≡ Menu

What are the most bizarre frum Jewish beliefs?

Fellow bloggers Dov Bear and Eliyahu Fink have been tweeting and blogging about some strange or over the top frum beliefs out there and I guess they want me to enter the mix of things. My facebook status update received 73 comments of people trying to kill each other for me suggesting that things certian poskim have told us to do are strange and the funny part of it is the entire religion is strange and quite frankly, religion in general is strange, but we do it because we were brainwashed y our local community kiruv kollel, are convinced we will be damned to gehenom if we don’t, grew up with it or married into it. So what are the strangest frum beliefs, practices and superstitions?

If a woman drinks the havdalah wine she will grow a beard

That everyone in the shtetl knew shas by the age of 13

Properly disposing of your nail clippings so pregnant ladies don’t have miscarriages

Wearing jeans is ossur

The halachic way to wipe your butt


Glatt kosher

The dinosaur bones were planted by God to make the non-Jews laugh at us

Listening to a woman singing will make men want to have sex with her

That water needs a hechsher

That women are on a higher spiritual level than men (as an apology for not allowing them to do any learning or leave the kitchen)

That the Lubavitcher Rebbe is still alive and is moshiach

Toiveling dishes and utensils in the mikvah


Transferring sins to an animal and than killing it

Using a slotted spoon for coleslaw on shabbos is considered work


Not putting food under ones bed

Not sleeping with your head to the door

Not touching your eyes in the morning

Modern day non-mevushal wine concerns (so many idol worshipers lurking around Napa)

Not being able to cuddle with your wife after wedding night sex

Rabbis not believing in science

That Reform and Conservative Jews are less Jewish

That black hat Judaism is authentic Judaism in any way shape or form

Refusing to eat fish and meat together for health reasons

Drinking bottled water on pesach, because back in the shtetl days the goyim would put bread down the well

Refusing to eat gebrokts

Cholov Yisroel

Pas Yisroel

That black hats make you more religious


Eruv – because putting up a string makes those 400,000 daily people passing through your neighborhood into a private domain

Violence against women in the name of tznius

Chassidim that go crazy to finish the leftovers of the rebbe – like getting kugel or fruit the rebbe made a bracha on at a tish

Keeping molestation hush hush for fear of shidduchim

The following are taken from the comments on the Dov Bear blogpost

If you have a court case against a non-Jew and it takes place during the Jewish month Addar, the Jew will win.
[-ReMa in Shulchan Arukh O.C.]

My bubbie always told me that women should eat the heel of a challa loaf because its pointed edge represents the male anatomy (!), and the woman eating this part of the challa would thus bear male children. No joke!

Another “absurdity” mentioned is the consumption of sliced onions left overnight.
Some thoughts about the above.
One principle discussed in Cha’zal, is “chamira sakanta me’isura” – laws regarding danger are more stringent than those regarding prohibition— make food safety a primary consideration.
here is a disagreement among later Poskim about this question and other details of the prohibition. The following is a summary of these views:
The Gemara (Niddah, 17a), notes that a person who eats shelled eggs, peeled onions or garlic that had been left overnight, endangers his life and will be judged as a person who took his own life. The Gemara explains that the danger associated with these foods is ruach ra’ah.
Yad Meir and Shevet HaLevi hold that this halacha is no longer relevant because Tosfos states that certain ruach ra’ah do not descend in “these countries”. We can infer from Tosfos that we do not have to be concerned for any ruach ra’ah unless we have a mesorah that that specific form is still prevalent. Yad Meir and Shevet HaLevi cite Hago’os Mordechai as a source for adopting such an approach regarding leaving eggs, onions and garlic overnight. They are supported by the fact that the Shulchan Aruch cites certain dangerous activities listed in the Gemara but not these. Minchas Yitzchok discusses this issue and concludes that there is basis for those who are lenient.

{ 78 comments… add one }
  • Yankel March 17, 2011, 12:39 AM

    Religion by definition deals with that which cannot be seen directly by the physical senses, hence the supernatural. If a religion was void of anything which was foreign to plain physicality, it would be self disproving.

    “but we do it because we were brainwashed by our local community kiruv kollel, are convinced we will be damned to gehenom if we don’t”

    I think this is a mentality which many people develop on their own, not because they really believe it’s true, but because it makes them feel better when they aren’t up to par in their Judaism.

    Let me give a very extreme analogy here. If someone is hit by a car and dies, it’s foolish to say “He died from a heart attack and then the car hit him”, regardless of all the statistics you bring about heart attacks etc. Yes, people die from heart attacks, yes it can happen in a split second, but we saw the car hit him, and he died. No reason to assume anything other than that.

    Similarly, Judaism has so many aspects about it which would lead one to accept it, it’s foolish to say that the reason we all believe it is because “Some kollel guy convinced us we will burn if we don’t” – even if there actually was a kollel guy who actually told us “Believe it or you will burn”.

    But ironically, since these aspects of “coercion” exist, all the obvious reasons have this mental block created around them in the minds of some individuals, and as far as they can see – “the only reason to go along with it is because I was brainwashed”.

    As far humor goes though, this is cliche “Frum Satire”.

  • John March 17, 2011, 2:27 AM

    How about the existence of God who created the world? That is pretty bizzare. If you accept that, then many of those on your list that God commanded us to do, pale in comparison to the bizzare notion that God commanded us to do it. Many others in your list (hechsher on water, violence against women are not mainstream practices at all)

    • DRosenbach March 17, 2011, 3:48 AM

      You hit the nail right between the eyes, John.

      • not again March 21, 2011, 7:57 PM

        Why is it that everytime someone questions gods existence, you begin to jump up and down like a little boy in the candy store? I thought you believed that god created the world “s’u einechem morom uru mi boro ele” Its time to move on and begin using your marbles for something constructive

  • Tirtza March 17, 2011, 2:43 AM

    Covering our hair…. with hair.

    • Dumpster Diva January 27, 2014, 5:53 PM

      Agreed. Covering natural hair with another person’s natural hair still baffles me.

  • Soul Bratha March 17, 2011, 4:02 AM

    Calling a nigga a shartzah. I take exception to that, I aint no shartzah, I’m a nigga through and though. Does anyone know what shartzah means in hebrew?I bet it’s some derogetory term.

    • Ben March 17, 2011, 8:55 AM

      You mean shvartze?

      It’s Yiddish, by way of German.

      It means black. Like, the color.

    • A. Nuran March 18, 2011, 10:55 PM

      And I can’t tell the difference between “nigga” and “nigger”.

      I’ll tell you a story…
      Some time back my wife was riding the bus. A young Black guy was talking loudly on his cell phone. Every other phrase was “nigga this” or “nigga that”. An older Black man in front of her who would have been about the same age is the young idiot during the Civil Rights era was beginning to shake with rage. People were getting visibly uncomfortable.

      Finally another young Black man stood up and said “If you don’t stop saying ‘nigga’ someone’s going to come over and ‘nigga’ your a**.”

      Loud cheers from the largely Black audience.

  • Yoreh K'chetz March 17, 2011, 4:14 AM

    Soul Bratha,

    It’s shvartza not shartza. Shvartz means black in Yiddish. I don’t think it’s meant to be derogatory, it’s the same as referring to a black person as black.

    • Soul Bratha March 17, 2011, 4:19 AM

      Hey Phil, thanx.

      That is the truthfull answer not the politically correct answer, cause you know I don’t play that game.

      • Yoreh K'chetz March 17, 2011, 4:23 AM


        • ari March 17, 2011, 5:16 AM

          its still used derogatorily though, iv never heard anyone say “shafartza” then say anything nice about the person

          • Yoreh K'chetz March 17, 2011, 5:22 AM


            Would those same people have had anything nice to say if they used black instead of shvartza? Probably not…

            The word is descriptive, irrelevant of whether or not the person using it likes blacks or not.

      • Ginger March 17, 2011, 3:59 PM

        yep, no matter how other people try to get around it, that term is always used in a derogatory or less-than-nice connotation.

        • Anonymous March 18, 2011, 6:58 AM

          Not at all. You must not know any Yiddish speakers. The word “Shvartza” means black, not only when referring to people. Do the people you know have something against black things? There is nothing derogatory about the word itself, it is purely descriptive.

    • Shmul March 17, 2011, 11:21 PM

      its the way many people say shvartza that makes it sound derogatory

  • Yoreh K'chetz March 17, 2011, 4:22 AM

    Dipping in a filthy mikva to become pure.

    Some chassidim have their wives bite the pitum off the etrog after the holiday, supposed to be a segula to have a baby boy.

    Women with shaved heads that only wear wigs during s*x.

    Women having a special outfit to wear during s*x (always wondered if it had a flap in the back).

    Smoking not being assur (yet).

    People being machmir to boil sugar before pesach and use only chicken fat, yet they’ll smoke cigarettes which have been proven to contain chametz.

    • A. Nuran March 17, 2011, 1:14 PM

      The over-used mikvah is just gross. I’m covering myself with Lotrimin as we speak.

      As for special outfits to wear on whoopie night, well, I’m still trying to get my wife to wear the frog suit and replace the bed with a lily pad 🙂

      • Yoreh K'chetz March 17, 2011, 1:27 PM


        I think the women get a cleaner version, they are also forced to bathe first unlike the slobs that don’t bother showering before using the men’s mikvah. Gets even worse on Shabbat morning, especially during the summer.

        I didn’t realize you obsession with frogs ran that deep…

  • sam March 17, 2011, 5:06 AM

    I liked the post, though I found it strange that you mixed real halochos with false superstitions.

    The thing I thought unfair was your your ‘quote’ from the Rema. He does say that the Jew will (always) win. He is referring to times when a Jew had it difficult to win a case in a non-Jewish court even when he was right. Adar is a time mesugal to overcome enemies including a potentially corrupt judge.

    • A. Nuran March 17, 2011, 1:15 PM

      I think there’s a big part of the point you’re missing here….

  • Hasid March 17, 2011, 5:35 AM

    There was a famous Badchan (comedian) in Munkatch named “Chatzi Nezek”. He had a malformed nose.

    His favorite joke was, that he once was at the Belze Rebbes tish and a farfel fell on his nose, and a Chasid bit it off.

    • Shrink March 19, 2011, 6:12 PM

      That’s what happened to my shmeckel and why it’s now only 3 inches.

  • Chris_B March 17, 2011, 5:42 AM

    ruach ra’ah is pretty bizarre as is, eggs & onions or not.

  • Bubba Metzia March 17, 2011, 5:42 AM

    Mixed Dancing.

  • Frumsatire Fan March 17, 2011, 6:18 AM

    Everything surrounding kosher wine, that’s some of the weirdest stuff.

  • Seriously? March 17, 2011, 6:48 AM

    A lot of these just come from not understanding the reasons behind halachos. Things are much easier to understand as sensible if you can wrap your head around, for example, what a Mikvah actually IS. Hint: cleanliness has nothing to do with it.


    The same blog also has a *one page* explanation of the Parah Adumah.

    • Yoreh K'chetz March 17, 2011, 11:26 AM


      I remember learning that a mikvah that is excessively filthy to the point where the water stinks is invalid. Yet I see men using such mikvahs every morning. As their is no concept of purity for men nowadays, I don’t see what the point is in dipping into a possibly invalid mikvah.

      • ish_elokim March 17, 2011, 8:25 PM

        it depend where you go to the mikvah.

        i know a lot of mikvahs that are pretty clean (albeit near the mir)-you can see to the bottom of them quite clearly

        • Yoreh K'chetz March 18, 2011, 6:02 AM

          Ish elokim,

          Just because you can see the bottom doesn’t mean it’s clean. You be able to see the bottom even if the entire mikvah was filled with urine.

          Back in my yeshiva days, I saw people plucking their beards, picking their @sses and even kids urinating into the mikvah.

          It doesn’t take a genius or health dept to figure out what happens when 500 men soak in a small hot pool on Shabbat morning, after not being able to shower and commanded to do the horizontal tango the night before :-0

  • dorot March 17, 2011, 7:12 AM

    I once saw frummies in Israel hoarding water in vats prior to Pesach to avoid the horror of accidentally drinking water that an unthinking secular Israeli >might< have poisoned with, say, a chometz pizza crust carelessly thrown into the aquaduct on Pesach.

    I don't know whether to file this under superstition or chumrot gone wild. What do I know? I am just a giyoret.

    • ben March 17, 2011, 12:56 PM

      what about the water they are hoarding not on pesach for pesach? couldn;t that have been contaminated as well?

      • John March 18, 2011, 5:23 AM

        before pesach it is batul. I am hoping one of you could explain why “hoarding water” is more bizzare than abstaining from leaven for 7/8 days in the first place, just because some book written by “the man in the sky” thousands of years ago tells us to?

    • A. Nuran March 17, 2011, 1:18 PM

      You might want to explain there’s flour dust in the air in their houses from all that pre-Pesach cleaning. They’ve been breathing it in, and when it hits their noses and mouths it becomes gebrokts.

  • anonimo March 17, 2011, 7:57 AM

    Maybe this is only true in some chasidic circles, but the belief that everything G-d does is for the sake of the Jewish people. Or that non-Jews were created to serve Jews. The ultimate in spiritual solipsism.

  • Avrumy March 17, 2011, 8:31 AM

    You pretty much covered my favorites, but I would add Shaidim and seamed stockings.

  • Ben March 17, 2011, 8:59 AM

    How about moving your bowels immediately every morning a health concern? (See Kitzur Shulchan Aruch in like the third chapter or so).

    What about the people who was with the wash cup without using soap previous to it, and acting like you’re not going to get Hep B?

    • FrumGer March 18, 2011, 9:36 AM

      Actually moving you bowels as often as you can is really great for your health…

  • AMR March 17, 2011, 10:43 AM

    The Satmer still believe to this day that Sheidim, spirits holy ones at that, have in the past and may again in the present or future get a woman pregnant.
    Families lose the yichus this way and it takes many generations to get it back.
    While I am sure that spirits were probably involved I am pretty sure they were consumed and not consummated…..

  • Izzy (1) March 17, 2011, 12:07 PM

    Women kissing women, men kissing men, but not a touch between the two.

    Not pouring a woman a shot of scotch during kiddish (as she requested) because the Rabbi said, “Don’t give it to her because she likes to drink.”

  • A. Nuran March 17, 2011, 12:28 PM

    As I said elsewhere, the idea that a diet of cholent, kugel, starch, sugar, salt, liquor and practically no fruits and vegetables is good for you.

  • wuteva March 17, 2011, 5:31 PM

    u forgot about the holy grail of them all…..The hole in the sheet!….Huw did u forget that?!

  • Leibel March 17, 2011, 6:06 PM

    Kitnyot does it for me, even those who follow it admit it’s crazy.

    • Avrumy March 18, 2011, 5:30 AM

      Few minhagim irritate me more. Some food is kosher lePesach from some Jews and not others? Based on mumbojumbo what-ifs like peanut oil may be turned into delicious waffles and cause us to sin? BS!
      Similarly, waiting 3, 5 or 6 hours from meat to milk based on pseudo-scientific medievalism on how meat decomposes betwen your teeth? But in some countries it is fatser than others? More BS!

      • A. Nuran March 19, 2011, 7:28 PM

        The point isn’t to avoid sin.
        It’s to ensure obedience.

        • Yankel March 20, 2011, 12:29 AM

          I wonder if you actually come up with all this William Cooper style paranoia yourself, or were just brainwashed by some psycho.

        • G*3 March 20, 2011, 5:52 PM

          A. Nuran, you’re giving people too much credit. Things like kitniyas or waiting wasn’t cynically invented by a leadership cabal to ensure the obedience of the masses. They’re a byproducts of a system that takes as a premise that earlier generations possessed superior wisdom, and so is incapable of changing anything set down in a recognized authoritative text. So something like kitniyos, which started as a purely practical measure, takes on metaphysical significance and endures even when the conditions that made it a good idea no longer apply.

          • daniel March 20, 2011, 6:21 PM

            i don’t know, kitnyot makes sense to me. most of the grains included in kitnyot weren’t native to israel when hashem established pesach. so why would he mention things that didn’t exist to those people? to me it’s an extension of the observance since you can make bread and such out of the “new world” grains included in kitnyot.

            • G*3 March 22, 2011, 9:11 PM

              Kitnayas exists beccause in medieval Europe it was common for different crops to be grown and stored together. Kitnayas was a practical measure to prevent people from eating non-chometz crops that had been contaminated with wheat or barely flour in storage.

              Sephardim (and Mizrachim) don’t hold of kitnayas because the above prctice was not common in other parts of the world.

              Today, when crops are grown and stored seperately, the practical reason for which kitniyas was established no longer exists. And yet…

              • Yoreh K'chetz March 23, 2011, 5:11 AM


                Actually, the reason given for Kitniyot is not because of European storage methods, nor is it because you can make flour from kitniyot.

                Shulchan Aruch Harav gives the reason. Shocking as it may sound, the reasoning is that in Eastern Europe people ate cholent every Shabbos. As cholent contains barley which is chametz, the rabbis feared that ignorant people may think barely is OK if beans are OK, so they outlawed beans.

                Following this theory, they should have also outlawed potatoes, but they avoided doing so as they feared it would be too harsh and people would starve.

                My personal belief is that modern poskim should spend more of their time revoking outdated minhagim instead of coming up with ridicluous chumras.
                Judaism is tough enough to follow as it is.

                A true rabbi with an ounce of brains is one that knows when and how to mattir things, any 3 year old can come up with baseless issurim.

                • G*3 March 23, 2011, 8:27 AM

                  > Actually, the reason given for Kitniyot is not because of European storage methods, nor is it because you can make flour from kitniyot.

                  The minhag of kitniyos appeared almost immediately after crop rotation became common in Europe in the 9th century. Barely or wheat would be grown in the winter, and legumes in the spring. It was almost certainly a measure to prevent the very real problem of legume crops being contaminated by stray stalks of wheat or barely in the field or by grain kernels in the storage sacks.

                  > Shulchan Aruch Harav gives the reason.

                  Shulchan Aruch Harav was written in the 19th century, a thousand years after the minhag of kitniyas first appeared. The cholent theory is cute, but unlikely. The first mention of cholent is from the 12th century, three hundred years too late for it to account for kitniyos.

                  > Following this theory, they should have also outlawed potatoes, but they avoided doing so as they feared it would be too harsh and people would starve.

                  Potatoes are native to the Americas, and were unknown in Europe when kitniyos was established. Unless the logic is that anything that ever goes into cholent should be kitniyos, in which case eggs and water are also a problem.

                  • Yoreh K'chetz March 23, 2011, 12:44 PM


                    Shulchan Aruch Harav was following the logic of Shulchan Aruch, which cites the main reason as people confusing kitniyot based foods with chametz based foods. I believe porridge (or something simlar) is the example used.

                    The Gra brings down precedent from Pesachim (40b), where Rava objected to the workers of the Raish Gelusa cooking a food called chasisi on Pesach, since it could be confused with Chometz.

                    Kind of ironic that he ate rice …

                  • Yankel March 24, 2011, 5:34 AM


                    “Shulchan Aruch Harav was written in the 19th century, a thousand years after the minhag of kitniyas first appeared. The cholent theory is cute, but unlikely. The first mention of cholent is from the 12th century, three hundred years too late for it to account for kitniyos.”

                    You need to get your numbers straight, S.A. Harav was written in the 18th century. Regardless, following your logic, your opinion which was thought of 1300 years later, should be regarded less than his, not more.

                    But if we’re being brutally honest, the real reason he’s right and you’re wrong, is because he actually knew the nature of Halacha and the situations which would warrant a given restriction, whereas your frame of reference is primarily “What opinion can I maintain which will be in opposition with the most accepted Jewish sources out there”.

                    To even fathom that the Bal HaTanya would attribute kitniyos to cholent without having clear knowledge that the cholent custom existed at the time of the decree, is nothing short of ridiculous.

                    True, the earliest source WE find for cholent is R’ Yitzchok of Vienna (around 1150), but so what. Hundreds if not thousands of libraries have been burned over the centuries, (ironically, including the Bal Hatanya’s library.)

                    If you go through all the works of the rishonim, and count the works referred to which are nowhere to be found, you’ll see only a small percentage made it to our day. Add this to all those works which were not even referenced, and the sentence “The first time____ appears” begins to have very little meaning.

                    Unless there is a specific source which speaks of when something actually began, we today – can only make an educated guess.

                    The custom of cholent began as a result of Karaite beliefs, which only took off and became a legitimate concern during the times of Anan ben David. It doesn’t make sense that a custom would randomly be instated 500 years after the sect began, especially not when it was on its way down at the time. The logical time for such a custom to start would be within 0 – 100 years of the Karaite rise. Hence – somewhere around the eighth century.

          • Yankel March 23, 2011, 1:37 AM

            I see that (among other things), you are almost entirely ignorant of the reasons why we keep minhagim for which the (given) reasons no longer apply.

            And nothing is a “byproduct”. It’s a lower level halacha. (Meaning binding only to the extent practical. If one is in a situation where he has to eat kitniyos for whatever reason, it is unanimously agreed upon that he may.)

            And yes, when a religion is based on an event in the past where information was given over, those present are ‘wiser’ than those in the following generations, and so on. Just like someone who experienced something understands its nature better than anyone else who only heard about it.

            I think this all goes back to your “we have computers and know physics, so we’re wiser” obsession, which doesn’t make any sense and never did. The “wisdom” we refer to is Torah understanding and connection to G-d, not the ability or knowledge to manipulate nature to do things for us.

            • AMR March 23, 2011, 1:42 AM


              what you say would be true if we still lived in Europe. According halacha kitniyot should not be observed in:
              The United States
              South America
              Israel – it was never enacted for the inhabitants there and it has nothing to do with who lives where when it has to do with minhag hamakom.

              If laws and minhagim were applied according to laws and minhagim things would make much more sense.

              • Yankel March 23, 2011, 1:46 AM

                If the people who currently live in all those places originated from Europe, the same exact laws apply. The only exception to that rule would be two day Yom Tov.

              • Yankel March 23, 2011, 1:51 AM

                If the people living in all those places originated from Europe, the same exact laws would still apply.
                The only exception to that rule is 2 day Yom Tov, (and if there was ONE official Beis Din in a country, then possibly other things as well, but no such thing exists today).

              • Yoreh K'chetz March 23, 2011, 5:30 AM


                It seems that Minhag hamakom only applies to those that enforce it. Israel was under sephardi rule way before the ashkenazim and chassidim started arriving. Accordingly, it should be a sephardi country. But when the ashkenaz communities showed up, they decided to do their own thing, and today sephardim are the minority.

                Contrast that with sephardim that escaped from Spain to Holland. For the most part, they assimilated into the ashkenaz communities.

                Accordingly, all of North America should be under Sephardi minhagim, after all sephardim were first to arrive in Canada, USA and Mexico. Unfortunately for sephardi customs, the continent was overwhelmed by Eastern Europeans that stuck to their customs on a much larger scale, which is why we get polish and Lithuanian based minhagim whose reasons don’t really apply here anymore.

            • Yoreh K'chetz March 23, 2011, 5:18 AM


              A minhag only becomes halacha if it’s accepted by the nation as a whole. a prime example would be going to the mikvah every morning. Chazal tried making it mandatory, but when it didn’t catch on, they revoked the edict. Some chassidim still keep the minhag, but it’s far from having any halachic status.

              We can then move on to the mihag of gebroks/matza shruya. Another one of the “yesh amrim or yesh nohagin you’ll find in halacha, much like kitniyot, but less wide spread for some reason, probably because the mihag of eating yummy matza balls overrides the mihag of avoiding gebroks.

              If anything, the reasoning behind gebroks is stronger. Yet we find that kitniyot is stricter. Go figure.

              • Yankel March 23, 2011, 6:27 AM


                A minhag only becomes Halacha FOR EVERYBODY if it’s accepted by everbody. However, something can still be 100% binding (although not on the level of actual halacha) to a large enough group of Jews even if only their ancestors accepted it upon themselves.

                A good example of this concept is the cherem d’rabeinu Gershom. Till today, sephardim are not bound by it, while ashkenazim are. Despite the fact that there was never a time when all of Klal Yisroel kept to it.

                Besides all this, as a Chabadsker you should be able to understand that most of what we do (minhag or more) has nothing to do with the literal meaning of the reason given, and should therefore not be discarded in the event that its “reason” seems to be no longer relevant. (See the Lekutei Torah on Pesach, where the Alter Rebbe discusses gebroks al pi sod).

                The way I look at it, although the majority of minhagim are important, there are probably a few which slipped through and which people do religiously yet are meaningless, but being that we have nobody who can ascend and come back to tell us what’s real and what’s not, we’re better off keeping all of them and not trying to verify each one, even though we know some are definitely shtusim.

                Its a small price to pay for such a valuable return.

                • Yoreh K'chetz March 23, 2011, 6:57 AM


                  Sure, their are many aspects of halacha that have deeper meanings in Kabalah and Chassidus.

                  Yet I find it strange that it was OK for Rava to eat rice on Pesach depite all the kabbalistic menaing, but it isn’t OK for a ger or BT that happens to become observant through an askenazic organizations, regardless of their background.

                  Had the same person joined through a sephardi group, it would be fine for them, even though sephradim in general are more kabbalistic.

                  Let’s flip the scenario to mihagim that existed, bacame halacha and are no longer in effect today, though no one formally rejected them.

                  Rambam discusses the halachaot of shoshvinut. Basically, if one makes a simcha such as a wedding and invites a guest, the guest would be required to invite him when it was his turn, and offer him a meal the same quality/value. If not, the first one had the right to go to net din to expropriate the amount.

                  I don’t see any reason for this not to be in effect anymore, but it’s a long lost minhag. Surely, when a minhag’s underlying reason is no longer applicable, it shouldat least be revisited.

                  Take another example from modern fridges and ovens. Once upon a time, opening a fridge or oven on Shabbat was forbidden, due to the mechanism. Today, we have Shabbat modes. Should we still forbid their use just because they were once forbidden?

                • AMR March 23, 2011, 7:04 AM

                  you said – but being that we have nobody who can ascend and come back to tell us what’s real and what’s not,

                  really torah is no longer in the heavens it is right here with us

          • Spinoza January 28, 2014, 5:48 AM

            well said

  • Anonymous March 17, 2011, 9:00 PM

    Moshiach: One day a man will come and destroy the mosque in Jerusalem. As a result, world PEACE will break out.

    • Yankel March 23, 2011, 1:42 AM

      I hope you straighten out your understanding of what Moshiach is all about, or you won’t be coming along.

  • Shabbos Goy March 17, 2011, 9:02 PM

    bizarre beliefs? us? nyuk nyuk nyuk

  • daniel March 17, 2011, 10:16 PM

    a lot of the technical shabbos restrictions seem to create more work and frustration than remove it, such as not heating up anything liquid on shabbos even if you left your oven on. i think when it gets to that point it becomes silly.

    also, not “breaking shomer”, no hugging, handshakes with women, etc. that is psychotic, that’s like the fundamentalist christians do. no sex, no fondling or other after-marriage only things or whatnot, that makes sense. but no hugging and kissing? yikes!

    i think all the restrictions like that that aren’t really based in the torah lead to gross abuses like molestation in the frummy community. call me crazy, but i think everyone would be a lot better off if they drop most of the gender separation crap as long as they aren’t “doing anything”.

  • voolf March 18, 2011, 3:52 AM

    You cant eat rice on passover because in Europe someone once stored rice in the same town as the flour.

  • Ben March 18, 2011, 7:47 AM

    “Listening to a woman singing will make men want to have sex with her”

    There are several female singers I’d like to have sx with.

  • rooster March 23, 2011, 7:09 AM

    Amirwhat you say would be true if we still lived in Europe. According halacha kitniyot should not be observed in:
    The United States
    South America
    Israel – it was never enacted for the inhabitants there and it has nothing to do with who lives where when it has to do with minhag hamakom.

    If laws and minhagim were applied according to laws and minhagim things would make much more sense.

    What about Canada ? Is there something we don’t know about here?

  • Yankele March 25, 2011, 2:17 PM

    I once seriously questioned the origin of quite a number of these practices and beliefs. The frummy basically responded with a rebuke to the effect that it is all “torah l’Moshe miSinai.”

  • Grace December 3, 2013, 6:49 PM

    I don’t know what half of these words mean.

    Wearing jeans is ossur… Does that mean unlucky?

    The halachic way to wipe your butt… Ummm… Backwards?

    Tefilin… Is this like Teflon?

    Glatt kosher… I don’t even have a guess for this one.

    • Anonymous December 3, 2013, 8:02 PM

      assur = forbidden

      Tefillin Google it

      Glatt kosher = over and above kosher (lit. “smooth”)

      Halachic way to wipe your butt = wait until you are more advanced to learn this . . .

      • Dumpster Diva January 27, 2014, 6:10 PM

        Butt Wiping: The Advanced Way

Leave a Comment