some people assert that hashem never gives a person a test that he/she cannot pass. Never, ever, which means if they sin, its because they're a bad person.

usualy this is coupled with a very black and white point of view of sin, such that they believe that so much as shaking hands with a person is a sin, and therefore if the other person feelings humiliated by having their hand refused, its because they're a contaminated unnatural freak and not because they did anyone wrong.

this principle is usualy used in judging others, as in "that girls a ######" why? casue she slept with one boy. why did she sleep with one boy? cause he was nice to her and liked her and she craved him and so she slept with him. Why was she talking to him? cause she was looking for comfort because her father beats her daily and has broken her arm thirteen times in the past, and her "friends" at school laugh at her for being so akward and appologetic, and her mother belittles her because she never does anything right, dah dah dah dah dah, "so what" they say. hashem never gives someone a test they cannot pass. if she slept with a boy, no amount of excuses can ever justfy it, or any other sin. its just because she's an "immoral ######".

this is almost the only context I ever hear this phrases used in. but is it justified? (and while I have not heard this example exactly, I have heard of similar examples).

my thoughts are that this principle is A only l'chatchila, and B a gross and untennable exageration meant specificaly to counter the tendancy of people to justify their actions. Why? because the entire statement is rediculous, and if you look in chumash and nach you would know that. Hashem regularly tests people with test they cannot pass, but if you were always looking at a test with the eye of whether or not you could pass it you might be doomed to fail any test of moderate difficulty, becacuse you might say "I cannot pass" and therefore resign yourself to failure.

what do you think?

and just to add, the rebbe also mentioned that the gemorah talked about the usual case. once something left beyond the usual case, things were up in the air and who knows how they'd fall, but people don't seem to take that seriously, at least as far as this statment is concerned, because abuse falls well beyond the usual case which means all bets are off.

but what do you think?

Woah. My head just exploded.

Wow, good topic, hope it can stay on track....

Considering that one can do teshuvah, how do others know whether this was done or not? In that case, the ones that refuse to "shake the hand of a sinner" are, in reality, committing an aviera of their own by publicly embarrassing another.

I actually do believe that G-d only give us "tests" that we can battle through. To compare ourselves with our forefathers & foremothers (and prophets) is to set ourselves up for failure because there are none today that were as "high" spiritually.

As for people judging others, although we are to treat others with respect, that it is not our place to judge others, there will always be those who do. Whether they do it because something someone does actually shocks them, or they just have the need to make others feel bad about themselves so they can feel better....doesn't really matter in the long run because the effect is the same.

That would be the same for those who lump a group of people together & say they all believe or think in a certain manner, but their barbs are only because they feel hurt/upset/covered by anger at whatever they think wrong that only a few people of that group may have done.

Was that clear??

precisely. these nice saying are for people to motivate themselves, not for them to judge others.

What do you mean by "nice sayings"?

Wrong. Which means, that if they sin, they didn't realize that they had the strength to pass.

Huh?


It's not justified, it's understandable. No sin is justified. But by understanding the cause, we can help the future. She had control, but she didn't realize that. Thus, she chose not to exercise that control. That is a result of a lack of chinuch. We need to realize that and help her feel cherished, so that she doesn't feel a need to turn to other places.


Is what justified?


People justify because they feel that admitting their mistakes is not allowed. Once you allow yourself to admit that you erred, you can allow yourself to start finding the reason why you erred, and helping yourself grow.
Justification helps nothing. Acknowledgement that we are human and make mistakes takes maturity. The realization that it is your fault, and in your control, is tough to digest. But it is also empowering. When you understand this principle, you can control the events of your life, instead of them controlling you.

Excellent statement!

Can it be called sinning if they can't pass the test? Further, can it even be called a 'test' if they cannot pass it?

As a tautology (since I'm assuming we are defining test as 'test one's loyalty, etc') it must be something that one CAN pass.

however, and this is where I think most people make their mistake, not everything in life is a 'test.' Horrible stuff happens, horrible situations are present. Even coupled with a belief in Divine Goodness, neither of the two imply the presence of a 'test.'

Calling something a 'test' is a nice turn of phrase that makes us feel better without actually addressing the reality that some aspects of life stink.

Conversely blaming someone for having failed what may or mat not be a 'test' is nothing more than an excuse for us to be morally high-minded. Calling it a test, rather than a fact (circumstance) of life, is just a convenient way of pretending we would have done better.

I agree, the word "test" may be the wrong one, but I still believe that we are never given more than we can handle. I don't think of it as "just a convenient way of pretending we would have done better.", but as something I could have done better & strive for that the next time I'm handed a bowl of ... let's call it trash.

define 'handle' If you mean not die because of it, perhaps. But there are things given to us, however so, that I don't believe we are meant to 'measure' up to, or 'grow' because. There are facts of life.

and, i'm referring to designating what other people go through as tests.

Regardless of whether you like or aprove of my terms or what I've said does not change the validity.

Just because I don't think what you think doesn't make me wrong.

And the point of discussion is what, then?
I'm not disapproving of your terms; i am asking about a potential meaning that I disagree with. Feel free not to care.

the rebbe said that the talmud (and by extention any aggadic liturature) only refers to the usual case.

a normal, healthy person will not generaly find any case where sinning wasn't his fault.

once you step out of the normal, all these statements about noone sins unless a spirit of folly enters him, or hashem doesn't give you any situation you can't handle, etc, become rediculous and conter productive, because they're talking about normal occurances.

thats rather why I chose the example above. Noone would say that the situation mentioned isn't a grotesque example of severe and unforgivable abuse.

and kids who've been treated like that need love. alot of love, and they aren't getting it from their parents so where do you want them to get it from? they need hugs, desperately, cause thats how people learn to love themselves. Halacha may or may not allow for it, but this is a case of something way out of the ordinary, in a case that the halacha can't really take into account on a system wide basis. she needs love, and she isn't getting it from the "kosher" sources.