tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post116287947894539197..comments2024-03-18T03:40:39.185-04:00Comments on The Curious Jew: In Defense of the BodyChanahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comBlogger29125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163558688358587822006-11-14T21:44:00.000-05:002006-11-14T21:44:00.000-05:00Chana,I am about to quote for you a dvar Torah wri...Chana,<BR/><BR/>I am about to quote for you a dvar Torah written on this week's parsha--not necessarily for comment, but rather for contemplation. Just as background, it is given by Rabbi Yissocher Frand, author of many phenomenal Torah works and world-renown speaker:<BR/><BR/>"At the beginning of this week's parsha, the verse says, "Sarah's lifetime was one hundred years, and twenty years and seven years; the years of Sarah's life" [Bereshis 23:1]. The Medrash quotes the pasuk "Hashem knows the days of the perfect, their inheritance will be forever" [Tehillim 37:18] and comments "Just as the righteous are 'temimim' [perfect / complete] so too are their years 'temimim'. Sarah was as beautiful as a 7-year-old at age 20, and at 100 her quantity of sins was equal to that of a 20 year old. <BR/><BR/>The Medrash is obviously addressing the strange way in which the pasuk states that Sarah lived to the age of 127. It is understandable why the Medrash wants to point out the righteousness of Sarah. The longer we live, the more susceptible and open we are to sin. So we can readily understand the praise implicit in the statement that when she was 100, she was like a person who was only 20 in terms of the number of sins she had committed in her lifetime. This is a significant measure of piety that is worth knowing about our first matriarch. <BR/><BR/>But what is the point of the Medrash telling us that at twenty, Sarah was as beautiful as a 7-year-old? The Torah is not discussing someone who is entering a beauty pageant here. What is the point of this drasha (exegesis)? We are discussing our matriarch Sarah. Why is it significant to know that she had the beauty of a 7 year old when she was twenty? <BR/><BR/>Rav Mottel Katz, z"l, in his work Be'er Mechokek explains the very important concept of Biblical beauty. The Torah goes out of its way to describe the various matriarchs as being beautiful in appearance. This is not the type of description which we would expect to hear today in describing a prominent Rebbetzin or even in proposing a shidduch (marriage match) to a serious Rabbinical student. Even when someone is interested in "looks", it is still uncommon for one to stress "she is a beautiful girl" when discussing a potential match. We are supposedly above that. However, the Torah does point out that the matriarchs were beautiful people. <BR/><BR/>Our Sages state that ten measures of beauty descended to the world. Jerusalem took 90% of that beauty and the rest of the world divided up the remaining 10% [Kidushin 49b]. Here again, the Gemara emphasizes that Jerusalem is the most beautiful city in the world. Why is it important that Jerusalem be a beautiful city? Would it be any less meaningful or holy for the Jewish people if Jerusalem were not the most beautiful city in the world? <BR/><BR/>The answer is that we as human beings are very influenced by our physical surroundings. Physical beauty can put a person in a frame of mind that is more receptive to the spirituality that exists. The Talmud says elsewhere, "three things broaden a person's mind – a beautiful house, beautiful possessions, and a beautiful wife" [Brachos 57b]. What is the meaning of this Gemara? The meaning of the Gemara is that when a person lives in nice conditions and is not bogged down by physical distractions, he has the ability to be more receptive to matters of holiness. <BR/><BR/>A person who is in a beautiful home with beautiful furniture, beautiful surroundings, and a beautiful wife, can have the freedom and peace of mind to devote himself to the higher tasks of life. The beautiful home, car, and wife are not ends in and of themselves. But they allow the person to rise above the impediments of physical distractions that sometimes get in the way of spiritual growth. <BR/><BR/>When a person enters Jerusalem and looks out upon the beautiful Judean Hills, his soul becomes more receptive to be influenced by the inherent sanctity of the place than what would be possible if Jerusalem had been an equally sanctified but less attractive city. <BR/><BR/>Chazal tell us in the above quoted Medrash that the beauty of Sarah was like that of a 7-year-old. The beauty of a 20-year-old woman can sometimes be used for the wrong purposes in life. The beauty of a 7-year-old, on the other hand, has a certain purity and innocence. This is exactly the point made by Chazal. The beauty of Sarah was not used like the beauty of a 20-year-old woman can sometimes be used. It was used like the beauty of a 7-year-old girl -– not for malevolent, not for prurient, and not for sensual purposes –- but purposes of inspiration and aspiration, as our Sages say "Sarah converted the women.""Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163115736781361362006-11-09T18:42:00.000-05:002006-11-09T18:42:00.000-05:00I wrote a paper on the concept of beauty in Judais...I wrote a paper on the concept of beauty in Judaism while I was in seminary. Guess what my conclusion was? Physical beauty is a manifestation of a beautiful soul. <BR/><BR/>Artistic expression is all well and good, but calling something art does not does not require one to be comfortable with it. The body can express perfectly well without nudity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163083220618083582006-11-09T09:40:00.000-05:002006-11-09T09:40:00.000-05:00There are a couple of ways to answer your first ob...There are a couple of ways to answer your first objection. Primary is the the answer that you allude to: we are fallible. Nobody has the power to judge another person to that degree, to say that they're an absolute rasha! That is pretty much out of the realm of human jurisdiction. Even the Sanhedrin, once they execute the person, give kavod to the met because they hope that the mitat beit din has been enough of a kapara that the person is no longer deemed a rasha.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, even were a person "absolutely evil," which seems pretty hard to achieve, nobody can undo their status as a tzelem elokim. <BR/><BR/>And why can't we have both worlds? The way I see it, we live in a universe where our perceptions are strongly blocked due to our sticky problem of having sensory mechanisms that can only see the physical. In general, it's a challenge for us to look past bodies and see <I>tzalmei Elokim</I>. But flaunting physicality only makes increases the difficulty in seeing beyond it. Physicality can very easily blind us if it's not in a framework of higher purpose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163057317179642472006-11-09T02:28:00.000-05:002006-11-09T02:28:00.000-05:00I'm pretty sure that we respect the body after dea...<I>I'm pretty sure that we respect the body after death because once it has been mukdash as a kli kodesh this status cannot be undone</I><BR/><BR/>According to this philosophy, a known <I>rasha</I> can be cremated, then? Surely HIS body doesn't qualify as having been mukdash as a kli kodesh. <BR/><BR/>What if a qualified court were to proscribe someone a rasha so we absolutely knew/ there was no doubt? You then state that I could burn his body if I liked? Take a knife and mutilate it? I don't think so...<BR/><BR/>Regardless of who we were in life, our bodies are to be respected after death. That speaks volumes.<BR/><BR/>Why can't it be both? Why can't the body be both sacred AND, to use your term, "viscerally impressive?"Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163051461229237792006-11-09T00:51:00.000-05:002006-11-09T00:51:00.000-05:00The halachot against cremation and autopsies are K...The halachot against cremation and autopsies are <I>Kavod hamet</I>. We don't call them <I>kavod haguf</I> or <I>hapigrah</I>. I'm pretty sure that we respect the body after death because once it has been mukdash as a kli kodesh this status cannot be undone. Think of it as sheimos.<BR/><BR/>Of course, bodies are beautiful. But they are the most beautiful when you look at them and say, "Wow, there's a tzelem Elokim in there" instead of "Wow, that's viscerally impressive."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163048223041026382006-11-08T23:57:00.000-05:002006-11-08T23:57:00.000-05:00>I want to clarify-I do NOT activate a feeling-ori...>I want to clarify-I do NOT activate a feeling-oriented approach to Judaism, in that you just do whatever makes you feel good or happy.<BR/><BR/>Now let me clarify. I didn't say you should do what ever makes you feel good. I said you should use your intuition to do what you think *is* good for you. And if you think following halacha is good for you then you should follow it. But even something is permitted according to halacha if you think it would be bad for you then you shouldn't do it.B. Spinozahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086206346767831626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163047142810554752006-11-08T23:39:00.000-05:002006-11-08T23:39:00.000-05:00Teach them sex-ed in 3rd grade.-anonymousWhere in ...<I>Teach them sex-ed in 3rd grade.</I><BR/>-anonymous<BR/><BR/>Where in my post did I suggest this? Don't put words in my mouth. I don't appreciate it.<BR/><BR/>So, anonymous, if I read you correctly, you seem to favor a total lack of knowledge. DON'T teach children or teenagers sex-ed. Let them have primitive ideas and concepts of sexuality- what it is and what it entails. No knowledge, no information, is the way to go here. That way we'll instill "pride" in our children.<BR/><BR/>A lack of shame in the body does not mean a lack of modesty. It simply means that the body in and of itself is not despised. That sexuality is appreciated in and of itself, and not only as a side-part to the mitzvah of 'peru and revu.' <BR/><BR/>Do you think, by the way, that Modern Orthodox and even fully Orthodox Jews keep all the laws of sexuality, even if reared in the way you suggested? Definitely not. Masturbation, making out with girls...happens a LOT in otherwise Orthodox circles (yes, even yeshivish circles.) So to suggest it would happen more frequently were people given knowledge about sexuality is almost entertaining. Teenagers find out about this- if they don't find out through parents or adults or people they trust, they find it on the web. <BR/><BR/>If sex and sexuality is not an open topic to be discussed, a topic one can bring up in the family setting and understand, a topic to be taught not only from a halakhic point of view but from an understanding, compassionate and sympathetic point of view, I shudder to think at how teenagers think of themselves. The guilt, the anger, the self-reproach, maybe the rebellion...There's so many ways.<BR/><BR/>I don't think there's any knowledge in this world that is wholly forbidden. The question is how and when to distribute it (and sometimes, in the case of top-secret cases, to whom.) But to close off a topic- to shut that door- because you're scared of what MIGHT come to be, is simply to open the window to what will SURELY be amongst the uninformed.Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163046672344305142006-11-08T23:31:00.000-05:002006-11-08T23:31:00.000-05:00Bodies are only beautiful in that they are the com...<I>Bodies are only beautiful in that they are the compartments of souls. </I><BR/>---said<BR/><BR/>Oh, how strange a statement is this! If this is the case, then kindly explain- why is it that we do not perform autopsies on the dead? Why is it that we don't allow cremation? Or mutilation of the body in any form? After all, it no longer houses the soul anymore, so according to your philosophy, it's no longer holy, no longer important. According to your philosphy, there's no reason to respect the body after death. Because after all, there's no soul then, right?<BR/><BR/>I, on the other hand, believe that the body in and of itself, with or without a soul, is beautiful and must be respected. The body in and of itself is beautiful and sexual and sacred and pure, all those things both simultaneously and at different times. And hence there are laws applying to the body even when we are dead, laws protecting it from any kind of scarring or hurt. <BR/><BR/>I don't know why it is that you seem to feel that an expression of sexuality is wrong- after all, this is hardly gilui arayot! These people aren't exhibitionists in a strip club; they're ballet dancers. There's a definite difference here. There's no Noachide law I know that prevents a man from walking around, or dancing shirtless.Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163046454387927192006-11-08T23:27:00.000-05:002006-11-08T23:27:00.000-05:00Let's figure out how the schools should teach the ...Let's figure out how the schools should teach the children.<BR/>Teach them about their sexuality. Teach them not to be ashamed.<BR/>Teach them sex-ed in 3rd grade.<BR/><BR/>And all the for guys and girls.<BR/><BR/>What will that end up with?<BR/><BR/>Guys who are 13 and can't keep their hands and body off girls..<BR/>Guys and girls who are 16 and have "explored".<BR/><BR/>Yes, no one should be ashamed of their body- its a gift from g-d. And its part of us.<BR/><BR/>But we are a bit more then that, we are proud of ourselves.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163044932450195622006-11-08T23:02:00.000-05:002006-11-08T23:02:00.000-05:00I could understand why it might be immodest, were ...<I>I could understand why it might be immodest, were the dancers Orthodox Jews, but as they're not, what's wrong with passion and chemistry?</I> <BR/><BR/>As Jews, we should <I>certainly</I> consider it a problem when gentiles are immodest. Of course, we can hardly expect them to keep tzniut in the Jewish sense. But every person in the world is prohibited from gilui arayos (think sheva mitzvot bnei noach), and even avizarei d'arayos are a problem. Indeed, no person should glorify sexuality if it's not for a higher purpose. Bodies are only beautiful in that they are the compartments of souls. Glorifying raw body expression is thus just as upsetting when it's a gentile in my eyes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163027686262094262006-11-08T18:14:00.000-05:002006-11-08T18:14:00.000-05:00Okay, I wasn't clear enough.B. Spinoza, I want to ...Okay, I wasn't clear enough.<BR/><BR/>B. Spinoza, I want to clarify- I do NOT activate a feeling-oriented approach to Judaism, in that you just do whatever makes you feel good or happy. However, I don't think that any halakhot are being broken by watching talented dancers perform in an artistic setting. (I will assume that's a given. After all, why else would the Honors Program take us there?)<BR/><BR/>E-kvetcher, I think the problem was the glorification and adoration of the human body ABOVE ALL ELSE. Humanism alone and exalted, man over God. However, humanism allied to Judaism should be fine. And as these ballerinas were gentiles (or if not gentiles, then non-religious Jews) I don't see how their dancing conflicts with Jewish values. <BR/><BR/>I personally feel amazement and admiration when I observe how these people can command their bodies. In me it inspires awe. <BR/><BR/>---said, why is raw sexuality disgusting? I could understand why it might be <I>immodest</I>, were the dancers Orthodox Jews, but as they're not, what's wrong with passion and chemistry? Does this mean that watching any dancing- pasadoble, tango, salsa and the like (and I'm talking about a woman watching, not a man) which revolve around passion, is wrong, and inherently disgusting?Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163019077889179632006-11-08T15:51:00.000-05:002006-11-08T15:51:00.000-05:00The Greek ideal of beauty revolved around the huma...The Greek ideal of beauty revolved around the human body. Wasn't this one of the key problems for Chazal in their opposition to the Hellenistic Jews of 2000 years ago?e-kvetcherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11235994048517019317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163015713302834212006-11-08T14:55:00.000-05:002006-11-08T14:55:00.000-05:00Chana,I agree with you. More people should use the...Chana,<BR/><BR/>I agree with you. More people should use their common sense. If you feel that an action is degrading or brings you down then you shouldn't do it. But if you feel it improves you and makes you a better person, then by all means go for it.B. Spinozahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086206346767831626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1163015335352998402006-11-08T14:48:00.000-05:002006-11-08T14:48:00.000-05:00Who said that these Stern students found the male ...Who said that these Stern students found the male body per se "disgusting?" They found the message of expressing the body and its emotions in raw form disgusting. And look-- raw sexuality <I>is</I> animalistic. Now, that doesn't mean that bodies are intrinsically sinful. Au Contraire. We are human in that we have souls, and since we have souls, our bodies are klei kodesh. Even the sexuality that bodies have are a part of the holy function and capability of our bodies as the keilim of our souls.<BR/><BR/>But to take the expressions of the body and glorify them for the utility of their raw expression--yes, that seems rather disgusting to me. At least, it seems to stand in serious conflict with my understanding of Jewish thought.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162973142484602842006-11-08T03:05:00.000-05:002006-11-08T03:05:00.000-05:00did you know that birds of paradise can have baby ...did you know that birds of paradise can have baby boys?Lela Harbingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16252413323199579989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162959712825052672006-11-07T23:21:00.000-05:002006-11-07T23:21:00.000-05:00"The problem with this performance and your quote ...<I>"The problem with this performance and your quote of the pasuk and your desire to praise the body is CONTEXT! You yourself admitted that the entire performance had overt sexual overtones. That is perverting something and cheapening it and that is disgusting."</I><BR/><BR/>Perhaps romantic would have been a better term than sexual. This was a ballet. A dance. A meeting of minds and a performance of bodies, the bodies expressing the words that couldn't be spoken. The man and the women whose forms work in harmony, her curve to his strong stance, her vulnerability to his protection. <BR/><BR/>This was not a cheapening of the body, a perversion. This was not a garish and vulgar performance. It was a dream, come from a dream-land, beauty and sexuality combined to form a romantic act. I have to disagree with you on this one, anonymous. <BR/><BR/>To be modest. To be modest is to act in a fashion that is modest; to act as one ought in various situations. At a performance- a ballet, a theater- I do not think modesty, as it were, is expected. The plot, the story, the tale they are telling involves us all. If this is a romantic tale, as it was in the case of the ballet, there will be sexuality. <BR/><BR/>I find that many movies and books are deepened by the sexual connection developed therein. I think it is the same with stories and plays, the theater even. But perhaps this all depends on the theater. Perhaps what I see as art, others cannot see but as being vulgar. Perhaps it depends on the perspective I bring to the show...to begin with.<BR/><BR/>What difference if I am a teenager and you a married woman? Teenagers are just as likely if not more likely to be interested in the oppostite gender, intrigued by sexuality. Honestly, this is all I ever hear about- who is going out on which date, who is cute, who is handsome, who is getting married to this one (and the ages at which these people get married just drop and drop...) and even honest people who TELL me they want to get married for sex. People here OBSESS over sex, while people I know at other schools treat it more normally- simply because it is accepted.<BR/><BR/>My view is to accept sexuality, and hence to make it attainable, something people feel they can understand and learn about and even appreciate (and no, I'm not condoning premarital sex.) My view is to say, sure! watch the ballet and take pleasure in its beauty and yes, frankly, the chemistry between the characters. Either aesthetically or in that you're living vicariously through the characters, it's okay. It's even normal to appreciate this. It's not dirty or wrong.<BR/><BR/>Relations between a man and woman are sanctified in marriage. But I do not think it is a sin for people of each gender to be curious about this, to try to understand, even to feel an emotional response to a performance. I think it is normal, really, and it is abnormal for someone to claim they are wholly uninterested in the opposite gender, indeed, that they find the male body "disgusting." I think that person is lying to herself, trying to invoke an attitude she feels she OUGHT to feel..when she doesn't. And I don't see the need.Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162956751685037532006-11-07T22:32:00.000-05:002006-11-07T22:32:00.000-05:00ok Chana, I am the anonymous who has been critiqui...ok Chana, I am the anonymous who has been critiquing/debating your posts. You are so right and so wrongon this one. <BR/><BR/>First You are right. The human body is considered an art form. Sensuality, art, beauty and physical attraction are one of G-d's gifts to mankind. Torah Judaism has no problem with sexuality - it is considered by chazal through Rishonim to modern gedolei Torah as a beautiful, wonderful thing. It is discussed and given the highest praises. <BR/><BR/>So why haven't you heard this message when I have over and over and over again - because you are an 18 year old single girl and I am married with kids! <BR/><BR/>The problem with this performance and your quote of the pasuk and your desire to praise the body is CONTEXT! You yourself admitted that the entire performance had overt sexual overtones. That is perverting something and cheapening it and that is disgusting. <BR/><BR/>The human body should not be used for exhibitionism but should be used as a tool for a higher purpose. And that higher purpose has been defined by the Torah as one that builds a home rather than for entertainment.<BR/>To keep something holy, one must keep it private. (i.e. aron in kodesh kedoshim, kohen gadol on Yom Kippur etc) Privacy is the hallmark of tznius. This is the way tznius has been defined by chazal. Esther's actions were not defined as tznius because she wore extra baggy clothes but because she kept her private life to herself. Same with Shaul. And this is why discussing or flaunting one's sexuality in public is so distasteful.<BR/><BR/>I agree with you that the sense of shame that young women feel toward their body will inhibit them from being able to express it in the proper time. It will lead to many problems emotionally and in relationships when the beauty is meant to be used and cherished. I think schools that emphasize that a girl should look put together and take pride in her appearance go a long way in instilling this value without being so explicit about it. However, I think the opposite extreme is far more dangerous.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162953426487965922006-11-07T21:37:00.000-05:002006-11-07T21:37:00.000-05:00Wow, I love the facelift you did on tis blog, and ...Wow, I love the facelift you did on tis blog, and that picture is awesome.SemGirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05802459454226915856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162946744951396292006-11-07T19:45:00.000-05:002006-11-07T19:45:00.000-05:00our rabbis certianly didn't hold beauty to be disg...our rabbis certianly didn't hold beauty to be disgusting or worthless, infact they made instituted a bracha to be recited when you see beautiful people, it is a rare bracha to say, and probably an extreemely emberasing bracha to have to make under many circumstances, even a bracha that should be said so that noone can hear it to keep shalom under certain circumstances.<BR/><BR/>And they also made a bracha for a lack of beauty.<BR/><BR/>certainly they saw value in the concept.Looking Forwardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04876831969877780546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162942578453852682006-11-07T18:36:00.000-05:002006-11-07T18:36:00.000-05:00While I'm playing with semantics and to make one p...While I'm playing with semantics and to make one point very clear-<BR/><BR/>Ilan said "the Stern girls you disapprove of"- <BR/><BR/>Let's get this very straight. I do NOT disapprove of Stern girls in general. I disapprove of certain OPINIONS held by Stern girls (and other people, too, for that matter.)<BR/><BR/>*smiles*Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162942422471738892006-11-07T18:33:00.000-05:002006-11-07T18:33:00.000-05:00Ilan- excellent point. I agree with you. I persona...Ilan- excellent point. I agree with you. <BR/><BR/>I personally do not feel ballet connotes sin, but rather art. <BR/><BR/>In terms of the conversations I overheard, however, the idea was that the display of the body was disgusting BECAUSE of the very nature of the body and its physicality (relating the two, I think.)<BR/><BR/>But it's true. If we're arguing semantics, so be it. I dislike the word "disgusting." If one is an art critic and decides, through experience, that the ballet is vulgar or tasteless because of this, that might be okay.<BR/><BR/>So I'm now straying into the idea of...who is qualified to hold an opinion?<BR/><BR/>But on the main point- I agree that I conflated the issues. Thanks for pointing that out.Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162941773298054572006-11-07T18:22:00.000-05:002006-11-07T18:22:00.000-05:00'Why this urge to label the body as "disgusting,"'...'Why this urge to label the body as "disgusting,"'<BR/><BR/>I think you hit it on the nail when you used the term <BR/>"Puritanism". This is clearly an example of Christian (and maybe Muslim) influence. Judaism values modesty, not self-degradation.Charlie Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17667135360784254574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162929968278304852006-11-07T15:06:00.000-05:002006-11-07T15:06:00.000-05:00I feel that you, and possibly the Stern girls you ...I feel that you, and possibly the Stern girls you clearly disapprove of, are conflating two issues:<BR/>1. Should the body be considered inherently disgusting and/or sinful?<BR/>2. Should we consider certain displays of the body, whether visual or verbal to be shameful or even sinful?<BR/><BR/>The answer to #1 I would argue is clearly no. You're right. We don't believe that there is <I>anything</I> inherently problematic with the body. But #2? Of course there are some <I>displays</I> of the body that are a problem. Maybe "disgusting" is the worng word, and maybe it isn't, but that's semantics.ilanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03348559130150486122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162929821672852142006-11-07T15:03:00.000-05:002006-11-07T15:03:00.000-05:00I only supplied the additional pesukim as a way of...I only supplied the additional pesukim as a way of showing that the original pasuk used in the post should not be seen as an absolute.<BR/><BR/>My aim was not to promote or support the idea that the body is "disgusting". Only that while man may have entered into creation w/o the feeling of shame at his God given form, there was a change that took place in this aspect of his relationship w/ the world at large. A change that both man and woman recognized and God reinforced.<BR/><BR/>As is the case w/ most things, either extreme is not correct.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-1162918969438889912006-11-07T12:02:00.000-05:002006-11-07T12:02:00.000-05:00Sure, they wore clothing, g. Nobody says we should...Sure, they wore clothing, g. Nobody says we should walk around nude. But nowhere in the verses does it say the body is disgusting, and that it must be covered because of that. Their eyes were "opened," i.e. they had more knowledge now. It's arguable what that knowledge entailed. I argue that thinking the body in and of itself to be shameful and/or disgusting is not it.Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.com