Not a maaseh shehaya but I'd appreciate your thoughts: Reuvain is a Modern Orthodox senior citizen. In his community, presumed social negiah restrictions are generally not observed (e.g., hello includes a social hug between the sexes), although Reuvain is meticulous in his observance of them. He is in his office in a conference with two colleagues when Miriam, the wife of a third tier social friend, also well past childbearing age, comes to the office door and says with a tear in her eye, "Reuvain, I hate to do this to you." Reuvain quickly asks his colleagues to excuse them, and Miriam blurts out, "David (her husband) just passed away," and she begins to slump, crying. Reuvain quickly gets up and walks to her and hugs her to comfort her and keep her upright. As he does so, he realizes she did not make any request or action alluding to any need prior to his action, but she did seem to very much appreciate it. She also belonged to the portion of the community which did not presume a social negiah restriction. Was Reuvain's action preferred, acceptable, or prohibited? If not preferred, what should he have done?
KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE
ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is
strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.
Thank you.
: Not a maaseh shehaya but I'd appreciate your thoughts: Reuvain is a
: Modern Orthodox senior citizen. In his community, presumed social negiah
: restrictions are generally not observed...
A real maaseh shahayah, which would liely garner the same thoughts.
One day, around 10am, the woman sitting in the cubicle next to mine
gets a call on her cell, and after a few moments had her screaming
and crying. It was the Salvation Army, where her son volunteered and
lived. He didn't wake up that morning.
Another co worker of ours, a yehivish guy who grew up in Israel but lives
in Lakewood, got us a conference room, dialed some phone calls for her --
the coronor's office and the like. He was clearly cfrom communities in
which persumed social negi'ah restrictions are fully observed.
But when our co worker broke down in a fresh round of crying, he put
his arm around her.
I think to do anything else is to be a tzadiq shoteh. But I never asked
a she'eilah; that was just my gut reaction at the time.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
Reuvain quickly gets up and walks to her and hugs her to comfort her
and keep her upright. As he does so, he realizes she did not make any
request or action alluding to any need prior to his action, but she
did seem to very much appreciate it. She also belonged to the portion
of the community which did not presume a social negiah restriction. Was
Reuvain's action preferred, acceptable, or prohibited? If not preferred,
what should he have done?
I'd vote for preferred. Sevara would be that negia is assur derech chiba,
and the question through the poskim is what consitutes derech chiba. The
fairly consistent answer is to include any contact in any social situation
in addition to more obvious situations of derech chiba. The situations
fairly consistently not included are professional scenarios where your
mind is presumed to be solely on the job eg doctors, nurses, physical
therapists etc. Then we have indviduals who can rely on themselves to
have their mind lshem shamayim like the amora who lifted kallas on his
shoulders. The gemara says there that even in his generation he was
unique in being able to rely on himself to have his mind only lshem
shamayim for this situation.
But the consistent point is the when you can be objectively certain
enough that a given situation will not cause hirhurei aveira then there
is no issur of negia.
I'd have thought the example above would fit that. And preferred rather
than acceptable because if I'm right in sevara then the weight of the
need to comfort the bereaved in such a fashion would make physical
contact the preferred option.
Ben
: I see a flaw in the logic. In the example of "doctors, nurses,
: physical therapists etc.", the physical contact is incidental in a
: "melacha she'ein tzricha l'gufa" sort of way: The same way that one
: will argue "I did not mean to dig a hole, I just needed some dirt", so
: too the doctor will say, "I did not mean to touch her, I just checked
: her pulse", or the therapist will say, "I did not mean to hold her,
: she just needed help walking." Those are examples of incidental negia.
"Melakhah she'inah tzerichah legudah" is specific to the 39 melakhos,
so "sort of" indeed. Besides, might be more of a pesiq reishei.
In any case, when a professional violates negi'ah, the heter is
ba'avidteih tarid (BM 91b). And it's specifically to professionals
and the air of professionalism. (As well as the lowered odds of a
problem for someone who has a license at risk.)
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
R' AM wrote:
'Please note the Aruch Hashulchan YD 383:2, who writes "yesh le'esor"
regarding chibuk v'nishuk when either spouse is in aveilus. And he
cites Koheles 3:5 - "There is a time for hugging, and a time to keep
distant from hugging." I would be surprised to find that the halacha
forbids this comfort from a spouse, and prefers that one get this
"needed" comfort from someone else.'
Halachos of contact between husband and wife are more strict than with strangers, vis all the harchakos during nidda which are unique to a spouse, due to the familiarity of pas b'salo. So I wouldn't be as surprised.
Although just to return my theme for a moment, If I'm right then the act is one of outright mitzva, probably including kiddush hashem. If I'm wrong, then the act is one of aveira lishma. Now I realise that we don't hold with aveira lishma these days, but when the overall cheshbon is as stated, I think I'd be willing to chance it. Especially when you add the possibility, as R'MB mentioned, that if you don't do it you're a chasid shoteh.
Because then the cheshbon becomes tzadik or chasid shoteh for not doing it vs big mitzva or aveira lishma for doing it. Given that in any given circumstance we wouldn't be able to be clear about which of these would apply, I think the worst of those four options is probably the chasid shoteh.
If this was on Areivim I'd sign off with 
Ben
Does it make a difference that the woman in the hypothetical scenario is -
unfortunately - no longer an eishet ish, and presumably at her stage of
life also not a niddah?