April 16, 2012 9:11 pm at 9:11 pm #869335
“There is no such thing as a chumra by Tzenius”
I think that statement is a little hyperbolic. There absolutely IS such a think as being too tzniusdig. When a woman (or man, for that matter) takes tznius to such a level that it interferes with their normal intimate relationship and sholom bayis,it is tzu fil.April 16, 2012 9:59 pm at 9:59 pm #869336far eastMember
can someone please give a straight up answer on whether listening to a recording is different from in person…ive always been under the assumption that kol isha was because you may be tempted by the women, but hearing a recording is different.April 16, 2012 11:24 pm at 11:24 pm #869337
Whatever others were taught, I was taught that a live performance that was not done with a microphone, was assur, but that there are opinions that a microphone alters the actual voice, so one is not hearing live singing. I was further taught that a recording is muttar.April 17, 2012 12:05 am at 12:05 am #869338rabbiofberlinParticipant
oomis 1105- you were well taught !April 17, 2012 12:17 am at 12:17 am #869339
How do I stop my neighbor from singing loud enough that I can hear her through the wall?April 17, 2012 1:41 am at 1:41 am #869340
Ahaben: You don’t. It’s your issue, not hers. Wear earplugs. (At least, if she’s not Jewish. If she is then there might be some interesting discussions.)April 17, 2012 1:48 am at 1:48 am #869341
(Even if she weren’t, airplugs wouldn’t help unless I wore them all day, since it can be at random times. Otherwise I’d hear it at least until I could plug them in each time.)April 17, 2012 7:30 pm at 7:30 pm #869342MDGParticipant
Rav Ovadia Yosef is lenient for recordings IF the man does not know what she looks like.
When it comes to speaking voice (Kiddushin 70), I learned that the Gemara is talking about going out of one’s way to hear a speaking voice – and that is Assur. Normally, we exchange information when we speak and that is Mutar. But talking for the sake of enjoying her voice becomes Kol Isha.April 17, 2012 11:10 pm at 11:10 pm #869343
MDG: That’s not an Issur of Kol Isha, that’s an Issur of looking/interacting with a woman in any way for inappropriate enjoyment. Afilu Etzbah K’tanah…April 18, 2012 4:40 am at 4:40 am #869344MDGParticipant
“MDG: That’s not an Issur of Kol Isha, that’s an Issur of looking/interacting with a woman in any way for inappropriate enjoyment. Afilu Etzbah K’tanah… “
IMHO, inappropriate enjoyment of the voice is called Kol Isha.
Anyways, I was quoting the Magid Shiur that I learned it from. For the sake of anonymity, I’m not saying who it was.April 18, 2012 6:11 am at 6:11 am #869345ToiParticipant
When Sam2 is the right-winger cautioning those to the left of him, you know the cr is shifting crowds.April 18, 2012 12:48 pm at 12:48 pm #869346
Avhaben, marry her.April 18, 2012 1:46 pm at 1:46 pm #869347
Avhaben, marry her.
That is a good solution. Of course, it will only help for most of the month. (Am I correct about that? It isn’t bfeirush in the shulchan aruch by harchakas nidda.)
I think the better solution is to kill her.April 18, 2012 2:48 pm at 2:48 pm #869348
popa see the beis shmuel in even haezer 21,4April 18, 2012 3:06 pm at 3:06 pm #869349
PBA: I think you’re wrong on that. The Halachah is that a man can look at a wife when she’s a Niddah. Why would singing be any different?
Toi: I’m not sure what you mean by that. I don’t believe in this right and left business anyway. I follow Halachah as brought down in the Poskim. I’m not sure why others expect differently, either “Lehakel” or “Lehachmir”.April 18, 2012 3:16 pm at 3:16 pm #869350
Chacham: He doesn’t answer PBA’s question, from what I saw. Interestingly though, he threw in two Halachos in there to show that he doesn’t hold like the Sridei Aish.
Also, his question in footnote 96 seems to be against a B’feirush Gemara.April 18, 2012 3:22 pm at 3:22 pm #869351
I only looked at the one you linked (link the other one, please), but I don’t see what you are citing to. It doesn’t talk about ishto nidda.April 18, 2012 4:36 pm at 4:36 pm #869352
I thought it was obvious that I meant marry her with kedushin al tinai that she gets spayed.April 18, 2012 5:32 pm at 5:32 pm #869353
Sam: I’m wondering whether to analogize it to looking at ?????? ??????? which is assur, or to mekomos hamegulim which is muttar.April 18, 2012 6:15 pm at 6:15 pm #869354
Another brother of mine who reads but doesn’t often post, alerted me to the pischei teshuva there, who asks this question, and does not answer.
?) ????? ?? ??? ????? – ?”? ?? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?”? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ??????? ?????? ???????? ?? ?”? ???’ ??????? ?? ?”? ????? ????? ?”? ???? ????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ??”? ?????? ?? ?”? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???”? ?? ????? ????? ??”? ?? ??????? ??”?:April 18, 2012 6:36 pm at 6:36 pm #869355
SAm2- The question in 96 is indeed a strange qustion. But which mefurash gemara are you talking about.
Either way I found a Reb Moshe on this see http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=919&st=&pgnum=139
(but I don’t like when seforim say things as a davar pashut with no mekor)
And is anybody else annoyed that from the many wonderful seforim hebrewbooks has they are missing most of the chalokim of the normal printing of shulchan aruch with nosei keilim.April 18, 2012 6:47 pm at 6:47 pm #869356
Mekomos Hamegulim is only Assur when the intent is to have Hanaa. Singing is Assur even without explicit intent.
The Gemara in Kedushin is hard to base things on, anyhow. As the conversation went on you see that he didn’t want to send regards to his wife even through the husband. It seems like, as MDG said, Kol Isha is sort of a relative, or borrowed, term.April 18, 2012 6:49 pm at 6:49 pm #869357
PBA: I thought Mekomos Hamechusim was also Muttar by Ishto Niddah. They’re not? I guess I could be wrong but I thought that was Muttar from the same S’vara as Yichud is. (And no, I’m not married.)April 18, 2012 6:52 pm at 6:52 pm #869358
Oomis is making a grave mistake. Regardless of whether we Pasken like a certain Mishna or Tanna, you can’t dismiss the words of a Tanna with your petty feelings and arguments! If we end up not Paskenning that way, it is not for your reason.
When we don’t Pasken like Beis Shammai, it is not because we laugh or even dislike their Shita. Eilu Va’eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. The Halacha happens not to be like them.April 18, 2012 7:01 pm at 7:01 pm #869359
PBA: I thought Mekomos Hamechusim was also Muttar by Ishto Niddah. They’re not? I guess I could be wrong but I thought that was Muttar from the same S’vara as Yichud is. (And no, I’m not married.)
Nope, see the mechaber 7 in the link I put above.April 18, 2012 7:15 pm at 7:15 pm #869360
That is often the result when a woman involves herslef in a halachic discussion.April 18, 2012 7:16 pm at 7:16 pm #869361
Sam2, Yichud is Muttar Bedochak. You can’t make him move out.April 18, 2012 10:40 pm at 10:40 pm #869362
PBA: I stand corrected.April 19, 2012 12:04 am at 12:04 am #869363
Chacham: It’s Mefurash that a woman can read the Megillah for a man. Unless you want to say that means read without the Trop (which someone would have said), then it’s obvious that whatever musical inflection is involved in Leining isn’t enough to be considered Kol Ishah.April 19, 2012 12:06 am at 12:06 am #869364
Haleivi, I think most people would say I am neither petty nor argumentative. You can agree or disagree with me, but please be civil.April 19, 2012 12:22 am at 12:22 am #869365ZeesKiteParticipant
Is a woman’s posting considered Kol Isha. Isn’t it “talking”?April 19, 2012 12:35 am at 12:35 am #869366
Sam: shkoyach. You now get to join my club on the CR of people who will say they were incorrect about something. It is a pretty exclusive club. And one of the other members is a retard.April 19, 2012 12:41 am at 12:41 am #869367shtiky shloMember
If you want to listen you can get a heter for anything nowerdays but doesn’t mean it’s right jewishlyApril 19, 2012 2:25 am at 2:25 am #869368
sam2- I hear.April 19, 2012 2:29 am at 2:29 am #869369
My point was that any feelings are petty in Halacha or in contrast to the holy words of a Tanna.
Keep in mind how Reb Yochanan punished a Talmid for having a hard time digesting his Drasha on a matter of Aggada. Reb Yochanan said, at another time, that one may only say what he is completely sure is the case. The Gemara says in more than one place that Hakadosh Baruch Hu quoted the words of the Chachamim.
Abaye said that when he had a small chore to do on his way home, his learning wouldn’t be the same. So completely engrossed in his learning was he. Their explanations were never off the bat. Every word is loaded with Chochma.
There are plenty of Sefarim explaining the depth and wisdom of Pirkey Avos. Whether or not we follow a particular Mishna, it never makes sense to say that it can’t be the Halacha because it’s not nice. A Tanna said it.
It is appropriate to express your Kasha. Sometimes it can remain a Kasha; most times not. In this case, I think the story mentioned by Toi explains it very well.April 19, 2012 2:51 am at 2:51 am #869370
PBA: I’ve admitted I’m wrong before in here… I think. 🙂April 19, 2012 6:06 am at 6:06 am #869371
I wonder if there is a Hetter to listen to a recording of a woman that you knew, but was Niftar. The Gemara says is Sota that the Yetzer Hora is not Sholet on someone who is dead.April 19, 2012 2:24 pm at 2:24 pm #869372
HaLeiVi: That should be a Machlokes Achronim. I don’t recall who says what (I learned this in like 4th grade), but I know there is a Machlokes Achronim about whether Kol Ishah is because it will cause you to have a Hirhur for this particular woman or because it will cause Hirhur in general for any woman.April 19, 2012 7:52 pm at 7:52 pm #869373
Could it be worse than looking at the Sota?April 19, 2012 10:41 pm at 10:41 pm #869374
HaLeiVi: Doesn’t the Gemara say that if she was pretty they wouldn’t look at her?April 19, 2012 10:51 pm at 10:51 pm #869375
No, but it does raise the question.April 20, 2012 7:26 pm at 7:26 pm #869376
Good looks are a very subjective issue. The Torah is not subjective.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.