benignuman –
The Rema in E”H 25:2 does argue on many of the psakim in O”C 240 but he does not argue on halacha that it is assur to gaze at the makom hatoref
This is not true. The proof is that in OC the Shulchan Aruch says looking, and kol sheken something else. The Rema is explicitly matir the something else, so ???? ????? ???.
We pasken m’ikkar hadin like Reish Lakish that it is ???? ?????? ????? ???? even regarding one’s wife.
I disagree.
Therefore regarding shok there is issur regardless of whether it actually is m’orer tayva
You said a pshat, and fit it into the cheshbon very nicely, but it makes no sense. Why should it be this way? Why should it be assur to look at a shok if it indeed causes no hirhur?! I can start making hanachas about aliens and then say a pshat in a Gemara based on that – the cheshbon might work out perfectly, but if I don’t show why it is reasonable to assume that my hanachas about aliens are correct, it is shtusim to say such a pshat in the Gemara!
You are probably aware that there is an issur of davening in front of exposed erva mamesh.
Yes, and this has nothing to do with anything. It is assur to daven in ?????? ???????? as well. That’s a whole different sugya, nothing to do with tznius.
I think that according to Rashi’s understanding of the Gemara, “shok” was given the status of erva mamesh
I already bavorned this tzad when I mentioned ????. If the Gemara is coming from this angle (which is a massive dochek according to the simple cheshbon of the Gemara) then it would have no bearing on hilchos tznius anyway.
I am certainly saying a chiddush in the Gemara, but so are you.
I am not saying a chiddush in the Gemara. This is the pashtus.
when Rashi says “eshes ish” he means arayos
I know. That doesn’t help you; it’s not what my problem was. My problem was that according to you it is forbidden to look at the ???? ????? of someone permitted to you, so the halacha should not just extend to people who are arayos.