@Uriel Probably requires a post during chanukkah.

@Adám I remember getting one last year (though I don't post questions mostly)

@Adám do non EYers use 10 slots lampstand for the extra day? ;)

@Uriel Hehe. No, but why do we all use eight when only seven were miraculous?

@Adám you know, there's a book discussing this specific question with about a 1000 answers

@Uriel I thought it was 100. I guess I wasn't exaggerating. Which one do you prefer?

@Adám The most famous one is that it did not run out on the first day

@Uriel Meaning it burned at ÷8 normal speed?

@Adám yeah. Or that the whole can stayed full after using it

Another one I heard is that it's 8 days for the 8 days of circumcision that was forbidden at that time

@Uriel No, that wouldn't work because then the last day (when it presumably burned at normal speed) wouldn't be miraculous.

@Adám hey, not my words. Beit Yosef

@Adám the miracle was that the can was still full after using it

@Uriel Hm, he would know what he's talking about. It's his question after all.

@Uriel Do I get one now?

@Adám u mean a dreidel hat or an upvote?

@Uriel A hat. Apparently that wasn't enough. Thankfully, I have a real hat.

:41827728 No, Maran Harav Chaim Kaniyevsky holds that it is better to daven bichidus with a hat and jacket than to daven with a minyan without a hat and jacket.

@Adám I don't come from that stream. We don't wear jackets and hats.

@Uriel On whom do you rely in that regard?

@Adám what do u mean?

@Uriel If R. Ch"K says one must, you need somebody quite authoritative to counter that, no?

@Adám hmm. Are you familiar with what's called "tzionut datit" and "haredim"?

@Uriel Charda"l? Somewhat. But what does Zionism have to do with head-covering?

@Adám charda"l is arguably the form of the most-religious part of the religious Zionist. One of the big difference between haredim and religious is the clothing. Haredim would wear white shirts and jackets while religious people would wear normal shirts and yarmulkes. I know most communities of non EYers to be on the haredi ideologies, so that's probably considered the normal look for you

@Uriel Be that as it may. R' Dovid Gottlieb has a way to split the observant Jews into two groups which I like the best: 1. Traditionalists (these base everything they do on what they consider tradition) 2. No-only-tradition-alists (these base what they do on tradition and on other sources) In order for an observant Jew to daven without hat, he would either need a tradition source or fall into the not-only-tradition camp.

← 29 messages moved from APL

@Adám 1. That split not what I'm taking about. 2. Both camps base some decision in other resources. Davening was not given by the Tora either, but by rabbanan. 3. The second group he's talking about anyways is more like reformists.

4. The today haredi outfit is nothing like tradition. It's based on the way European landlords before a few centuries (and later many of the population) used to dress, as it was considered an honorable clothing at that time (and that's where the prayer stuff goes - prayer require honorable clothing). During the temple period they didn't even have pants and shirts.

@Uriel 1. Assigning labels won't change the status of things.

@Uriel 2. Rabbanan is a traditional source. You need a different counter-example.

@Uriel 3. No. Anyone who does something for a reason which is not included in a source he himself would call tradition is a not-only-tradition-alist.

@Adám the same way tradition serves as a base, a lack of there of does the same. Schita is the most common effect; and for the same way, people who never embraced this dress form wouldnt take it as any tradition, at least for themselves

@Uriel Those who dress like European landlords because they consider that Jewish tradition, are traditionalists (at least in that respect).

@Uriel Schita?

@Adám hmm. well they did replace their old form of dressing with the new jackets outfit, nah? someone did make the transition

@Adám not eating animals without masoret. like giraffes

@Uriel "people who never embraced this dress form"? So you are claiming that there are coloured-shirt/no-hat/no-jacket people who's descend from continuously religious families that never dressed in a "traditional Jewish" fashion?

@Adám no, I'm claiming that everybody changed their dressing. Just not the same way.

@Uriel It could very well be gradual change. That is at least what can be observed today. E.g. shtreimlach are growing in size, reckel-patterns transform, etc.

Also, this wasn't the only form of clothing for Jews in Europe, and Jews weren't only in Europe.

@Uriel Can you substantiate your claim that a significant part observant European Jewry wore anything else than some form of formal suit/coat with some form of cap/hat (if they could afford it)? I don't know much about non-European tradition, but from what I've understood, they tended to conservatively coloured versions of local formal outfits — with hat and/or atifa.

@Adám actually, many religious orthodox groups in certain places didn't even wore a yarmulke

@Uriel [citation needed]

@Adám I heard it from old religious people, as their witness for themselves goes. I guess you could find some internet source as well

@Uriel Also, define "religious orthodox groups". What does Sh"A say about the requirement for head covering. (Teimanim are exempt as per Rambam, but it holds for everyone else.)

@Uriel If someone was to say about himself that he is a religious orthodox Jew but does not feel compelled to follow Sh"A (or conflicting, but accepted opinions brought in commentaries thereto), I would have doubts about his sincerity.

@Adám don't forget Etheopeans and Indians when counting non-ShA groups. Some of them didn't even know the temple was destroyed when they were first contacted

@Adám well, many ashkenazim rely on the Rma, embedded in the ShA. I trust you know the story regarding that

And btw, Rabbi Ovedia Yosef (former leader of the haredi world) did said one who prayed without head covering should not repeat.

@Uriel Not knowing of the Temple's destruction only applies to Ethiopians, who required conversion (l'chumra at least). Many of the Indian Jews were clearly not very religious when "discovered", but those there were practised a quite normal Judaism by modern standards.

@Uriel I don't know what story you hint at, but I did write or conflicting, but accepted opinions brought in commentaries thereto, which covers Rem"a.

@Uriel I don't think anyone would disagree with R' Yosef (leader of the haredi world is a stretch) that brachos said without head covering are kosher b'dieved. This is clear from the Gemorra in that the first of the morning brachos used to be said without covering (though that is clearly unacceptable by modern practices).

@Adám the conversion was because of lack of certainity regarding their Judaism due to non Jew groups who persumed Judaism without proper conversion before

@Adám well, Mode Ani doesn't even have Shem hashem

Most of clothing practices are derived by the need to be not didrespectful while praying, and therefore are dependent on the time period and local culture

@Uriel I think everyone agrees that their practice in Africa was not within normative Judaism, and that using them as tradition would be ridiculous.

@Uriel True, but this does not detract from a certain set of minimal standards. You still have not quoted a reliable source for going against Sh"A et al. But, as it is very late, and I want to daven netz, I bid you chodesh tov and chanukkah sameach!

@DoubleAA After I posted the deleted question the user contacted me again to ask to post another question (re yotze mitzva matza after eating from a separate matza). I remembered having seen this question and realized that user was also banned and question deleted. Not sure what is going on - and not asking for more details - but FYI. I told the user I wouldn’t post more questions for him

@Adám well, they were not within rabbinic judaism, but they are definately not ridiculous. they simply don't have all the takanot made after they were exiled. and some says that the traditions of the teimanim might be the most accurate ones.

@Uriel OK, then lets define ourselves as p'rushim and be out of the doubt. Regarding Teimani minhagim: Are you Teimani? If yes, then I rest my case. If no, then you would need a serious hatarat nedarim to be able to follow their minhagim l'kula, just like what they would need to follow ours.

@Adám I'm not, and I'm not following their practices

@Uriel Fine, so who are you following to be able to daven without hat and jacket?

@Adám as I explained before, I don't have anything telling me I have to daven with hat and jacket. Why should I then?

@Uriel Shulchan Aruch says to do so. Don't you need somebody to counter that?

@Adám Shulchan Aruch mentions only the Gartel, for the reason of one preparing himself to the prayer.