(c) Apr 18 2001 RashiYomi Inc. MY COLLECTED & INDEXED MAIL JEWISH POSTINGS-Ver #1
Individual Postings 1st appeared(& were copied in html form) on the Email List Mail Jewish

From: Russell Hendel <RHendel@RO.HCFA.GOV>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 09:22:55 -0500
Subject: TZNIUTH: What is Good Halachah really about--Revision

Although this note will address specific comments about modesty(tzniuth)
I think it opens up a broader question about the PURPOSE of halachic
discussion.  Details will be given below.

I am responding to [Kestenbaum V23 72] who asserts that most people
don't care about tzniuth to the extent it has been discussed, that we
are hiding our sexual passions behind halacha and there is no point to
the discussions. Similar remarks with a different approach were made by
[Miller]

In the first place I refer to the eloquent statements by [Schwartz] and
[Freedenburg] in the same issue.  Clearly, there ARE women who care
about tzniuth, who think it makes them better people, and who are
willing to share their ideas with other people.  So my first comment to
Kestenbaum and Miller is perhaps they should change their circle of
friends.

On a deeper level I would like to examine why it is important to discuss
such minutae in tzniuth.  To rephrase the query, what consitutes a
valid, good, or beneficial question.

A first approach might suggest that halachic discussion is valid if the
halacha has relevance and/or applicability.

 However the laws of the rebellious son (Ben sorair and morair) (Deut Ki
Tasay) have no applicability---there never was a ben sorair and morair.
The question of why we should study the ben sorair and morair was raised
and answered in a beautiful and eloquent essay by Rabbi Samson Raphael
Hirsch with deep meaning to halahchic relevance.

Suppose, says Rabbi Hirsch, by way of example, that one parent was soft
and one was harsh in their treatment of children. According to the
halachah a ben sorair and morair with such an upbringing (one parent
harsh and one soft) is not to be stoned.  The reason for this is as
follows: The whole purpose of stoning the ben sorair and morair
according to the talmud was because of what the ben sorair and morair
was going to become (if he is rebelling at 13 he will probably become a
criminal so he should be stoned now). Hence, argues Rabbi Hirsch, if his
present behavior can be blamed, not on his personality, but on his
upbringing, then we don't stone him because we are not sure how he will
turn out.  Since in this case the parents have contradictory approaches
of upbringing the son might learn to manipulate them and he is not
stoned.

Rav Hirsch concludes that proper parental upbringing would require a
unified approach of both parents.  Rab Hirsch explicitly notes
     *that from these non relevant rebellious son laws that never took place
     *we can nevertheless learn important principles of upbringing.
The method for doing this is simple: Every stoning requirement in the
rebellious son laws should be interpreted as focusing on the good upbringing
of the son (and therefore he rebelled because of HIS personality---since he is
bad now he will turn out bad and should be stoned).

Returning to our original discussion on what is a good halachic
discussion, we can see that immediate relevance is not the only
requirement.  A discussion on non relevant halachas that however allows
us to infer proper principles of behavior is also a "good" halachic
discussion.

Another illustration of this duality in halachah---relevance vs
principles--can be obtained from the neighbor laws in the Rambam. The
Rambam points out that although most people feel comfortable with
planting a tree on their own property nevertheless if the tree grows and
a branch overshoots a fence and starts growing towards a neighbors
window then the neighbor can cut down the branch (depending on its
length).

There are many people who do not plant trees and hence this halahcah has
no immediate relevance.  But the halachah focuses on principles of
social human interaction and caring for other people.  The Talmud in its
discussion of this law compares the growing branch to "an arrow shot by
the planter".  In other words, when I plant a tree I am probably NOT
thinking of my neighbor.  I am doing my own thing on my own property.
Halacha teaches us to look at my planting from my neighbor's point of
view---how will he feel about it if a branch starts growing towards a
window.

As a final example the Rambam in monetary damage laws, chapter 13
relates how the original chasidim would totally destroy their broken
glass (instead of discarding it in the garbage) so as to avoid harming
their neighbor (in other words, the broken glass should not be perceived
as garbage but rather as a potential "pit"---the archetype name given to
the a certain class of damages)

These last two examples: The branch that is halachically perceived as an
arrow or the broken glass that is perceived as a damaging pit clearly
demonstate principles of good halachic discussion relevant to tzniuth:
      A halachic discussion is "good" even if the halacha is not immediately
      relevant if the discussion leads to insights and principles about proper
      behavior.  More specifically, many halachoth---such as the planting and
      glass example--- have as their goal that we should not only think of
      ourselves when doing something but also think about how our neighbors
      perceive things.  To put it still another way, an irrelevant halachah may
      disencourage selfishness and have us think of our fellow man.

By way of illustrating the application of this principle of halachic
relevance to tzniuth let us examine the"slit skirt" question. A woman
puts on a dress with a slit skirt. She is only thinking of herself, it
makes her feel good.  Halacha would turn around and tell her to think of
her neighbor, the man.  The man says, she is hurting me by exposing me
to a sexual tension.  Now halachah turns to the man and asks the man to
think of this neighbor, the woman: Halachah says to the man, "Do you
really think she is trying to tease you; maybe she is doing it because
she can't walk in a non slit dress and the slit facilitates her
movement.  Is it the slit or the intention that bothers you? She is not
intending to tease you just to facilitate her movement"

As this example shows, true halachic discussion is suppose to lead to
deep moral concern and social empathy with other people.  Yes, halachah
is picky, but its pickiness has as its goal the development of multiple
perspectives on acts from different people's points of views.

In this spirit, I would like to encourage more solicitations from people
on slit dresses and Tzniuth.  To derive maximum benefit the various
discussions should focus on how the SAME act can be perceived in SEVERAL
ways by different people.  The goal of the halachah is to make us aware
of these multiple perspectives and to adjudicate.

Russell Hendel Ph.d. ASA
Dept of Math and Comp Science
Drexel Univ, Phil Pa
rhendel@mcs.drexel.edu