tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post2814999579821222139..comments2023-10-30T08:40:59.016-04:00Comments on Wolfish Musings: Just How Far Does A Beis Din's Jurisdiction Extend?BrooklynWolfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-35735146697565846332008-07-14T12:18:00.000-04:002008-07-14T12:18:00.000-04:00And Satmar women wearing anything provocative on t...And Satmar women wearing anything provocative on their feet was a problem exactly when???<BR/><BR/>I am not worried about the Satmar deciding to adhere to a beit din decision from a different century given that they refuse to leave the 19th most of the time as it is. I'm more worried that they actually felt it necessary to go ahead with this.<BR/><BR/>Did the succession battle crack the egg?-suitepotato-https://www.blogger.com/profile/04567987879881511630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-1290762268326129572008-07-14T11:56:00.000-04:002008-07-14T11:56:00.000-04:00ProfK the press also reported that the reason for ...ProfK the press also reported that the reason for the kol koreh was against being stylish and since white jackets are in they should be ossured. What's really strange with that is that chassidishe women have the minhag to wear all white or mostly white on Yom Kippur. Is this also going to be assured? How about kallahs--is the new bridal dress color going to be black? And then there are tachrichim.<BR/><BR/>It occurs to me that the point of the kol koreh might have been for the women to cut down on their spending on new clothes. Same thing with the shoes--not about tsnius at all but about cost. But then why not just say so?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-17285881534250033622008-07-14T01:46:00.000-04:002008-07-14T01:46:00.000-04:00profk: that's so interesting that white now may be...profk: that's so interesting that white now may be on the way to being assured. When the beis hamikdash was standing and the laws of tumah would still apply, all women who were niddah had to wear white, so others would know that the woman was niddah and anything she touched would become tameh. I wonder what's going to happen when the third beis hamikdash will be build?<BR/><BR/>I know that there is nothing particular about white. The community just needs to agree that all niddah women need to wear the same color and tahora women cannot wear that color. But what's left for the future? niddah women wear dark navy blue and every other woman wears black?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-65104625435273008542008-07-13T21:07:00.000-04:002008-07-13T21:07:00.000-04:00Considering the Noda B'Yehuda's caustic disapprova...Considering the Noda B'Yehuda's caustic disapproval of Chassidus, I doubt the residents of Kiryas Yoel accept his jurisdiction totally.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-1606331678329662362008-07-13T07:31:00.000-04:002008-07-13T07:31:00.000-04:00The Jewish Press also reported this kol koreh. Th...The Jewish Press also reported this kol koreh. There was another one as well--this one was against the wearing of white jackets by women (I believe by Satmar.) The color is too "exciting" among other things. And they too go back centuries for a precedent on the ban. White is too exciting? Kallahs must drive them crazy.ProfKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17954446826821665314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-90632886394638052132008-07-11T14:12:00.000-04:002008-07-11T14:12:00.000-04:00Jurisdiction is indeed an issue in Jewish law. On...Jurisdiction is indeed an issue in Jewish law. One of the more interesting applications of jurisdiction had to do with an anonymous book that was published in 1789 attacking the Chief Rabbi of the triple community of Altona, Hamburg, and Wansbeck. That book, Mitzpeh Yekutel was put under a ban and the unknown author was subject to a ban as well. It turned out the author was the son of the Berlin chief rabbi, R. Tzvi Berlin. After he found out his son was the author, they succeeded in getting the ban overturned by arguing the Triple community does not have jurisdiction over Berlin. The Noda b'Yehuda as well as others were involved.Dan Rabinowitzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11519934722728609504noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-15026615720915851422008-07-11T14:08:00.000-04:002008-07-11T14:08:00.000-04:00My favorite part is where he says that people will...My favorite part is where he says that people will have to sit shiva if they wear the shoes!<BR/><BR/>And I thought all this craziness is a product of our pathetic generation. Nice to see that some things have a long tradition in Judaism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-44396614967054256442008-07-11T13:57:00.000-04:002008-07-11T13:57:00.000-04:00Wolf:I think you are way off in your analysis here...Wolf:<BR/><BR/>I think you are way off in your analysis here. <BR/><BR/>First of all, even the secular courts have the concept of precedent. While precedent does not bind you to the prior decision or concept, it is something that needs to be taken seriously. So too here. <BR/><BR/>Secondly the KJ bais din would likely be banning this with or without the N"B's psak. It is just begin used to buttress and make it more acceptable to the masses because of the increased authority.<BR/><BR/>No, a psak from years ago does NOT have automatic application today. But it needs to be evaluated to see when it is relevant. That is the job of the Rabbonim in each community and that is why they need time to just sit and learn the volumes of seforim.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-79779604427828767872008-07-11T13:16:00.000-04:002008-07-11T13:16:00.000-04:00AJ,That's fine, it strikes me as underhanded. If ...AJ,<BR/><BR/>That's fine, it strikes me as underhanded. If they have a clear halachic basis for their ban, then it should be able to stand on it's own without having to resort to the p'sak of a bais din from halfway around the world and two centuries earlier. <BR/><BR/>In addition, have they taken the context of R. Landau's ruling into consideration? Perhaps the reasoning that applied then does not apply now. By taking it out of context (which I'm not saying it does... I don't know) you can get very dangerous results. An example would be someone ruling that a woman shouldn't leave her house more than once or twice a month because the Rambam ruled that way. Well, that's true, but the Rambam lived in a very different world than we do. Context played a big part in his ruling, and it wouldn't apply to today's world.<BR/><BR/>The WolfBrooklynWolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03994285019137108636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11425059.post-44856629915245615372008-07-11T13:11:00.000-04:002008-07-11T13:11:00.000-04:00Do you think its possible that he is not implement...Do you think its possible that he is not implementing the ban simply because R Landau did?<BR/><BR/>Kiryas Joel Beit Din may have wanted to implement the ban for Tzniut/nonTzniut reasons, but felt that it would be better/taken more seriously if related to the Noda BYehuda one -- people won't think "that crazy Beit Din, uprooting our tradition and fun of wearing gold/silver shoes" if they feel it comes from an earlier time.Alanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09136034677018916047noreply@blogger.com