[Avodah] Habituation

[kennethgmiller at juno.com]

(I am indebted to listmember R' Samuel Svarc for several things he wrote, both on-list and off-list, which showed me some important differences in halachah between seeing ervah and touching ervah.)

I would like to highlight two more things which are easily confused with each other.

A man might be in a certain situation, where he is exposed to ervah, but because of certain factors, he might correctly conclude that he is allowed to stay in that situation, provided that he does not deliberately *look* at the ervah.

The same man, in the same situation, exposed to the same ervah, and with the same factors applying, might INCORRECTLY conclude that he is not only allowed to stay in that situation, but is even allowed to say brachos there.

Consider the case where the ervah that I am referring to is excrement. Excrement is an inherently objectionable thing, and one is not allowed to say brachos in its presence. This is true even for a person who is both blind and has no sense of smell. The criteria are whether the excrement is visible or smelly, not whether HE can see or smell it.

R' Michael Makovi wrote:

> If a blind man cannot see an attractive woman, for example,
> that seems to me to mitigate the issur of looking at her,
> even though he's neither habituated nor distracted. He won't
> have hirhur / hana'ah from her, and to me, that's enough.

(Let's set aside the fact that it is not *possible* for him to look at her.) The problem with this paragraph is that it stops a few words short. "That's enough..." for what? Yes, that's enough to allow him to stay in that situation. But it is not enough to allow him to say brachos there.

Mechaber 75:6 --

"If ervah was in front of him, and he turned his face away from it, (29) or he closed his eyes, or it was nighttime, or he is blind, then he is allowed to say the Shma -- because Hashem made this dependent on sight, and he cannot see it."

Mishne Brurah 75:29 --

"But the Acharonim conclude that none of these solutions help, except for turning his face away, because the pasuk (Devarim 23:15 - A.M.) does not write, "you shall not see", but "it shall not be seen" - meaning "it will not be visible". And even turning his face, which was allowed, is only in the case where he turned his entire body and is standing in another direction, so that becomes at his side (and not in front of him - A.M.). But if he merely turned his face, it does not help. Similarly, if he is himself naked, no solution can be devised which would allow him to speak divrei Torah. The Mishbetzos Zahav wrote that if he is in one reshus, and a naked man is in another reshus facing him, and he closes his eyes from seeing, in such a case all authorities would allow it. Something similar can be found in Derech Hachaim. In Eshel Avraham 79:8 it sounds like he changed his mind about this, and Chayei Adam 4:9 doesn't sound that way either. However, if there was a glass window making a hefsek between him and the ervah, and he closes his eyes from seeing, then it would help according to all opinions, because at least a chatzitzah is covering the ervah..."

R' Michael Makovi later wrote:

> Rn' Toby Katz was confused by my heter for a blind man to look
> at photographs in Playboy. What I was trying to do was made an
> extreme example: this man has 0% hirhur, and so he has 100%
> heter. He can look at Playboy all day, because he'll get no
> hirhur whatsoever. The case of a blind man looking at
> photographs sounds ridiculous, and it is - that was precisely
> my intention. I was trying to find a case where there is
> absolutely positively no hashah of hirhur whatsoever. The
> hashash is so non-existent, that it doesn't even make sense
> to discuss the case. To prohibit a blind man to look at
> photographs in Playboy would just be the most outrageous
> pesaq ever. (Unless the fear was that he'd look at them in
> public, and cause a hilul hashem. The fear wouldn't be
> hirhur / hana'ah, however.)

Yes, the case of a blind man looking at photographs is ridiculous. But I would say that because it is simply not possible for him to LOOK at the photos, the case must be reworded: What can he do in the PRESENCE of these photos?

Can he hold these photos up in front of his face? Yes, for exactly the reasons which RMM gives - there's no hanaah. But can he hold the photo in front of his face, and say a bracha? The above-cited MB is directly relevant to this question. (My guess is that the photo is merely a picture *of* ervah, and is not *actual* ervah, and that, combined with his inability to see it, would allow him to say the bracha. But if someone would say that the photo *is* actual ervah, I could not demonstrate that he is wrong.)

R' Isaac Balbin wrote:

> There was a recent Psak that a blind man may use his hands to
> determines how a woman "looks" if that is important to him
> being able to determine that she is attractive to him for the
> purposes of marriage.

R' Michael Makovi responded:

> That was Rabbi Yuval Cherlow, my rosh yeshiva at Yeshivat
> Hesder Petah Tiqwa. I'd have to ask him to be sure, but IIRC
> I believe his heter was based on the presumption that for
> this blind man, feeling people's face is normal for him, and
> he gets no hana'ah from it. I'm not sure, however, if he
> permits this only for the sake of shiddukh/marriage, or if
> he permits blind men to feel women's faces in general.

Let's invoke Occam's Razor again, and aim for the fewest guesses, with the only jump being a postulated equivalence between seeing for a sighted person, and touching for a blind person. Now, a sighted man must not look at women, because he might enjoy it, although an exception is made in the case of a prospective wife. Similarly, a blind man must not touch women, because he might enjoy it, even if an exception might be made in the case of the prospective wife.

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
Diet Help
Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/c?cp=xg4IebvnMlM-1hnx4u51hAAAJz3zeK-F0bLcqGb51B0rOTOKAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAAA=