Being judgemental | Imamother

causemommysaid

Fri, Apr 15 2016, 2:12 pm

Seas wrote:

On the contrary, I'm one of the least judgemental people you'll come across. I know people are flawed and there are many reasons why they might act they way they do. I don't condemn anyone (well hardly anyone, the exception being a frum person who went otd and is now a mechallel Shabbos).

At our Shabbos table we have all kinds of people, with varying levels religiosity (but only shoimrei Shabbos) and all are equally treated with respect and dignity. I never deign to judge others for their misdeeds, and certainly never think that had I been in their position I'd have been better.

However, and this is the crux of the matter, I would never ever justify or condone an action or even view that is not 100% according to the Torah. The fact that the person who did the action has difficulties on her life doesn't make the actual action right.

I use the example of 1+1 because if your child comes home and is upset about her grade and she complains that she misunderstood the question, you can sympathise with her and really feel for her. However, that still doesn't make a wrong answer right. What's right is right and what's wrong is wrong.

The problem is that people often get 'married' to their actions or views, so that any criticism or objection is taken personally. In truth the actions can be judged independently of the person who did them.

we should have Webster's Dictionary print this as the definition of Judgmental.

youngishbear

Fri, Apr 15 2016, 2:26 pm

causemommysaid wrote:

we should have Webster's Dictionary print this as the definition of Judgmental.

Perhaps by delusion?

To be kinder (hats off to mtzadhasheini) perhaps under rationalization.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 7:36 pm

imasinger wrote:

The question is, what does one hope to gain by stating that a person has done an aveira, according to one's own interpretation?

If the other person has been taught differently, a blatant statement "you are wrong" will be perceived at best as rude and annoying, and will lead those who have been taught different interpretations of halacha to say, "no, YOU are wrong." In which case, the critic's statement has done nothing in their minds except to strengthen their resolve to keep doing the thing that the critic finds objectionable.

If the other person has some notion in common with the critic that their action was not right, they are going to feel guilty and act defensive when it is publicly pointed out by someone who has not formed a real connection.

Generally I only comment when I see a very wrong idea that has been stated and I think there's a risk that others might be influenced by it and accept it unthinkingly. Additionally, sometimes there's a question of chillul Hashem - lit. Hashem's name being desecrated without anyone standing up for Him. I want to be able to say with a clear conscience that when I saw someone writing something clearly kneged hatorah, I stood up and voiced my opposition.

An example of this is in a recent thread where someone voiced the sentiment that it matters not that someone is openly stamping on the torah by cohabiting with a [non jew] so long as they're happy. To which I wrote that this sentiment, while masquerading as kindness and rachmanus, is really אכזריות and evil, as happiness in this fleeting world is worthless when it comes at the cost of eternal reward.

Several posters didn't understand what I wrote, yet instead of asking me to clarify they went on the attack. Which brings me to...

Quote:

At this point, I feel I must apologize to you, Seas, by not following what I said above, and lashing out at you on a recent thread. You had said some very hurtful things (not having two brain cells to rub together, etc), and I got angry. I should have waited until I was calm to respond.

It doesn't bother me at all that you attacked me as I'm bh perfectly capable of shrugging off hurtful words written by some stranger on the internet. What did bother me, however, is that you attacked me without bothering to read what I'd written, as by the time you commented I'd already clearly explained that I wasn't talking about the actual invitation extended to the cousin, but about the above sentiment which the op expressed.

You, however, stated your wonder at how I could pasken better than a rav who'd okayed the invitation. Which just proved that you'd obviously not bothered to properly read before you attacked.

Quote:

But hopefully you can see my point. Did my strongly worded post help change your thinking? Did my words on that thread do anything other than annoy you in return? It's an example of the flaw in the logic that any perceived aveira should be called out publicly.

So again, it's not the wording but the content. If what you write is applicable and makes sense I'll accept it regardless of its harshness, as I'm bh intellectually honest enough to do that.

Quote:

Last, and most important, it is vital to examine one's own motives in speaking out in judgment.

Often, we can fall into a kind of gaiva of self righteousness, where the underlying reason for pointing to another's flaws (perceived or real) is to inflate one's own ego.

It is always a good idea, before any post other than one asking a question, to ask, "have I written something that will benefit others, and/or help me to grow?"

With this you have a point, as it does feel good to be self-righteous. Am I always (ever) free from that kind of gaiva?
Probably not.
But is that reason enough to refrain from commenting?
Debatable.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 7:36 pm

OOTforlife wrote:

Why kid ourselves? This site is judgy all the time. People just pick and choose what and who they are judgy about based on their culture, hashkafah, and their own past experiences and biases. And they pick and choose what and who to be DLKZ about. Same old same old.

Exactly. For me chillul Shabbos is so abhorrent that it's my red line, and I won't accept or mix with an OTD who's mechallel Shabbos (it's different when someone is a tinok shenishba).

Ironically, al pi halacha (which if you think about it is the very basis of being DLKZ), there's a mitzvah to be DLKZ a 'get-withholder' but not a mechallel Shabbos.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 7:37 pm

amother wrote:

What is ok ( in my opinion) is to judge actions on a theoretical level. Saying what X did was wrong but he is still a good person is not being dan lekaf zechus.

Saying X action is wrong is fine.

Being dan lekaf zechus is saying X is a good person and even though he did X action which SEEMS wrong he must have a good reason for doing what he is doing ( driving on shabbos because of pikuach nefesh) or doesn't know that there is something wrong with his action.

Whether this is in fact the case is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS its Hashems business.

This is mostly what I wrote in the OP only realistically it's not always possible to be DLKZ according to your definitions. What you can do (and this is what I wrote) is to simply refrain from judging said transgressor.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 7:39 pm

tichellady wrote:

I actually understand what the op is saying and perhaps she is not judgmental but she seems to be very sure that she always knows what's right and what's wrong. That's what scares me. There seems to be very little open mindedness. There is room for different opinions within halakha but she seems to see things in a more black and white way.

As we saw in a different post earlier today, she made it clear that it is wrong not to eat meat on yomtov ( not that anyone was asking her opinion). There are halakhic opinions that hold that you should eat food you like on yomtov, and if you don't like meat and wine, you should skip them. There are also rabbis who think that being vegetarian is a holy practice. I had two rabbis in seminary who were vegetarians for religious reasons ( one was a follower of Rav kook). There's no need to put down's people's religious practices because they are different from yours. You can both be right.

I now this is an unpopular view here but not all opinions are equally valid. If you wouldn't give a first year medical student's opinion equal weight as that of an experienced physician, why would you accept as equally valid the majority opinions of our nations greats who are backed by millennia of mesorah, with the opinions of some individual rabbis whose views were obviously shaped by modern-day philosophy and isms?

Maya

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 7:55 pm

Seas wrote:

I don't see the more right wing opinions as backed by millennia of mesorah. In fact, most of their ideology is just as much shaped by modern day philosophy as others. Or did they have smartphones and skirt inch rulers millennia ago too?

tichellady

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:11 pm

Seas wrote:

I agree with you that not all views are equally valid but you don't get to decide which are and which are not.

greenfire

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:13 pm

Seas wrote:

I pray you never have an off the derech relative - they wouldn't survive your criticism and would probably stray further away from any spiritual connectives ... now that would be a real chillul Hashem

somehow I imagine you haven't been on the other side of a divorce sans a gett either ... ya never know how you'd feel then

amother

Ginger

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:15 pm

Here we go again...

amother

Ivory

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:17 pm

greenfire wrote:

Anyone else get the feeling s/he's a get withholder?

MitzadSheini

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:19 pm

Seas there are two forces that are always competing in this world- emet and shalom. Your seem to naturally lean towards emet. But shalom is an equally important force and sometimes the correct response to something may be to lean more towards shalom than you naturally tend to do.

amother

Ginger

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:23 pm

I think it would do some people well to learn how Judaism evolved, the different approaches, paths and opinions of earlier gedolim, and how there are so many differences in what some consider fundamental unarguable facts of Judaism.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:24 pm

tichellady wrote:

I agree with you that not all views are equally valid but you don't get to decide which are and which are not.

Quite right, which is why we can debate individual cases by testing for majority opinion and mesorah.

For example in the case of vegetarianism, it is clear from all the classic sources that Judaism doesn't have a problem with slaughtering and eating animals. On the contrary, blood sacrifices were a major part of the avodah in the Bhm"k, and they will be reinstated במהרה בימינו when Mashiach comes. Additionally, meat was always consumed by Jews לכבוד שבת ויום טוב.

OTOH, the case for vegetarianism, animal rights and mercy on the animals etc. is a modern-day philosophy, which implies that we can somehow show greater kindness and rachmanus than Hashem and all the sages of all the generations.

Accordingly, idealogical vegetarianism is a heretical view and is antithetical to Judaism.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:27 pm

mtzadhasheini wrote:

I like your definition. On this site, however, the popular view is to gravitate towards shalom with little to no regard to emes, so I'm providing somewhat of a balnce.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:28 pm

greenfire wrote:

You shouldn't make assumptions. Without going into any detail as I value my privacy, I can say you're wrong on both accounts.

MitzadSheini

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:30 pm

My I humbly say that your job, like everyone else's job, is not to provide balance on this site. It's to be balanced WITHIN YOURSELF.

(and I'm not sure I agree with your premise anyway....)

amother

Ginger

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:32 pm

Seas wrote:

Uh, mercy on the animals IS a Torah value - have you learned about Tzaar baal hachaim?

And many great people were vegetarian.

I know of many individual chassidim who don't eat meat for kabbalistic reasons. I can't tell you the exact reason, but I think it has something to do with the level of Adam before the cheit, where guess what - he was vegetarian!!

Then there's kashrus reasons.

And some people just feel squeamish eating meat.

This leads to a question: Why do you assume that someone who is vegetarian is doing it because of animal rights? (Heretical or not is a different discussion.)

And why did you think that someone who says that at this point, at least her relative is happy, means that she is condoning 'cohabiting' with a non-Jew?

Someone with black lenses on will view everything as black. Someone with clear lenses will recognize that there are shades of gray, and very little things in life are as black or white as they seem. And that the sun is brighter than they thought when they were still wearing black lenses.

Seas

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:35 pm

I'll happily answer anyone who posts a question or rebuttal under her own sn. If you haven't the guts to do that don't expect a reply.

amother

Ginger

Mon, Apr 18 2016, 8:44 pm

I respect that, though I won't out myself as I've discussed this thread IRL.