Comments on: Pure and chaste … from afar

By: “Pure and chaste … from afar” | Likelihood of Success

“Pure and chaste … from afar” | Likelihood of Success — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 05:14:23 +0000

[...] post reprinted below was among the first published on this blog. It came up while I was searching for [...]

By: O-U, baby | Likelihood of Success

O-U, baby | Likelihood of Success — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 05:03:39 +0000

[...] Dawn Eden gives props, as they say, to a somewhat (for her) unusual source, on her favorite topic — chastity. [...]

By: O-U, baby « Likelihood of Success

O-U, baby « Likelihood of Success — Thu, 31 May 2007 05:44:42 +0000

[...] Posted by Ron Coleman on May 31st, 2007 Dawn Eden gives props, as they say, to a somewhat (for her) unusual source, on her favorite topic — chastity. [...]

By: Ron Coleman

Ron Coleman — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:48:23 +0000

Ooh, Warren, you have really hit a great point here. I have never quite seen it put that way in our literature, but it is well known that the greatest sages and the Patriarchs themselves indeed accounted for every second and every perutah (small coin) in their lives. Wasting time or resources is not consistent with living a life full of meaning. As you suggest, wasting, so to speak, emotion is probably even worse.

By: warren

warren — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:09:59 +0000

Thanks Ron. It’s interesting to me that both Judaism and Catholicism have this sense in which “nothing Good is ever wasted”. I think it’s actually an intense and good idea to avoid dissipating all your energy, spending all your life in effect, in the pursuit of things from which nothing good can actually come. In the original Mary Tyler Moore context, in particular, it now makes perfect sense to me.

Warren

By: Michael B.

Michael B. — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 05:13:00 +0000

So, Zach, what if Mary had confessed that she fancied Murray? What then? A broken marriage and an abandoned family, or just a painful parting of the ways? Nothing good could have come of his confession.

Whatever relief I had in confessing my feelings for my erstwhile friend, whatever thrill there was in hearing that she had feelings for me — those were sweet moments at the time, but subsequent events have drained all the sweetness away. I’d gladly relinquish those memories if it were possible to regain the status quo ante and once again be nothing more than friendly acquaintances.

Life isn’t about feelings. It’s about duty, responsibility, and obligation. Your emotions are helpful to the extent they help you devote yourself to your duties. To the extent that they lead you away from your obligations, they ought to be suppressed or, as Ron says, channeled in a constructive direction.

By: Ron Coleman

Ron Coleman — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 03:40:09 +0000

Warren, “shomer negiah” means “observant of the rules restricting forbidden contact.” People who are “tzenuah” — observant of the rules of “tzeniuth” — are more likely to remain “shomer negiah”!

What we are supposed to do in terms of “sucking it all in” is channel the expression of strong emotions into permissible, not forbidden, relationships. It’s a problem if a person gets himself into a situation where there has been “k’rivath hadaath” where there should not be. Big topic, Warren! But by and large that’s why among orthodox Jews there is a lot separation of the sexes even when not strictly mandated — it’s just “good practice.”

By: warren

warren — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 03:36:00 +0000

What’s the difference between “tzeniuth”, and “shomer negiah”? I guess they go together and both together make something equivalent to a christian precept of “chastity”, although “shomer negiah” forbids all physical contact, right?

But do you really think it’s better to suck it all in? I’ve spent my life getting over that tendency, when it really counted, I think sometimes it’s better to put your heart out there, and speak the truth. I mean, can you really consider yourself alive, if you don’t? Surely Judaism, like other faiths, has some counterpoints or opposing principles that moderate “k’rivath hadaath”?

Warren
[Catholic guy who digs Jewish terminology]

By: zach.

zach. — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 01:13:45 +0000

Well, in this isolated case, maybe he was wrong. I guess I mean more generally. As you say, feelings are hard to contain.

My comment at the end was added more because as I was writing it I was imagining someone likening our analysis to Quayle’s comments re: Murphy Brown, if anyone remembers back that far. I also have a tendency to over-empathize with fictional characters and fictional situations, so I have to fight that impulse to keep from going off the deep end :p

By: Ron Coleman

Ron Coleman — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:54:29 +0000

But he wasn’t going to get together with her, Zach. He says, and he should say, he was committed to his wife. Plus his dreams were never realistic; he’s not in Mary’s league. All he did was actually warp the friendly relationship with Mary, with no real up side.

That doesn’t mean a lot of people wouldn’t do the same thing. Sometimes emotions are hard to contain.

All in all, we can learn a lot of things from well-drawn fictional characters, don’t you think? I mean, heck, Zach, you found something to say.