Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › Romantic songs
- This topic has 139 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 1 month ago by 👑RebYidd23.
February 3, 2014 3:14 am at 3:14 am #1003592swetkibMember
My Rov, who was niftar about 20 years ago and was one of the gedolei rabbonim of the previous dor, would never call his wife by her name in public. Public, as in shul when there were other people around.February 3, 2014 6:27 am at 6:27 am #1003593
But she may have an opinion on the matter as well.February 3, 2014 4:14 pm at 4:14 pm #1003594
Being affectionate in public is wrong. This obviously includes public handholding.
What about on your wedding night? I’ve noticed plenty of newlyweds holding hands and no one gives a hoot. Why is it any different?February 3, 2014 4:35 pm at 4:35 pm #1003595
Actually, I think I’ve heard chassidim and perhaps others have a minhag to davka hold hands back from the chuppa to show that it wasn’t a chuppas nidda.February 3, 2014 4:42 pm at 4:42 pm #1003596
Because they’re just married, it’s very hard for them to restrain themselves in public.February 3, 2014 4:57 pm at 4:57 pm #1003597
Seriously? Is there a source for that anywhere? That’s probably the most interesting thing I’ve ever heard about Chassidim.February 3, 2014 5:01 pm at 5:01 pm #1003598
Being married means they’re allowed to.February 3, 2014 5:04 pm at 5:04 pm #1003599
Sure there’s a source. Go to a chassidish wedding and watch.February 3, 2014 5:18 pm at 5:18 pm #1003600
Probably the same source as where the mitzva tantz comes from…February 3, 2014 7:18 pm at 7:18 pm #1003601
Actually, I think I’ve heard chassidim and perhaps others have a minhag to davka hold hands back from the chuppa to show that it wasn’t a chuppas nidda.
Why? Aside from the mesader kidushin and the witnesses, whose business is it whether it was a chuppas niddah or not?
The WolfFebruary 3, 2014 7:31 pm at 7:31 pm #1003602
Why would it be the business of the mesader kiddushin or the eidim either?February 3, 2014 7:50 pm at 7:50 pm #1003603
Your question doesn’t answer mine. I still don’t see why there should be a need to demonstrate to everyone that it was a chuppas niddah.
In any event, the witnesses for sure need to know, since there can be no true yichud in such a case. As for the mesader kiddushin, probably so that he can instruct the chosson on how to properly give her the ring.
The WolfFebruary 3, 2014 8:12 pm at 8:12 pm #1003604
Eidei yichud.February 3, 2014 9:55 pm at 9:55 pm #1003605
Why should the eidei yichud need to know, unless they happen to find the kid hiding in the room?
But I’ve been at plenty of weddings, and I’ve never seen the eidim actually search well enough to find a kid hiding under the tablecloth.February 3, 2014 10:18 pm at 10:18 pm #1003606
Also, the mesader kiddushin needs to know in order to arrange that shouldn’t be an issur of yichud at the chasunah or afterwards.February 3, 2014 11:07 pm at 11:07 pm #1003607
In any event, Popa, how about actually addressing the point I raised, to wit:
Why would the couple need to demonstrate to everyone that the chuppah is not a chuppas niddah? No one else (barring, perhaps, the individuals we’re debating) need to know.
The WolfFebruary 4, 2014 12:54 am at 12:54 am #1003608
I have no clue.February 4, 2014 3:29 am at 3:29 am #1003609February 4, 2014 4:18 pm at 4:18 pm #1003610
Hand holding is not necessarily romantic. Men shake hands all the time.February 4, 2014 5:07 pm at 5:07 pm #1003611
Hand holding is not necessarily romantic. Men shake hands all the time.
Kissing is not necessarily romantic. People do CPR on strangers all the time.February 4, 2014 8:48 pm at 8:48 pm #1003612
Exactly. It’s the manner in which it is done that counts.February 4, 2014 8:58 pm at 8:58 pm #1003613jewishfeminist02Member
“Because they’re just married, it’s very hard for them to restrain themselves in public.”
This does not make sense. Yiddishkeit is all about restraint and particularly in marriage. You’re telling me they “just couldn’t help” holding hands instead of waiting another thirty seconds to hold hands in the yichud room? Either holding hands in public is mutar or it isn’t, but don’t tell me there’s some special exception for newlyweds. There isn’t.February 4, 2014 10:03 pm at 10:03 pm #1003614🐵 ⌨ GamanitParticipant
Chasidim work very hard to make sure that there should be no problem of chuppas niddah. It is very rare that it should be. When it is, there is no handholding by chuppah or mitzvah tantz. The holding hands is to show continuation of kinyan from chuppah to yichud room.February 5, 2014 2:34 am at 2:34 am #1003616
Ah, thank you Gamanit. I didn’t think my reason made much sense, but I did hear that one time. Thanks for clearing that up.February 5, 2014 4:13 pm at 4:13 pm #1003617🐵 ⌨ GamanitParticipant
popa_bar_abba- I guess it comes from trolling to much, but I actually assumed you knew your reason didn’t make sense… I didn’t know whether you knew the real reason or not though.February 6, 2014 6:30 am at 6:30 am #1003618
I knew my reason didn’t make sense (though I knew the reason and forgot one of the key words), but I knew that by being slightly provocative I could get the answer from someone else.February 6, 2014 4:41 pm at 4:41 pm #1003619
Gamanit – Thanks! That actually does make sense. Now the question is if non-chassidim have the same pure intentions in mind when holding hands after the chuppah…February 6, 2014 9:49 pm at 9:49 pm #1003620WIYMember
Dont go there. You should be happy that they lasted that long.February 9, 2014 4:49 am at 4:49 am #1003621
don’t go anywhere I need your pictureFebruary 13, 2014 1:41 am at 1:41 am #1003623
Sorry, if I could take this thread one conversation back for just one post, please:
“I could certainly hear very good reasons why it is less appropriate to kiss in public than to smile and giggle at each other.”
“I’m sure you could. I can too. But its not something else, still a question of public affection, just boils down to a question of degree. So I’m not convinced.
“And of course there is a difference between what is appropriate to do in public and what is appropriate to do in your own home in front of your children. Why wouldn’t there be?”
I think this’s debatable too, and here I certainly think you’re creating a difference that’s too much to say on your own without a clear source in Halacha.February 14, 2014 12:56 am at 12:56 am #1003624
Physical contact is definitely different from conversation.February 14, 2014 4:23 am at 4:23 am #1003625
Certainly its different.
The question is, if its done in a manner clearly affectionate – not merely respectful and caring – why is that ok ? It does not seem to me to be integrally different, just a question of degree.
I have heard from a huge Talmid Chochom and posek (not mine!) that such things are assur. You wouldn’t believe the examples he gave. I doubt, however, that too many poskim would go as far as he did, and so am not sure where one draws a reasonable line. I don’t think you can just go with your distinction with no source.February 14, 2014 4:38 am at 4:38 am #1003626
Because it’s okay for people to know that you’re married.February 14, 2014 4:49 am at 4:49 am #1003627
OK. But it doesn’t answer my question at all:
If its inherently wrong to display affection, why only in a physical manner ?February 14, 2014 5:02 am at 5:02 am #1003628
Because physical things are different. By the way, why are none of the later posts about songs?February 14, 2014 12:48 pm at 12:48 pm #1003629
You could also ask, if showing emotions is prohibited, then why is not showing any emotions prohibited? So why is it allowed to be affectionate to your child in public? Or to be happy in public at a wedding?
In other words, just because you are able to draw a line a “showing affection” doesn’t mean that is the only logical line that can be drawn.February 16, 2014 2:10 am at 2:10 am #1003630
Obviously its showing affection between husband and wife which is pritzus. You want to say that showing affection in non-physical way is not ? Could be. Just my impression is that its the show of affection that’s the problem, not the act itself. As I mentioned earlier I heard from a (very-famously machmir) posek. I’d have to look up the lashonos in halacha that made me think so.February 16, 2014 2:35 am at 2:35 am #1003631
I think you miss my point. Certainly it is only an issue between a man and woman who are in a romantic relationship. But that does not mean that any affection is assur.
There is a continuum of affection that starts as innocuously as appearing in public together, and goes all the way up to things that nobody thinks should be done in public.
It appears you want to get rid of all gray areas, and classify every action as either “affection” or “nonaffection”. That’s nuts.February 16, 2014 3:29 am at 3:29 am #1003632
That’s not fair. This whole thing started with your assertion that to an extent (to kids) a couple’s affection should be clear. Which means you’re referring to things either done exclusively by couples, or at least that take on different “flavor” as such. If all you meant was mutual affection similar to other close relationships, I misunderstood. But hey – laughing and giggling (which I think you mentioned) between couples is usually pretty distinct from regular people having a good time together. And if thats not what you meant, then like I said, I agree.February 17, 2014 6:37 am at 6:37 am #1003633
Well, couples shouldn’t be giving the impression that they hate each other, especially if they don’t.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.