Kol Isha

Speaker:
Ask speaker
Date:
Jan 25, 2015
Length:
54 min
Downloads:
140
Views:
782
Comments:
1

Halacha:
Parsha:

More from this:
Comments
1 comment
Leave a Comment
Title:
Comment:
Anonymous: 
  1. Title: Hearos
    Author: Adam Ariel ,

    Kevod Harav,You came so close to mentioning the simplest explanation of why Trei Kalei is relevant, yet didn't complete the thought. You said that "since that's what you are trying to hear you can concentrate and hear the Shofar/voice". This is hence not an issue in the slightest for Kol Isha. You can also concentrate and stare at a woman's pinky finger if you want which would be completely Asur, yet she is not obligated to cover her finger because of that! See http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20024&st=&pgnum=91 for instance.Regarding singing vs speaking voices, you point to OC 75 to show that the Shulchan Arukh understands there to be such a categorical distinction and then you apply it back to EH 21. I believe both these points are fallacious. OC 75 is limited dramatically by the Rama's comment that any "regular" voice is not an Ervah, seemingly including singing voices as well if they are "regular" (a la Arukh HaShulchan ad loc. re. uncovered hair). Moreover, as you proceed to outline many ways in which the laws of EH 21 and OC 75 are conceptually distinct, you do not consider that singing may have only been a consideration in OC 75 and EH 21 prohibits other forms of speech as well. Indeed the Mechaber's omission of such a detail in EH 21 is striking, especially considering he quotes verbatim from Rambam who doesn't have such a distinction at all. Given the distinction between erotic and seductive, a parallel distinction between singing as a category and overly-friendly content is not impossible, to say it lightly.Finally, I'm surprised that you attributed the Chayei Adam's chiddush that Shok is "objective Ervah" to the Tosfot Rosh and the Shittah Mekubbetzet. Those Rishonim state that Shok is Ervah even though it is occasionally revealed. There is no indication that Shok is objective Ervah. The only thing these Rishonim hold is that body parts which are occasionally exposed but usually covered are still Ervah. (Modern parallels may be knees which come exposed from a skirt while seated or married women's hair inside the home.) In fact, we know form elsewhere (eg. Bava Batra 57b) that women would sometimes uncover their Shok, even if generally it was covered. In any event, neither the Shittah Mekubbetzet nor the Tosfot Rosh is cited in the Beit Yosef or Tur (OC 75) so it is highly unlikely that the Chayei Adam is resurrecting them on his own authority without saying so.Kol Tuv,Adam

Learning on the Marcos and Adina Katz YUTorah site is sponsored today by David Graber to mark the yahrtzeit of Avrohom ben Yissachar