I’m told the inyan Gilui Arayos is so unaidel, we should not even say the words, we should say G.A. if we have to say it.

I’m wondering if the iyan of Pritzus is the same … perhaps I should refer to such things as PR?

Please discuss.

Yay, let's be frummer than the Torah.

who told you?

Personally, I don't believe everything I'm told and of those many things I do believe, I take with a grain or more of salt.

If we start refering to gilui arayos as GA, does it mean the chassidishe snowbirds who used to go to Miami will now go to Atlanta?

Once G.A. becomes too unaidel, what should we say then?

"Sexy Time"...

Begin again at the beginning, huh?

Sounds to me like the h.commers do not subscribe to either theory.

Perhaps if some compelling logic were offered?

Aseh siyug litora. Its a bifeirush mishna.

9

How does this apply here? The very term giluy arayos is itself a euphemism.

We are supposed to make fences, correct?

9

this was discussed already see my comment here

Yeah, yeah, got it.

To corrall your horses?

Aren't we already?

To stop yourself from doing aveiros. I hope you arent doing averos with your horses.


9

How would saying G.A. or PR. stop you from doing aveiros?

Its a fence, its intention would be to act as a warning. How does any fence you are supposed to make stop you?

9

Maybe if you stop eating Cheerios it's a fence for Torah?

What I'm saying is, mah inyan shmitta etzel har sinai? What part of the Torah are you fencing in by saying G.A. instead of giluy arayos?

Its the fact that you are reminding yourself that its something that is bad, and shouldnt be done. Why do you think we call it giluy arayos not ####ing. In fact why do you think it was called ####ing?


9

Because it's not eidel or refined to say ######ing... It has nothing to do with fences it has to do with not being gaas and vulgar.
There is no point to make a euphemism for a euphemism It is like the people who write H-shem or Ginger Keil they are only making themselves look foolish...

Nibbul peh is another matter. We don't refrain from it as a fence, it's prohibited in it's own right.

But it was originally considered eidel and refined. It was a way to abreviate for Fornicating under carnal knowledge, or something like that.
Then after it became too used it was considered vulgar, so it became a bad word.

9

Exactly. And thats what happened with lots of words, they start off innocent words that are used as euphemisms, until they become accepted as bad words, and then you gotta look for replacements...


9

That's a phony etymology.

It is true that words of terms of neutral meaning sometimes become vulgarities, eg, to "do" someone. However, you haven't demonstrated that the term "giluy arayos" has become a vulgarity. If it does, en hachi nami, don't say it. But it's no mitzvah to turn it into a vulgarity so that it becomes something to avoid saying.



When giluy arayos is a bad word, replace it.

But if to me (or whoever started this thread) its a vulgarity, then I would have to make up a word (or fence) to replace it until it itself needs a replacement.
9Depends on the person erecting the fence.
9

First of all, rabbis are enjoined to make fences. Second, where do we find that one should make a person fence? If one nut considers a neutral word a vulgarity, a fence should be erected?


Prove that from either sources which advance such an interpretation of making fences, or examples of fence erection being a personal matter.

The person who started the thread didn't say that one person finds the word vulgar and wants to make a euphemism for themselves, so that wasn't what we're discussing.

"I’m told the inyan Gilui Arayos is so unaidel, we should not even say the words, we should say G.A. if we have to say it. "

Furthermore, "not eidel" is not identical with "vulgar." Chazal never said a word about "eidel" or erecting fences to promote eidelkeit.

This thread reminds me of a Joke...

An old guy who is a bit hard of hearing goes to the doctor's office walks up to the receptionist and says in a loud voice "There's something wrong with my ######".
The receptionist says to him, "Sir, it's not polite to speak that way in front of all these people, you're supposed to say that something else is wrong with you and we'll understand that you really mean something else." Why don't you try again.
The guy leaves comes back in and says to the receptionist "There's something wrong with my ear"
The Receptionist, smiling that the man took her advice, asks him "And what exactly is wrong with your "ear" sir?"
So the old guy answers in his usual loud voice "I can't pish out of it"...

The mishna says "aseh siyug latora" obviously it means we should create fences to help us keep the torah. The rabanim already made their fences. Thats where we have gizeiras like muktza and others. We are supposed to make our additional fences, wherever we need it. Each person depending on their own level.

9

Alright, I guess I get your line of reasoning …

Obviously? I would like you to justify that reading for me. As far as I can tell, the Mishnah is not talking to you and me.

It says:

ונביאים מסרוה לאנשי כנסת הגדולה. והן אמרו שלושה דברים: היו מתונים בדין, והעמידו תלמידים הרבה, ועשו סייג לתורה

Are you telling me that the לאנשי כנסת הגדולה who taught three things, the first two having to do with being a judge or teacher, but the third is addressed to you and me?



If you could explain how that's a convincing reading of the Mishnah, I'd accept it without any source. Please either explain it to me, or provide a source for such an interpretation (and how it justifies it, given the plain sense of the Mishnah).

It could be that that particular mishna may not be talking to you and me (although I dont know forsure) But in quite a few places throughout shas its something we are told to do.

9

Show me.

I just checked up that mishna. The pirushim say that it is intended for all people.

Also the gmara in yevamos says

9

Good work.

9

Note the use of the word atzmecha and not acheirim.

Noted. Thats where the issue of arvus comes into play.

9

Or something entirely unlike that. If I posted the precise URL it would probably violate site rules, so click on this and scroll down

Snopes could be right, but that doesnt change the point.

9

Since I don't know what the point is, I haven't disputed it.

Read.









9