If you eat chulent.........

groisamomma

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 1:40 am

freidasima wrote:

Groissemomma you are digging yourself deeper and deeper into your pit of ignorance and stubborness. Nice that you defend the chassidic way so strongly, but you know, chassidus doesn't need you to defend it. There are nice chassidic customs but to call them Holy is...well is a bad joke.

FS, you keep reiterating how learned you are, but you aren't looking anything up. You're only spewing filth without backing any of it up from actual seforim. If you're as learned as you'd like all the amothers here to believe, look up the Aruch Hashulchan 257 where he quotes the Re'ma about hot foods. The Aruch Hashulchan writes, "It is a minhag Yisroel to eat hot chicken soup, kugel, and cholent." He writes the Yiddish words for each one.

freidasima wrote:

They are traditions. No traditions like that are "holy". They may be important to the group but they are not holy. I gather that for you cholent and a sefer torah are on the same level, both "holy"...well maybe that's what they taught you in your chassidic education...oy vey if so..

Look at that! Remember when I told you in my last post to stop putting words into people's mouths in order to ridicule them? Hmm...look how long it took you.

freidasima wrote:

For example, The ONLY reason chazal insisted on hot food is the karaites, until then we know that bnai yisroel ate cold food on shabbos just as the manna was cold. The sources vis a vis hot food and karaites pre-date the Remo by hundreds of years. The Remo's explanations come later and were added on in addition to the original reason which was the karaites.

Again. Look inside the Re'ma: He says you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Either you refuse to look it up, or you disagree with him. Either way your behavior is quite laughable.

freidasima wrote:

Maybe YOUR ancestors thought that pashtida is kugel and "stew" ..but all over the world Jews elsewhere did not interpret the SA's wordings as meaning "kugel" and "cholent" but as many other things. Bring me a source that your ancestors were correct and all the others were wrong.

Exactly! That's what I've been trying to tell you the whole time. People who eat such foods do so because that is the way their ancestors understood the Shulchan Aruch. NOT because (in your words), "someone sneezed before the Holocaust." A silly assertion, which is ignorant and crude. Wow, you just agreed with me...I wonder where we disagree. So...to recap: Those who eat these foods do so because the SA says so according to their ancestors' understanding (and probably your ancestors, too).

I would NEVER tell you my ancestors' interpretations was the correct one if there were other interpretations. I respect and revere ALL minhagim.

freidasima wrote:

You are the one looking foolish. Instead of backtracking with dignity and saying that all the foods you bring are from a certain area, a certain time and in many cases stemming for reasons of poverty - you are making up theories and all sorts of sanctities that are ludicrous and have no basis in reality.

Who is making up theories?? I quoted the Shulchan Aruch verbatim again and again and again without adding a word, EVER. Certainly you jest.

freidasima wrote:

And it would behove you to quote precisely. Show me a precise quote from what I wrote that nothing except wine and challah are mandatory. I wrote it is mandatory to to remenber the shabbos with the most expensive foods one has or one can afford.

And to quote you "precisely" from your previous posts in this thread where you said that nothing else is mandatory, only wine and challah:

Quote #1:

freidasima wrote:

The only elements one must have are wine, pas (motzi). Nothing else is mandated. The business of meat and fish is lovely but it isn't what used to be done by the tanoim.

Quote #2:

freidasima wrote:

The "bosor vedogim vechol matamim" is a lovely piyut but not a tzivui (to have both for example).

Yet here you said the opposite:

freidasima wrote:

No one is saying that one shouldn't eat meat or fish on shabbos just the opposite.

So who's contradicting themselves???

freidasima wrote:

If you really believe that your shabbos cholent has the same kedusha as a shofar or a lulav....I wish you well and now understand why so many misnagdim of my grandmother's generation would talk about "those ignorant chassidim". Oy vey if you really believe what you wrote. Oy vey.

Neither is holy. Both are "cheftza shel mitzva." LOOK IT UP.

Which is why I have repeated ad nauseum that doing a mitzva makes a Yid holy. At no point have I said more than that. LOOK UP my previous posts.

freidasima

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 2:39 am

I give up with you. You are contradicting yourself (now you say that the ACT is holy but before you wrote:"

""Traditional" Ashkenazi Jewish "soul food" has intrinsic shabbat kedusha if only for the reason because they are enumerated by the Shulchan Aruch. "

Meaning the actual FOOD is holy. And you wrote that over and over in your first posts. Now you realize how ridiculous that sounds so you are backtracking? Now it's not the food but it's the act...

You are also of course taking everything written very literally. like a fundamentalist.
But I guess you are a fundamentalist so why should I expect anything else from you?

Meat and fish, meat and fish...but the actual mitzva that we are commanded has only two performative parts. Kiddush/ Motzi (and then benching as the continuation of motzi). Oneg shabbos is interpretative. meaning the words "meat and fish" that you quote over and over are symbolic of the most expensive foods that exist, which is the mitzva of oneg shabbos

As for the rest of your stuff, it is rather ignorant to cite the oruch hashulchan, a late 19th century composition of r. Yechiel Michel Epstein, as if it is halocho. One doesn't pasken from it, But then again you keep citing the SA..and one doesn't pasken from the SA directly either as much that was written there is a reflection of the social norms of a particular period and society.

That's why our present day rabbonim of each group pasken for us. We don't go directly to the SA. Maybe your rabbonim pasken that one MUST eat chicken soup with lukshen, and eggs and onions and salmon (but no other type of fish) and kugel and cholent, and say it is a ba'al yaavor...and you keep asserting that this is what your ancestors did (how far back exactly?) and you keep asserting that YOU know that word X means Y exactly...but you really haven't shown me any sources to back up that today's lukshen kugel is pashtida and you also haven't shown me any written sources that proves that interpretation..

And then again you are so literal instead of trying to understand the actual concept behind what was written and why it was written.

but being a fundamentalist concepts dont interest you. You just keep to the letter of the law including in cultural concepts from the 16th century.

What's the danger in that?
Well I'll tell you. If you raise kids without explaining to them what the crux of the concept is and without saying that this is YOUR small group's interpretation of it but it's not a ba'al yaavor mitzva (which is not what we have learned here what your groups do)....then that kid will literally think as he is growing up that if you don't eat cholent and kugel and eggs and onions on shabbos you have not fulfilled shabbos and that's the same as not keeping shabbos and then if you are questioning and everything including minhog is holy (remember what you said? A cholent is like lulav and shofar?")...welll then that kid is going to say if I didn't eat eggs and onions I might as well have that cheeseburger too.

Etc.

Which is why we see so many chassidic kids who end up going OTD going so far in the other direction and saying if we threw away X (eggs and onions) our group teaches us that it's all on the same level, so if I sinned already in that I might as well "go the whole way".

And they do.

That's the true danger in what you write.
Minhogim are nice, sweet and traditions. But they are NOT law, they are NOT holy and anyone who quotes the "minhog yisroel din hu" might as well go and learn where that statement by chazal comes from (dinei mamonos ONLY) and how it is misused today by so many gruops.

DrMom

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 3:16 am

groisamomma wrote:

DrMom wrote:

groisamomma wrote:

FS, I am happy that you finally admitted that according to Gemara and Shulchan Aruch a person should eat fish and meat on Shabbos. In post after post you denied that, so thanks for coming out with it. Honesty is a breath of fresh air.

I assume you already realized that the Re'ma in 257 clearly writes that one should eat hot food for that is the way of kavod and oneg shabbos. He continues on that furthermore, one who prohibits keeping food warm on Shabbos, should be suspected of apikorsus.

The first half of his sentence cannot be explained two ways: He is clearly referring to the parameters of the mitzva of oneg shabbos, nothing else. Continue on your path of honesty and admit to that.

Pashtida in Yiddish is kugel. Always was. Always will be. You can stand on your head and spit wooden nickels. There are many ways to make kugel and people eat it in different ways. If you prefer quiche, good for you. Kindly do not deny the words of the Re'ma.

There were small groups of Karaites then, and there are small groups today. That being said, this is completely irrelevant to the discussion as the Re'ma clearly states that the main reason for eating hot food is because of oneg shabbos and not because of the Karaites.

I don't know exactly what you learned "in depth" and "from within" since you have not responded to any of my sources with direct quotes from anything you learned inside.

"Asher kidishanu b'mitzvosav..." refers to every single mitzva a person is mekayem. If certain foods are oneg shabbos, they sanctify a person.

As sarahd wrote above, lox is a German word for salmon.

Actually, Karaites weren't always the small minority group they are today. During the period 900-1100 BCE, they constituted ~40% of the world's Jews, and presented a real threat to Rabbinic Judaism. That's why many rabbinical authorities are so emphatic about davka doing things that karaites would find objectionable. Their halachic rulings were colored by their bitter theological and political strugles with Karaism.

So when you say, "We don't do x to show we are not Karaites; we do it because y said so," well part of the reason why "y" said so it because the Karaites davka said not to do x, and y wanted to definitively demonstrate that he and his followers were NOT Karaites and to officially refute Karaite interpretations of halacha.

For better or for worse, Jewish halacha and minhag and opinion is intimately intertwined with influenced by historical, sociological, and political circumstances.

It happens today too. How many rabbanim say not to do "a" because it is important to distinguish ourselves from Reform Movement, which makes big deal out of permitting "a"?

DrMom, if you look inside the Re'ma you will see that the Karaites is not the primary reason for this halacha. Unfortunately, I also learned only the Karaite reason in school (probably because it's more sensational:) but in reality it is only a side reason. The main reason given by the Re'ma for eating hot foods is for Oneg Shabbos.

I learned that many halachic authorities were unusually insistent on eating hot foods because they wanted to discredit Karaite interpretations of halacha. The other reasons were added in order to bolster their essentially politically-motivated psakim.

BTW, IIRC, the Rema said that one should permit hot food to be eaten in his home, but didn't insist that one had to eat it himself. But I could be mistaken...

Again, it seems that even a superficial examination of the history of halacha reveals that many psakim -- both long ago as well as today -- are influenced by the social and political climate. I am not saying these rulings should be ignored, but the context in which they were made should be understood and appreciated.

DrMom

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 7:38 am

shev wrote:

MaBelleVie wrote:

smilethere wrote:

Not according to chassidim. Not applicable with shabbos food.

What if you eat in the home of a non- chassid? What if you go away and those foods aren't available? If its minhag k'din you would really have some issues.

When ever we go away we make sure to have the foods that we eat available, or we take it along or we'll buy it.
I don't have any friends or family that don't eat these foods on Shabbos. Call me naive but until I came onto Imamother I never knew people eat milky for the meals or they don't eat these foods. EVERYONE I know eats these foods. If I'll go into a take where I live they will have all these foods for Shabbos.

Isn't it great to come here to imamother to learn that there are so many different Orthodox communities, each with their own traditions, and own foods?

I guess you don't participate much in the "What's for Shabbat dinner tonight" thread! LOL

groisamomma

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 10:00 am

FS, your entire post is completely and utterly besides the point. I never debated your "non-fundamentalist outlook" and b'li neder I never will. It's not my business.

The only thing that's important is that YOU LIED. To say that the ONLY reason to eat these foods is because of some non-minhag "tradition" and "because somebody sneezed" is complete and utter falsehood. You can act in any way you want, BUT YOU CANNOT LIE.

YOU CANNOT LIE.
YOU CANNOT LIE.
YOU CANNOT LIE.

Those are the only rules in this game.

FS, you asserted that you do agree that one must accept minhag, only that these foods are not a minhag. In fact, you were wrong. These foods are brought in SA, and the Aruch Hashulchan who's a later commentary, translated them into Yiddish for us. These words "minhag yisroel torah" are the Aruch Hashulchan's words, right there. Again, LOOK IT UP.

The minute you admit that the reason people eat these foods is because according to "some" it's a minhag yisroel our conversation is over.

I NEVER claimed it was halacha, not a minhag, I clearly said again and again it was a minhag brought down in Shulchan Aruch. And I was right and you were wrong.

Claiming certain people confuse minhag and halacha is YOUR opinion of them. Stop projecting your (self?) hate onto others. Nobody else claims eating cholent is a Din; everyone knows it's a minhag. But, as you said yourself, one should keep to a minhag.

To sum this conversation: You ridiculed people who keep what the Aruch Hashulchan calls minhag yisroel. Just admit that "unholy tradition" is not the only reason to eat these foods and we are truly done.

groisamomma

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 10:09 am

DrMom wrote:

groisamomma wrote:

DrMom wrote:

groisamomma wrote:

DrMom wrote:

BTW, IIRC, the Rema said that one should permit hot food to be eaten in his home, but didn't insist that one had to eat it himself. But I could be mistaken...

Yeah, you are mistaken. The Rema says both things.

DrMom wrote:

Again, it seems that even a superficial examination of the history of halacha reveals that many psakim -- both long ago as well as today -- are influenced by the social and political climate. I am not saying these rulings should be ignored, but the context in which they were made should be understood and appreciated.

Good point. We must keep to it and know the reasons.

freidasima

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 3:38 pm

groissamomma you seem to have real anger issues here...wow what vehemence. Too bad you don't use it on something real.

Where exactly is this so called lie? I repeat - there is no halochic reason to eat any of the foods you mentioned. If someone sees it as their personal or family tradition that's fine or even their group's tradition, but other than that? No chiyuv, no need, no halocho, no din. No kedusha, no holiness, no sanctity nothing nada. And I am not the only one saying that, you can find thousands of orthodox (non chassidic) rabbis who will back up every word.

The ONLY direct chiyuv that has always existed and that one has on shabbos in terms of food other than the concept of having three "seudot" is kiddush and motzi. The direct chiyuv of hot food, as we have already stated, and as I was backed up by others, only became a chiyuv after the Karaites and BECAUSE of the karaites. Before then it was not a chiyuv.

This is the internet honey, there are no "rules", I didn't lie and you are living in a delusion.
Eating what you stated: "eggs and onions, salmon, cholent, kugel"is NOTbrought down by the shulchan oruch...maybe in the chassidic version if there is such a thing? Sure isn't in any version the rest of us have. Eggs and onions...that's rich...and cholent?

And here we go again with your fundamentalism.
THE ONLY REASON TO EAT ANY OF THESE SPECIFIC FOODS IS A SPECIFIC GROUPs TRADITION.

Get it?

Nothing wrong with tradition but it is NO MORE THAN THAT.

TRADITION IS NOT HOLY. TRADITION IS JUST A REMINDER OF WHAT A SPECIFIC GROUP DOES.
A SEFER TORAH IS HOLY. A GEMORO IS HOLY.

CHOLENT AND KUGEL, EGGS AND ONIONS ARE NOT HOLY. NEITHER IS EATING THEM.

And just BTW, tradition, per se, gets changed and altered all the time, you are just not aware of it obviously...even in your specific group. Even food traditions. Even your shabbos food traditions. You aren't eating exactly what your ancestors ate 200 years ago, you are eating an american version thereof but it ain't 'the same".

Just admit that and we can end this ridiculous discussion.

freidasima

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 5:41 pm

You backtrack once again. You claimed these foods are holy. Then you backtrack a bit and claimed that they only become holy when one eats them on shabbos. Then you backtrack some more and say that they are a chefetz shebakedusha and that the act of eating them is what is holy.

Nada holiness. Your group's tradition? Fine. But let's leave the word holy, or kedusha for things which are across the board holy in Judaism like a Sefer Torah, a talmud something containing Hashem's name. Even a lulav and shofar aren't holy per se until they are used for a holy act and only during that act. But again these two objects are specified by name in the Torah and there is no debate among the various factions of am yisroel what the definition of "shofar" or "lulav" is, unlike foods.

I never ridiculed someone who is keeping their tradition, just the opposite, don't read selectively. I keep writing that tradition is fine and keeping a tradition is sweet and fine. But the minute one turns what is besach hakol a custom of a particular group into THE Only correct interpretation of an amorphous term and then claims that the object of their interpretation is holy...that is cheapening true kedusha, true holiness, and trying to upgrade what is "just" one particular group's custom, as important as it may be to that group, into something it is not.

And that is what you have been doing in almost all your posts until this last one.

It'snot just ridiculous to do so, that's your issue, but it is also, dangerous for the reasons that I enumerated earlier.

Which is why it is so important to be precise about what is what, why it is done and not to lump tradition and holy together or call something a chiyuv when it is not. Lo tosifu velo tigreu mimenu. Don't add don't subtract. There is a reason chazal teach us this. Just recall the very educating Midrash of the snake, the tree and chava and what happened when the words forbidden to touch appeared out of nowhere..

tweek

Tue, Jul 31 2012, 6:18 pm

As an outsider peeking in (and not sticking around because I don't have time for this), I can see clearly that you are each coming from totally different perpectives.

If you can stop getting stuck on the petty details, you can see that this is about understanding the subtle concepts that are part of some of the different derachim in Yiddishkeit (which is what makes it so beautiful).

There is a concept in Chassidus that certain foods have certain deeper mystical meanings, and that by eating them on Shabbos, a person is elevated spiritually. Not understanding that, is similar to a Chassidish person not understanding that a MO rav would permit women flashdancing (sorry to bring that up again shock

, best example I could think of!) It just means a person is coming from a different world.

Of course it is important to differentiate between that and halacha, and I'm pretty sure most people understand the difference (I hope!). On the other hand, if you go back to one of the true origins and purposes of Chassidus, which was to elevate the mundane and to elevate the simple person, even a simple act of eating done by a simple person can be elevated to a moment of kedusha with the right kavana. That is one of the fundemental concepts of Chassidus which so many of these intense feelings regarding traditional foods come from.