Rabbi Chaim Frances & Rabbi Yitzchak Elefant 

Question: An employee regularly stays late at the office to meet project deadlines. Over time, he observed that he is often the only male present, with just a few female colleagues also remaining. At what point does this situation raise concerns of Yichud, and what practical steps should be taken to address it in accordance with halachic guidelines?

Answer:

To address the question, we first must determine whether this is a scenario of Yichud, we can then address some of the practical solutions.

1] If there is one man and only 1 or 2 women present this would constitute Yichud^[1]. If there is one man and 3 women present, one should still act stringently, however, as long as they are all^[2] not leeboi gas buh (see section 6 for a classification of when a relationship is considered leboi gas buh) in cases of necessity it would not constitute Yichud^[3].

Generally, if two men are present, the situation is not considered yichud^[4]. However, if the men are porutzim, the prohibition of yichud applies regardless of their number (see footnote^[5]).

2] If the situation does constitute Yichud, it may be permissible if one of several halachic exemptions (heterim) applies.

1. The heter of yotzei v’nichnas (intermittent entry)^[6].
2. It is a scenario of Pesach Pesuach (an open or accessible door).
3. The heter of baalah ba’ir (the woman’s husband being present in the same city).

3] The heter of yotzei v’nichnas applies when there is a reasonable likelihood that someone may enter the room or office at any time—such as another employee returning to retrieve materials or finish work. The fear of someone walking in creates a natural deterrent, thereby removing the Yichud concern (however, this only serves as a valid heter if the individual who may enter would resolve the Yichud problem—such as another male or a third female^[7]) This heter applies even in a case where there is a libo gas bah relationship amongst the parties^[8].

4] If no one is expected to enter, the heter of pesach pasuach^[9] may still be relevant. This principal —literally “an open door”—means that the concern of being seen can deter inappropriate behavior, even without an actual person entering.  However, there is significant debate among the Poskim about the parameters of this heter.  According to the strictest opinion ^[10] it only applies if the door is physically open and faces a public area where people can see inside. If the door is closed, or if the location is one where people generally do not pass by, the heter would not apply. Therefore, in our scenario, for the Heter to apply, there must be other individuals who regularly occupy the building and have a direct line of sight into the office .A more lenient opinion^[11] that even a closed but unlocked door is sufficient^[12]. The reasoning is that the fear of someone walking in serves as a sufficient deterrent.

There is a debate on how to understand the more lenient opinion regarding how likely it must be for someone to walk in for this heter to apply. Some^[13] maintain that it must be common for people to enter homes or offices without explicit permission; otherwise, the deterrent factor is minimal. Others are more lenient and rule that as long as an outsider has the ability to enter, the fear of exposure exists and qualifies as pesach pasuach^[14]. It is important to note that there has to be some likelihood of someone walking by. However, if it is nighttime when people do not generally walk here then it will be forbidden according to all opinions^[15]

When it is a scenario of Biblically forbidden Yichud – One man and one Jewish lady, it is praiseworthy to act stringently and to ensure that the door remains open. However, the Minhag seems to be like the lenient opinion and this is certainly the case where it is only a question of Rabbinacally forbidden Yichud (i.e one man and two Jewish ladies or one man and one Non-Jewish^[16] lady)^[17] .

However, there is another important factor that must be considered for this heter to apply. There is a dispute in the Poskim whether the heter of pesach pasuach applies if the relationship of the parties is considered to be Leoboi Gas buh^[18].

Practically speaking, if the concern is only with a Rabbinic prohibition of Yichud—for example, in the case of yichud with a non-Jew or when two women are present—there is greater room for leniency. By contrast, when the issue involves a Biblical prohibition, such as seclusion between one Jewish man and one Jewish woman, one should adopt a stringent approach and not rely solely on the leniency of pesach pasuach. Nevertheless, since this matter is subject to dispute, if an additional factor for leniency is present, it may be relied upon. For instance, where it is uncertain whether a leboi gas buh relationship exists, one may act leniently. Additionally, if the door is fully open and visible to passersby ^[19], one may likewise rely on pesach pasuach even in a case of leboi gas buh.

5] In a case where none of the aforementioned heterim apply, there may still be another potential leniency, namely the heter of Baalah Ba’ir. Under this heter, if a woman’s husband is in the same city as she is, the prohibition of Yichud does not apply^[20]. The Poskim debate the underlying rationale: some attribute it to the heightened concern that the husband might enter unexpectedly, while others explain that even absent such a concern, a woman is naturally disinclined to engage in impropriety while her husband is present in the same city.

There are two practical implications of this debate, with each side presenting both a leniency and a stringency:

1. In a scenario where the husband is indeed in the same city, yet it is certain that he cannot arrive—for example, if he is confirmed to be in a location farther than the shiur yichud, or if the woman is in a place of which her husband is unaware—then the implications differ^[21]. According to the opinion that the heter of Baalah Bair is based on the heightened concern that the husband might enter unexpectedly, the heter would not apply. However, according to the other opinion, the woman is still disinclined to engage in impropriety simply because her husband is present in the same city.
2. When is someone considered to be “in the same city”? The Chazon Ish holds that for this heter to apply, the two locations must share the same name. In contrast, Igros Moshe maintains that the heter is valid as long as the husband has the ability to return within the timeframe of yichud. This too appears to depend on the original dispute regarding the reasoning behind the Baalah Bair leniency.

In a scenario of Biblical Yichud (one man and one Jewish lady*^[22]), one should be machmir in both of these cases. However, in a case of Rabbinic Yichud, one may rely on the lenient opinions^[23].

However, there is a circumstance in which the heter of Baalah Ba’ir does not apply. When there exists a relationship of Leoboi gas buh exists between the parties, this heter does not apply because in such a case there is a closer connection that makes the usual leniency unreliable.^[24].

If there is any uncertainty as to whether a relationship constitutes Leoboi gas buh, one should be stringent. Unlike in the case of Pesach Pasuach, where it is questionable whether Leoboi gas buh has any impact, all authorities agree that with regard to Baalah Ba’ir, the heter is indeed affected by the presence of a Leoboi gas buh relationship^[25].

6] Leoboi gas buh refers to a relationship in which the parties have a comfortable and familiar connection. This may include, for example, growing up together or being related, though other types of friendly familiarity can also qualify. The Poskim make it clear that this does not require any inappropriate or intimate behavior; as long as the individuals are at ease communicating and their relationship is considered friendly, it qualifies. As noted in Aruch HaShulchan 22:6,^[26]

Summary:

When is it Yichud:

• When there are two or more men present: This is not considered Yichud unless the men are considered prutzim.
• One man and one or two women: This is considered Yichud.
• One man and three or more women: There is room for stringency, but one may be lenient in situations of need.

Practical Solutions:

• If it is likely and expected that someone may walk in at any time: The heter of Yotzei V’nichnas will apply (assuming the person walking in will negate the situation of Yichud), regardless of whether the parties have a libo gas bo
• If you are not expecting someone to come in but it is possible (i.e., it is still within a reasonable time when people are out and about): The heter of Pesach Pasuach may apply. Depending on how visible the room is to the outside, and whether the case involves Biblical or Rabbinic Yichud, this will determine whether it is permitted. It is also questionable whether a libo gas bo relationship affects this heter (see above for clarification).
• If the heter of Yotzei V’nichnas and Pesach Pasuach do not apply: If the woman’s husband is in the same city, the heter of Baalah B’ir may apply (see above). This heter is not applicable when the parties have a libo gas bo

It is important to remain aware and mindful of the halachic implications of Yichud, given the seriousness of the prohibition. While this overview offers a basic framework of the relevant Halachos, every situation carries its own nuances. Therefore, one should consult a competent Halachic authority for a personal Shaila to ensure proper conduct in each specific case.

^[1] Where there are two woman it will worst be a scenario of Yichud Darabanan – Chochmos Adam 126 in binas adam 16  ).

^[2] See Toras Hayichud 3,18 who quotes R’ Eliyashiv ztl that as long there is one who is not Leboi gas buh it will not impact the Heter.

^[3] This is subject to a dispute in the Rishonim, see Igros Moshe e”h 4,65,14 who says one can rely on the opinion of Rashi in a case of need.

^[4] See Rama Even Haezer 22,5.

^[5] Who is considered a porutz is not a simple topic. However, there appear to be two approaches to classifying someone as a porutz.The Shevet HaLevi (Chelek 5, Siman 202) writes that one who has no issue with looking at inappropriate pictures or websites, reading or watching inappropriate material, or going to inappropriate places would fall under the category of a porutz. The Igros Moshe (Chelek 4, Siman 65, Ois 17 writes that even a perfectly kosher Yid who has not done any of the above, but is uncertain whether he would be able to resist temptation if another man were watching him in such a situation, is still categorized as a porutz. Only if he is certain that he would not succumb to temptation in the presence of another man— even if he might fail if he were alone— is he not categorized as a porutz.

^[6] See SH’T Bais David e’h 25 . Although there is a differin opinion of the Maharal Diskin, the contemporary poskim seem to follow th Bais David Lechatchila (see Shiurei Halacha 4,10, Toras Yichud 8,32 amongst others)

^[7] See above for status of one man and 3 or more ladies.

^[8] See Shiurei Halacha 4,10.

^[9] See Shulchan Aruch Even Haezer 22,9.

^[10] See R Akiva Eiger SH’T Kama 100,101.

^[11] See Chochmos Adam in Binas Adam 126,18.

^[12] See Igros Moshe (E.H. 4:65:4) rules that this heter can apply even if the door is locked, provided it is likely that someone may knock and there is a natural tendency to feel obligated to answer.

^[13] See SH’T Binyan Tzion 138.

^[14] The psak of the Minchas Yitzchok 7,73.

^[15] See keneses hagdolah al hature E’H 22,9. See also Shiurei Halacha 4 note 19.

^[16] There is a discussion in the Poskim if a non-Jewish lady who is in a marriage like relationship whether there would be a Biblical prohibition, See Shiurei Halacha 9,6 that the Halacha seems to follow the lenient opinion.

^[17] Shiurei Halacha 4,2

^[18] See Chelkas Mechokak 22,13 and the B’S 22,13 who rule stringently. See Taz 22,8 who maintains the heter will still apply.

^[19] Todah’s Yichud 5:28 citing Rav Elyashiv zt’l

^[20] The entire Heter of Balah Bair is subject to a dispute in the Poskim. Rashi argues, and is quoted by the Aruch Hashulchan E’H 22,6.

^[21] See Chochmos Adam 126,6 (quoted by the Pischei Teshuva E’H 22,7) is of the opinion that since there is no concern that the husband to return now the Heter will not apply. See Chid’a See Dvar Halacha 7,2 who quotes the Chazon Ish who is lenient and maintains that even so the heter will apply, as a woman has an extra nervousness if the husband is in the city.

^[22] If she is of age that she can be considered a Niddah.

^[23] See Shiurei Halacha from R’ Felder Shlit’a.

^[24] See Kidushim 81. and S’A E’H 22,8

^[25] See shiurei Halacha 8,5

^[26] It is likely that if their relationship is strictly business related and conducted in a professional manner and they are not comfortable talking about other matters it may not be considered Leiboi gas buh.