schechte@csd2.UUCP (asher schechter) (02/17/85)
Kol hamelamed bito Torah k'ealo melamdo tiflus. So it is no wonder
that Susan calls my view "silly".It must be talmudically correct.
The Chassidic and Misnagdim movement were just questions of style.
The laws were the same age old Biblical laws that G-d gave to Moshe.
Of course there were periods during biblical times that saw Jews
transgress the Torah, but the overall general rule was Torah
Judaism (Orthodoxy).
Out of simplicity I refrain from a long winded discussion.
Asher Schechterteitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (02/19/85)
> Kol hamelamed bito Torah k'ealo melamdo tiflus. So it is no wonder > that Susan calls my view "silly".It must be talmudically correct. I just wanted to say one thing. The prohibition against teaching one's daughter Torah is the forcible teaching. Each fathe is obligated to make sure that his on learns Torah. We learn this from the verse in the Shema, " v'limadtem otam et b'neichem " [ and you shall teach your sons ]. The Torah did not obligate the father to teach his daughter. However, if the girl wants to learn Torah, should we push her away? G-D forbid. If she wants to learn, teach her, just don't force her to learn. This is the idea behind the quote which is so often taken out of context. Eliyahu Teitz. >
schechte@csd2.UUCP (asher schechter) (02/22/85)
I would like to inform you of a tshuva in Igrot Moshe from Rabbi
Moshe Feinstein where he disagrees with your statement.
It is in the new chelek Yorah Da'eh 87.
Asher Schechter