Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › Is your house communist?
- This topic has 15 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by Veltz Meshugener.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 7, 2013 4:22 pm at 4:22 pm #610303Veltz MeshugenerMember
This question has two parts:
1. What is your house like regarding the following question?
2. What is the correct way for a house to be?
In your house, and the houses of your extended family, do people respect the individual ownership of goods? Obviously, you’re not going to take your brother’s yarmulka off his head, but say you’re married and visiting your parents, and your yarmulka blows out the window. Would you just go to the drawer of your brother who’s away in yeshiva and take a yarmulka without thinking twice? IME this comes up a lot with things like baby bottles left by other siblings, ties, shirts, shampoo, deodorant, etc. Also can relate to food in the fridge, sports equipment (I just found a driver in my brother in law’s closet, and I’m planning to go golfing tomorrow. His driver is better than the rental clubs even though he has never golfed in his life), music CDs, etc.
I guess this is on my mind because I’ve been staying with relatives all summer. What do you think?
August 7, 2013 4:33 pm at 4:33 pm #969749akupermaParticipantEach receives according to their needs, each contributes according to their abilities — works fine for most families (don’t try it with strangers).
August 7, 2013 4:43 pm at 4:43 pm #969750Veltz MeshugenerMemberLOL. I was taking a course in negotiation, and we discussed how to set a salary structure for a particular type of employee. The professor asked around for ideas, and nothing anyone said was what he wanted. After a while, I suggested that the employee be compensated according to need. The professor was about two minutes into his explanation about why that was a terrible idea before he realized I had been joking.
August 7, 2013 5:04 pm at 5:04 pm #969752nitpickerParticipantyou cannot use items that belong to someone else, even someone in your family, without permission. If your family has a sort of understanding of permission, then fine, within the limits of that understanding.
On the other hand, those who are somech al shulchan avihem, perhaps don’t really have personal ownership, or very little of it.
Just the same most usually behave as if each is real owner, and respect each others ‘property’.
Even communists don’t consider the world hefker once something is distributed. (That’s a logical contradiction, but just add it to the list)
August 7, 2013 5:05 pm at 5:05 pm #969753nitpickerParticipant—-
August 7, 2013 7:48 pm at 7:48 pm #969754ToiParticipanti switch toothbrushes with my brother just to bug him.
August 7, 2013 8:17 pm at 8:17 pm #969755Veltz MeshugenerMemberNitpicker, thank you for weighing in. It’s a little unclear from your answer if you’re describing how your house is, or what the halacha says it ought to be. Can you clarify?
August 7, 2013 8:47 pm at 8:47 pm #969756jewishfeminist02MemberHalachically speaking, if you are in shul and don’t have tefillin for whatever reason, and no one is available to lend you a pair for whatever reason, it is mutar to use a pair that you find, provided you handle them gently and put them back exactly as you found them. This, for once, does not come from my husband– I just read it in an ArtScroll book about the halachos of traveling.
Regarding a family home, in my house we ask if the person is around and just take if he or she isn’t, unless it is something that we know is precious or irreplaceable, or something not hygienic to share. My brother and my husband wear similar size shirts, so my mother gave two of my brother’s shirts to my husband when he realized he hadn’t packed enough. And when I’m not home, my mother frequently borrows my clothing (we are also similar sizes). Usually she’ll just let me know the next time we speak on the phone (“oh, by the way, I borrowed your denim skirt, I hope that’s okay”) and it’s fine. But I think it really depends on the family dynamic and how comfortable people are. In my opinion, if you don’t know or can’t guess how your family members would feel about you borrowing their things, you probably need to work on your family relationships.
August 7, 2013 8:58 pm at 8:58 pm #969757nitpickerParticipantI am not sure what your original question means.
you can not use someone else’s property without permission.
you already know that.
If you are asking if permission can be assumed, the answer is clearly no. If you know that in a particular home or house the permission is tacitly granted you, fine.
There is not much more to say about it.
August 7, 2013 9:06 pm at 9:06 pm #969758nitpickerParticipantAs to the other part of you question, “how should a house be”,
well again it depends. Even small children should have things that they believe belong to them. That is how they learn the difference between mine and thine. Just the same, their property clearly really belongs their parents, who can confiscate it if choose.
As for older member of a household, it is their choice in this matter should be respected.
My brother and I had a spoken agreement that we could use or do whatever we wanted with each others property. And it wasn’t quid pro quo. I gave him permission to do what he wanted with my things because that is what I wanted to do and visa versa.
I cannot say whether that is how it
should
be.August 7, 2013 9:40 pm at 9:40 pm #969759natureParticipantjewishfeminist02: Your example of tefillin applies specifically to ???? items and is not relevant to the OP’s question. It is assumed that one wants a ???? to be performed with his property.
August 7, 2013 10:05 pm at 10:05 pm #969760LevAryehMember“Halachically speaking, if you are in shul and don’t have tefillin for whatever reason, and no one is available to lend you a pair for whatever reason, it is mutar to use a pair that you find, provided you handle them gently and put them back exactly as you found them. This, for once, does not come from my husband– I just read it in an ArtScroll book about the halachos of traveling.”
This is a halacha in Shulchan Aruch, in Hilchos Tefillin. I’m glad it’s in the Artscroll book too.
The reason for this halacha is because we assume that a person would want a mitzvah to be performed with his belongings.
The Mishna Berurah points out that this does not apply, under any circumstances, to sefarim or siddurim, because there is a big chance that they will get damaged while being used. (Interestingly, he adds that sefarim are assur even for casual use, because we are choshesh that the person using them may get caught up in a sugya and use the sefer “heavily”, causing it to rip.)
August 7, 2013 10:06 pm at 10:06 pm #969761Veltz MeshugenerMemberNitpicker, this is what I am curious about. You wrote:
“If you are asking if permission can be assumed, the answer is clearly no. If you know that in a particular home or house the permission is tacitly granted you, fine.”
That is a contradiction. You use the words “assumed” and “know” without definition. I can describe the same exact situation by saying either “I assumed that I had permission” and “I knew that permission is tacitly granted”.
August 8, 2013 2:48 am at 2:48 am #969762nitpickerParticipantinteresting. I dont know what contradiction you are talking about.
I don’t have to defin ‘is’ and I don’t have to define ‘know’ in this case.
what in the world was the first question?
you cannot use other peoples stuff without permission.
if you are not sure if you have permission, you also cant use it.
you can not logically say the following:
This object belongs to a member of my family.
members of family are not makpid (or shouldn’t be makpid )on each other.
Ergo
I have permission to use it.
Which part of no don’t you understand.
over and out.
August 8, 2013 2:15 pm at 2:15 pm #969763popa_bar_abbaParticipantI would like to go golfing also with your brother’s clubs. I’ll be by in a few.
August 8, 2013 3:19 pm at 3:19 pm #969764Veltz MeshugenerMemberFor someone with the name “nitpicker” you seem a little confused by my nitpicking.
What I’m saying is that the words you used don’t have a single specific meaning that exists in a vacuum. It seems you meant to distinguish between “tacit granting” of permission (where there was an active, though tacit granting) and “assuming” that permission would be granted (but it was never in fact granted).
But from the perspective of the user, those things are exactly the same 98% of the time. I have no idea whether when my brother left the house last time, his eyes fell upon his old shaver, and he thought, “let me leave it here, so that Veltz can use it when he comes to visit, and I hereby grant tacit permission”.
Additionally, you don’t describe what tacit permission is. What if his eyes fell on the shaver and he thought, “let me leave it here because I don’t have room in my apartment and maybe someone will visit and forget their shaver”? Is that tacit permission, or do I still need to call him? What if he thought “let me leave it here because I don’t have room in my apartment, and so I really don’t care what happens to this shaver anymore?” or “let me leave it here because one of the blades tends to cut my cheek, and better Veltz’s cheek should be cut than mine”? What if he left the house thinking, “I know I left a bunch of good stuff. Luckily Mom and Dad have lots of visitors who will be able to make use of it, because I don’t have room for it”? Can I flip through his baseball cards?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.