Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Maharal - because women are on a lower spiritual level they don't observe all the mitzvos like men

Maharal (Makkos 23b): And He gave him 365 Negative Commandments corresponding to his body and his matter so that he should not do that which was not proper. Because doing something improper applies only to the physical body of man. Therefore the Negative Commandments are 365 corresponding to the days of the year. That is because man from the aspect of his body has the level of the sun which has 365 days. It states in Bava Basra (58a), “I looked at Adam’s two heels and they are like the ball of the sun.” The explanation of this is that it comes to say that Adam was created in the image of G-d (tzelem). He in particular had this divine level completely. And the gemora is saying that Adam’s heels which are the end of the level of image (tzelem) are joined with the body which is like the image of the ball of the sun.

There is no doubt that the image (tzelem) of the face has a level which is more distinguished. That is because the face has the name of image (tzelem) more and therefore it was impossible to look at it. However it was possible to stare at Adam’s heels which are the end of the level of image (tzelem). That is because the end of the level of image (tzelem) has a connection to matter which is the body and it doesn't have such a distinguished level. Nevertheless the heels which are the end of image (tzelem) are like the ball of the sun because the end of image (tzelem) of man is joined with the body. Therefore its level is like the sun whose light is material. Consequently the Negative Commandments which are from the aspect of material which man received and which is below the image (tzelem) – have the same number as the days of the year because it is also below the level of image (tzelem) of man. I already explained this in Avos regarding “beloved is man who was created in the image (tzelem)” . It is important ot understand these great things.

And now we can understand that woman who is material is obligated to observe the Negative Commandments but is not obligated in all the Positive Commandments. That is because the spiritual level of women does not reach to the highest level - which is the level of the Positive Commandments that a woman would function fully - because she is material. She only has the level of image (tzelem) which is relevant to the Negative Commandments. You should also understand why Positive Commandments displace Negative Commandments – because they are on a higher level then Negative Commandments.

164 comments:

  1. What is the point of this?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Are you asking why anyone would want to know the Maharal's views?

    ReplyDelete
  3. No. Why are you telling everyone the Maharal's views? What is your agenda?

    ReplyDelete
  4. No, I think the question is: why are you putting up post after post on the inferiority of women in Judaism? What purpose does it serve? Yes, yes, I know you've said "Well I'm just sharing what Gedolei Yisrael have written" but that's like someone going to a shiva, saying something negative about the deceased and saying "Well yeah, but I'm just saying what everyone should know". Seriously, in a time when we are struggling with a branch of "Orthodoxy" that is revolting against Torah because of its egalitarian desires on one side and a leadership on the other side that thinks that Saudi Arabia and the Taliban are ideal role models when it comes to the treatment of women, what benefit is there in giving people the impression that, in fact, Judaism does see women as lower forms of life with limited rights and privileges because they were created simply to meekly serve their men?

    ReplyDelete
  5. You are saying we need to sugar coat the facts?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why do you think it is a minority view?
    You need an agenda to discuss what is?

    ReplyDelete
  7. What does it say? Just as a person gets reward for the drisha he also gets reward for the prisha?
    So there are poskim and mephorshim who saw women as inferior forms of indentured servants. In this time and society pointing that out does not lead to any kiddush HaShem.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What possible good purpose can be served by continually putting forth all these opinions that denigrate women - that outweighs all the pain and anguish they cause to the women who read them? While knowledge is important, and intellectual discussion is of immense value, does this supersede the value of not being loeg larash? Many intelligent, and intellectual, and (yes) spiritual women read these things. For those who are already aware of some of them, this only pours salt on their wounds. For those who were previously unaware, this serves to sow doubt, confusion, and heartache. Is this intellectual discussion truly worth all the torment and suffering that it causes to others?

    ReplyDelete
  9. No, he is not saying we need to sugar-coat the facts. He is saying that you make an editorial choice each time you post about what issues and viewpoints should be given prominence in this forum, and he is questioning the wisdom/rationale for giving so much air time to this specific issue and this specific viewpoint, when it is one that is apt to have a negative impact on how many people view Torah Judaism.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I was wondering if in the world of the souls , there is gender and how this plays out ?
    I think when discussing this type of post we need to remember the big picture - that Hashem may in fact have created people with different spiritual potentials but as people we all have the challenge to actualize these potentials for the benefit of those around us and making the world a more spiritual place where hashem is central to life. Acknowledging these differences may help towards working for better families , communities and individuals

    ReplyDelete
  11. I agree that this isn't very useful and is probably counter productive. I feel this way for the reasons already stated by others and also for another reason. Let me give you a mashal. 3 simple amai ha'aretz, of different backgrounds are having a debate and quarreling. One is a descendant of The Gra, and from that school, one is from Ropshitz style chassidus, and the third is from chabad. Each one is claiming superiority over the others. Each quoting their rebbies about the merits of their brand of Yiddishkeit over all others. Walks by a Talmid Chacham and laughs to himself seeing that none of these 3 people have any of the attributes which distinguishes their brands. They have no real Torah or chassidus. They are all just simple Jews. They are basically fighting over nothing that is relevant to them. The difference between these types of Torah practice only kicks in when one is already serving Hashem on a high level. Now back to our point. The Maharal is speaking about lofty madraigos. Any person, man or woman, who sins sometimes, is way way below the level that the Maharal attributes to women. Any man, of all the men I know, who sees these words and feels superior over women, is a fool. His conceit is over nothing which is relevant to him. Any woman who is a little more nizhar in kiyum hamitzvos then him, stands way way above him, because that is far more basic then the madraigos which need a solid base first. So why are we getting into this discussion to create a pirud between Jews, over nothing. When we will be at the madraigos where these differences apply, we will also be at the madraiga that it wouldn't be a problematic issue for anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  12. nice spin but that is not the way the sources are written. There is a major disparity between what the sources say and what people assume. You feel that this shouldn't be discussed or even have people aware of it because the awareness of this is not helpful. I have a problem with concealing reality or claiming that the true Torah position is X even though there is no evidence to support it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Again tell me that you feel that the Maharal is a obscure minority opinion and show me the sources that constitute the majority. If you acknowledge that this is the majority position of Torah authorities then you have to explain why this should be concealed, misrepresented or simply ignored. If you are claiming that if people really knew what Torah Judaism is about they would be ashamed of it and therefore we shouldn't tell the truth - I think that is basically apikorsus. Next you will tell me that we should conceal the Torah view of intermarriage and homosexuality or capital punishment or anything else which is not politically correct?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Are you saying that only by distorting or denying what the Torah says are people able to accept it?! Are you ashamed of what G-d's views are? I am not making up anything and I am not cherry picking minority views. Please show me that the mainstream view taught by our Mesora is significantly different that what I have been presenting.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Please show me the sources that reject the material that I have posted. Please give me guidelines for what pages in my gemora I should erase. Please tell me why political correctness is more important than truth?

    ReplyDelete
  16. First of all, I am not sure why you are yelling at me. I did not state whether or not I think this is a good idea; I was merely helping to clarify what I understood "Garnel" meant. As for the matter itself, there is a difference between concealing and advertising.While being מגלה פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה is a very serious matter, that does not mean that we have an obligation to broadcast every element of the Torah to the world at large at all times. I think that, for example, one would talk about the Torah's viewpoint about homosexuality to someone taking his first steps his interest in Torah, yes, that would be a mistake. Not all truths need to be spoken about at all times.

    ReplyDelete
  17. What is the benefit that is gained by continually shoving these derogatory opinions into the faces of intelligent and spiritual women (ala loeg Larash), that outweighs all the pain, anguish, and demoralization that this causes?

    ReplyDelete
  18. You are so quick to discount someone else's statements. In my Messorah this is basic doctrine, and you had the chance to consider it for a total of 1 minute, and discard it. I have criticized you many times of not being willing to consider opinions different from yours, and I repeat that critique again here.

    ReplyDelete
  19. As I said - please provide sources which disagree with what I have posted

    ReplyDelete
  20. what is the benefit of knowing the truth? We should only present information which is politically correct or makes a person happy or uplifted.

    ReplyDelete
  21. when do you think it is a good time to talk about the Torah's viewpoint about women? Beis Yaakov, Seminary, or 20 years after marriage?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Talking about it in groups with the relevant people is not the issue here. Such subjects need to be handled with sensitivity and tact. Not sure if you are aware, but this is a website open to the public, not a Beis Yaakov. This forum does not allow for the topic to be addressed in the manner that it needs.

    ReplyDelete
  23. This is not a fair comparison. The Maharal's view on women is not explicit in the Torah, and the Torah's view of women is open to much broader and definitely more favorable interpretation than the view of the Maharal, whose opinion might have been influenced by the culture and time in which he lived. One can legitimately challenge the Maharal's view from other sources - Rishonim, Geonim and chazal, and not be apikorus.

    The Torah's views on intermarriage, male homosexuality and capital punishment, on the other hand, are explicit and clear, and thus cannot be challenged.

    BTW: Will you be posting anything on the Torah's view of intermarriage, homosexuality or capital punishment?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Truth is an important value, but it is not the only one. There are also other values, such as preserving peace and harmony, not embarrassing or causing unnecessary pain to others, etc. No one here is suggesting that lies and distortions should be promulgated here, but it is valid to question the purpose of posting every negative opinion in this very public forum, even at the expense of those other values.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Are you suggesting that the normative way that women are viewed and marriage is practiced among frum people today needs to revert to be in accord with the views you are presenting here?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Dear rabbi eidensohn. The real question is why do you feel the need to post posts about women being inferior To men. Is your wife giving you a hard time? Does she make you feel that she is SUPERIOR? Can you only be superior if you post that she is inferior? How is your shlom bajit after this post? Maybe your inferior wife Can post a comment to this? Are you maybe the ambassador to the eida charedis view of women? I am indeed looking forward to your response if you feel it being worth your time and effort. Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  27. I have answered this repeatedly. If that is the Torah position then you should know it. I am working on a book on the issue of gender and sexuality. This has nothing to do with me personally. This is simply the mainstream view from our mesora. No need to play amateur psychologist.
    I also wrote a book on child abuse. Does that mean that I must either be an offender or a victim?! If I write about korbonos that means I must feel like a korbon?! Or are you trying to say that only women can write about women?!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I have repeated stated that I am not telling anyone what to do about the information. But it is important to know what our Mesora says on the subject.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am not specifically seeking out negative views. But it is clear that what I post is the main stream view of our Mesora. Would you have a similar problem if I had been posting views that say women are superior to men?

    ReplyDelete
  30. I have posted material on intermarriage, homosexulaity and capital punishment.
    Feel free to "legitimately challenge the Maharal's view from other sources - I am not aware of main stream views that differ.

    ReplyDelete
  31. what forum are you thinking about? The beis Yaakov system doesn't teach this. The yeshiva system doesn't teach it. Haven't found any contemporary seforim that talk about this. Where do you think a person will learn about this topic?

    The same argument was made about talking about child abuse - it simply doesn't work.

    ReplyDelete
  32. To repeat: Such subjects need to be handled with sensitivity and tact. Not sure if you are aware, but this is a website open to the public, not a Beis Yaakov. This forum does not allow for the topic to be addressed in the manner that it needs.
    And your comparison to child abuse doesn't hold water. In that case, there were people suffering lifelong damage due to the subject being kept under wraps. I don't think anyone will commit suicide if they don't discover that the Maharal believed that women are spiritually inferior to men.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Actually, the Torah view on capital punishment is not clear at all. Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Tarfon, for example, were abolitionists, and apparently believed that capital punishment is for theory alone, not for practice, see Makkos 7a.

    ReplyDelete
  34. You are not responding to my point.
    The material is legitimate but like my friend's aunt who married her brother, you don't have to go around announcing it to everyone.
    You don't have to erase any pages in your gemara, just to read them with a little sechel. Are you next going to publish all the sources that state that non-Jews are subhuman, that it's okay to rob from them and that we don't have to save their lives on Shabbos? Because there are plenty of those.
    And no, political correctness is not more important than the truth but Beis Hillel does say that discretion often is. Or would you have preferred God tell Avraham Avinu, a"h,: Yeah, did you hear that? Sarah called you old!
    And frankly, stopping writing "This is what God wants." Can you supply me with one reliable quote of His where He says what you're telling? Not someone's interpretation or a secret from "the Seforim". Give us a quote from Torah or Nach.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The purpose of bringing up child abuse is to protect children. Unless you feel that the way women are viewed and marriage is practiced in the frum community today needs to revert to be in accord with these views, what would be the practical purpose of teaching these negative/hurtful views in Yeshivas and Bais Yaakovs?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Its not as easy as it looksJanuary 31, 2017 at 11:23 PM

    That is not a good comparison. Child abuse needed to be discussed to make sure people know it's an issue and to report it. There was a very important reason to discuss child abuse. Mens superiority in the sources? What are you trying to achieve? (Besides telling us the truth)

    ReplyDelete
  37. Its not as easy as it looksJanuary 31, 2017 at 11:27 PM

    Of ourselves it has something to do with you personally. It's something you feel strongly about. You chose these sources. You didn't write them, but these are the ones you are highlighting. Otherwise you would go through the maharal and just post sequential paragraphs.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Find my any gadol who says these views are not applicable and then we will have common ground

    ReplyDelete
  39. not sure where you learned Torah - but to say that the words of Chazal, Rishonim and Achronim don't count - the only thing that matters is a quote from Torah or Nach - is not Orthodox Judaism but closer to being a Karaite

    ReplyDelete
  40. capital punishment has been halacha for many years. And even without a Sanhedrin. You might also recall Rav Moshe Feinstein's teshuva on the matter. So please don't tell me that it isn't a mainstream position.

    שולחן ערוך חושן משפט סימן ב
    סעיף א
    כל בית דין, אפילו אינם סמוכים בא"י, אם רואים שהעם פרוצים בעבירות (ושהוא צורך שעה) (טור), היו דנין בין מיתה בין ממון, בין כל דיני עונש, ואפילו אין בדבר עדות גמורה. ואם הוא אלם, חובטים אותו על ידי עובדי כוכבים. ( ויש להם כח להפקיר ממונו ולאבדו כפי מה שרואים לגדור פרצת הדור) (טור בשם הרמב"ם בפרק כ"ד מסנהדרין). וכל מעשיהם יהיו לשם שמים; ודוקא גדול הדור, או טובי העיר שהמחום ב"ד עליהם. הגה: וכן נוהגין בכל מקום שטובי העיר בעירן כב"ד הגדול, מכין ועונשין, והפקרן הפקר כפי המנהג; אעפ"י שיש חולקין וס"ל דאין כח ביד טובי העיר באלה, רק להכריח הצבור במה שהיה מנהג מקדם או שקבלו עליהם מדעת כולם, אבל אינן רשאים לשנות דבר במידי דאיכא רווחא להאי ופסידא להאי, או להפקיע ממון שלא מדעת כולם (מרדכי פ' הגוזל בתרא), מכל מקום הולכין אחר מנהג העיר; וכל שכן אם קבלום עליהם לכל דבר, כן נ"ל (ועיין בי"ד סימן רכ"ח דיני תקנות וחרמי צבור). כתבו האחרונים בתשובותיהם דמי שנתחייב מלקות, יתן ארבעים זהובים במקום מלקות (מהרי"ו סימן קמ"ז ומהר"ם מריזבורק); ולאו דינא קאמר, אלא שהם פסקו כך לפי שעה, אבל ביד הב"ד להלקותו או ליטול ממון כפי ראות עיניהם, לפי הענין, למגדר מלתא (וע"ל ריש סימן תכ"ה בהג"ה).

    ערוך השולחן חושן משפט סימן ב
    אף על פי שאין דנין בחו"ל דיני נפשות ומלקות וקנסות מ"מ אם רואים ב"ד שהשעה צריכה לכך שהעם פרוצים בעבירות דנים הכל כפי צורך השעה ואפילו כשרואים ליחיד שהוא פרוץ בעבירות יכולים לקנסו כפי ראות עיניהם ובלבד שתהיה כוונתם לשמים ואפילו אין בדבר עדות גמורה אלא שיש רגלים לדבר וקלא דלא פסיק וליכא אויבים דמפקי לקלא אם נראה שזהו צורך שעה לדונו בכך וכך צריכים לעשות כן אם יש יכולת בידם שאם נעמיד הכל על הדין ונצריך עדים והתראה נמצא העולם חרב ולא חרבה ירושלים אלא מפני שהעמידו דבריהם על דין תורה [רשב"א בתשובות חלק ג' סי' שצ"ג] ויש להם רשות לייסרו בגופו וממונו כפי שרואים לגדור הפרצה ואם הוא אלם עושים ע"י ערכאות המלוכה והם יצוו עליו עשה מה שדת ישראל אומר לך וכל מי שיש כח בידו לעשות סייג לתורה ואינו עושה אין לו סייג בעוה"ז ובעוה"ב ולא נין ונכד ועצור ועזוב [ב"י בשם מדרש הנעלם] וכן מחוייבים להשגיח שלא ימצא חלילה בין ישראל איזה מחשבת מרד אף בלב נגד אדונינו הקיר"ה ושריו וכבר אמרו חז"ל שהקב"ה השביע את ישראל שלא ימרודו במלכיות [כתובות קי"א א] וכתיב [משלי כד, כא] ירא את ד' בני ומלך ומלכותא דארעא כעין מלכותא דרקיע:
    סעיף ב
    וכח זה הוא רק לגדול בתורה או לטובי העיר שטובי העיר בעירם כחם כב"ד הגדול ובזמנינו מוטל על הרב וטובי העיר לגדור פרצות ישראל בכל יכולתם וכל אשר יעשו איזה מכס מוכרחים הצבור לקיים אף דאיכא רווחא להאי ופסידא להאי כיון שדבר זה נוגע לתקוני הצבור או למיגדר מילתא ומי שמעכב בזה או מקלקל הוא חבירו של ירבעם בן נבט ואל תשגיח אם יש גם מהלומדים שמחזקים המהרסים דמסתמא אין בהם יראת שמים דוק ותשכח:

    ReplyDelete
  41. the views are not designed to denigrate and hurt nor is that my motivation

    ReplyDelete
  42. Why do you repeatedly avoid answering the main question, what is the benefit of pushing these issues to the front? It may be true that someone is ugly or fat (as in morbidly obese, so it is an unquestionable fact-not opinion). But if the person is not going to lose weight because of your "encouragement", you don't belong saying it! What is being accomplished by bringing these truths to the fore?

    ReplyDelete
  43. The views may not have been designed to denigrate and/or hurt women, especially since they were written in times when most (if not all) women were uneducated and would never be expected to see them. Nevertheless, they do denigrate and are very hurtful to today's women. What strong benefit outweighs the pain, anguish and demoralization that is caused by posting these views?

    ReplyDelete
  44. we are not talking about ugly or fat hashkofa- we are talking about Jewish hashkofa. It either is or is not valid as mainstream. If you can find authoritative views that disagree please produce them. Otherwise all you are saying is that you find them unacceptable and therefore don't want them presented.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Truth is a strong value, but it is not the overriding value in all cases. As stated by Bnos Tzelafchad, the rachamim of Hashem is on nekaivos as well as zecharim. Surely Hashem is not looking cause unnecessary pain to today's women. . . Surely, he is counting their tears (as acknowledged by the Maharal himself) . . .

    ReplyDelete
  46. As a psychologist you must understand that no one chooses a topic to focus on without an underlying reason. As in fact you are saying about me and others that the underlying reason for my questioning your reason is that I find these views distasteful, which I never said. So, again what is YOUR underlying reason for bringing up this topic, repeatedly. There are alot more Torah truths out there that you could discuss but chose instead to dwell on this one. Why? ( I really am not trying to be confrontational, I just would like to understand why this Truth is so much more important than all others. If you would have chosen another topic, I would be asking the same question, unless I could figure it out for myself)

    ReplyDelete
  47. I haven't heard any reports of women crying from my posts - and I am not aware of any source that says don't teach hashkofa because it might get somebody upset.

    The simple solution for your problem is to stop reading my blog or just to skip any article regarding women.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Ed you don't understand what I have answered and I don't see any reason to repeat myself. The only answer that would satisfy you is if I said I am wrong. Without your producing rabbinic sources surporting your assertions there is nothing more to say on the topic.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Serious question. But first an introduction to the question.

    There is widespread use of technology today. That doesn't mean that people today are more "spiritually advanced". A girl born today is a descendant of women who lived in previous generations. And when she grows up, she is a woman of the same status as her forebears. Furthermore, it is a bedrock principle that the Torah doesn't change. Thus, the Torah teachings about women that were studied yesteryear are the same Torah that is studied and applied today.

    So: it seems to me that if a woman is offended by the material in the post, then it's possible there may have been women offended by such material in past generations.

    And: if there is a woman who learns the material in this post and gains from it and elevates herself through it, so, too, there may have been women in the past who benefited from it, or had the potential to benefit from it.

    It seems to me that this is obvious.

    My question: Why then do some of the commenters make an almost blanket distinction between how "modern" women will react to this post versus how the women who lived before them would react?

    I'll venture an answer. It is because many women today have been exposed to, and accepted, the concept that it is bad to consider the idea that men and women are not equivalent. Thus, one of these women who hold this way and who enjoys visiting this blog may encounter this post and feel badly.

    If I'm right, then the right approach, I think, is not to remove the post. The right approach is to disabuse women of the equations that men=women & women=men.

    ReplyDelete
  50. good point. We note that the medrash talks about Lilith - Adam's first wife - who went bad because she wasn't treated equally to Adam. Then we have Beruriah who upset with the statement that nashim daatan kalah. During the emancipation there were many women who rejected yiddishkeit.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Could you please tell me what assertions I should bring proofs to from rabbinic sources? I don't remember making any assertions. Seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I don't know how you would know about how all the women who read this are reacting. It's not likely that any woman would comment on this blog about how she was up all night in tears over being confronted with this material. I do, however, know of mature, intelligent, capable women who were reduced to tears over the continual barrage of material designed to make them feel inferior. (And stating - "just don't read it" is not helpful. Any intelligent/intellectual individual has an interest in knowing what has been said/is being said about him/her.) You haven't provided a rationale for this continual assault on women that outweighs the pain and suffering inflicted upon those women.

    ReplyDelete
  53. No need to sugar coat HIS opinion, but counterbalance it with opinions of other sages as important as he was(is).

    ReplyDelete
  54. "The Maharal rejected the idea that boys should begin instruction at an early age, insisting instead that children be taught in accordance with their intellectual maturity." his view on education rejects the practice most of us have of sending boys to school at 3, which tells me that his view about women can be questioned or rejected.

    Wikipedia tells me the Maharal had 6 daughters, is it related to all his opinion about women? My problem with his views is that it lacks comparison with the views of other sages of equal importance.

    Gender does not dictate ones level in spirituality. Moses was born because of Miriam's pleads to their parents. Hashem told Avraham to listen to Sarah's voice and not the oposite. Women did not take part in the golden calf episode. Some say (I have no source for that, just hear in speeches) that the matriarchs had a stronger prophecy than the patriarchs, Shimshon's mother saw and spoke to the angel while the father had a sort of "spiritual blindness", R. Akiva's wife saw his potential instead of himself or another man causing his awakening in Torah... so... there are all these "evil women" described in the Talmud (gluttons, gossiping, using their legs to walk towards evil etc.) but, there are women who showed (like Shimshom's mother and Avigail) a higher spiritual level than her husbands.

    ReplyDelete
  55. So is your point to make sure that women feel inferior and subordinate?

    ReplyDelete
  56. On December 11, 2016, you yourself posted Rav Moshe's view: Igros Moshe (O.C. 4:49). " . . . it is necessary to know that the reason that they are exempt from time bound mitzvos is not because women are on a lower level of holiness than men. Because as regarding holiness they are equal to men in terms of the relevance of being obligated in mitzvos. Because it is only from the aspect of holiness that exists in all Jews that there is an obligation to do mitzvos. Because all the verses about holiness are also said about women - whether it was at the beginning of the acceptance of Torah "And they should be for me a treasure and you shall be for me a holy people" which was said to Beis Yaakov i.e., the women and "Tell the Children of Israel" i.e., the men or whether "Holy men you shall be to Me" said in Mishpatim or "And you shall be holy" which was said in Shemini or "And holy shall you be" and "you shall be holy" in parshas Kedoshim. Or "You are a holy people for G-d" in parshas Re'ah. The rule is that every place which mentions the holiness of Jews applies also to the women. Consequently women also say the beracha with the language , "who has sanctified us with His mitzvos" as the men say on the mitzvos - even on those mitvzos which the Torah does not obligate women to do.

    The reason that the Torah does not require women to perform these mitzvos is only because of a leniency that G-d decided should exist for them as we discussed before - and not because they are inferior - G-d forbid.

    And amongst the obligations between a man and his wife there is the obligation that a man needs to honor and respect her and she needs to honor and respect him - without any differential. There were many women who were prophetesses and they had the full status of prophet as that found amongst the men. Furthermore in many things - whether in the Bible or the words of our Sages - they were praised more than the men. There is no degradation of the honor of women."

    ReplyDelete
  57. Where did I say it is not a mainstream position? I said that the Torah viewpoint on it is not clear, and cited two tanna'im, one of whom is the primary source of our Torah Sheba'al Peh, who held that it should not be implemented.

    ReplyDelete
  58. 1. Sources from chazal and Rishonim have been presented to you by myself and others to show that women are not inherently inferior beings. Perhaps you are not convinced - and that is fair enough. However, this view of women is not the mainstream hashkafa today, as you have mentioned - it's not taught in schools or Yeshivot.

    2. If your point is that the Maharal's view was at one time the mainstream view and in the frum community the hashkafa does not change - well that is not true. For xample, it was once acceptable to ascribe anthropomorphic attributes to G-d - the Raavad says as much in his hasagot on the Rambam. Today the hashkafa is that Hashem has no body. The hashkafa changed, even thouh the earlier hashkafa fitted more the literal understanding of pasukim and chazal. It changed because it was illogical and one could defend the new hashkafa by not taking certain pasukim and certain chazal literally. It was also necsary for the hashkafa to change because the Torah is true and only teaches truth.

    In the same it is illogical to say with what we know today, that women are inherently inferior and their sole purpose is to serve men. And unlike the once accepted view of divine anthropomorphism, which actually had support in the Torah when taking certain pasukim and cahazal literally, this negative view of women (as essentially inferior) has no such literal sources in Torah and chazal. And just like the hashkafa changed, in the case of divine anthropomorphism, to match what is knoen to be true, so also is the hashkafa changing about women. And it is a good thing, and in no way negates the different halakhot and norms of behaviour for men and women, as brought down by chazal and the rishonim.

    ReplyDelete
  59. that the material about women's status should not be discussed

    ReplyDelete
  60. I haven't found any - do you have any material?

    ReplyDelete
  61. My simple request is that you tell me who are the authorities that disagree with the Maharal. Regarding education the Maharal pointed out that education had deviated from the views presented by Chazal. The issue was whether the times required that deviation or not. Thus the Maharal was the conservative force trying to return to the authentic view. Also not sure that the Maharal had problem with sending kids to play groups at 3. He asserted that there was a program of systematically learning Torah and that children should not be started too early for that program or that they should skip stages.

    The Maharal was not a misogynist in any sense of the word. He had a very close relationship with his wife who was also his secretary for his seforim. He also encouraged her to learn Torah 5 hours a day.

    The main issue is whether women's status is inherent (Maharal) or whether it is strongly though not exclusively the result of social factors and learning (Rambam). The actual statements are fairly consistent amongst authorities regarding the existence of gender differences

    The examples you give only indicate that in some instances some women can be superior to some men - some of the time. These however are clearly understood as exceptions which provide no basis for a general understanding of gender issues.

    ReplyDelete
  62. no my point is that you shouldn't be ignorant about the mainstream views of Judaism.

    I have never said that one should take such information and feel superior about it or inferior.

    ReplyDelete
  63. And therefore what. Are you saying that Rav Moshe disagrees with the Maharal? They are not talking about the same thing. The Maharal was not discussing holiness.

    ReplyDelete
  64. the only significant difference I have seen is whether status is inherent or primarily learned or socialized. Other wise we see things such as Rav Moshe's teshuva where he talks about equality of holiness - but that doesn't necessarily contradict the Maharal's views of Form and Matter.

    Even regarding the learned vs inherent discussion it seems that one can not generalize from the fact that according to the Rambam some women are capable of high levels of learning with the issues the Maharal talks about or whether women should drive because of the issue of modesty.

    For example while Rav Moshes stated that men and women are equal in holiness he also said that women should not learn Mishnayos. While he said that men or more obligated to their wives then the woman for example regarding conjugal duties- he also states elsewhere that a woman is required to agree to her husband's request for intercourse as long as she is healthy.

    While Rav Soloveitchik taught women gemora - he also said that it is heresy to say that women are not desperate to get married and that can never change.

    Bottom line - instead of cherry picking sources - it is important to get an over all view - and that is what I am trying to present

    ReplyDelete
  65. I don't know how you would know about women reading this blog and being up all night crying.
    that is a rather condescending view of women. I think they are strong enough and intelligent enough to learn the facts and try to understand the significance. I think they have a strong faith in Yiddishkeit and would like to know what is reality and how to understand what our Sages say. You are basically saying the only way a woman could be frum is if she is barefoot and ignorant and fed fantasies that inspire her.

    It is your perception that I strongly disagree with and as I said if you don't like it - no one is forcing to read it.

    ReplyDelete
  66. My point was that there is a qualitative difference between the issues. One (the view of women) is a midrashic interpretation, the other are explicit commandments in the Torah text itself. How those commandments utlimately get mapped to halacha is another matter. I cannot disaggree with the commandments themselves, but can argue over the halacha. A midrashic interpretation does not need to be accepted at all, unless one thinks it adds value to Torah observance.

    ReplyDelete
  67. It is hard to dismiss hashkofa (midrashic interpretations) which are fairly consistent, lack dissent and appear over hundreds of years. You might not want to accept them but that puts you in a minority position and the burden of proof is on you

    ReplyDelete
  68. "The reason that the Torah does not require women to perform these mitzvos is only because of a leniency that G-d decided should exist for them as we discussed before - and not because they are inferior - G-d forbid."

    ReplyDelete
  69. Sky
    20 days ago

    Do you think if the Rambam and other rishonim and achronim were alive today, and could see the intellectual achievements women (abstract and otherwise), that they would still take the same positions?

    Daas Torah -> Sky
    20 days ago
    No

    ReplyDelete
  70. Again does Rav Moshe disagree with the Maharal? You can read his statement as that their inferiority is not the reason for the leniency. You will find Rav Moshe asserting that he disagrees with Chazal or Rishonim or Kabbala etc etc etc etc

    ReplyDelete
  71. The plain meaning of this statement (especially in the context of the whole tshuva) is that women are not inferior. As a psychologist, you are aware that the conclusions a person chooses to draw say something about the individual drawing the conclusions. . .

    ReplyDelete
  72. and therefore what? the conjecture that views would be different is not the same thing as dismissing their view without any dissenting authorities.
    In short I am saying that the wide range of fairly consistent statements about women in the literature constitutes the elephant in the room

    Some would prefer pretending its not there or deny its there or simply ignore it

    ReplyDelete
  73. I never said it shouldn't be discussed. I just asked why you are discussing it. If I ask my son why he is going to the store, I am not saying he shouldn't. I just want to know why! Not everyone is out to get you!

    ReplyDelete
  74. The reality of women today does not match the negative views that you continually present. Women achieve in professions, academia (and Torah study)at very high levels, and they continue to excel as more opportunities are afforded them. The normative view of women and the way women are treated today by gedolim and the Orthodox community at large is more in line with the current understanding of women than the prior perception of women. An attempt to reconcile all the previous, disparaging views with the modern woman, might be of value. Simply promulgating negative/damaging opinions that would likely not have been formulated today is yatza scharo b'hefsedo.

    ReplyDelete
  75. But what happens when that century's old and accepted haskofa (based on midrashic intepretations) contradicts reality?

    ReplyDelete
  76. As I said - first you need the facts and then you can try explaining them. You want to start with the explanation and ignore the facts

    ReplyDelete
  77. as I said I have answered this question repeatedly - you don't get it or don't want to accept it - that is tough.

    ReplyDelete
  78. How many times are you going to repeat yourself. Is Rav Moshe disagreeing with the Maharal Yes or No?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Continual presentation of these facts without an accompanying explanation is hurtful and damaging.

    ReplyDelete
  80. No, that's not what I'm saying. Says "This is what God wants" implies you have a direct quote, something to hang your whole premise on. If you want to be accurate then say "This is what Chazal and the others understood God wants".

    ReplyDelete
  81. you said that before - doesn't make it true

    ReplyDelete
  82. I see. Social factors or inherent... material for a complex and long discussion... Thank you for letting me know.
    No, I don't have any source of someone disagreeing with the Maharal... I never studied this topic, but if I ever find something, I'll share it in the blog.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Surely you are capable of some empathy. Try to imagine how you would feel if you were a woman being continually disparaged and made to feel inferior. Or alternatively, think how you would feel if all this had been written about men . From where you sit, it is easy to view this dispassionately, as a simple intellectual discussion, but for the objects of that discussion, it is anything but . . .

    ReplyDelete
  84. please stop repeating yourself - I heard what you said and so did everyone else - I disagree with your assertions

    ReplyDelete
  85. we understand G-d Will through what the prophets and the chochomim say. I gather you think you have an alternative. Please explain it.

    Find yourself a rebbe. If you want to be a Satmar or follower of Rav Kook - and accept that what they tell you is what G-d will - then what is the problem? Or are you trying to say that what our chachomim have told us is not to be taken as G-d's will?!

    ReplyDelete
  86. While this may or may not be the majority view, you clearly have an agenda. You have posted numerous posts on this issue, many of which have been taken out of context or mistranslated in order to fit the idea you have been trying to represent. You have posted commentaries on the decree of achashveirosh to make it seem as though it was their views on women rather than the view of one Persian king. You've quoted explanations of the curse of Chava, translating them to make them seem to be Halacha rather than a curse of god. For example- you quoted sforno, who explains והוא ימשך בך to mean that while man needs to be aroused in order to perform, women does not. In your translation it basically said that men are allowed to rape.
    Many of your other sources showed the role and position of women at different times to be an inferior one. You presented them as though they were the way god intended, although there is no reason to conclude this from the difficult history of women.
    You do have an agenda here! The question is why?

    ReplyDelete
  87. The Maharal also writes that men were given
    mitzvot in order to overcome their innate aggression and become more
    spiritual. Since women had less aggression, women had more spiritual
    potential, and thus needed fewer mitzvot, and thus women should not
    perform most of the time bound mitzvot. (Hidushei Aggadot I, Kol Kitvei
    Maharal.)


    You could post this Marahal too as "Women are innately more spiritual then men" But you cherry pick.

    ReplyDelete
  88. The Maharal also writes that men were given
    mitzvot in order to overcome their innate aggression and become more
    spiritual. Since women had less aggression, women had more spiritual
    potential, and thus needed fewer mitzvot, and thus women should not
    perform most of the time bound mitzvot. (Hidushei Aggadot I, Kol Kitvei
    Maharal.)

    You could post this Marahal too as "Women are innately more spiritual then men" But you cherry pick..

    ReplyDelete
  89. you want to put a negative explanation on what I have done - so that is your problem.

    Your description of what "my agenda" is not accurate. I have not stated that I have presented a comprehensive view of everything that has been written about women. I have provided selections that go against the current assumptions of what Judaism says about women

    ReplyDelete
  90. and now we can understand that woman who is material is obligated to observe the Negative Commandments but is not obligated in all the Positive Commandments. That is because the spiritual level of women does not reach to the highest level - which is the level of the Positive Commandments that a woman would function fully - because she is material. - so I assume part of being material is critical for the role of child rearing and hence women are not obligated to do positive commandments that are time dependent. I assume others that just talk about the excemption from time dependent positive mitzvoth and not all positive mitvoth , spiritual level is not an issue or relevant to our discussion

    ReplyDelete
  91. If Jewish women stopped having children, there would be no more superior Jewish men to speak of

    Men make NO difference in the continuation of the Jewish tribe.

    Chew on that.

    ReplyDelete
  92. I'm not giving it a negative explanation nor have I asked for a comprehensive view of everything about women.
    I was only pointing out that not all your sources about women were accurate. You have repeatedly stated that you are giving over the truth - this is not so, as per my examples you have in many instances misrepresenting miforshim.
    When you continually spin Torah sources to fit into a particular ideology, that seems to indicate a clear agenda.
    Can you tell me that any of my examples are inaccurate?
    If not then the question stands- why do you feel a need to make the Torah seem to denigrate women?

    ReplyDelete
  93. I disagree with you and your understanding of what I have written

    ReplyDelete
  94. Good evening to all. That women and men are not equal is well known to most of us. We all read men are from mars... and while there seems To be an agreement on the fact that some women might have been on a higher level than their husbands I feel that the question is if in general women have less of a potential for spiritual growth then men do. Can women reach spiritual heights equal or higher than men ? I understand from your article that that's not the case. In my opinion they can. They just get there by doing different activities then men have to do in order to reach their spiritual potential. For example bzw supporting her husband in thora learning a women reaches a very high spiritual level that might equal her husbands level. I don't have any source to that in my head but that doesn't mean it's not true. I appreciate if you can elaborate on this if you care to.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Can you be more specific? What is it you disagree with?
    Do you disagree that when someone consistently misrepresents and misquotes sources making them all seem to fit a particular view, that it would seem that person has an agenda?
    Do you disagree that the examples I gave came from this blog?
    Do you disagree that your intention was to misrepresent? (For example when you brought a rashi in Esther explaining achashveiroshes decree as though it were rashi's opinion on the proper role of women- did you honestly think that that was rashi's intended meaning?)

    ReplyDelete
  96. I disagree that I have misrepresented and misquoted sources. You obviously have an agenda and I am not playing it.
    If you want to be nasty you will simply be banned from future comments.

    ReplyDelete
  97. see the discussion about women getting olam habah by supporting their husbands and children's learning
    http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2016/11/are-women-in-image-of-g-d.html
    Olam Habah for women

    A related question is whether women get Olam Habah. See the commentaries on Berachos (17a) which asks what is the basis that women get Olam Habah - and answers because they provide a support system for their husband and children to learn Torah. The clear implication is that those women who don't provide a support system for Torah learning - do not get Olam Habah.

    Similarly the ignorant will not get Olam Habah unless they support Torah study

    ReplyDelete
  98. I apologize if my comments came across nasty, I did not mean them to. I gave specific examples of places where sources seemed to be misquoted on this blog. I would love if you could respond to them.
    Either way, I can certainly be more careful of how I word any future posts. Your blog your rules.

    ReplyDelete
  99. This blog is mostly about gender so what's the problem with bringing Torah sources about the topic? Do you have issues with the many speakers and writers who say women are more spiritual than men - without bringing Torah sources?

    ReplyDelete
  100. Maybe it's because the rampant teaching that men are inferior is wrecking homes. So let's get some real Torah sources in here to straighten out the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  101. and how does a frum man feel because for the last 30 years we have heard endlessly that men are inferior. Did that kind of talk ever bother you?

    ReplyDelete
  102. maybe because he sees families going down the tubes everywhere in part because of the incredible chutzpah of many women today

    ReplyDelete
  103. again what is your view on all the material that denigrates men, visit aish sometime if you want to read some of it

    ReplyDelete
  104. maybe his point is that women need to stop feeling superior

    ReplyDelete
  105. the book men are from mars denigrates men
    i do hope that's not your source for understanding this topic

    ReplyDelete
  106. The Maharal also writes that men were given
    mitzvot in order to overcome their innate aggression and become more
    spiritual. Since women had less aggression, women had more spiritual
    potential, and thus needed fewer mitzvot, and thus women should not
    perform most of the time bound mitzvot. (Hidushei Aggadot I, Kol Kitvei
    Maharal.)

    You could post this Marahal too as "Women are innately more spiritual in potential then men" But you cherry pick..

    ReplyDelete
  107. .The Maharal also writes that men were given
    mitzvot in order to overcome their innate aggression and become more
    spiritual. Since women had less aggression, women had more spiritual
    potential, and thus needed fewer mitzvot, and thus women should not
    perform most of the time bound mitzvot. (Hidushei Aggadot I, Kol Kitvei
    Maharal.)

    You could post this Marahal too as "Women are innately more spiritual in potential then men" But you cherry pick..

    ReplyDelete
  108. Again, my view is that material from Torah sources should not be hidden or distorted, but hurtful material need not be shoved into people's faces all the time. People should be made to feel good about themselves (and not bad about themselves) but not at the expense of women, men, or any other groups.

    ReplyDelete
  109. First you acknowledged my point. What we understand as God's will is what our Torah and Chazal tell us. I'm glad you agree. You will also surely agree that as great as they were, Chazal were still human beings, infinitely smaller than God Himself. Therefore they could tell us what they thought, based on their holy analysis, He wants from us but to definitely say "Yep, this is it!"? Does God want a newly circumcised Jew to dip and eat the Pesach in the evening or wait a week? Each side thought their opinion was what God wants.
    Same thing with my example. One God, One Torah, One Divine Will so both the Satmar and Rav Kook, ztk"l, cannot both be right when they diametrically oppose each other. Who's speaking in His name?

    ReplyDelete
  110. Yes and if there would be no mud on the ground then nothing would grow and there would be no food and everyone would die and there would be no people at all, so we should should all revere the mud as being greater than man.

    ReplyDelete
  111. What is the definition of Olam Haba? Is Olam Haba when a person passes on, or is it for when the world reaches its perfection? Do people understand it differently (even if their understanding is erroneous)? I think it's important to be clear that all good deeds do get rewarded, even if the rewards are different than for other deeds.....

    ReplyDelete
  112. Well according to the Rambam, Reality should determine hashkafo, and not the other way round.

    ReplyDelete
  113. I have not heard all this talk about men being inferior, but if I did it would absolutely bother me. People should be made to feel good about themselves (and not bad about themselves) but not at the expense of men, women, or any other groups.

    ReplyDelete
  114. I agree that is beneficial to get an overall view of what our Torah sages teach on this matter. The evidence today supports, however, the view that the status of women is learned and socialized. There is no evidence that women are inherently inferior in the ability to aquire knowledge, form ideas and learn truth - which is really what matters. Men and women have different constraints simply because of their biological differences. Perhaps, when Moshiach comes we will differently, but until then this point needs more emphasis.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Nobody says that. There are those who say that women are naturally on a higher spiritual level than men, which is why men, not women, need to fulfill the time-bound positive mitzvos. The fulfillment of those mitzvos elevates the men to the same spiritual level as women. But that has nothing to do with this Maharal, who states that women always remain, by definition, inferior to men.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Oh darling, you miss the point. You're cute.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Since my other response to you was "detected as spam," I'll try this again.

    It's silly to compare the laws of nature to the laws of God as dictated in the bible.

    God, in this case, put the future of his nation into the hands of Jewish women. Jewish men are irrelevant, sadly.

    Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  118. What you have just said is that a women's role is less spiritual than a man's. If he needs to engage in spiritual acts to catch up to her then his day must be more spiritual or he'd never catch up. And if he can't catch up then she needs to be the rabbi. Is this what you are trying to tell women, their their role is less holy?

    ReplyDelete
  119. I don't know of any credible source that says women are more spiritual than men. I know of some that say they are equal.

    ReplyDelete
  120. i hear that and for many decades these kinds of sources were not released to the public. but the problem of women's chutzpah (maybe not you) is so bad today that it's time to put these sources in peoples' faces to correct the problem

    ReplyDelete
  121. Women are certainly intelligent enough to understand this information, but what do,you see as the significance, and how would this improve the Yiddishkeit of women?

    ReplyDelete
  122. You apparently don't understand English very well.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Maybe if you gave examples of what you describe as "women's chutzpah," it would be easier to understand exactly what you mean by that assertion. (Chutzpah is an ambiguous term that can mean different things to different people.) Also parenthetically, I have nowhere stated that I am a woman, and (especially) in the context of this blog, I think I ought to be insulted by your assumption.

    ReplyDelete
  124. There is Olam Haba for all Mitzvos not just learning Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Oh that's helpful. Let's try again. Look at your logic. A man needs mitzvos to catch up to the woman. This implies that a woman's role is less spiritual or the man would never be able to catch up.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Woman is married to nice man, he does all his mitzvos, he tries to make a decent living, he keeps himself in shape. She decides she wants someone else so tosses him out of the house, takes custody of the kids, and minimizes visitation time for him. I know personally of five cases like this, friends of mine. That's chutzpah.

    ReplyDelete
  127. I still have no idea what you are talking about. But I will try to explain: Imagine a race with a finish line, 1 mile from the start. Person A is given a bicycle, but starts at the starting line. Person B is not given a bicycle, but starts 1000 feet from the finish line. The race is calibrated that if each of them gives full effort, they reach the finish line at the same time. So the man has more ground to cover to reach his goal of perfecting himself, but is given more mitzvos by which he can improve. The woman has less ground to cover, and accordingly is given fewer mitzvos. But ultimately, they can both achieve the same level of spiritual perfection.
    Please note: I am not saying that this is the consensus explanation as to why women are exempt from some time-bound positive mitzvos, but it is one explanation given.

    ReplyDelete
  128. And I know of no stories like that. Did you ever hear the side of the women in those stories? I notice that you made no mention of how the men in question treated their wives or children. Perhaps that may have something to do with it.

    ReplyDelete
  129. True, there is reward for every action, and thought. But there are varying levels, and not all rewards are equal.

    However, it is still important to define Olam Haba - or to categorize the different stages and what they mean.

    ReplyDelete
  130. you are ignoring Berachos 17a
    Rab said to R. Hiyya: Whereby do women earn merit? By making their children go to the synagogue23 to learn Scripture and their husbands to the Beth Hamidrash to learn Mishnah, and waiting for their husbands till they return from the Beth Hamidrash.

    ReplyDelete
  131. It is sad and unfortunate when marriages break up, and certainly both parents should be allowed to parent their children, but there are often many factors involved, and it is rarely clear that there is only one guilty party in a breakup - or who that party is. As my aunt often says, "How come everyone I know who gets divorced is the blameless party?" In any case, I don't see how promoting superiority of one partner over the other in a marriage - simply by virtue of gender - is likely to enhance shalom bayis.

    ReplyDelete
  132. ok read this
    http://www.aish.com/jl/m/w/Women--Mitzvot.html

    do you object to it as well because it denigrates men ". There are articles like this all over the web. If you are being fair, you'll express your objections on those sites too.

    ReplyDelete
  133. because homes where women see themselves as being superior to their husbands are crazy houses and most homes are like that today

    ReplyDelete
  134. the intellectual achievements of women still don't compare to that of men but i don't see how that is relevant anyway, we are talking about spirituality

    ReplyDelete
  135. so you are saying a man's day is filled with more spirituality or else he'd never catch up, he's moving faster, and that is exactly what we don't want women to think that their role is less spiritual

    ReplyDelete
  136. read this
    http://www.aish.com/jl/m/w/Women--Mitzvot.html
    one example

    ReplyDelete
  137. depends where but in the modern world, the BT world, and much of the yeshiva world, men are denigrated

    ReplyDelete
  138. the book male and female he created them (targum 1996 or so) talks about this stuff

    ReplyDelete
  139. You have missed the point of the entire discussion here. The issue is whether or not women are inherently inferior, not whether or not their days are as filled with spiritual activities as the days of men.

    ReplyDelete
  140. why do you keep talking about education? we live in an overeducated society that is about as nonspiritual as can be

    ReplyDelete
  141. i said they were nice decent men

    ReplyDelete
  142. It does not say anywhere in that article that men are inferior to women.

    ReplyDelete
  143. First of all, you didn't say the men were decent. Second of all, and more importantly, you have no idea how any of those men behaved in private with their spouses and children. The idea of an outsider such as yourself assigning all of the blame for the breakup of a marriage to one of the spouses is laughable. All the more so it is laughable that you managed to assign all of the blame on the woman five times.

    ReplyDelete
  144. The article is not disparaging men at the expense of women. It simply states that women have their own important role to fill, which is different from that of men. It does try to make women feel good about the part they play in Judaism, but it does not denigrate men. Do you have a problem with women feeling good about themselves and their roles?

    ReplyDelete
  145. I'm sorry if that is your experience, but it is not mine. In most frum homes, with which I'm familiar, men and women regard themselves as equal, but with separate (equal) roles to play. In most of these homes (with which I'm familiar) there is shalom bayis.

    ReplyDelete
  146. This particular post is not about intelligence, but other posts on this site were. Some (such as the Rambam) equate spiritual capability/achievement with intellectual capability/achievement. Women have historically been denied the opportunity to engage in intellectual pursuits, but now that they have been afforded the opportunity, they are increasingly engaging in professions which require intellectual capability and are proving successful.

    ReplyDelete
  147. The article is not disparaging men at the expense of women. It simply states that women have their own important role to fill, which is different from that of men. It does try to make women feel good about the part they play in Judaism, but it does not denigrate men.

    ReplyDelete
  148. My experience is mostly with the Yeshivish community, and I have nowhere encountered the attitude that you describe. On the contrary, men are revered for their Torah learning and knowledge, and I have never heard them denigrated in comparison to women.

    ReplyDelete
  149. maybe you missed this line, "women more closely resemble God than men do"

    ReplyDelete
  150. And what argument is used to justify women more closely resembling God or being inherently more spiritual?

    ReplyDelete
  151. That's just apologetics - a (feeble) attempt to put a positive spin on the shelo asani isha/sheasani kirtzono. All men disparage women every day. This article is just trying to throw a bone to women . . . Did you miss where the article states "This is not because of any difference in the level of sanctity between men and women?" This is simply an attempt to make women feel good about their place in Judaism, which in our time (when women have many options open to them in the world and no longer need to accept second place) is hard to sell.

    ReplyDelete
  152. What you are saying is that women don't take this talk literally. And maybe you don't. But I know those that do and maybe worse I know men that do. If the statement that women are closer to G-d is false then you shouldn't make it. And if the idea that men have extra mitzvos because they are so pathetic isn't true then you shouldn't say it. Words do matter and words affect our minds and actions. If not, then let's say anything. If you don't see that many women today have no respect for men then you aren't looking. And if you don't that creates havoc in homes then you aren't thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  153. Avraham was told to listen to Sarah in that instance. In general, he was her rebbe. "Rabbi Avigdor Miller, Tape 412, True Modesty, 1:10:25

    Question: We see in the case of Rabbi Akiva that a woman can affect the man. How is the reverse and to what extent?

    "Is the question can a man affect a woman? Certainly. Certainly. What do you think made Sarah great? Here Sarah became a great naviah. כֹּל אֲשֶׁר תֹּאמַר אֵלֶיךָ שָׂרָה, שְׁמַע בְּקֹלָה Avraham was told listen to Sarah. And Avraham is called a tefel b'navuah to Sarah. That doesn't mean Avraham was less. Avraham was a bigger navi. Only Avraham was always in the street arguing with people. And when you argue you get excited so the schinah is not always able to rest on you. Sarah was magayeres es hanashim in her own home . So Sarah lived a tranquil life and therefore the navuah could come upon her more frequently. But Sarah was the result of Avraham's tutelage. Avraham was her rebbe, no question. "

    ReplyDelete
  154. Not only the Maharal: Other authorities that either explicitly or implicitly contradict the notion of generally higher spirituality in the female include Rambam, Mishnah Horarios 3:7; Tur, Orach Chaim 46; Akeidas Yitzchak, Bereishis 6; Bartenura, Mishnah Horarios 3:7; Taz, Orach Chaim 46; Zies Ra'anan (Magen Avraham), Yalkut Shemoni, Shmuel 1:1; Vilna Gaon, Even Shelaima 1:8; Baal Shevet Musar, Midrash Talpiyos, Ohs Aleph, Anaf Isha; Rav Tzadock Rabinowitz, Dover Tzedeck, p. 119; R' Avraham Yitzchak Kook, Olas Re'iah, Birchos ha-shachar; R' Moshe Feinstein, Iggeros Moshe, Orach Chaim IV, 49; R' Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Man of Faith in the Modern World, (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 1989), p. 84; Lubavitcher Rebbe, Sichos in English, Iyar-Tammuz 5744, Vol. 21, pp. 69-72; R' Avigdor Miller, Rabbi Avigdor Miller Speaks, (Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah), pp. 245-246 .

    ReplyDelete
  155. There's no good argument to say women more closely resemble God. People just choose areas in which women excel, say tranquility, and portray that as being all there is to spirituality. But spirituality has many components - truth seeking, energy, commitment - these also are spiritual traits. Men excel in some, women in some.

    ReplyDelete
  156. He wrote, "Woman is married to nice man."

    ReplyDelete
  157. The man is supposed to lead the home and the woman to go his way. Is that going to happen if she sees him as equal? No, and there will be discord everywhere. What's really happening in these homes is that the man is giving in and putting up with her left, right, and center. And the kids grow up crazy.

    ReplyDelete
  158. Has anyone here seen "Yentl"?

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.