The Gift of Boredom

Rabbi Besser’s post, “Over-stimulation is the enemy of imagination – we should give our children the gift of boredom”, and the article it was linked to were interesting food for thought. I certainly see the difference between the way my kids spend their free time and the way I spent mine with my siblings when I was a child. Although we had many toys, we spent more time playing imaginative games, both indoors and out of doors. My kids spend much more time watching TV and playing on the computer or video games. Their hand-eye coordination is probably better than mine was, but they don’t use their imaginations as much, and I am sorry about it.

As for the last part, “…we should give our children the gift of boredom”, well, I’ll let you know how that goes – it so happens that I just unplugged the two TV’s in our house three days ago. It was for a variety of reasons, and something that I have thought about for years, and finally decided to do. Will they think of it as a gift? Only time will tell, but my 10 year old announced at supper tonight that she likes this new policy, because she now spends more time talking to us.

One More on Dreams

I had never realized that at the end of the story, even Yosef's dream, that his father and brothers would bow down to him; the one that he went through such extraordinary measures to bring about, is never fulfilled.  At the beginning of this week's Parsha, Yaakov alone bows down to Yosef, but it is many years later and you wonder if that "counts".

Do Not Place a Pedestrian before a Driver on Shabbat

As my family and I were walking in Israel a question came up concerning driving on shabbas. Is driving one melacha that a driver would be violating or every time the driver presses on the gas or break is its own separate melacha that is being violated?If it is more than one melacha-meaning each time the driver has to stop and start again they are doing a violaton- then in a place like Israel where many of the people who may be driving on shabbas are Jewish (maybe not observant), is it a problem for observant Jews to be crossing the street against the light if it causes them to have to stop or slow down for us, causing them to violate the melacha another time?-Rebecca Schenker

It's important first to articulate the assumption behind your question - that it is wrong to cause another Jew to sin. This is in fact true, and it is based on Chazal's interpretation of "lifnei iver lo titen michshol [do not place a stumbling block before the blind]" (Vayikra 19:14), which is understood to forbid (among other things) causing someone else to commit a sin (the classic example is: giving wine to a nazir). So if starting and stopping a car is indeed melacha, it would be prohibited to cause another Jew to engage in it.

According to Rabbi Dovid Ribiat in his sefer The 39 Melochos (pages 1216-1218), one violates the melacha of mavier (lighting a fire) thousands of times a minute when one drives, because one cylinder of the engine turns approximately 1000 times per minute when the car is idling (=motor running but the car not moving), and each turn is caused by a separate spark. Engines can have 4, 6 or 8 cylinders. When the car drives at a higher speed the engine turns faster, thus increasing the number of sparks released. (Rabbi Ribiat has a fascinating - to this automotive ignoramus, anyway - diagram explaining how a car engine works.) So causing someone to slow down and speed up changes the number of sparks released and would indeed be causing melacha to be done.

And as I'm thinking about your question, it may not be a problem only in Israel. The New York area in general is populated with many Jews, most of whom are not observant, and perhaps even when we cross streets in our own neighborhoods, we should try to avoid forcing cars to stop for us.

An Interesting Article

This was linked on a Jewish Education board this morning -

Over-stimulation is the enemy of imagination – we should give our children the gift of boredom 

 What do you think?

Adoption and פרו ורבו

Tamar Novetsky writes:

If you have children and immediately give them up for adoption, have you done the mitzvah of puru urevu? 

A couple of points about פרו ורבו before I try to answer that question.  First, remember (as you learned last year) that it is a מצוה from which women are exempt, so we're only talking about the father.  The topic that is more often discussed is whether you fulfill the mitzvah with adoption.  There are opinions that you do, based on the maamar chazal that "hamegadel adam betoch beyso kieylo yilado" that someone who raises another child in his home is considered as if he fathered him.  I assume that this is not to the exclusion of the biological father, but in addition to him.  I think that once you have children (a boy and a girl in accordance with the opinion of Beis Hillel), you are yotzei whether or not you actually raise them.

Shabbos on the Boardwalk

A question from Mrs. Sinensky's 10th grade Gemara class:

Is it OK to play monopoly on Shabbos (b/c you are playing with "money," you're sort of doing business)?

The Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (as quoted in the שמירת שבת כהלכתה) allows it.  Rabbi Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg does agrees that it is technically permitted, but adds that "playing a business-oriented game on Shabbat is not conducive to a proper attitude about Shabbat."

Have you been ever been stuck driving close to Shabbos? Read Further!!

Here is a straightforward overview written by Rabbi Donneal Epstein, author of "Halachos for the Traveler" which details what you should do! The summary originally appeared in the OU's Jewish Action, and can be here.

Dreams

With all of our attention on Chanuka, it's important to give some thought to פרשת מקץ as well.  To skip ahead to next week for a moment, Chazal say that the famine ended after only 2 years because Yaakov came to Mitzrayim.  I always thought that this meant that in the merit of his entry to the country, the רעב was somehow inappropriate, and therefore it stopped.  This might be true, but it seems a bit odd considering that according to the simple reading of the pesukim, he was hit by the hunger in כנען.  Maybe the reason that the hunger stopped was because Yaakov came to מצרים; meaning, the only reason that there was a famine to begin with was in order to get Yaakov and his other sons down to Mitzrayim.  This could have taken 2 years, 4 years or 7 years, but once they were there, there was no purpose in Hashem withholding food from the people. 

We see that the dreams in this story don't actually happen as foreseen - after all, Yosef predicted 7 years of hunger, 5 of which never materialized (if we were evaluating him as a נביא, would he pass?).  Similarly, the most dramatic part of פרעה's dreams was the skinny cows eating the fat cows.  Yosef interpreted this to mean that the famine would be so bad that the years of plenty would be forgotten.  In reality, due to Yosef's
plan, the opposite occurred.  The years of plenty were well remembered during the hunger years, because the people had the food left over.  The dream doesn't accurately predict the future, only the default future - what will happen if you don't alter reality, because clearly it is subject to change based on people's actions.

If so, maybe we can better understand a famous but puzzling Ramban.  He says that the reason that Yosef didn't tell his father or brothers who he was, and why he acted the way that he did is because he was trying to ensure that the dreams came to fruition.  Why?  Did he have a מצות עשה to do Hashem's bidding?  Perhaps he did he because he wanted the dreams to come true.  He knew that the fact that he dreamt them did not guarantee that the scenario will play out, but it was a result that he wanted, so he worked to make sure that it happened just as he had seen it.

(Disclaimer: Ramban uses this theory to defend Yosef for putting his father through this ordeal, so I'm not sure that this approach would work within his opinion.)

more on boy-girl friendships

Two thoughts I wanted to add to the boy-girl discussion from 2 weeks ago:

a) The questioners wrote that one of the benefits of guy friends is that they add less drama. Maybe your experience is different than mine, but I know that when I was around your age, boys were the CAUSE of all the drama. Without boys around, there wouldn’t have been much drama between the girls.

Which is why I would say that having nothing to do with Judaism or halacha, it’s important to be honest about the fact that there are emotional pitfalls to friendships with guys in high school. No matter how much one thinks that a certain friendship is purely platonic, it happens extremely often that either the girl or the guy end up developing feelings for the other that are not always reciprocated, and this usually leads to much emotional pain, confusion, and heartache. Or two girls who have been best friends since birth develop a crush on the same guy friend, and then what happens to the girls’ friendship? I just think it’s important to think about whether the upsides of the guys being part of your life exceed the downsides from a purely emotional point of view, before even getting into any potential halachic issues.

b) On a different note, I thought you might be interested to realize that the issue of the appropriateness of male-female friendships is something that is not just a high-school issue; it is a question that we, your teachers, grapple with in our own lives as well. In fact, just a few days before the question was posted on the blog, I was at my parents’ house for Thanksgiving dinner together with some extended family and close friends, and a heated debate enlivened the meal about exactly this topic, just of course related to a life stage a few (or many) years ahead of where you are now. The specific question we were all debating was the appropriateness of married couples (even with their kids) going on vacation together since the families will then obviously be spending a lot of time together and it can potentially create a certain level of closeness between the various husbands and wives. My point is this: Friendships between members of the opposite sex, even married members of the opposite sex, are never 100% platonic. God created us in such a way that we are always aware of the other person being the opposite gender, with whatever that entails. That is just the given reality. The question is how we are supposed to navigate this reality. Does it mean that one should never interact at all with members of the opposite gender? Much of the charedi world advocates exactly this type of complete separation of the genders, and I completely understand where this approach is coming from; our Orthodox community is unfortunately not immune to extra-marital affairs or teenagers engaging in pre-marital sex or (less egregious but way more common and still assur) not observing the laws of shomer negiah. However, I personally do not live my life by the complete separation approach (at least I don’t now, though I pretty much did in high school due to how much I disliked all the drama the boys caused at the end of elementary school, as I mentioned above), and that’s generally not the approach of modern Orthodoxy. But what then is the approach? Obviously, it is an absolute given that all of the halachot set up to prevent problematic relationships must be adhered to, such as negiah, yichud, etc. If not, then by definition, the relationship is a halachically problematic one. But once all of the halachot are being kept, then what? Honestly, it’s not entirely clear. I think it’s important to keep in mind the two opposing sides: on the one hand, the value inherent in the other 50% of the human population from whom we can hopefully learn and enrich our lives (and them from us), but on the other hand, the serious danger, both emotional and halachic, inherent in such friendships. Thus, my ultimate advice, both to myself and to others, is to proceed with caution; know yourself and what boundaries you need to make sure that you are living a halachic, Torah-true, emotionally healthy life.

A New Kind of Menorah?

Here's a link to an article about a couple of YU students who invented a new Eco-friendly Menorah. A pretty cool invention, plus a great example of Torah U'Maddah in action. Chag Sameach!

The Brush Off

Tziporah Herzfeld asks:

Is it assur to use a lint roller on Shabbos? On the one hand, you're supposed to look put together and presentable for shul, but on the other hand, would it be considered borer because you're taking something unwanted from something wanted?

Good, important, practical question.  While I reiterate the disclaimer that this blog is not meant (and should not be used) to establish psak,  I think the problem would be melaben.  The prohibition against cleaning would apply to any dirt or dust embedded in a garment, unless it is totally on the surface - exactly what the lint brush targets.  While you should double check your Rabbi, I wouldn't use it until you get an answer from him.

As for your other point, I think it is important to remember that while there are many ideals that are important on Shabbos (enjoying yourself, relaxing, looking nice, being comfortable etc.), with very limited exceptions, these will not permit something that is otherwise prohibited.  Always check with a posek, or at least a user-friendly sefer like Rabbi Ribiat's 39 melachos before making a calculus such as this by yourself.

A Look Back, A Look Ahead

No rest for the weary.  As we all bask in the glow of another incredible Mishmover - the biggest one ever!- we have but a few "waking" hours until Shabbos and Chanuka begin.  Yasher koach to Mrs. Kahan for her amazing shiur which had everyone captivated; Ms. Gordon for her awesome Batman session which had everybody talking long after it was done - and for sleeping over - thanks to Ms. Beiler too; the seniors for their chaburas which displayed the diverse talents of our student leaders, and provided a wonderful example for the rest of the school to learn from; Ms. F for her famous midnight shiur which I heard was huge hit as always (I had to go home at some point); the faculty who came & pitched in with sessions and "hang out" time (Ms. Wolf, Mrs. Cohen, Mrs. Feldman, Mrs. Knoll, Rabbi Prince & our annual midnight guest - Dr. Yaish); Mrs. Nadler for setting up the movie; the Torah Committee (Racheli, Daniella, Michelle, Allison, & Tamar) for making the whole thing happen; the Chessed Committee led by Mrs. Kraft for the awesome chessed project; and of course to the 100+ students whose inspiring commitment to Torah and fun brought about an unforgetable evening of learning and good times.

Going forward, after the ימים נוראים I raved here about YU's "To Go" publications.  The Chanuka To Go is available here on-line.  For those of you who have less time (or paper), this edition is once again highlighted by an article by our own Mrs. Knoll, that I can't wait to read.  She also delivered the most recent shiur at Midreshet Yom Rishon, which is available as well.  For those of you who want to brush up on the halachot of Chanuka, here is a good one.  And don't forget about Parshas Vayeshev.  Have a great shabbos and a wonderful Chanuka.

A Jewish Perspective on the Human Body

If your body is just a kli that holds your neshama, then when the neshama leaves, why is it so crucial to give so much respect for the kli that is now just ordinary because it is empty from spirit?
-Daniella Ginsberg

Guest Response from Rabbi Norman Lamm:

The halakhic view is that whatever comes in contact with kedusha and then ceases its contact, loses its original degree of holiness but does retain some element of holiness because of this original association.


Example: “sefer torah she-balah” (a sefer torah that became worn and unusable) must be treated with respect even though it is no longer at the peak of kedusha. Similarly a shul or tefillin, etc. Therefore the same mechanism applies to human beings: when alive, a person attains a certain degree of kedushah thanks to the neshama that is intimately tied up with his body. The body, after death, retains halakhic “protection” which demands that we not offend it, even though the neshama has left it.

On the Other Hand...

This entire conversation about copying music has carried the disclaimer that most of the halachik literature on the subject was written about older technology, but if the current means of distributing (and copying) music in any meaningful way, it is not reflected in the discussion.  Mrs. Rosenbaum contributes the following:

I have been reading the posts regarding copying files from iTunes and I have a few comments.


I am not versed enough to comment on the halachic issues regarding transferring music to several iPods, but I do know a few things about iTunes.

When iTunes was created, problems such as ripping off a song were issues that needed to be addressed by their own legal teams. Based on recommendations from their suppliers (the people who own the music), certain technological restrictions were placed on the music. Music bought from iTunes has a special encryption which prevents the downloaded music from being stored on more than 5 computers. They did not place restriction on the number of iPods that can download the song from any of those computers or how many times it can be burned onto a CD. The reason for this, I assume, is that the people who own the music decided that it would be fruitless to try to completely control thier music since people have been copying music illegally since records and tape recorders (if you know what those are). They decided to control the music in a limited sense, but allow users who bought the music to share it with others. They make their money with the inital purchase and the appeal of using iTunes encourages more people to buy music, even if some of the music they get for free from friends or family who purchased the music. Lately many of these restrictions have been removed. It seems that the music companies are not looking to completely control their music. For those that still control their music with sharing restrictions, it would be illegal to use programs to remove the encryption. In either case it would be illegal to make a profit from your purchase by reselling the file or a CD of the music.
Whether the intentions of the music companies helps us figure out the halachos regarding file sharing on iPods is up for debate.
I do agree that removing encryptions or burning CDs that explicitly say not to is halachicly and legally prohibited. But CDs and music without these restrictions and encryptions might not fall under that same halachic and legal status since the companies are giving you the option to share (but not sell for profit!)

More on Copying Music

Penina Cohen writes:

I have a couple of things to add to what Ms. F and Rabbi Besser said about downloading a song off of someone else's iTunes. As a Jewish music fanatic, I have seen a fair amount of CD's in my day. On most Jewish CDs it writes clearly on the front of the CD, "All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or broadcast is against Halacha and applicable laws." This means that any time someone makes a copy of any part of this Cd without the permission of the production agnecy, they are breaking Halacha. It is like the domino affect: imagine if only one person bought a certain CD, and put it on their iTunes. Her friends then come over and put the CD on their iPods. If one of these friends has software that can transfer songs from her iPod to her iTunes, then her other firends can come to her house and download the CD. Hundreds of people can end up having this CD on their iPods, and the group only got paid for one copy of the CD. Is that really fair to them? And this is without the argument that it is against American law to duplicate a product without permission from the artist. This extends to books, inventions, and music If a group owns a copyright for their product, and someone subsequently copied that product without permission from the original group, they are stealing according to American law. In Judaism, we have the concept of dina d'malchuta dina. This means that the law of the land in which the Jews are living is the law. Even if you figure out a way to say that halachikly you are not stealing, which is hard to do, we still must obey American law as well.

As you can probably tell, I am very passionate about this subject. To me, it is the same thing as a farmer who grows apples for a living. His only way to make any money after his finding a field, planting the tress, watering them, growing them, harvesting the apples and preparing them is by selling his apples, and his assumption that people will buy them. If someone decided that they do not need to pay for the apples, and to take them without payment, everyone would agree that he is stealing. Downloading music is no different. You are taking these musiciands "apples" and they are making no money from it. I think that even with Halacha and American law aside, it is a logical, moral argument that downloading music is taking something that you have to pay for without paying, thereby stealing from these musicians.

Yasher koach for your spirited and thoughtful post, and perhaps even more impressively, for using apples as your example for our conversation about iTunes - well done. 
I think that the objections that you articulated are among the very reasons why most poskim (led by Rav Moshe) agree with you - see the articles by Rabbi Belsky and Rabbi Jachter cited previously.  However, the latter article does bring some authorities who are lenient.  If it is not assur (though again, it probably is), then there is nothing hat the record companies can write on the label that will change that.

Shabbat & High Heels

Daniella Ginsberg writes:
Is it muktza to walk on the grass on shabbos in high heels if it makes holes in the ground? And if so, what malacha is it?
Thanks,
Daniella

The melacha that wearing high heels on grass, dirt, or sand might violate is choresh-plowing. Rabbi Ribiat, in his encyclopedic work, The 39 Melachot (which is an excellent resource for Hilchot Shabbat questions!) writes that there is firm basis to allow wearing high heels even when making holes and kicking up dirt or sand is inevitable. He does quote some in the footnotes who say that it might be preferable to walk slowly if you are wearing heels in this situation, as then penetrating the soil and kicking up soil might not be inevitable.

More on Copying Music

Yasher koach Ms. F, for tackling the question that many people don't want to talk about.  Rav Moshe's opinion (as explained here) is pretty absolute, as Ms. F said. It should be noted that he, of course, was addressing dubbing tapes rather than illegal downloads, and I don't know if there is any reason to distinguish between the two.  I think this is pretty mainstream, but I thought I remembered other opinions.  In a pretty comprehensive article, Rabbi Jachter brings down some opinions that if you would not have bought it anyway.  I can't find a record of it, but I think I remember Rabbi J. David Bleich that it was permitted because the seller has no halachik means to prohibit it.  Once the consumer buys the product, it is his in total, and the seller can't retain any rights.  Jewish record companies have argued that they sell the music on condition that it is not copied, but the absurd conclusion of that would be that if copied, the sale is nullified, and the consumer can return it for the purchase price.  See the Rabbi Jachter article for his analysis of the dina d'malchusa dina issue.

A quick reminder, that the fact that we can identify authorities that permit copying music in limited circumstances, does not give us the license to follow those opinions just because they exist and we like their rules.  As always, everyone should seek the ruling of her Rabbi before doind something that is halachically controversial.

Pure Chesed

Over Thanksgiving break, my husband (a rabbi, but not of a shul) was asked to perform a funeral that Friday for the 104-year-old mother of a woman in my hometown. Normally my hometown rabbi would have done the funeral, but since he was going away for Thanksgiving, and since the service and burial were to be in New Jersey, my hometown rabbi asked my husband to fill in. Some background: In order to show kavod ha-met, it is proper to have a minyan at the cemetary so the family can say kaddish, and also to have Jews do the actual physical labor of burying the dead. The woman who passed away didn't have so many relatives, and many of the male relatives were kohanim. Not so many people would be at this funeral, and those who would were either quite elderly themselves, or kohanim who could not come into the cemetary. In short, my husband needed some able-bodied men to help him, both with the minyan and with digging. Thursday, he posted a request on "Teaneck shuls," the message board for Orthodox north Bergenites. I was sure no one would respond. Who would want to give up a Friday vacation day (a gift given to spend sleeping, with family, shopping or even learning) to come to stand in a cemetary in the rain, hear speeches about a woman they didn't know, and dig dirt? But my husband was confident - and he was right! Eight people - strangers to him - emailed to offer to help! He needed 4 people in the end, and he got them. These people did not know the woman who passed away, anyone in her family, or even my husband. They weren't doing it as a favor to any person at all - just pure chesed. I couldn't believe it, but my husband said "That's what Yidden do."

Entering a Church

Rikki Novetsky asks: At the Ma'ayanot community service fair, I signed up to be a part of the Bergen County Youth Council for the Homeless -- basically a youth group that comes together around once a month to create fundraisers and food/clothing drives for the homeless people of Bergen County (apparently there's a lot of them, although coming from my Jewish bubble, I never knew). I found this group to be quite intriguing, since I've always found appeal in helping out the people closest to home. The only problem is, the first meeting is at the Central Unitarian Church in Paramus, New Jersey. Can I go to the meeting? I highly doubt it would take place in the actual chapel area, and the meeting would be to benefit the disadvantaged. I am also aware of, however, the prohibition of entering a church.

Hi Rikki, great question! The issue of entering a church depends on whether Christianity today is considered Avodah Zarah and if a church would be considered a בית עבודה זרה that one would be forbidden to enter. There is a מחלוקת over whether or not Christianity is considered idolatry forbidden for non-Jews (due to their belief in the trinity), or just for Jews. The Rambam (Hilkhot A"K 9:4) says it is, while the Rama (YD 141:1) says it is not, since Christians combine their belief in G-d with another power, something called שיתוף, which while forbidden to Jews, may be permitted to non-Jews. The Meiri has a radically different opinion, stating that when the Gemara uses the term "idolaters", it is referring to "lawless nations". Therefore, Christians today, if they follow a moral and ethical code, would not be part of this category at all.

With regard to entering a Church for non-worship purposes, I can't comment about your specific case (you should probably consult your local posek), but Rav Moshe Feinstein (YD 3:129) forbid entering a church even just to look at paintings or architecture (a question that comes up a lot when people travel to Rome). For more on his position and that of Rav Soloveichik, you can click here.

Your question reminded me of an interesting debate that came up when Rabbi Haskel Lookstein participated at a prayer service at the National Cathedral in honor of President Obama taking office. The Rabbinical Council of America criticized Rabbi Lookstein for entering a church under these circumstances. There is an interesting exchange found here and here, and also here, defending/criticizing Rabbi Lookstein's decision. Rabbi Lookstein's rationale for why he decided to participate is found here.

Copying Music that Someone Else Bought on iTunes

Question:

Dear Why-anot!
If person A bought cds or music from itunes and then person B copies that music to her computer or ipod - is transfering music halachically allowed or not?

From,
The 11th Grade Technology Class

Answer:
According to Rav Moshe Feinstein, you are not allowed to copy music that someone else bought on itunes. When you copy the song, instead of buying it yourself, you are taking money away from itunes which takes away money from the song's creator. Basically, it is stealing.

Student Reaction to Mrs. Sinensky's Post

Not the last one.

I don't think I fully understand Mrs. Sinensky's blog post. If friendships with boys are problematic because of what they may lead to, I can understand that logic (personally, I think halacha itself provides enough boundries from inappropriate activities, and drawing the line at friendship might be putting an unnecessary chumrah on ourselves. Why not say that boys and girls should never talk or see each other because we're scared of what it might lead to?)
But I'm confused about the second reason, that boy-girl friendships are bittul Torah. What's the source of the concept of bittul Torah, and where do we draw the line? If you want to say that non- Torah activities can be outside the realm of bittul Torah as long as they in some way compliment your Jewish life and your identity as an oved-Hashem (I don't know if that's a real answer), than I would think that(assuming they're appropriate), boy-girl friendships have as much potential as single sex friendships to fall into that category of non-bittul Torah things. What are the boundaries of bittul Torah?

-Rachel Friedman

Click HERE for an interesting article

Boy-Girl Friendships in High School

Question:
Some people say that from a girl’s perspective, it is in no way bad and may even be momentous for us to have a few good guy friends. When you need a friend to talk to and you know that a girl will only add more drama, its good to have a guy friend that you know will be chilled and much less likely to evoke drama on the matter. (assuming of course that the friendship remains appropriate and permissible according to halacha). While all that makes sense from our (a girl’s) perspective...we don't really then understand the mishna in Pirkei Avot which says something along the lines of a guy not being allowed to talk to a girl. Touching and other prohibitions between girls and boys are comprehensible, but talking?! Isn't that a little extreme..??
Thanks !
-Shira Westrich and Hanna Erdfarb

Response:
The Mishna in Pirkei Avot that you are referring to is:

משנה מסכת אבות פרק א משנה ה [ה] יוסי בן יוחנן איש ירושלים אומר יהי ביתך פתוח לרוחה ויהיו עניים בני ביתך ואל תרבה שיחה עם האשה באשתו אמרו קל וחומר באשת חברו מכאן אמרו חכמים כל זמן שאדם מרבה שיחה עם האשה גורם רעה לעצמו ובוטל מדברי תורה וסופו יורש גיהנום:

A few comments: It is important to note that Pirkei Avot is not saying that it is prohibited (in the sense of mutar/assur); it is recommending that one not do so. In general, Pirkei Avot is a book of sagely advice, not a book of issur and heter. That being said, of course we should not dismiss lightly the wisdom of Chazal!! The question that we need to address, then, is what Chazal mean exactly by this recommendation. There are different interpretations of this Mishna. In surveying the opinions of Rashi, Rambam, Rabbeinu Yonah, R’Ovadiah M’Bartenura, and Tosfot Yom Tov, there are two general ways to interpret Chazal’s recommendation in this Mishna. The first is that discussions with women may lead to bittul Torah. The second is that discussions with women may cause a man to have halakhically problematic thoughts, which is an issur in its own right, and worse, may lead to halakhically problematic behavior. (Another detail of the Mishna that is debated is whether the “isha” here refers to a single woman or a married woman. According to those who think that it refers to a married woman, there is further debate regarding if the woman is a Niddah or not.)

In addressing the question about how having relationships with guys fits with this Mishna, I think it is important to consider what type of relationship we’re talking about. If it is a relationship which is built upon shared values and ideals and the pursuit of religious growth, then I think there are definitely positives to the relationship. At the same time, the consideration of bittul Torah for the man (since he has a chiyuv) is a consideration, and that needs to be worked into the equation. And even though women do not have a technical chiyuv in Talmud Torah, she also has an obligation as an eved Hashem to fill her time with meaningful and wholesome activities as well. In addition, the possibility of a relationship leading to inappropriate thoughts and actions is always a real one, even for a relationship that is centered upon the best values and ideals. We don’t know ourselves as well as we think we do, and never truly know how we will deal with situations that test our self restraint.

In short—I certainly don’t think that having relationships with guys is necessarily prohibited, yet it is clearly not looked upon by Chazal as recommended. There are definite benefits to friendships between boys and gils in high school, but whether or not to enter into these relationships is a decision that I think should be made with serious consideration of the above factors.

All-Time Monthly Blog Post High

I just wanted to announce that due to our thoughtful student body and dedicated faculty, we have reached our all-time monthly blog post high of 40 posts!! Yasher koach!