[Avodah] who avoids whom?

[Chana Luntz]

RMB writes:

>Kol Yisrael areivim plus ein apitropos la'arayos places a large obligation
on all of us to avoid lifnei iveir and mesayeiah lidevar aveirah in these
>areas.

I don't see why ein apitropos la'arayos places any greater burden on others
to avoid lifnei iver and mesayeiah lidevar avairah in these areas than in
any other area of halacha, nor kol yisrael areivim.  Not that an obligation
to avoid lifnei iver and mesayeiah lidevar avairah is negligible, but I
cannot see any justification for making the obligations greater in this area
than in any other equivalent averah.

>But it's still a problem "owned" by the potential avaryan, first and
foremost.

Agreed - the Nazir cannot get out of the averah by claiming that "she gave
me the wine and hence I ate".

>That said, tzeni'us is a middah to be developed, and not entirely (and
perhaps even not primarily) about preventing hirhurim. 

I don't disagree with this, even this kind of definition of tznius, but
Kimchis is not necessarily the best example of it.  A much better example,
as it completely divorces the matter from anything to do with women, are all
the halachos in the second siman of Orech Chaim regarding appropriate
conduct in the bathroom.

>Otherwise, why was Kimchis rewarded by having all 7 sons merit becoming
kohanim gedolim for ensuring that "the rafters of my home have never 'seen'
>the plaits of my hair" (Yuma 47a)?

>On a tangent, I don't understand one element of that story... He son R'
>Yishmael was metamei through the roq of a nakhri, and so the backup had to
serve on YK. (Although R' Yishmael did serve in the past, the gemara says he
>held 4 qav of qetores.) This is how his brother Yeshvav served as KG. I
find it odd, because this seems like an odd part of a reward -- one of her
sons >got to be KG through the other's mishap?

This is the only bit of the story you don't understand?

First of all, the question can be asked, how do the chachamim know that it
is in her merit that all her sons were kohen gadol, maybe it was in the
merit of her husband, their father?  One answer, that they were all her
sons, but not all sons of the same father, is somewhat difficult, because as
kosher kohanim, she can only have had them with a different father if her
previous husband had died (and the second and/subsequent husbands were not
cohanim gadolim).  And presumably she would not have been allowed to marry
more than twice because of the halachos of katlanis.  But perhaps the fact
that they came from two fathers and only one mother was enough to indicate
it was her merit.

Secondly, one of the miracles of the  beis hamikdash was that the kohanim
gedolim did not become metameh - although one can answer that this was only
in relation to tumas keri, and not to forms of tumah that are within the
kohen's power to prevent (or maybe it was bayis rishon, and not bayis
sheni).

Thirdly of all there is the practicality of the matter.  Where and how did
she prepare for eg tevila if she kept the plaits of her hair always covered
(and presumably plaited).  This may be what the Tosphos yeshanim means by
saying at the time that it is possible to cover.  But there is clearly a
tension between being medakdek in this and being medakdek in hilchos tahora.


One could say that this is the answer to your question.  After all, the
Yerushalmi quotes in relation to this story the pasuk kol kavuda bas melech
penima mimishbatzos zahav.  This story with R' Yishmael apparently happened
on Yom Kippur, but since he was out in the shuk presumably the garments onto
which the rok of the nochri fell were indeed the bigdei zahav and if one
accepts the argument that the reason he was not protected was because he
should have been more careful with hilchos tehora, perhaps this also links
back to being overly careful with tznius perhaps leading to kulos in hilchos
tehora.

On the other hand, while I might be mistaken, I have the distinct impression
that, while the pashtus of the gemora would seem to be referring to the
braids of the hair of the head, at least some of the more mystically minded
rishonim appear to be understanding this as referring to hair in different
place.  This particular gemora keeps being quoted by some of the more
mystically minded rishonim (such as Ramban, Rokeach) in their discussion of
appropriate behaviour during tashmish and the consequential nobleness of
resultant offspring.  If that is right, then we are actually discussing
something entirely different.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Regards

Chana