<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 11.00.9600.17924"></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
PTSIZE="10">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2
face=Arial>From: Meir Shinnar via Avodah
<avodah@lists.aishdas.org><BR><BR>>> That is the crux of the issue
-- not whether we wish to pasken that this<BR>is muttar for ourselves (or for
those who listen to us..) -- but how we<BR>view those who follow a different
shitta -- and anyone who suggests that<BR>RYBS viewed his wife as nonobservant
or not fully halachically committed<BR>is motsi la'az and needs to go to her
kever<BR><BR>[snip]<BR>That issue about the rav's wife not being unique is
important -- it<BR>was a shitta in lita -- even if one the rav may have
disagreed with,<BR>it was not one that was hutz lamachane. That is the crux of
the issue. <<<BR><BR>Meir Shinnar</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>>>>></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>[1] No one has ever suggested that RYBS viewed his wife as
"nonobservant" so nobody has to go to her kever, although anyone who wants to
may do so. I assume her children and grandchildren go on her
yahrzeit. The line between observant and nonobservant is pretty clear,
even though all of us sometimes sin. I have yet to hear of anyone saying
that if a woman keeps Shabbos, kashrus and taharas hamishpacha, but does
not cover her hair, she is "nonobservant." However if you know of a person
who does say that, please cite the source, thank you. Maybe he is the same
person who says that if you talk loshon hara you are nonobservant -- and
therefore there are only about 500 observant Jews in the whole world, if
that.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>[2] There is no "different shita." There was no "shitta in
Lita" allowing married women to go out with their hair uncovered. What
there was in Lita was the winds of Haskala, Reform and sliding, sliding, sliding
away from Torah, more marked among the women even than among the men.
Sarah Schnirer noted that there were chassidishe homes in Poland where, after
the Friday night Shabbos meal, the teenage girls and even the mother would go
out to see a play at the local theater. If there was slippage in Poland,
where chassidus was strong, you can just imagine what was going on in Lita,
where there was nothing to capture the hearts and minds of people who were not
themselves talmidei chachamim -- viz, the unlearned masses, and the women.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT><BR><FONT color=#0000ff><STRONG>--Toby
Katz<BR>t613k@aol.com</STRONG></FONT><FONT lang=0 color=#ffffff size=2
face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><BR><STRONG>..</STRONG></FONT><FONT
lang=0 color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
PTSIZE="10"><BR><STRONG>=============</STRONG><BR><BR><BR>-------------------------------------------------------------------</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
lang=0 color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2
face=Arial><BR></FONT> </BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>