulkah to work could fall into the same "anti-keli" category as not putting on tefilin for a day, something that severs the bonds you and your creator.

Hence, why stop there? Let's make other holy things or halachos into anti-kelis while we're at it...

Can we get a full list of halachos in shulchan aruch that are anti-kelis?

Shaking hands.
Yarmulkas.
Not shaving.

Keeping kosher?

Don't forget Shabbos.

May as well sleep with the woman recruiters like the non-frum guys do.

What about sleeping with the male recruiter? That will score you even more points with the firm...