User talk:Shaul avrom/Archive Apr 2007

my name
is humorous and if you're overly protective of the satmar rav's article, you shouldnt be, we should all be able to contribute fairly regardless of our names. frummer 18:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week
I saw you posted on this site recently.

Would you mind going there again and voting?

Thanks, Happy138 12:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

A git voch. --ChosidFrumBirth 00:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Your Statement "I find it hard to believe"
You find what difficult to believe, exactly? Please notice that by "Torah-observant" Messianics do not generally mean "Orthodox"; they consider the written Torah foundational, and the Talmud a subservient commentary that can be kept a bit more leniently. Please respond in ENGLISH, and not in any mix of Hebrew-English, Yiddish-English, or Yeshivish. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Noogster (talk • contribs) 16:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC).
 * If "Messianics" considered Torah foundational they would not believe that their leader was a man-god, nor disparage the Oral aspect of the dual Torah and the received Messorah. This Noogster is obviously the type that was warned about in Devarim 13 and one musn't listen to or even argue with him (see R' Chill's exhortation in The Mitzvot).Wlmh65 01:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * My colleague here isn't recognizing how wide the gamut of the term "Messianic Judaism" truly is. I, personally, am a strict monotheist so I do not really believe that Yeshua HaMashiach is/was divine (tho I do believe in his pre-existance, which happens to be very Jewish less Maimonides), don't believe in the "trinity", and I don't believe in a personal Satan. The following is good reading on the topic: http://www.mikvehyisrael.com/trinityone.html I do not consider there to be a "dual Torah" (mainly because the written Torah never references the Oral); there was a written and holy Torah given to Mosheh, which is essentially inalterable, and then there is the traditional interpretation of the Torah beginning with Mosheh on Sinai and developing all the way to the present day, exemplified and recorded in the Talmud, and which we can comfortably call the "Oral Torah", as it is the authoritative and traditional interpretation of the Torah. Noogster 02:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Electricity
You may wish to read HRH"G R' Shlomo Zalman ZTL's psak in Minchas Shlomo as well as the various teshuvos of R' Moshe ZTL on electricity. Most poskim believe only incandescent lightbulbs are Issurei D'oraysah due to Bishul. The Chazon Ish ZTL's psak of Boneh notwithstanding (and R' Shlomo Zalman goes through great pains to argue), the issurim of electricity are d'rabbanan. So, even with Eidim and Hasra'a, most poskim would not consider this a Skilo offense. More importantly, you seemed to have missed my point (intentionally or otherwise) about the ma'ase ksiva. No dyo, no individual letters, only the phosphorescent afterimages of excited chemicals in a CRT and the optical illusin caused by electrically charged dots of liquid crystal. You may find a brief chazara of Hilchos Shabbos together with a posek rather stimulating. . Kol Tuv, -- Avi 04:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Tefillin/Peyos
I think the peyos part is OK, because it's a "really" specialized article. The tefillin article, I think has too much information in it already and it doesn't really need the extra superfluous information. There's no real encyclopedic point in how different groups put on tefillin. Besides, how accurate is it? I know litvaks that wear upside down shins, and what about the daled on the shel rosh? Double or single?
 * I understand, but what really is the point in differentiating among the chassidishe sects how tefillin is worn? It's like writing an entry that a Chaim Berlin guy will wear his hat all the way up, and an Israeli Charedi will wear a Borsalino with the Borsalino tag visible, while American "charedim" will not wear a hat with a visible Borsalino logo. If you want, you can put it back, but I think it takes away from the article. Yossiea 20:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Commons photo of the year id confirmation
I confirm that I am the same user as 192.168.1.109 --Shuli 20:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Chardal
We already reached a consensus on this. Just because you don't believe they are charedi doesn't make it so. They are charedi, they are Charedi Data Leumi. Furthermore, as anyone in Israel can attest, MO is not the same as RZ or Chardal. They might intermingle at points but they are not one and the same. For more information, you should read the main Chardal article and see all the relevant talk pages. Yossiea (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Civility

 * That was his name, and he is known as such in the English Speaking world so back off you Meshuge, your a vilda chaya, a shmuck, a shmendrick, a shlimiel, a shil).Special:Contributions/Shaul_avrom.

I'll thank you to keep a WP:CIVIL tongue in your mouth. -- Zsero 07:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Editor review
I reviewed you. YechielMan 15:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Please review these articles
Could you have a look at these articles and their talk?


 * Jewish reactions to intelligent design
 * Jewish opposition to evolution

I feel the articles are extremely well sourced and balanced. I'd like somebody else to remove the tags. Please look at my last versions, because I have run up against somebody from the evolution/creation universe who wants to pick a fight. --Metzenberg 03:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I really need your help here. ZayZayEM is engaging in troll-like behavior, such as making edits on the very materials I am editing, removing materials immediately after I add them, and so forth. It is a harassment pattern that extends across multiple articles.  The main articles involved are:


 * * Jewish reactions to intelligent design
 * * Jewish opposition to evolution
 * * Natan Slifkin


 * It is bizarre behavior, because I can see no reason why he is even interested in this material. As you and I both know, it is material you have to really understand well to edit. Over the last week, I have substantially rearranged all the materials on Judaism and evolution in an effort to clean up the main Judaism and Evolution page first of all, so that it can be turned into a page that is not dominated by issues (such as the Slifkin affair) that would have undue weight.  ZayZayEM has simply made it impossible for me to work. He has followed me from one article to another, demanding arbitrary changes. many of his edits, and his changes, show that he knows very little about the subject, which as you and I both know, is quite abstruse at times. --Metzenberg 16:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The notzri religion
I am well aware of the lies of the notzri religion; the religion is a lie, a diametric corruption of the authentic (historically verifiable, see Harvey Falk, Geza Vernes, Hyam Maccoby, E.P. Saunders, James Parkes, Jerusalem Synoptic School) Torah teachings of Ribi Yehoshua of Nazareth, the rYb"Y. I do not in any way identify with that religion or its sun-g*o*d worship. Rather I identify with the Netzarim movement within Orthodox Judaism (http://netzarim.co.il/), an accurate reconstruction of the 1st-century Beit Hillel establishment of the same name, rejecting Qabbalist superstition in favor of more halakhically sound rMb"M/Teimani leanings and such. The belief that he was born of fornication is historically unverifiable (do not lower yourself to the methods of the mentioned notzri religion). There is no need for me to follow my own eyes: the 1st-century followers of the Tzadiq are without outside deference my example. Paqid Yirmeyahu ben David is among the top brass in scholarship on this subject. His reconstructions of various "NT" texts (including, and foremost, the Hebrew account from Matityahu ha-Leivi) from every extant related text demonstrate conclusively that the Davidic genealogy is among the more unmolested/non-redacted features. While I have no doubt that this person is the Mashiakh, even if it were somehow disproven all other attributes of his blessed memory be intact. Noogster 03:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Knowing Each Other
No I don't think we know each other. --Oneworld25 21:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey

 * Yo, Yodamace1 here on that line from Haredim and Zionism. What's up? You sound like a very interesting person...from what I've gathered, you're a Lubavitcher who follows the Eda and watches NBC. So, I'm a baal teshuva studying at Yeshivas Ohr David in Katamon. I don't usually introduce myself to internet strangers, but again, you sound just fascinating. Anyways, if you're ever in Israel, maybe we could agree to meet and shmooze at some public area.

On to buisness...
 * My problem with that sentence is the word "supporters".
 * A) If you want to say that they staunchly support Israel full throttle, as one could derive from the word "strongly," that's not true. There is a general Ashkenazic Haredi concensus that the State of Israel was created in a non-halachic manner and that we are fighting the government, not working with it, for Judaism. There are two legitimate Ashkenazic Haredi opinions on this issue as to how the government should be fought. Agudath Israel of Israel and Degel haTorah hold that we fight the system in the Knesset and that yidden should vote. The Eda and Brisk hold that yidden don't vote and don't accept $$$ from the government. Ger follows the first opinion mentioned; that's not "strong support." That's "fighting the system from the inside."
 * B) If you want to say that they support Israel as opposed to it's enemies--i.e. the Palestinians and surrounding Muslim countries--that's very misleading because everybody holds that way (NK doesn't count. They're in cherem)
 * C) My impression was that Chabad--as in the top rabbis who run the thing--claim that they aren't so Zionistic. I recall reading this in the name of a prominent rabbi. However, I must admit that the rabbi has just about nothing to do with Chabad.
 * D) Belz doesn't have people in the Knesset because the negotiations with the gedolim of Agudath Israel didn't work out well for Belz. It has nothing to do with their stance towards Zionism (see United Torah Judaism.). If its emes that Vizhnitz doesn't have representatives in Knesset, I would guess that they're in a similar situation to Belz. Gut moed. --Yodamace1 08:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I see. Dude, I figured you went to a Litvish yeshiva, but Ner Israel? You've probably done a crazy whole cheshbon hanefesh to end up with the Eida as your rebbeim. So if you're ever in Israel or Atlanta, put a message on my Discussion page. --Yodamace1 15:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well that's cool. But isn't Ner Agudist? In fact, wasn't Rav Ruderman a member of the Agudah's Moetzei Gedolei haTorah? And if you're in the States, shouldn't your rebbeim also be situated in the States? Maybe you should wait until you go to Israel to affiliate with the Eidah--and when you do go to Israel b"H, consult Rav Feldman about what to do. I'm not trying to come off aggressive or tell you what to do, the above were just my initial thoughts. btw, bet Malachim (Chassidus) would interest you. And, by the way, Happy Back-in-Chometz Day. I bet you haven't been slacking as bad as me, but with Pesach vacation, my learning and davening have both been slammed. Hopefully, I'll be back in full swing from now on. My email's yodamace@gmail.com let's keep in touch that way since I won't have full access to the Wiki once I'm back in Yerushalayim ir haKodesh. --Yodamace1 01:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

R' Pinkus
I am not casting aspersions (chas v'shalom) on anyone, but if we are going to bring every single reference to Zionism in sefarim the article would become completely unweildly. Certain gedolim are much more well known than others, so unless there is a specific reason why this sefer has particular relevance, I think we should stick to those gedolim who are more mefursum. -- Avi 18:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks! :) --Bear and Dragon 13:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)