I FORGOT!!!!!

When I came back from Minchah and sat down to eat, I got this nice, mostly juicy, piece of chicken......and it was cold!!

My shvigger had forgotten to put it in the oven or something

kol hakoid about the meal.
and the refraining to blame the in-laws,
my philosophy on in-laws, is the reason why people find it hard to get along, is because in-laws are not a natural creation from Hashem, it is a result on a union, therefore they are not blessed with success in a natural way.

lavi wrote:


what about marriage?
and if you'll answer that this is God created, don't the in-laws come along for the ride?
Is it too difficult for God to include that in the package?

howbout friends?
Do they get along?

good question,

i have a lot of info, religious and secular,l'havdil (men are from...women are from...) that marriage is not natural.
that is why we gotta bless em 7 times for seven days straight, because without 'em there is little hope. no such a thing as an easy marriage.
take out the shem Hashem,(from the words ish and isha)-with signifies siatta dishmaya and you get aish and aish.
so Hashem really give marriage a lift out of dumps.
also that is a reason for the niddah break, the energy has to be recharged,
whereas the natural relationship between brother or sister or friends, stays in it's natural state.
(sorry for being b'kitzer- but i get a feeling not to many people are interested in this post)

I think you should give yourself more credit; people are interested.

I think in-laws have difficulty, for they like to control.
Parents like to control their children's life or decisions, and when they grow up and marry, that could be a recipe for disaster.

I think marriages can work, for the couple works on it.; they want it to work; they will it to work.

Niddah break is mainly for other purposes, and certainly wouldn't explain marriages outside of those who keep these halachos.

b'hatzlachah to everyone's relationships

cordnoy wrote:



as far as the niddah break goes, i think you'll agree none of us can actually say what the MAIN reason is, or for that matter, that there is a main reason.
what we can know is from chazal.
and chazal do give a reason for the break, and that is for marital harmony. niddah 31b.
(what is very interesting is that one of the major poskim on the page on shulchan oruch toras hashlomim. yd.183 note4 actually brings this chazal and takes it so far, that maybe unmarried women don't have issurim of niddah. of course, l'halacha we don't hold this way, and even the aforementioned posek is not clear about his conclusion, nevertheless we see how important this issue is to marital harmony).

now that being said, i think there is evidence around to show how much this is true, and when there is no break, the quality of the marriage can decrease.
how does this fit with one of our a'seres hadribros that sex is optional, (which i take to mean that one can have a happy marriage technically speaking without intimate relationships)?
i don't feel that the rule is true.
BUT i do understand that addict may have to follow different set of rules, than the regular person.
and just like a sick person may be excused from obligations in marriage, it maybe that an addict has exemptions as well

I don't have an opinion on this discussion, but I'd just like to point out a slight support to lavi's last post:
lavi

Perhaps this is really a discussion for the baalei batim's forum, but the fact is that the issurim regarding a penuya (or any woman who is not your wife, even if she is married to someone else), even one who is a niddah, are more lenient than the more extreme distances chazal placed between a man and his wife during the niddah period.

Just saying.

thanks bg for your post,
but i don't know on what you are basing your fact on

Am I bg? If so, I was referring to stringencies such as passing things.

ok. understood.
thank-you.

lavi wrote:

I LOVE my shvigger (Zeidy MT says too much, anybody see him around lately?).
As for the minchas yaakov's chiddush, the chinuch explicitly writes that we cannot say so, and minchas yaakov in Toras hashlomim doesn't dream of using it lemaase, I don't know what the pleisi is so riled up about, and all the other meforshim as well.
As for leniencies with a penuya, they aren't leniencies, rather a married woman has stringencies. Aderabba we are more stringent with a penuya which is why we follow the Rivash and do not permit them to purify themselves.

TZ, the mareh mekomos are giving me a headache

btw, whatever happened to AIW?

Well, we know from AIW that
The reason they're called lessons is because they lessen from day to day...
Vedoik

TehillimZugger wrote:



I heard that out version on minchas Yaakov is edited and that's why they are riled up, because the original was mashma more l'heter.
and I clearly said in my post that " l'halacha we don't hold this way, and even the aforementioned posek is not clear about his conclusion, nevertheless we see how important this issue is to marital harmony)." exactly like you said, and would appreciate if you would read my post more thoroughly before commenting.

I did read it and notice it.
Sorry.
I was afraid some sex pervert might take advantage and decided to spell it out more clearly.