Talking With Members of The Opposite Gender

SJS, 🙂 nope not at all!! I know I gave it away. I gota make a new sn or start keeping my mouth shut

Mayan_Dvash: Huh? Unless youre not talking to me.

anon,

Because it says in the Igros Moshe (Choshem Mishpat volume 2, siman 32,

sub heading 9 ?) that it is assur to shake a woman’s hand. (It also says in the IM it is prohibited to chat with women, like ujm provided the mekor yesterday.)

Actually, Joseph, I was just trying to make sure I understood what Mayan_Dvash was saying.

Striving,

Good point. I too wondered about the seeming discrepancy of frum site/casual, social interaction between the genders.

I haven’t been following the thread, but if it focuses on hand shaking, I invite people to track down Rabbi Reisman’s motzei Shabbos shiur of two weeks ago about living in golus. He mentions common shailos of the work place, including hand shaking. Besides the actual psak, our mindsets are crucials.

anon for this: I’m saying that in a case of Oiness is different. For example, a friend of mine went to his graduation when he got his master’s degree. Everyone is dressed in their caps and gowns. Part of the march from backstage to their seats, they were going to shake “the dean’s” hand and a photographer was there to capture the moment. The way it was set up, the dean was just beyond a door. So he’s walking along, gets to the door and the dean who is a woman (this is the moment he finds that out) sticks out her hand. So he shakes her hand because he didn’t even have time to think about what was going on. However, if I am walking in to a job interview and the manager happens to be a woman, I always excused myself for not shaking their hand, and in EVERY case they respected that.

If you are firm but remain mentchlach in your position not to shake hands it’s usually not a problem. Most goiyim are aware of this by now. You just smile and say politely, “I’m sorry, we don’t shake hands.” Keep it simple. It does not matter if they think you are a bit strange. You are saying it in a very pleasant manner and you conduct yourself professionally and respectfully the rest of the meeting. They will not even remember this small incident.

Once or twice I’ve had to explain “for religious reasons”, just to respond to a questioning look. In this day and age everyone has their own beliefs and nobody will look down upon you for sticking to them. Usually, it’s even the opposite- you are looked up to.

Good luck

It is an issur d’oraysah. Reb Moshe, in the Igros Moshe, states that Lo Sikrevu means you can’t talk to girls. Rav Moshe is quoting a statment of Chazal in Avos D’Reb Nosson and rulings of the Ran and others. Avos: “Al tarbeh sichah im haishah” – Do not talk more than necessary with women. The Mishnah continues: “Whoever does talk more than necessary with women causes bad for himself . . . and in the end will end up in Gehinnom!” Re derech chibah: The Halachah (Rambam) prohibits negiyah even in a non-affectionate manner. Casual negiyah is also prohibited — see the Steipler’s Letters quoting the Chazon Ish for details — even if it doesn’t “mean anything”. Even regarding a simple handshake between strangers, Rav Moshe writes that you should not rely on this as a heter.

Lo Sikrevu – the Torah prohibition of touching – is referring even to non-affectionate touching, according to the Rambam. The Ramban argues, and holds that non-affectionate touching is not included in the possuk, but is assur nonetheless m’drabbanan. The prohibition of Lo Sikravu applies to all ages equally. There is no logic in saying that an explicit Torah prohibition is “not talking” about certain ages.

Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer:

“A person must stay far, far away from the women, and it is prohibited to signal with your hand, to hint with your eyes, to any prohibited women. It is furthermore prohibited to laugh together with them and to be frivolous in her presence, or to watch her beauty. Even to smell her perfume is forbidden….”

Rav Moshe addressed the Derech Chibah issue in his Teshuva, saying that whenever boys and girls are friends, even innocently, that is considered Assur, like Derech Chibah. R. Moshe Feinstein repeatedly (Iggeros Moshe, Orach Chaim vol. 1 no. 113; Even Ha-Ezer vol. 1 no. 56) ruled that a man enjoys shaking a woman’s hand and it is therefore

prohibited. The Steipler writes in his letters in the name of the Chazon Ish that it is absolutely prohibited. Regarding a so-called heter that you will embarass her if you don’t shake hands, it’s simple logic: If someone asked you to call them on Shabbos and you telligng them sorry I cant do that would embarrass them for asking, would you be mechalel shabbos to prevent their embarrassment? Or if someone offered you non-kosher food and refusing would embarrass them would you eat treif?

Mayan_Dvash, thanks for clarifying. I’m glad that not shaking hands has worked out well for you.

Joseph wrote: “Lo Sikrevu – the Torah prohibition of touching – is referring even to non-affectionate touching, according to the Rambam. The Ramban argues, and holds that non-affectionate touching is not included in the possuk, but is assur nonetheless m’drabbanan.”

It is not poshut bichlal to say that the Rambam was referring to “non-affectionate touching.” The poshut understanding of the Rambam is not like that, though the Beis Yosef did understand the Rambam like you, but the Shach disagrees completely (Yoreh De’ah 157:10). R’ Moshe in his teshuva paskened like the Shach. Also, I don’t think that the Ramban mentioned “non-affectionate touching,” either. Perhaps you got that confused with the Teshuvos HaRashba.

Joseph wrote: “TJ, I don’t believe Reb Yaakov ever said any such thing regarding a heter for embarrassment. Do you have a mekor for that? I think not.”

Actually, I do. Emes L’Ya’akov on the Tur and Shulchan Aruch, p.405 n. 4.

Joseph wrote: “Reb Moshe wrote befeirush in the quoted IM that shaking hands is always assur under all circumstances. Period.”

True that R’ Moshe asured handshaking, though he was lomeid zechus for those who hold that it isn’t derech chiba. I just wrote what R’ Reuven reported about his father’s shita, in a case where there is the additional issue of embarrassment.

Joseph, I have heard that for women its less problematic (I was given a heter to shake mens hands at work). I would guess that might stem from “…a man enjoys shaking a woman’s hand and it is therefore prohibited.” Do you anything about that either way?

As for comparing it to mechalel shabbos or treif – many different jobs have requirements that force you to violate halacha in some form. We couldnt have Jewish doctors otherwise. Its not like there arent plenty of doctors around nowadays that Jews need to enter that profession.

Holy Mods, I’m not sure why you keep censoring my posts.

Joseph, look at the Badei Hashulchan. He (or one of the commentaries on the bottom) discuss this and end result, it’s not clear cut that it’s 100% assur (at least for a non-Jew).

Joseph wrote: “there is no issur to embarass a goy”

Public humiliation is a very serious sin (“kol hamalbin… k’eelu shofeich damim”). Even though the issur b’etzem refers to chaveiro, chilul Hashem is an important consideration here. Possibly even mishoom eivah, as well. (In addition, a goyah is not exactly in the same category of arayos d’oraisa as a Bas Yisrael. As such, the parameters of lo sikrevu as applying to a goyah are not necessarily so clear cut).

P.S. To Joseph, and to the mods: This forum is a reshus harabim. V’dai l’chakima birmiza.

TJ, If someone asked you to call them on Shabbos, and you telling them sorry I can’t do that would embarrass them for asking, would you be mechalel shabbos to prevent their embarrassment? Or if someone offered you non-kosher food and refusing would embarrass them, would you eat treif? You cannot be oiver an issur (especially d’oraisa) to avoid embarassing someone – no in these examples and not in negiah. Especially not for a nochri.

Joseph wrote: “TJ, Actually you are incorrect regarding Reb Yaakov paskening it permissable to shake hands to avoid embarasement. In the mekor provided, Reb Yaakov states “Regarding returning a handshake to women when they extend their hand first in greeting, not in an affectionate manner, this is a very serious question and it is difficult to be lenient.” Reb Yaakov goes on to state that in a situation where there will cause embarasement, it requires further study whether it is permissable to be lenient or not.”

I never said that R’ Ya’akov “pasken[ed] it permissable to shake hands to avoid embarasement.” I refer you to what I wrote above: “[Where] return[ing] a handshake won’t cause embarrassment… R’ Ya’akov [was] inclined to assur returning the handshake.” I also wrote: “R’ Ya’akov wrote “tzarich iyun” in such a case where returning a handshake would be necessary to avoid embarrassing someone.” You are arguing against a phantom here.

Joseph wrote: “Reb Moshe, multiple times in the Igros Moshe, is very clear that it is assur.”

Again, I never disagreed with that. (However, as I mentioned before, he was lomeid zechus on those who hold that it is muttar.) At the risk of repeating myself, I was simply reporting what R’ Reuvein said about R’ Moshe giving a different p’sak when the person would be embarrassed. This p’sak wasn’t in Igros Moshe.

Joseph wrote: “TJ, If someone asked you to call them on Shabbos, and you telling them sorry I can’t do that would embarrass them for asking, would you be mechalel shabbos to prevent their embarrassment?”

I don’t know exactly how embarrassment factors into p’sak regarding handshaking, but I can offer some conjecture. (1.) According the preponderance of poskim, there is no inherent issur involved in physical contact with a woman – it is dependent on the type of contact and whether it is “derech chiba v’ta’avah.” In a case where the person would be embarrassed if you don’t shake their hand, that concern itself may affect the halachic nature of the handshake given that the circumstances are such that you are only handshaking to avoid the other person being humiliated. As such, such a handshake might not be considered “derech chiba.” (2.) The Taz and the Shach have a fairly meikel view of physical contact. The Shach, for example writes that physical contact is only assur if it is “derech ta’avah v’chibas bi’ah.” It seems like these opinions would mattir handshaking. Perhaps the threat of humiliation justifies following a more lenient opinion. (3.) The Yerushalmi’s consideration of “ain yetzer hara matzui l’sha’ah” is an additional factor that might be relied upon when there is a threat of embarrassing someone. (4.) A non-sakana type of mishoom eivah can override a d’rabanan. In the case of a goyah, she an ervah mid’rabbanan, and therefore lo sikrevu would only be d’rabbanan even l’fi HaRambam. As a result, avoiding embarrassing a goyah might be an additional factor to justify handshaking.

You can’t violate lavim, but perhaps you can be someich on mitigating factors. Even R’ Ya’akov, who didn’t pasken either way in this case, thought that there MIGHT be a tzad l’hakeil. It is clearly not so poshut.

I give credit to this site; truly a Makom of dignity and Yiras Shomayim.

I have noticed a significant drop in the overly personal interaction here, and both the site and the posters are due kudos for modifying the tone of their posts and together increasing the quality of a really unique place.

TJ said – “I don’t know exactly how embarrassment factors into p’sak regarding handshaking, but I can offer some conjecture. (1.) According the preponderance of poskim, there is no inherent issur involved in physical contact with a woman – it is dependent on the type of contact and whether it is “derech chiba v’ta’avah.” In a case where the person would be embarrassed if you don’t shake their hand, that concern itself may affect the halachic nature of the handshake given that the circumstances are such that you are only handshaking to avoid the other person being humiliated. As such, such a handshake might not be considered “derech chiba.” (2.) The Taz and the Shach have a fairly meikel view of physical contact. The Shach, for example writes that physical contact is only assur if it is “derech ta’avah v’chibas bi’ah.” It seems like these opinions would mattir handshaking. Perhaps the threat of humiliation justifies following a more lenient opinion. (3.) The Yerushalmi’s consideration of “ain yetzer hara matzui l’sha’ah” is an additional factor that might be relied upon when there is a threat of embarrassing someone. (4.) A non-sakana type of mishoom eivah can override a d’rabanan. In the case of a goyah, she an ervah mid’rabbanan, and therefore lo sikrevu would only be d’rabbanan even l’fi HaRambam. As a result, avoiding embarrassing a goyah might be an additional factor to justify handshaking.”

I have observed frum men in professional settings holding their hands behind their backs when in conversation with women; or holding papers or glasses in one hand while holding a drink in the other thus creating an innocent obstacle to hand shaking.

I once heard from a Rav and Posek in Flatbush: When a couple adopt an infant and raise the baby as their own; the halacha is that when the child becomes of age, all contact between the father/daughter or mother/son must cease and Yichud issues apply as well. But, says the Rav, no Posek will ever tell them that they must adhere to these rules.

cherrybim,

You are mistaken. There is no such thing as halacha being something is assur, but that “no Posek will ever tell them that they must adhere to these rules.”

You are also mistaken that “all contact between the father/[adopted] daughter or mother/[adopted] son must cease and Yichud issues apply as well.” The Igros Moshe E.H. 4:64-2 says it is permissible. (Most other poskim disagree with Reb Moshe though.)

Joseph wrote: “‘Even to speak with her when she is behind a fence is not something we tell him to do. He should die rather than speak to her from behind a fence.’ This Rambam is talking about even an unmarried woman whom he lusts.”

The case here is of someone who is sick due to lust for a particular woman, and the doctors say that he can only survive if he gives into his lust by conversing with her. There are two opinions in the gemara from which this halacha is based. (1.) Chazal were talking about an eishes ish. (2.) Chazal were talking about even an unmarried woman.

According to the first opinion, it would be possible to say that the reason is that it is stam a case of “yehareg v’al ya’avor” due to abizraihu of arayos. However, according to the second opinion, that cannot be a factor. The reason why chazal wouldn’t permit an unmarried woman to be used in such a manner was so that B’nos Yisrael wouldn’t be treated as hefker – as some sort of object available to cure men of lust. Treating women like that would ultimately contribute to a proliferation of pritzus in society. (There is also a concern for p’gam mishpacha).

The Rambam quoted by Joseph paskened like the second opinion.

Reb Moshe specifically said in his teshuvas that handshaking is derech chiba. I quoted the three Igros Moshe’s in a previous post.

Jothar: The Gedolim have called for the establishment of Vaadei HaTznius.

AUDIO & PHOTOS: Thousands Attend Lakewood’s Tznius Asifa

AUDIO: Thousands of Women Attend Lakewood’s Tznius Asifa

The Rosh Yeshiva’s Shlita stated we need a Vaad Hatznius. You can listen to the audio on YWN of the Lakewood Tznius Asifa. In the fututre restrain yourself from referring to the holy work of the vaad hatznius, under the guidance of the Gedolim (whom you seem not to trust) as “gangs”. A little Emunas Chachomim would do your neshama a lot of good.

Don’t believe the sheker and loshon hora on the blogs and Israeli media about those that engage in this Avodei HaKodesh. Instead of reading these “sheker reports”, put your trust in the Torah leaders of Klal Yisroel.

Jothar, you are 100% correct. Those people are doing something wrong. We have to understand that what they’re doing is looked down upon by our leaders and the majority of our society. We cannot, however, make generalizations based on those who are doing the wrong thing.

~a~

Joseph, As you so rightly assume, I like you, & I agree with you, but after reading through most of the posts, I have to say, I will not get into bringing M’koirois for everything although there are many more to bring down, where it states very clearly the Isur of shaking hands, simply because you’ll never finish arguing with the ones that are looking to do it! I also don’t want to get personal with anyone. But I do have a few comments, 1)Please be careful with your choise of words as they could be misunderstood, like your allowed to embarrass a Goi, I know what you meant, but some might not. Now I’m writing to everyone, 2)It’s not hard to get a Heter today for anything from a “Rav”, including women Davening for the Omud or worse things that I do not want to mention. 3)When the words “reportedly” are used about a P’sak, I’m dumbfounded. 4) Let’s not forget the G’morah on V’yad L’yad Loi Yinokeh, or, Hamistakel B’etzbah K’tanoh Shel Ishoh, and even if it is Muter,what about V’asu S’yug Latoirah? 5) To say women are differant, Chas V’sholoim, if anything, they are worse,(again I’m not getting into bringing referencess or the words written), 6) Who are they afraid to embarrass, the other person? NO! rather “themselves” 7)I have a huge house Boruch Hashem full of guest at all times & I have a list of rules outside the door that includes quite a few on Hilchois Tz’ni’us & no one has yet had a problem with it or gotten embarrassed. Please, I don’t want anyone to think that I am a Fannatic, I’m not! Most of my house is full of people that are not Chassidish or Yeshivish, also see what an impression I give, on the topic of “when parents don’t want a Shidduch”, Avol, Yikoiv Hadin Es Hohor, V’al Yisbayesh Mipnai Hamal’igim Olov Ba’avoidasoi Yisborach Sh’moi, applies by both posts, even if 1 sounds as if it’s from the right & the other as if from the left

First: The moderators are on top of the actual content of the post. Secondly, the fact that the moderators don’t let you exchange names/email addresses/locations means that it’s not possible for the two to meet. If that’s not good enough, what is?