חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם. דומה למיכי בוט.

Headscarf for a woman

שו"תHeadscarf for a woman
שאל לפני 3 שנים

Please Rabbi Michael,
The following is the Word file regarding the woman's head covering. Sorry it wasn't attached earlier:

 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DBz27eMLfrkUgnEepuD_xI5pxozrNezq/edit?usp=share_link&ouid=103054435058019085063&rtpof=true&sd=true

Thank you very much for your insights.


לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

השאר תגובה

0 Answers
מיכי צוות ענה לפני 3 שנים

I appreciate the article. I assume I earned it because I have previously written a critique of the evidence of the "YoYam". In my opinion, the "YoYam's" statements are completely unfounded (not out of fanaticism but on the merits of the matter. I have no problem permitting it if it is indeed permissible). I am attaching the article (written by my student) for your perusal if you wish:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11RLsHJakEK9iagR6xc8yX6Aly1RACyV0/edit?usp=share_link&ouid=103054435058019085063&rtpof=true&sd=true
As for this article by Mr., what the heart desires, time suppresses, and therefore I flew happily among its pages, and commented on several main points, mainly in the first part (on the religion of Moses and the Torah). I am attaching a commented collection, which will be reviewed there.
As I wrote, in the second part I agree in principle (that the Jewish religion is according to the accepted custom, and this is a matter of judgment). I will only point out that I personally do not accept a halakhic discussion that deals with the question of what a certain or unknown rabbi intended, to permit or teach a right or to do something else? As far as I am concerned, this has no importance. What is important is whether there is a permit or not, and not whether someone wrote to permit. I divided this between first-order rulings (from the sources themselves) and second-order rulings (according to precedents). But if Mr. decided to discuss the second-order precedent question, which rabbis permitted and peppered with the intention of Maharam al-Ashkar and the Yom, etc., you would be surprised at him, after all, the majority of all rabbis wrote the opposite of the Dina. So what is your point: if you want to rely on the opinion of the rabbis (i.e. to issue a second-order ruling), then the Yom and the rabbi al-Ashkar are a negligible minority. And if you want to express your opinion (to issue a second-order ruling) First Order) – Say it without regard to them. In short, if Mr. Fusak rules like Maham Ala-Ashkar and the Yum because his opinion is inclined towards them, then he should write his opinion and opinions and not rely on them and pepper their words. In my opinion, this is unnecessary.
And I wrote it.
All the best, and may the Lord grant that his restoration, whose springs cross, may increase Torah and magnify it.


לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

השאר תגובה

Back to top button