Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Rav Moshe Feinstein: Sitting next to women on buses

Igros Moshe (E.H. 2:14): Nevertheless concerning other women even if they are married and nida and non-Jews – everyone agrees that there is no prohibition to come into contact with them since it is not done in a sexual arousing manner (derech chiba). Therefore there is no reason to be concerned about contact with women. Consequently there is no need to refrain from traveling on subways and buses to go to work when they are very crowded and it is not possible to avoid contact with women. That is because contact without intent for pleasure that results from the inevitable crowding and pushing is not done in a licentious manner (derech chiba)…. Similarly there is no prohibition for this reason to sit next to a woman when there is no other place available. That is because this is also not done for the sake of pleasure (derech chiba)…. However if it is known that this will bring about lustful thoughts then he should refrain from traveling in these circumstances if it isn’t necessary. But if he needs to travel on the buses and subways because of his work then it would be permitted even if it brings about lustful thoughts. He needs to fight against these thoughts by distracting himself and thinking about words of Torah as the Rambam (Issurei Bi’ah 21:19) advises. He can rely on this to allow him travel to work.  However if he knows that he has a lustful nature and these circumstances will cause him to be sexual aroused – then it is prohibited even if he needs to travel on the buses and subways for his job. But G-d forbid that a person should be that way. This is a result of idleness as it states in Kesubos (49) concerning a woman but it applies also to a man. Consequently he needs to be involved in Torah study and work and not be that way.

10 comments :

  1. Here is where I disagree with many who say this teshuva applies four square to the situation in Eretz Yisroel.

    Rav Moshe was writing about New York, where there is almost no choice but to take the subway or bus to work. Israel is different. The Jews can, democratically, make their own choices, which they've done. If some want separate male and female public trains and buses, to avoid awkward contact, I say, why not?

    Additionally, the mode of dress in Rav Moshe's day was, somewhat, more modest. You didn't see the daily immodesty on Monday to Friday workdays that is seen today.

    I believe the teshuva continues to apply in New York today, but today's Israel? I question that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Elliot, I beg to differ.

    I am not sure of the date of the psak. However, the standard chlothing in the US in the 50's and then in the 60's was shockingly exposed compared to previous years. The impact of clothing depends on part on what you have been used to.

    However, the key point is earlier. He says if you have no lustful thoughts, or can contain them, there is no issue since the physical contact in that context is not derech chibah.

    1. Has charedi education failed so badly that most men are not capable of avoiding or containing lustful thoughts.

    2. Perhaps the problem is that hyper-tzniut and hyper segregation is the source of the problem. As you know from life in the MO world, ordinary contact with women increases the ability to enter into other incidental interactions without overreacting.

    I am told that R. CY Sonnefeld used to visit widows in Jerusalem on erev shabbos to wish them a good shabbos. At this point I get the impression that most charedi rabbonim would not do it, even those so inclined, because it would violate communal norms. I think the norms are the problem.

    I agree that as a matter of liberty, a subgroup, with its own money should be allowed to organize things for itself as it wants, within certain legal limits. But in Israel, all such arrangements would be directly or indirectly subsidized and would impinge on others.

    Moreover, this is an endless vcious cycle. The more life is sexually segregated (we already have seperate sidewalks in some places) the more any manifestation of femaleness becomes provocative. The endpoint of such a cycle is Taliban rule with burquas and complete removal of women from the public sphere.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Elliot, you are adding social ideas to a psak. That isn't what it says. Read it and judge it by its reasoning, not by other ideas or its dating. If Rav Moshe meant it to be a bedi'avad psak for 1950, he would have said so.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Reb Moshe wrote very clearly not to translate his teshuvos in to english

    ReplyDelete
  5. I´m not surprised that the Godol Rabbi Moshe Feinstein even used his head for other purposes than t´fillin, kippa and hat.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Has charedi education failed so badly that most men are not capable of avoiding or containing lustful thoughts."

    The greater the tzaddik, the greater the yatzer hara.

    It is understandable that religious men coming from a sheltered environment may feel extremely uncomfortable, to the point of lustful thoughts and arousal, when confronted by immodestly dressed women in a too-close-for-comfort environment. Others who deal with this every day are probably less affected.

    This, to me, is emes, and should be frankly addressed. I'm not against all separation of the genders all places all the time, but I'm not in favor of mixing the genders all the time either, e.g., we believe in mechitzas in shuls.

    Famous story involving Rav Lopian: A bachur asked for permission to attend a simcha of some type where there would be a mixed crowd. Rav Lopian said he might be affected by the immodesty. The bachur said, I've learned so much Torah, I won't be affected. The Rav asked for his mother's name. Bachur asked why? Rav said I want to make a mi sheberach for you. Rebbe, I'm not sick. Rav said, yes you are sick. I'm 80 years old, can barely walk, and half blind, and if I saw what you're about to see, I would be affected. You're 18 years old, so you must be sick!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hey Elliot, I'm with you. Here in Israel we certainly need separate buses. But more importantly, separate elevators. And separate escalators. And separate check-out counters in the supermarket (with cashiers of the appropriate sex). And separate cops to give tickets to male drivers and female drivers. And let's not forget separate sidewalks!

    ReplyDelete
  8. For me, the most interesting part of the teshuva was the end:

    "However if he knows that he has a lustful nature and these circumstances will cause him to be sexual aroused – then it is prohibited even if he needs to travel on the buses and subways for his job. But G-d forbid that a person should be that way. This is a result of idleness as it states in Kesubos (49) concerning a woman but it applies also to a man. Consequently he needs to be involved in Torah study and work and not be that way."

    Whenever I hear/read discussions on the responsibility for preventing hirhurei aveira, the focus is almost always on the instigator of hirhurei aveira, e.g. a scantily clad woman, as opposed the one engaging in it, e.g. the man looking at her. This is the first source I've seen which clearly states that some of the responsibility for avoiding hirhurei aveira does, in fact, rest on the one who is in the position to engage in it.

    I also find it noteworthy that he notes the necessity to be involved in both Torah study and work in order to sufficiently remove oneself from the type of idleness that leads to a lustful nature. He seems to imply that engaging in just one of the two without the other is not sufficient.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Amen, Chizki. We need an Avot 2:2 movement.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Is the reason why some men cause a geshtenk on airplanes because they say it is assur to site next to a woman, or because they are sexually aroused? these are 2 different matters. Rav Moshe rules that if the trip is necessary then it is mutar even if the man has lustful thoughts, but he advise talmidei chachamim to study Torah.

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.