| Role Of Women In Judaism |
Article Index for Role Of |
Website Links For Role |
Information AboutRole Of Women In Judaism |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT ROLE OF WOMEN IN JUDAISM | |
| judaism and women | |
| womens rights in religious movements | |
|
BIBLICAL TIMES See also Old Testament Views On Women . The role of women in the Bible is contradictory: few women are mentioned by name and role, suggesting that they were rarely in the forefront of public life. There are, however, numerous exceptions to this rule. These exceptions include the Matriarchs, Miriam the prophetess; Deborah the Judge, Huldah the prophetess, Abigail who married David , Esther , who in the Biblical account did not meet with opposition for the relatively public presence they had. Women could perform a number of religious roles, including being Prophetesses and Nazirites ; Deborah was a judge. Women also had a role in ritual life. Women were required to make a pilgrimage to the Temple In Jerusalem once a year and offer the Passover Sacrifice , as well as on special occasions in their lives such as offering a ''todah'' (thanksgiving) offering after childbirth. Hence, they could participate in many of the major public religious roles that (non-levitical) men could, albeit less often and on a somewhat smaller and generally more discreet scale. Views within classical rabbinic literature The classical Jewish literature contains quotes that may be seen as both laudatory and derogatory of women. The Talmud states that the women of their time and culture spoke more than they should "Ten measures of speech descended to the world; women took nine" (Kiddushin 49b) and that women are "light-minded" (Shabbat 33b). "The sages say that four traits apply to women: They are greedy, eavesdroppers, lazy and jealous... Rabbi Yehoshua bar Nahmani adds: they are querulous and garrulous. Rabbi Levy adds: they are thieves and gadabouts" (Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 45:5). On the other hand it is said that a man without a wife lives without joy, blessing, and good, and that a man should love his wife as himself and respect her more than himself (Yevamot 62b). When Rav Joseph heard his mother's footsteps he would say: "let me arise before the approach of the Shekhinah (divine presence) (Kiddushin 31b). Israel was redeemed from Egypt by virtue of its righteous women (Sotah 11b). A man must be careful never to speak slightingly to his wife because women are prone to tears and sensitive to wrong (Bava Metzia 59a). Women have greater faith than men (Sifri Numeri 133) and greater powers of discernment (Niddah 45b) and they are especially tenderhearted (Megillah 14b). While few women are mentioned by name in the rabbinic literature, those who are mentioned specifically are portrayed as having a strong influence on their husbands, and occasionally having a public persona. Examples are Bruria, the wife of the Mishna ic Rabbi Meir, and Yalta, the wife of Rabbi Nachman ( Talmud ). Rabbi Eliezer's wife (of Mishnaic times) counselled her husband in assuming leadership over the Sanhedrin . PRESENT DAY Orthodox Judaism Orthodox Judaism generally considers men and women to have complementary, yet fundamentally different roles in religious life, resulting in different religious obligations. This idea stems from the belief that men and women are inherently different in nature, with different respective strengths and weaknesses. In the area of education, women were traditionally exempted – and often discouraged – from any study beyond a understanding of the practical aspects of Torah , and the rules necessary in running a Jewish household – both of which they have an obligation to learn. Until the early 20th century, women were often discouraged from learning Talmud and other advanced Jewish texts. Women are exempt from having to follow most of the set daily Prayer services, and most other positive time bound '' Mitzvot '' (commandments), such as wearing '' Tefillin ''. (There are a number of notable exceptions). As such, the '' Halakha '' (traditional law codes) specify that women are not eligible to be counted in a '' Minyan '' for purposes of time-specific prayer, as a ''minyan'' is a quorum of those who are obligated. However, according to many Orthodox authorities {Link without Title} , women can count in a ''minyan'' for purposes of certain public ''mitzvot'' for which they are obligated and which according to many authorities require a ''minyan''. These mitzvot include publicizing ''Megillat Esther'' on Purim, public remembrance of Amalek , the Birkhat Hagomel blessing after e.g. childbirth, and public martyrdom. Traditionally, most Orthodox women have shied away from many mitzvot from which they are exempted. For this reason, many Orthodox rabbis view contemporary deviance and efforts at change as motivated by sociological reasons and not by true religious motivation. They also view these suggested changes as a break with the accepted norms of observance, and strongly discourage women from engaging in many activities that are ''technically'' permitted as a result. For example, most Orthodox rabbis discourage women from wearing a Tallit or Tefillin , which are traditionally worn only by men. This became a controversial issue in the advent of Feminism , when Jewish women began to demand religious empowerment similar to that of men. More liberal elements in Orthodoxy acceded to the requests of these women, especially in areas of Torah Study , while more conservative elements remained solidly against this innovation in religious practice, often fearing that the motivation of these women was one solely of feminism and not of pure religious desire. The position of a rabbi within the spectrum of Orthodoxy would often be defined by his stance on the role of women in religious life. Many Orthodox rabbis, based on their reading of rabbinic literature, hold that men are lacking a spiritual element that women possess, which accounts for why men have more obligations. This is expressed by Rabbi with which the true Jewish women are filled. She has the tendency by itself to submit herself to all the laws of purity and godliness, and demands such submission from all that come into contact with her." Some voices within Judaism hold that such views are indefensible apologetics. Orthodox Rabbi Saul Berman writes "It is one thing to recognise the problems and attempt to understand the...factors which produced them....It is a completely different matter, both dishonest and disfunctional, to attempt through homiletics and scholasticism to transform problems into solutions and reinterpret discrimination to be beneficial. To suggest that women don't really ''need'' positive symbolic ''mitzvot'' because their souls are already more atuned to the Divine, would be an unbearable insult to men; unless it were understood, as it indeed is, that the suggestion is not to be taken seriously, but is intended solely to placate women." Views such as those of Rabbi Berman were considered to be on the fringe of Orthodox theology when he first stated this position in the early 1970s, but the in subsequent generation they have been accepted by significantly larger numbers of people within Orthodoxy. An entire genre of Orthodox feminist literature now exists, and has caused changes within some Orthodox synagogues and communities. (''The Status of Women in Halakhic Judaism,'' Berman, Tradition, 14:2, 1973.) Most Orthodox synagogues do not allow a woman to become the president of a congregation, or to give the customary ''d'var Torah'' (brief discourse on the weekly Torah portion) during services. Supporters of these positions believe that they are essential to preserving modesty, are based in halakha, and that opponents are motivated by political as distinct from religious motives. Opponents of these positions reject the idea that these positions are based on modesty and halakha. Rather, they claim that such positions represent a view of women whose source lies in sociology, and not in Torah. Orthodoxy is divided on whether or not it is appropriate for women to be involved in public roles. Many Orthodox rabbis believe that it inappropriate for women to be involved in any form of politics or leadership. For instance, former Chief Rabbi of Israel Mordechai Eliyahu stated that "A woman's place is not in politics." Much of Haredi Judaism views the idea of women in such public roles as unacceptable, or forbidden by Jewish law. On the other hand, many within Modern Orthodoxy believe that such roles are acceptable. Rules of modesty See Also: Tzeniut Orthodox Jewish women generally do not touch, socialize with, or sit next to men other than their husbands or relatives, for reasons of modesty. They also observe additional restrictions against, for example, Flirting . Rules of Family Purity See Also: Niddah Orthodox Jewish women refrain from contact with their husbands while they are Menstruating , for a short period after menstruating, and after the birth of a child. This also includes indirect contact; for instance a plate would not be passed on directly, but first put down on a table so that both do not hold on to the object at the same time. Changes in the Orthodox position One of the first major breaks with the traditional role of women came from within the Orthodox movement, by the ''Chofetz Chaim'' Rabbi advisors on sensitive personal matters such as Family Purity , and ''toanot'', legal advocates for women (e.g. in divorce proceedings) before religious courts. Nishmat trains ''yoatzot'', while Midreshet Lindenbaum trains ''toanot''. Recently, a few left-leaning . Orthodox Approaches to Change Leaders of the Haredi community have been steadfast in their opposition to a change in the role of women, arguing that the religious and social constraints on women, as dictated by traditional Jewish texts, are timeless and are not affected by contemporary societal change. Many also argue that giving traditionally male roles to women will only detract from both women's and men's ability to lead truly fulfilling lives. Haredim have also sometimes perceived arguments for liberalization as in reality stemming from antagonism to Jewish law and beliefs generally, arguing that preserving faith requires resisting secular and "un-Jewish" ideas. Modern Orthodox Judaism, particularly in its more liberal variants, has tended to look at proposed changes in the role of women on a specific, case-by-case basis, focusing on arguments regarding the religious and legal role of specific prayers, rituals, and activities individually. Such arguments have tended to focus on cases where the Talmud and other traditional sources express multiple or more liberal viewpoints, particularly where the role of women in the past was arguably broader than in more recent times. Feminist advocates within Orthodoxy have tended to stay within the traditional legal process of argumentation, seeking a gradualist approach, and avoiding wholesale arguments against the religious tradition as such. Arguments for change in prayer roles within what is claimed to be classical ''halakhic'' reasoning have generally taken one of three forms: (1) Because women were required to perform certain Korbanot (sacrifices) in the Temple In Jerusalem , women today are required to perform, and hence can lead (and can count in the minyan for if required), the specific prayers substituting for these specific sacrifices. (2) Because certain parts of the service were added after the Talmud defined mandatory services, such prayers are equally voluntary on everyone and hence can be led by women (and no minyan is required). (3) In cases where the Talmud indicates that women are in principle qualified to lead certain services or perform certain riturals, but authorities hold that women do not do so because of the "dignity of the congregation", lack of education, or similar arguments, modern congregations are permitted to waive such dignity if they wish, and lack of education or similar conditions no longer apply. Women's prayer groups Since women were not allowed to lead services or read from the Torah in mainstream Orthodox Jewish synagogues, a small number of Orthodox women began holding women's ''tefila'' (prayer) groups beginning in the 1970s. While no Orthodox legal authorities agree that women can form a '' Minyan '' (prayer quorum) for the purpose of Regular Services , women in these groups read the prayers, and study Torah. A number of leaders from all segments of Orthodox Judaism have commented on this issue, but it has had little impact on Haredi and Sephardi Judaism . However, the emergence of this phenomenon has enmeshed Modern Orthodox Judaism in a debate which still continues today. There are two schools of thought on this issue:
Conservative Judaism The past 30 years have seen a revolution in how Conservative Judaism views women. Although its original position differed little from the Orthodox position, it has in recent years minimized legal and ritual differences between men and women. The Committee On Jewish Law And Standards (CJLS) of the Rabbinical Assembly has approved a number of decisions and responsa on this topic. These provide for women's active participation in areas such as:
A rabbi may or may not decide to adopt particular rulings for the congregation; thus, some Conservative congregations will be more or less egalitarian than others. However, there are other areas where legal differences remain between men and women, including:
A number of traditional specific women's mitzvot, such as observing ''niddah'' (family purity) and ''mikvah'' (ritual immersion, e.g. after menstruation), are still official positions of the Conservative movement and are included in Conservative compilations of Jewish law such as Issac Klein 's ''A Guide to Jewish Religious Practice'', but have so fallen out of practice that they would likely not be recognized or regarded as current obligations required of Conservative women by most Conservative laypeople. Changes in the Conservative Position Prior to 1973, Conservative Judaism had more limited roles for women and was more similar to current Modern Orthodoxy, with changes on issues including mixed seating, synagogue corporate leadership, and permitting women to be called to the Torah. In 1973, the Committee On Jewish Law And Standards (CJLS) of the Rabbinical Assembly voted, without issuing an opinion, that women could count in a ''minyan'', although it continued to hold that women could not serve as rabbis or cantors. In 1983, the Jewish Theological Seminary faculty voted, also without acompanying opinion, to ordain women as rabbis and as cantors. In 2002, the CJLS adapted a Responsum by Rabbi David Fine, ''Women and the Minyan'' , which provides an official religious-law foundation for these actions and explains the current Conservative approach to the role of women. Individual Conservative rabbis and synagogues are not required to adopt any of these changes, and a small number have adopted none of them. Conservative Approaches to Change Prior to 1973, Conservative approaches to change were generally on an individual, case-by-case basis. Between 1973 and 2002, the Conservative movement adapted changes through its official organizations, but without issuing explanatory opinions. Since 2002, the Conservative movement has coalesced around a single across-the board approach to the role of women in Jewish lawThis section summarizes the CLJS's 2002 Fine "Women and the Minyan" {Link without Title} (pdf) Responsum's review and critique of prior CJLS efforts to adopt an authoritative responsum.. In 1973, 1983, and 1993, individual rabbis and professors issued six major opinions which influenced change in the Conservative approach, the first and second Sigal, Blumenthal, Rabinowitz, and Roth responsa, and the Hauptman article. These opinions sought to provide for a wholesale shift in women's public roles through a single, comprehensive legal justification. Most such opinions based their positions on an argument that Jewish women always were, or have become, legally obligated to perform the same ''mitzvot'' as men and to do so in the same manner. The first Sigal and the Blumenthal responsa were considered by the CJLS as part of its decision on prayer roles in 1973. They argued that women have always had the same obligations as men. The first Sigal responsum used the Talmud's general prayer obligation and examples of cases in which women were traditionally obligated to say specific prayers and inferred from them a public pray obligation identical to men's. The Blumenthal responsum extrapolated from a minority authority that a ''minyan'' could be formed with nine men and one women in an emergency. The Committee On Jewish Law And Standards (CJLS) declined to adopt either responsum. Rabbi Siegel reported to the Rabbinical Assembly membership that many on the CJLS, while agreeing with the result, found the arguments unconvincing. The Rabinowitz, Roth , and second Sigal responsa were considered by the Jewish Theological Seminary faculty as part of its decision to ordain women as rabbis in 1983. The Rabbinowitz responsum sidestepped the issue of obligation, arguing that there is no longer a religious need for a community representative in prayer and hence there is no need to decide whether a woman can ''halakhically'' serve as one. The CJLS felt that an argument potentially undermining the value of community and clergy was unconvincing. ("We should not be afraid to recognize that the function of clergy is to help our people connect with the holy.") The Roth and second Sigal responsa accepted that time-bound ''mitzvot'' were traditionally optional for women, but argued that women in modern times could change their traditional roles. The Roth responsum (pdf) argued that women could individually voluntarily assume the same obligations as men, and that women who do so (e.g. pray three times a day regularly) could count in a ''minyan'' and serve as agents. The Jewish Theological Seminary accordingly required female rabbinical students wishing to train as rabbis to personally obligate themselves, but synogogue rabbis, unwilling to inquire into individual religiosity, found it impractical. The second Sigal responsum [http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/teshuvot/docs/19861990/sigal_women.pdf (pdf) called for a ''takkanah'', or Rabbinical edict, "that would serve as a ''halakhic'' ERA", overruling all nonegalitarian provisions in law or, in the alternative, a new approach to ''halakhic'' interpretation independent of legal precedents. The CJLS, unwilling to use either an intrusive approach or a repudiation of the traditional legal process as bases for action, did not adopt either and let the JTS faculty vote stand unexplained. In 1993, Professor Judith Hauptman of JTS issued an influential paper {Link without Title} arguing that women had historically always been obligated in prayer, using more detailed arguments than the Blumenthal and first Sigal responsa. The paper suggested that women who followed traditional practices were failing to meet their obligations. Rabbi Roth argued that Conservative Judaism should think twice before adopting a viewpoint labeling its most traditional and often most committed members as sinners. The issue was again dropped. In 2002, the CJLS returned to the issue of justifying its actions regarding women's status, and adopted a single authoritative approach, the Fine responsum {Link without Title} (pdf), as the definitive Conservative Halakha on role-of-women issues. This responsum holds that although Jewish women do not traditionally have the same obligations as men, Conservative women have, as a collective whole, voluntarily undertaken them. Because of this collective undertaking, the Fine responsum holds that Conservative women are eligible to serve as agents and decision-makers for others. The Responsum also held that traditionally-minded communities and individual women could opt out without being regarded by the Conservative movement as sinning. By adopting this Responsum, the CJLS found itself in a position to provide a considered Jewish-law justification for its egalitarian practices, without having to rely on potentially unconvincing arguments, undermine the religious importance of community and clergy, ask individual women intrusive questions, repudiate the ''halakhic'' tradition, or label women following traditional practices as sinners. Reform Judaism The past 30 years have seen a revolution in how Reform Judaism views women as well. Reform Judaism now believes in the equality of men and women. The Reform movement rejects the idea that Jews are bound by Halakha (Jewish law and tradition), and holds that all of its members and clergy have total personal autonomy in deciding how to practice their faith. As such, Reform Judaism ignores traditional prohibitions on women's role in Jewish life, and holds that women, if they decide to do so, may perform any ritual done by a man, such as:
American Reform Judaism has rejected the traditional Jewish view of matrilineal descent. Instead, they hold that if any one parent is Jewish, then the child is automatically Jewish as long as the child is raised as a Jew. The movement has never formally defined what it means to raise a child as a Jew; as such, Reform rabbis note that the ''de facto'' standard is that anyone with a single Jewish parent or grandparent is considered Jewish within the Reform community, even if they have not been raised as a Jew. Reform Approaches to Change Reform Judaism generally holds that the various differences between men and women's roles in traditional Jewish law are not relevant to modern conditions and not applicable today. Accordingly, there has been no need to develop legal arguments analogous to those made within the Orthodox and Conservative movements. FOOTNOTES SEE ALSO
EXTERNAL LINKS
REFERENCES
Orthodox Judaism and women
|
|
|