Tuesday, May 19, 2009

*That* subject



If you were to ask me if I am 'shomer negia' (a term I can't stand) I would answer 'obviously'. That's how I see it. It is not even a question for me. I have never touched a guy, and don't plan to, until I'm married. That means no handshakes, business or otherwise, no hugs, no friendly pats, and definitely no punches, though I've been tempted to at times.

There's a book called 'The Magic Touch', by Gila Manolson. It is all about relationships, and the advantage of being shomer before marriage. I recommend reading it, if you struggle with this issue, or if you just want a good read.

This is how I see it:

Something sacred, hidden,
like royalty.

Keep your distance.
Look, no touching.

It's precious,
lock it up,
throw away the key.

Keep it safe, special,
until the time is right.

It is a gift, from you to him.
Here, take me as I am.

Why would you want to ruin that?

It is a present,
wrapped up, with a bow.

Who likes to give, or receive,
a present that has already been opened?

60 comments:

  1. There is a difference between a handshake and "a present that has already been opened." At least in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, we'll see what happens when you hit the real world. Not that there's anything wrong with this attitude, but it smells of one who has yet to experience the temptation-al tadin chaverecha ad shetagia limkomo-limkomo mamash.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Childish- there is a difference, but I figured people would be able to tell. Yes, its touching on 2 different levels, but either way, both are wrong.

    TRS- who was that directed at?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Then I dont think I'll ask you to clarify, because I dont like people telling me things like that. Thanks anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Of course you don't like people telling you things like that. No one likes people telling them things like that. And they never listen either. But people mature, and they stop being so self-righteous.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I dont consider myself 'self-righteous'. And you can insult or criticize my writing all you want, but don't make insults against me.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Funny-as I have remarked to several people today, I think your writing is quite good. And I certainly never meant to insult you. I'm sorry if it came across like that. I remember once writing a whole post about how bochurim who have girl friends are idiots-I now have come to realize that in fact I don't know everything there is to know, and in face there are many legitimate reasons why a bochur would have a girlfriend. I'm not saying this is a good thing, I'm saying that I can now understand and sympathize with the behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. For once, I think I agree with TRS. Once upon a time, I too thought like Altie. Now, I judge other people a lot easier, because I've come to realize that it's not as simple as once I thought. That doesn't mean that I don't stand by what I believe- that keeping shomer negia is important. I still think it is important, and I still keep shomer negia (giving dirty looks to the chareidi guy pushing me forward on a bus).

    But a present that has already been opened is MUCH different than a handshake or even a pat on the back. Altie, I envy your innocence. Yet, once I was the same...and my beliefs haven't changed. Only experience has.

    It's not as simple as it looks. Try getting engaged- after you know the person well enough to do so. You'll see what I mean...I hope. And if not...I hope you do before you marry them.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yeah I read that book once. Then I fell asleep.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Chanie: Agreeing with me? Have you lost all your standards?

    le7: snort (lol)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Okay I only read the first chapter. I mean I agree with it's premise. So what's the point in reading something I agree with?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Is that why you read my blog so religiously?

    ReplyDelete
  14. No, I read it for the comments. Helllo.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Interesting. I'd have to agree that once you leave the bubble of sem and reach the real world, you will begin to see mixes of gray everywhere, and not just black and white.

    In the beginning of high school, I was just like you. I even bought that book for one for one of my friends. By the end of high school, I had made a conscious decision not to be shomer negiah. It was never an issue for me because everyone assumed I was, so I never touched anyone anyway. But, I never considered hand-shaking to be wrong.

    Then I went on shlichus. My shlucha didn't shake hands and gave the religious reason. I couldn't live in her house, claim to represent Chabad, and still shake hands. So I stopped. I wouldn't go back now, but it is important to understand that there are levels... it's not all the same.

    Each person must decide his path for himself. Judging will not help the situation anyway...

    ReplyDelete
  16. TRS- No, it means that I was once like Altie and then got hit in either the heart, head, or stomach. It means that I never had any temptation to even shake hands, except with one person. Nu? Did I lose all standards?
    As I told Altie: Try getting engaged and you'll see.

    C- does that mean you're no longer Chabad? Or that you're now sn? Not judging, just curious.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'm definitely Chabad. I've always been shomeret negiyah. There was one point in my life where I didn't want to be, but no one touched me anyway and I would never make the first move :).

    The most I've done is shake hands, but like I said, I don't consider that a breach of shomer negiyah.

    But now I definitely am shomeret negiyah.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ah, I get it now. :) Thanks for clarifying. Good to hear...wait, b'karov etzlaich!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Chanie: I was being facetious. No, you didn't lose all standards, or any standards for that matter. You merely matured.

    ReplyDelete
  20. TRS: Oooh, now I get it. Well, thank you for the compliment...if it is one. I kind of wish I hadn't though. It was much simpler. Makes me wonder, though, when you matured.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The way you posted your first comment implied that you had.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Whoops, there I was, being facetious again.

    I'd say that it that point in life I've matured enough to realize that I'm still a long way away from maturity.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Okay...but you've still matured somehow.
    Meh, I'm just wondering when this kind of "maturity" kicked in, because for us I think it was much later.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think the maturity kicks in when you realize how bad you can truly be, and at the same token, how good you can be. Not saying you necessarily have to be bad (or good), I'm saying that when you look deep down into the pit that is your soul and understand your potential, then you're on the road to maturity.

    And who is this "us" of which you speak?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hm....that's an interesting theory. See, I thought maturity was taking responsibility for yourself, and not trying to fool anyone- including yourself. But I guess it could be defined other ways, too.

    Understand potential? Feh, I have no idea how far I could go if I applied myself.

    Us is us. Take it as you wish.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Whoops, just realized that probably a lot of what I said went right over your head. Oh, well.

    BTW- for those interested, I wrote a response post to this one on my blog.

    ReplyDelete
  27. You think I'm stupid or something?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Maybe you are. How should I know?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Take it on trust-I'm not.

    After re-reading your comments, I fail to see where you've (possibly) spoken over my head. Please elaborate.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Okay, fine. For this I'll trust you. For the rest...I have to consult.

    Look, lav davka did it go over your head. But lav davka did you understand, either.

    ReplyDelete
  31. That which I am not saying. But perhaps you did understand.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Until I have reason to suspect otherwise I'll assume that I did.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Okay, so be it. Fine by me....

    ReplyDelete
  34. TRS- thanks. I try not to judge. That is not the point of this post at all. I know people have struggles, sometimes I wished I had this struggle, but like C, G-d protected me, and never tested me like that. I know its not simple, or easy, but my mind likes to simplify things as much as it can. Thats all.

    ReplyDelete
  35. altie - i am impressed. somehow your post got a serious response from TRS! its a miracle! ;-/
    i read this post and i thought,"wow, i remember when i felt like this!"
    but its not naivete. its confidence in who you are. but what happens is life, and things that shake up that confidence, until hopefully, you achieve a new understanding of yourself, and susbsequently, the people aruond you. and that is another definition of maturity ;)

    ReplyDelete
  36. Cheerio, I like your use of ;-/.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  37. But I see no problem thinking this way. Ir's not like I don't know there are temptations. But I can still philosophize, simplify it. I see no problem with that. The world seems to have this need to crush peoples ideals, because they think said people are too 'naive'. Well, who are you to judge who is naive? Maybe you are just too exposed, too desensitized. There are two ays to look at everything.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Altie- did you read what I responded on my blog?

    ReplyDelete
  39. " 'shomer negia' (a term I can't stand)"- I've heard rabbis complaining about the term "shirat eynaim" or "shmirat habrit" as well (for religious people). The Torah is one whole, there's no such thing as someone who follows the Torah but is negligent in a point that's so importasnt point. That's defined as someone who doesn't 'keep' the Torah. Judaism isn't defined by eating chulent, but by self-control..(obviously).

    ReplyDelete
  40. the problem with ideals is that they are ideal. and we are not ideal. we have the potential to become ideal beings, but that's an extremely difficult thing to achieve. and what happens when we or the people around us behave in a way that is less than ideal?
    i still believe in all the things i believed in when i was in seminary. i'm just not unaware of the reality of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Cheerio- You don't have to behave a certain way because everyone around you acts that way....

    ReplyDelete
  42. no chani, i dont know your blog address.

    ReplyDelete
  43. http://chassidsavoda.blogspot.com/2009/05/sn-ttfn-ta-ta-for-now.html

    ReplyDelete
  44. no, you don't. what i'm refering to is the fact that everyone, on some level, in any area, will act in a way they consider less than ideal.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Thanks, TRS.

    Cheerio- true. Unfortunately.

    ReplyDelete
  46. " 'shomer negia' (a term I can't stand)"- I've heard rabbis complaining about the term "shirat eynaim" or "shmirat habrit" as well (for religious people). The Torah is one whole, there's no such thing as someone who follows the Torah but is negligent in a point that's so importasnt point. That's defined as someone who doesn't 'keep' the Torah. Judaism isn't defined by eating chulent, but by self-control..(obviously).first of all, noone on earth would be said to "keep the whole torah" by your logic. . . not even people like rav elyashiv. last i checked his children are not trained in business as torah requires b'pheirush.

    No, people generaly do not keep the torah in its entirety. secondly, the rishonic and early achronic sources on shomer negiah as practiced today are sketchy at best, and many ahalachic chumrot have been included in this category. . .

    vis a vis the others, they are spoken about bevause they are hard, and are sins that many people have a problem with, and often fail, chazal record this as a fact. there are many mitzvos that are widely neglected due to their difficulty. either that our outright defied. (such as men going to work to support their wives.)

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yoni- So what does define Judaism? (Sometimes, the connection of your comments to the already-existing discussion are so...ADHD. :D)

    ReplyDelete
  48. trying to serve hashem. . . learn gemorah, or anything else for that matter.

    one isn't excluded from the klal until one violates shabbos, kasherut, or niddah b'farseiah... Shabbos in particular though.

    its in the gemorah and other sources, thats why these are the things that we teach a prospective ger.

    ReplyDelete
  49. with regards to the post i really don't have a right to say much. . . so anyway.

    other than give your kids hugs every day to tell them how much you love them.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Yoni- re the first post, fine. Re the second- huh? Mah kashur? But whatever, you can explain it to me in private...

    ReplyDelete
  51. to keep them from having these problems in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Btw, why can't you stand the term "shomer negia"?

    ReplyDelete
  53. it's like saying, 'is she chassidish or not.' it's a label. I know that being shomer is different than being chassidish, but it is still a label to try to figure out what level of frumkeit that person is on. And I hate labels.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Okay, I understand. :) And I agree. I hate labels.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Altie, your comment from May 21, 12:11pm sums it up. I was wondering why everyone was assuming you were judging when in fact, I saw no signs of snobbery in your words.

    ReplyDelete
  56. thank you. i feel the same way :P

    ReplyDelete

THINK before you utter your thoughts.