4

Suppose I am a Jewish woman. Suppose I am in a taxi (or similar semiprivate place) with a male cab driver who I am quite sure is not Jewish. May I sing in front of him?

Hypothesis: That since the prohibition of kol isha does not apply to non-Jewish men, I will not be guilty of lifnei iver by singing in this situation. Correct?

SAH
  • 19,756
  • 4
  • 56
  • 165

2 Answers2

8

According to this Rivevos Ephraim 5:491 it should not be a problem since the problem is making a man stumble and come to impure thoughts and its assur during kiras shema and these things are not applicable to a non Jew. See the tshuva inside. There are two Rabbanim who answered in the tshuvah.

enter image description here

sam
  • 41,686
  • 4
  • 80
  • 141
  • 4
    Would he say the same for taking off her clothes? – Double AA Jul 29 '15 at 01:24
  • the second would hold its a problem since its aryios mamesh, and according to the first opinion it should also be a problem – sam Jul 29 '15 at 01:33
  • Maybe I don't understand what Arayos Mamesh is. I thought it was sex. Also I don't see why the first opinion would care as Hirhur is permitted accd to it. – Double AA Jul 29 '15 at 01:34
  • I am using the wording of the second answer,which seems to hold it would be if it weren't the fact it was a derabbanan,regarding the first opinion I see your point – sam Jul 29 '15 at 01:37
  • Is his seeing her naked a Deoraita? Which? – Double AA Jul 29 '15 at 01:46
  • @DoubleAA I could think of additional factors and reasons why undressing could be prohibited when singing would not be. – Fred Jul 29 '15 at 01:52
  • 4
    @DoubleAA Just some possible suggestions off the top of my head: chillul HaShem, p'gam mishpacha, possibly provoking the man to make advances towards her, or violating das Moshe or das Y'hudis. – Fred Jul 29 '15 at 02:28
  • 2
    @Fred All of those can apply to singing as well (except, perhaps, Dat Moshe, which probably doesn't apply in any case). – Double AA Jul 29 '15 at 02:29
  • 1
    @DoubleAA Perhaps, but I think it is more likely that they would apply practically to a woman undressing than to a woman singing. I agree, though, that there may very well be grounds to say a woman should not sing in front of a non-Jewish man aside from the grounds that are addressed (and dismissed) in the responsum (e.g. the importance of conducting oneself modestly, regardless of whether one's audience may be brought to sin). – Fred Jul 29 '15 at 02:31
  • 2
    @Fred Are Jewish expectations of modesty based solely on what a gossiping non-Jewish taxi driver would find riské?? Am Kadosh Anu! Exposing oneself in front of unrelated individuals is a violation of Das Yehudis in the first degree and it's a shanda that the responsum in this answer was ever printed, let alone said. והצנע לכת Modesty is a Jewish value of its own. – Double AA Jul 29 '15 at 02:36
  • 1
    @DoubleAA I agree that that is an important concern. (I had edited that point into my previous comment just before you posted yours). I would hope Rabbis Fisher and Bronstein (Bornstein?) were aware of that important aspect of tz'niyus, but perhaps they felt that singing has some unique status that allays that concern, וצ"ע. – Fred Jul 29 '15 at 02:42
  • 1
    This notion that women spend there whole lives just trying to prevent men from sinning is the worst thing that's happened to traditional Jewish modesty values since the rest of the Western world's forgetting them. I digress... – Double AA Jul 29 '15 at 02:48
  • @doubleaa I think there is a big difference between kol isha and nudity,I think the poskim would agree that nudity is 100% assur for other reasons,to be honest I do not know the sugya of kol isha well besides the basics – sam Jul 29 '15 at 03:13
  • @sam What other reasons? – Double AA Jul 29 '15 at 03:59
  • @Double AA: Like you hinted at, קדושים תהיו, would probably include these type of things. – Emet v'Shalom Jul 29 '15 at 22:12
  • @Emetv'Shalom I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Kedoshim Tihyu would seem to include exposing one's body and one's voice. Hence my reductio ad absurdum holds. – Double AA Jul 30 '15 at 03:52
  • 1
    @Double AA: I'm agreeing with you and adding a mekor in the Torah for why singing should be avoided. – Emet v'Shalom Jul 30 '15 at 12:31
0

do not just assume an answer because it seems not tznius to you! halacha is halacha and if it is mutar then it is mutar. There is no concept of lifnei over for non-jews and therefore a woman can sing in front of a non-jewish man because she has no additional issur of singing (only lifnei over)

additionally why do you assume singing is "being immodest" - modesty is a very fluid, subjective concept and can be defined very differently for different people. you only think its immodest because that is what you were taught to feel.

user11569
  • 19
  • Hi user11569! Welcome. While you might think that 'modesty' is just a handful of well-defined technical rules in a book, traditional Judaism doesn't seem to agree with you. Be well. – Double AA Dec 10 '15 at 01:43
  • @DoubleAA Source for your claim? – SAH Dec 11 '15 at 15:18
  • @SAH I guess start here http://judaism.stackexchange.com/a/14638/759 and look further at every place in history that modesty as a value was applied to reach a conclusion absent any technical prohibition (not to mention the use of the concept as a motivating factor for various Halakhot relating to bedroom and bathroom practices). For example, we can all with little effort come up with a women's outfit that is clearly immodest but covers all the right parts. Don't wear that. – Double AA Dec 11 '15 at 15:25
  • @DoubleAA I guess I was hoping you'd list some specific cases when "modesty as a value was applied to reach a conclusion absent any technical prohibition." I believe you that they exist but can't think of any myself – SAH Dec 11 '15 at 15:33