- This topic has 103 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Joesph…we may be both Americans and Brits here, but the English language got this word from French.
Cheval>>>>horse
Chevalier>>>>>>Knight
Chevalerie>>>>>Chivalrie
From 1066 England was ruled by the Norman French (William the Conqueror)
The language of court and the upper classes was French, the peasantry spoke Anglo-Saxon tongues.
Modern British English developed as a language with parallel word from French and Anglo-Saxon English.
Chicken–English, Poultry–from French Poulet
As often stated the Americans and Brits are separated by a common language. Our first floor is at the entry, theirs is up a full flight.
Rav Frand also added that Rav Dovid (I’m not sure who that is, but the guys present probably know) would tell bochurim when they were dating to hold open the door for the girl even though this would entail walking behind her. (although personally, I don’t see why this has to be the case. Why can’t she walk through the doorway and then move to the side?, but in any case, that seemed to be his assumption)
Or why can’t he go first and hold it open for her
Additionally, I remember when I was a bachur and I was walking with a friend to pick up his sister so when we left, I went through the door first and she said “ladies first” to which I replied “not in Halacha” and when we got to their house she asked her father and he agreed with me
Coffee Addict- listen to Rav Frand’s shiur that I brought above. It sounds like according to halacha, she was right. Although it’s possible there are other opinions.
Halacha is precisely the opposite. Halacha is men first. Halacha specifically states as such even when saving lives.
When a girl says “ladies first” to obtain priority for herself, she is a victim and perpetrator of the American and Western self-entitlement culture who subscribes to non-Jewish ideas and culture.
Why should a guy be any more inclined to open the car door for his date than he would open the car door for his younger or older sister? She, at least as much, ought to open the door for him.
The reason I was looking for this thread was that I wanted to relay the following incident that happened on Shabbos. I had to go somewhere with my friend and her husband. On the way back, my friend’s husband, who is a tremendous Talmid Chacham and a tremendous Baal Middos, opened the door for us, but stood back so that he wasn’t behind us. So it is possible to do both!
lilmod ulelamaid – how far back?
I was walking with my friend, himself a posek and tzadik, who was with his wife. When we got to his home, his wife opened the door for us to allow us in while she stood aside, and only afterwards did she enter herself.
Joseph – “ladies first” is the saying and i go by that! so thats an insult to me. i feel like its okay to go by that saying. theres NOTHING wrong with that. but im the kind of girl who makes it into a joke and says “guys first” and then i let the guys go even tho there waiting for me!
You shouldn’t be joking or frivolous with guys.
Sparkly – how far back is what?
Sparkly,
You don’t understand men (especially if he says “ladies first”)
The Gemara in Taanis brings a story with choni hamagel’s grandson that his wife walked ahead of them (as opposed to behind) but I’m assuming it was more than 4 Amos
I think Rav Frand may have said in the shiur I brought above that any distance within sight is a problem.
CA: “Sparkly,
You don’t understand men (especially if he says “ladies first”)’
Huh? I didn’t get that. Please explain.
Lilmod,
What’s the issue of walking behind a woman
OH! I didn’t understand what you meant. But are you trying to say that’s why men say “ladies first”??!!! I have a hard time believing that especially after listening to Rav Frand’s shiur. You really think so?
Lilmod,
Joseph – not true. btw, I have heard that according to Halacha, since common courtesy nowadays is that the guy let the girl go first, he is SUPPOSED to let her go in front of him even though according to tznius it should be the other way. Apparently, we do believe in chivalry.
You haven’t quoted where to find it and anyways I see that you said anywhere within sight is a problem, usually when someone says ladies first she’s in sight
Listen to r Dovid orlofsky’s shiur on platonic relationships
Joseph- it seems like you’re still bothered by this inyan, even after people have cited the Tzitz Eliezer who is matir in general and a shiur by Rav Frand who disagrees with you. Do you reject that there is another legitimate shitah out there? Or are you just encouraging people to be machmir, while still recognizing that others reject your premise “halacha says men first” ?
Joseph – why not?
coffee addict – why are you saying i dont understand men? i do if im always around them which i pretty much am since im ALWAYS at college and go to events that have guys.
lilmod ulelamaid – how far back did your friends husband stand behind you and your friend when you were walking with her?
coffee addict – why cant guys see girls?
Sparkly,
Just because you’re around them doesn’t mean you understand them
I suggest you should also listen to rabbi orlofsky’s shiur on platonic relationships
I never said guys can’t see girls
Zogt, in Rav Shlomo Zalman’s letter replying to the Tzitz Eliezer, RSZA says there’s reason to be meikel on this inyan today due to the conditions in the street today, with so many women in public unlike in the past, that it is often difficult to avoid the situation. But Rav Shlomo Zalman is clear it is a b’dieved, not a l’chatchila like some posters here are posturing.
Coffee addict: “You haven’t quoted where to find it”
I actually did. I took the time and spent the money to listen to the entire shiur just so I could quote it. I have copied and posted my original post below. You can listen to the shiur yourself.
Coffee addict: “and anyways I see that you said anywhere within sight is a problem”
That statement was in answer to the question “how far away is a problem?” I was just answering that IN A SITUATION where it is a problem, I think the Halacha is anywhere in a sight (for example, in the olden days when it was completely assur).
Previous post copied and pasted:
I just spent $3.00 to purchase a download of Rav Frand’s shiur entitled “Nasso 20- Walking behind a woman” from the Yad Yechiel website.
He first quotes the Gemara, Rambam and Shulchan Aruch who say that it is assur to walk behind a woman. He then brings the Tzitz Eliezer who raises the question regarding what to do if you encounter an Eishes Chaveir (wife of a Talmid Chacham). On the one hand, there is an obligation to show honor to the wife of a Talmid Chacham which would entail letting her go first. On the other hand, it is forbidden for a man to walk behind a woman.
The Tzitz Eliezer quotes the Trumas Hadeshen who states that he should let her go first since today we are not so careful not to walk behind women in general. The Tzitz Eliezer is puzzled by this – why should that make a difference? He came up with the following svara to explain the Trumas Hadeshen- it used to be that women did not go out and it was unusual to find a woman in the street so the sight of a woman was likely to lead to hirhur. However, today (in the Trumas Hadeshen’s times) it had become normal for women to be out on the streets, so it was no longer a problem to walk behind a woman.
The Tzitz Eliezer wrote his svara to Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach who was maskim to (accepted) it. Rav Shlomo Zalman also added that when manners dictate letting the woman go first, one should do so.
Rav Frand also added that Rav Dovid (I’m not sure who that is, but the guys present probably know) would tell bochurim when they were dating to hold open the door for the girl even though this would entail walking behind her. (although personally, I don’t see why this has to be the case. Why can’t she walk through the doorway and then move to the side?, but in any case, that seemed to be his assumption)
If anyone wants to listen to the shiur, they can purchase the download for $3.00. Please don’t argue with me about the topic until you have listened to the shiur.
Joseph: “Zogt, in Rav Shlomo Zalman’s letter replying to the Tzitz Eliezer, RSZA says there’s reason to be meikel on this inyan today due to the conditions in the street today, with so many women in public unlike in the past, that it is often difficult to avoid the situation. But Rav Shlomo Zalman is clear it is a b’dieved, not a l’chatchila like some posters here are posturing.”
According to the way Rav Frand quotes him, it sounds like in a situation where it would be considered rude for the guy to go first (like on a date, or if she is an Eishes Chaveir), the guy should let the girl go first.
I’m not sure what you mean by b’dieved. Technically, b’dieved means “after the fact” which is not really relevant here. I assume that you mean that it is something one should only do in certain circumstances – when there are other issues involved such as granting respect to an Eishes Chaveir, or being polite to your date. That is the only type of circumstance that anyone was discussing here. I am not sure what the halacha is when that is not the case, since it was not 100% clear to me from Rav Frand’s shiur, but we were not discussing any other situation.
Also, you seem to be implying that Rav Shlomo Zalman is just saying that today there is no choice because there are so many women on the street. According to the way that Rabbi Frand quoted him, the point was that because there are so many women on the street, the inyan does not apply (or does not apply as much -I’m not sure which), because men are used to seeing women on the street.
ps to above post: I just reread my above synopsis of Rav Frand’s shiur which was written right after I listened to it, and he quoted Rav Shlomo Zalman as saying that in any situation in which manners dictate letting the lady go first, the man should do so.
So, we do believe in manners, and we do believe that men should let ladies go first when it is dictated by manners!
I’m sorry I didn’t see that post (or at least the part with the title) not sure why
Additionally you’re sidestepping the shiur from rabbi orlofsky
coffee addict – guys arent THAT different from girls!
I’m also wondering would shake a woman’s hand? Personally when I’m in that situation I say “sorry, religious reasons” and they’re cool with that, my last professor who is also a dean of the college that I went to tried shaking my hand and I told her that and she was surprised because other Jewish men have.
Additionally not everything is black and white so you can’t say the Halacha follows the tzitz eliezer etc, because if I try hard enough I could find someone that assurs
“guys arent THAT different from girls!”
Huh?
Sparkly,
Listen to the shiur
And this one is free
Coffee addict:
1. It is possible that there are other opinions, but in the context of the original discussion and the reason I brought in Rav Frand’s shiur in the first place, it is irrelevant if there are other opinions.
2. When someone quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as saying something is muttar, you can’t just keep saying that YOU think it’s assur. If you know of another opinion that it is assur, please bring it.
3. Do you know of another opinion? If so, I would be happy to hear of it.
4. This is not a complete raayah, but I would imagine that if there is another opinion that the mainstream Litvish American world holds of, Rav Frand would have brought it. From listening to his shiur, it does sound like Rav Frand thinks this is the only opinion or at least the only one people should be listening to.
5. L’maaseh, let’s say there is another opinion. I don’t know if you are a boy or a girl, but let’s say you are a boy and you are on a date. Let’s say you have reason to believe the girl will be insulted if you walk ahead of her, and you know that you can be “somech” on Rav Shlomo Zalman and let her walk first. Don’t you think you should do so? If you walk ahead of her you will be insulting her and you can let her walk ahead of you without doing something “assur” since you can be “somech” on Rav Shlomo Zalman. Considering the fact that most people rely on Rav Shlomo Zalman for many things, why should you davka choose a more machmir opinion when someone’s feelings are at stake?
6. Re R’ Orlofsky’s shiur: you hadn’t yet mentioned it when I originally posted about Rav Frand’s shiur
7. I’m not sure what R’ Orlofsky’s shiur has to do with this topic. I listened to it many years ago, but as I recall it was about not talking to boys and about being shomer negiah. What does that have to do with a boy letting his date go ahead of him?
8. I always shake women’s hands, but I never shake men’s hands. Most people are fine with it when you explain it’s for Religious reasons. Once in Israel, I was with a girl who did shake a not-Frum Israeli man’s hand when he put out his hand because she thought she was supposed to halachically in order not to embarrass him. He responded by saying, “Oh, I thought you were Religious.” Apparently, he was testing her. I wouldn’t shake hands with men anyhow, but I do think that anyone who thinks they should in order not to embarrass the person should think carefully about it because Israelis often do know better and t/f may be testing them.
edited
Anyways I did research on it (googled the origin) and you would be upset if you found out the real reason for “ladies first”
When I googled it, this is what I found: “According to Chabad.org, a site that reports on Judaism and the Torah, the “ladies first” rule is a very old tradition. The story goes that when Moses was instructed to inform the people of Israel about the Torah, he was told to “speak to the house of Jacob, and tell the sons of Israel.” Since the house of Jacob appears first in the instructions, and it refers to women, the theory follows that Moses had to speak first with the ladies. Probably a smart political move.”
I don’t know if this true or not, but it was certainly an interesting svara.
Tachlis, if a guy thinks it’s a problem to let the girl go first, maybe he should at least make sure she realizes that it’s out of respect for her that he is going first.
Wow Lilmod,
1) I assumed you to be a man! (A little too lomdish)
2) I’m not saying women aren’t lomdish, just more men are so don’t get upset
3) the chabad.org website isn’t reliable because the Gemara which says men shouldn’t walk behind a woman which came at the same time as Torah shebiksav
4)Google ladies first origin, that will come up but a story will also come up about how it all started (too bad I can’t post links)
5) a Google search brought to this cr topic which is very apropos
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/walking-behind-a-woman
I have to go now, and it’s very hard to rebut on my phone so until later
lilmod: Please read Rav Shlomo Zalman’s reponse in its original letter. (It’s reprinted in the TE.) Your understanding of it is mistaken. He holds it is only to be done b’dieved in the sense that if it is unavoidable. i.e. a crowded street with women. Not to b’davka do it.
Additionally, the vast majority of poskim, both historic and contemporary, do not pasken to be meikel on this issue. The Shulchan Aruch rules it assur. If any posek would hold differently than the S”A he would openly state as such. The absence of a ruling mattiring what the S”A assured, is a clear indication that he holds it assur. The Gedolim in the days of the Shulchan Aruch and shortly thereafter have agreed to accept the psakim of the mechaber and the Rema as authoritative. The Shach writes that one cannot even claim “kim li” against a psak of the Shulchan Aruch. This is akin to accepting someone as your “Rebbi”, where you follow his psakim. This is the same thing that happened when, let’s say, Klal Yisroel decided that the period of Chazal has ended after the 7th generation of Amorayim (Mar Zutra, Mar bar Rav Ashi, etc), and nobody from here on in can add to the Gemora. There was no “halachah l’Moshe m’Sinai” that told us that the Gemora was sealed; it was the accepted reality told to us by our Gedolim. The same thing applies to accepting the Shulchan Aruch and Rema.
Furthermore, one cannot be meikel on an issue that S”A assurs simply because there is an opinion out there, even a valid one, that isn’t from his rebbi or posek, being meikel on an issue. Even if someone else will be insulted that you didn’t latch on to the kulah and you instead followed the halacha as the Shulchan Aruch paskens and as your rebbeim pasken.
Joseph: “Furthermore, one cannot be meikel on an issue that S”A assurs simply because there is an opinion out there, even a valid one, that isn’t from his rebbi or posek, being meikel on an issue. Even if someone else will be insulted that you didn’t latch on to the kulah and you instead followed the halacha as the Shulchan Aruch paskens and as your rebbeim pasken.”
Maskim. However, I was under the impression that Rav Shlomo Zalman says it’s muttar, and personally, I would not consider him “to be an opinion out there.”
It’s quite possible that I misunderstood what he wrote – I didn’t see it inside; I was simply quoting from what I understood from Rav Frand’s shiur.
I would be happy to see it. Do you know where I can find it? What’s the TE?
In any case, I think that it is very important that before a guy goes out, he asks his Rav what he should do, since either way, he is in danger of being over on a halacha. If he is told to go in front of the girl, he should make sure to find a way to do it that won’t offend her, such as by explaining to her why he is doing so.
Coffee Addict:
1. Not insulted at all. I don’t mind being told that I am as lomdish as a boy, especially since it’s true :), as long as you keep in mind that even though I can learn like a boy, I’m as sensitive as a girl (actually much more than most).
2. I wasn’t saying that the chabad.org website was accurate; I just thought it was cute that that is what I came up with.
3. I didn’t listen to the shiur on the chabad.org website, but from the quote, it doesn’t sound like it was talking about ladies walking in front of men – it was talking about the general concept of “ladies first”.
Lilmod,
Some men are just as sensitive as women (keep that in mind too)
Additionally since you are dating, realize guys don’t like being shlugged up during a conversation with a woman (dating or in marriage)
The chabad.org website brought
Up until that point, the rule was “men first.” Adam, as we all know, was created before Eve. Noah and his sons entered the ark first, followed by their wives — at least that’s the order they’re listed in Genesis 7:13 (a “sinking ship” situation in the reverse, if you will). When Jacob traveled with his family, the males rode up front and the womenfolk behind them (Genesis 31:17) while Esau placed the women before the men.
Understanding it as walking, riding behind vi? a vi? in front
Coffee Addict: “The chabad.org website brought
Up until that point, the rule was “men first.” Adam, as we all know, was created before Eve. Noah and his sons entered the ark first, followed by their wives — at least that’s the order they’re listed in Genesis 7:13 (a “sinking ship” situation in the reverse, if you will). When Jacob traveled with his family, the males rode up front and the womenfolk behind them (Genesis 31:17) while Esau placed the women before the men.”
Not sure what your point is.
“I would be happy to see it. Do you know where I can find it? What’s the TE?”
The Tzitz Eliezer 9:50. Pay attention to Rav Shlomo Zalman’s reponse. In the beginning he writes “it provides something to rely on in emergency situations.”
Here is RSZ’s response:
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14508&st=&pgnum=208
“Bshas Had’chak”
Lilmod,
You said
I didn’t listen to the shiur on the chabad.org website, but from the quote, it doesn’t sound like it was talking about ladies walking in front of men – it was talking about the general concept of “ladies first”.
So I brought that to show ladies first means walk in front from the inverse relationship n the Torah
Additionally I’m thinking that the reason for the heater is so that people shouldn’t get all upset if a woman is walking in front of him into a bus and cause a scene (something common in Israel)
Joseph, thank you very much! Do you know if Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach himself has a Teshuva on it?
Also, just wondering, have you ever asked your Rabbanim about it? If so, what did they say?
He also writes, ???? ??? ???? ????? ???? [?? ????? ????? ??
??? ??????] ??? ??? ?????? ??????,
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.