Originally published 4/29/08, 1:33 AM.
Another insight into Tight Clothing from Cantor Wolberg: [yes the double entendre was quite intended!] -RRW
Another insight into Tight Clothing from Cantor Wolberg: [yes the double entendre was quite intended!] -RRW
Cantor Wolberg cantorwolberg@cox.net wrote:
Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart in 1964 stated: "I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it." Obviously, his perception would be quite different from our perception.
Prohibition against tight clothing would be our "I know it when I see it" but it's all a matter of how high (or low) our individual bar of morality is. We certainly have much higher moral standards than the Constitution of the United States and yet, da'as Torah doesn't necessarily give us the unequivocal, definitive answers.
The Constitution doesn't contain chukim, so its orientation is quite different from ours. Living in a country such as the U.S. presents tremendous challenges in being able to deal with cognitive dissonances, and it's no wonder that we can't agree on many things with each other. This, IMHO, is what gives fertile soil for potential sinas chinam.
ri
1 comment:
This points to the importance of the technical and logical side of Halacha versus the intuitive side. The former is impersonal but it actually gives us a common language for discussion and debate. There is a limit to acceptable Jewish thought, a point where tayuvta can be iterated, and another's opinion thus not just rejected but declared outside the pale. But this can only be the product of the technical, logical side of Halacha which demands the rigour of thought and clarity of what survives the analytical process. Outside of this realm is the intuitive which while also of extreme import, cannot declare what is absolutely unacceptable. The intuitive can describe what one thinks is most correct, what one follows, what one even thinks is correct, but it cannot impose. To impose the intuitive is the start, as Cantor Wolberg defines, is the beginning of the roots of sinat chinum. The intuitive can only work for the individual or the community bound to the position of one specific individual or group of individuals. It cannot impose on the general community (unless, perhaps, it is the Sanhedrin who had to chose one of the intuitive positions as the law for all Israel).
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Post a Comment