<div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">No. It has been previously pointed out on one or both of the lists,</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">: that regardless of the revulsion a mitzva causes in either the eyes of</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">: jews/goyim, it can't be a chillul hashem by definition...</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">This was asserted, not proven from sources. By taking it as a given</span><br style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">we're presuming our conclusion.</span><br>
<div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">-------- you make it sound like it's an unreasonable assertion. but how could it be anyother way?</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">forget chumras--- if someone is grossed out by let's say hilchot niddah or mishkav zachar---- straight biblical commandments --- or mechiat amalek/7 amim--again stragiht biblical commandment---> what could you say, that there is a hava amina that the tora itself is a chilul hashem?? it must be that chillul hashem is not in the eyes of scoffers/atheists etc it has to be in some lesser group....</span></div>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Micha Berger <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org" target="_blank">micha@aishdas.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 02:46:29PM -0700, saul newman wrote:<br>
: No. It has been previously pointed out on one or both of the lists,<br>
: that regardless of the revulsion a mitzva causes in either the eyes of<br>
: jews/goyim, it can't be a chillul hashem by definition...<br>
<br>
This was asserted, not proven from sources. By taking it as a given<br>
we're presuming our conclusion.<br>
<br>
...<br>
: It must be, since the tora promises that others will see you and fear<br>
: you as a consequence of your mitzva performance, there must be something<br>
: lacking in our avoda....<br>
<br>
(Nearly?) every chumerah in one area is also a qulah in another. And if<br>
the qulah is greater than the chumera, following the stringency is not<br>
doing Hashem's Will. In our case, if one can avoid alienating others<br>
from Torah because one refuses to avoid an opportunity to do something<br>
non-mandatory, the action could be a net minus on Hashem's "scale" --<br>
and a chilul hasheim.<br>
<br>
I'm not sure, that's why my previous post had more question marks than<br>
periods.<br>
<br>
Tir'u baTov!<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-Micha<br>
<br>
--<br>
Micha Berger "Someday I will do it." - is self-deceptive.<br>
<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</a> "I want to do it." - is weak.<br>
<a href="http://www.aishdas.org" target="_blank">http://www.aishdas.org</a> "I am doing it." - that is the right way.<br>
Fax: <a href="tel:%28270%29%20514-1507" value="+12705141507">(270) 514-1507</a> - Reb Menachem Mendel of Kotzk<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>