Tuesday, February 11, 2025

Mechitza in Shul

Igros Moshe (OH I #39) Question To clarify the question the nature of the mechitza which is required in the synagogue between men and women, in particular the required height. That is because there are places in America where the observance of this halacha is deteriorating even though it is important for the sanctity of the synagogue. It is possible that this is not the result of a desire to sin but rather ignorance of the true nature of the obligation and its importance. Therefore it is important not only to know the details of the mitzva but its significance and nature. Answer  The actual law is that even if men are in one section and women in another it is prohibited that they not have a physical barrier between them and this in my view is a Torah law as can be seen from the gemora Sukkah (51b) that says that in the Temple that women were placed in a balcony over looking the court yard in order to separate the men and women. It is known that that no additions or modifications are allowed to the Temple. So obviously this balcony was an inherent part of the Temple as if it were written explicitly in the Torah and not Rabbinic or from the Prophets.  This is also alluded to in the Yerushalmi.  We see from the gemora Sukkah (51b) that even if there was a physical barrier between the men and the women but it was still possible that there would be levity between them there is still a Torah prohibition being violated. Don’t make the mistake to think the mechitza is needed just to prevent yichud (seclusion) of a man and a woman because with the large number of women present there was not a problem of yichud according to both Rambam and Rashi and in addition both areas were open to people entering which is better than a house that is open to the street. The main concern of the mechitza was to prevent levity between the men and women as the result of talking and contact between them. This was dealt with in the Temple by making a balcony above and behind the men  for the women. 

We can conclude from this that the synagogues where both men and women come to pray, it would be best to make balconies for the women so the women can be above. But if this is a problem for some reason it is necessary to make a mechitza (barrier) to prevent levity between the men and women. And It is not adequate just to have the doors always open.  This clearly means that a mechitza which is 10 tefachim high is not valid because it doesn’t prevent levity or prevent talking between the men and women or even contact. .In my opinion that it is sufficient if the mechitza is shoulder height . The prohibition is not to prevent the men seeing the women. Therefore a mechitza that is shoulder hight since it prevents the problem of lalos rosh (levity) is valid and this is 18 tefachim.Nevertheless it is desirable to be stricter and one who makes it so not even the head is visible will be blessed. That is because many women in America are not careful to cover their head. However the Aruch HaShulchan has already ruled that in modern time due to our many sins that there are many women who don’t cover their head and it is permitted to pray before them and thus there is no objection if the mechitza is only shoulder hight but below 18 tefachim it is not valid and one needs to strongly protest if it is lower than 18 tefachim since this is a Torah requirement. This requirement of a mechitza applies in all situations where men and women gather  Either there should be a balcony reserved for women only in shul or a proper mechitza of 18 tefachim  – even if the women can be seen. 

11 comments :

  1. Why does no major law code mention the mechitza requirement?

    ReplyDelete
  2. " It is known that that no additions or modifications are allowed to the Temple."

    It is also known that Herod extended the Temple, hence added and modified it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is this the first formal measure of a mechitxa in a teshuva?
    I'm wondering why some people were so opposed to him?
    What did earlier authorities hold?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's a story that Rav Moshe, zt"l, and the Rav, zt"l, visited a shul in New York. Rav Moshe felt the mechitza was fine and the Rav said it wasn't. People were confused - the Rav was more strict that Rav Moshe? And then people realized that the Rav was tall and Rav Moshe was short...

      Delete
    2. That's the difference between MO and hareidi.
      The Rav had respect but did not attack
      A chareidi peer told his friend that he would have to give account for making RMF the poseq hador.

      Delete
    3. Well that was the difference back then. It was the people en masse who made Rav Moshe the poseq hador by accepting his authority and looking to him for guidance because they respected him and could see his quality, not because they were told to by "the askanim"

      Delete
    4. Garnel your story is nonsense!
      It is claiming Rav Moshe was about 6 feet tall.
      While he does say shoulder height he also said that it was 18 tefachim which is about 5 feet obviously that was not Rav Moshe's height.!

      Delete
  4. the Mishnah Middot 2;5 states that the balconies were added at a later date, and originally they were not walled?

    Bartenura says : חלקה היתה בראשונה – Maimonides explained, broken through/breached, that it was not surrounded by a partition.



    עֶזְרַת הַנָּשִׁים הָיְתָה אֹרֶךְ מֵאָה וּשְׁלשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ עַל רֹחַב מֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְחָמֵשׁ. וְאַרְבַּע לְשָׁכוֹת הָיוּ בְאַרְבַּע מִקְצוֹעוֹתֶיהָ, שֶׁל אַרְבָּעִים אַרְבָּעִים אַמָּה. וְלֹא הָיוּ מְקוֹרוֹת. וְכָךְ הֵם עֲתִידִים לִהְיוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל מו), וַיּוֹצִיאֵנִי אֶל הֶחָצֵר הַחִיצוֹנָה וַיַּעֲבִירֵנִי אֶל אַרְבַּעַת מִקְצוֹעֵי הֶחָצֵר וְהִנֵּה חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, חָצֵר בְּמִקְצֹעַ הֶחָצֵר, בְּאַרְבַּעַת מִקְצֹעוֹת הֶחָצֵר חֲצֵרוֹת קְטֻרוֹת. וְאֵין קְטֻרוֹת אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵינָן מְקוֹרוֹת. וּמֶה הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת. דְּרוֹמִית מִזְרָחִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הַנְּזִירִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַנְּזִירִים מְבַשְּׁלִין אֶת שַׁלְמֵיהֶן, וּמְגַלְּחִין אֶת שְׂעָרָן, וּמְשַׁלְּחִים תַּחַת הַדּוּד. מִזְרָחִית צְפוֹנִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת הָעֵצִים, שֶׁשָּׁם הַכֹּהֲנִים בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין מַתְלִיעִין הָעֵצִים. וְכָל עֵץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בוֹ תוֹלַעַת, פָּסוּל מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. צְפוֹנִית מַעֲרָבִית, הִיא הָיְתָה לִשְׁכַּת מְצֹרָעִים. מַעֲרָבִית דְּרוֹמִית, אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, שָׁכַחְתִּי מֶה הָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, שָׁם הָיוּ נוֹתְנִין יַיִן וָשֶׁמֶן, הִיא הָיְתָה נִקְרֵאת לִשְׁכַּת בֵּית שְׁמַנְיָה. וַחֲלָקָה הָיְתָה בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וְהִקִּיפוּהָ כְצוֹצְרָה, שֶׁהַנָּשִׁים רוֹאוֹת מִלְמַעְלָן, וְהָאֲנָשִׁים מִלְּמַטָּן, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְעֹרָבִין. וַחֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת עוֹלוֹת מִתּוֹכָהּ לְעֶזְרַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, כְּנֶגֶד חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת שֶׁבַּתְּהִלִּים, שֶׁעֲלֵיהֶן הַלְוִיִּם אוֹמְרִים בַּשִּׁיר. לֹא הָיוּ טְרוּטוֹת, אֶלָּא מֻקָּפוֹת כַּחֲצִי גֹרֶן עֲגֻלָּה:
    The courtyard of the women was a hundred and thirty-five cubits long by a hundred and thirty-five wide. It had four chambers in its four corners, each of which was forty cubits. They were not roofed, and so they will be in the time to come, as it says, “Then he brought me forth into the outer court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court, and behold in every corner of the court there was a court. In the four corners of the court there were keturot courts” (Ezekiel 46:21-22) and keturot means that they were not roofed. For what were they used? The southeastern one was the chamber of the Nazirites where the Nazirites used to boil their shelamim and shave their hair and throw it under the pot. The northeastern one was the wood chamber where priests with physical defects used to pick out the wood which had worms, every piece with a worm in it being unfit for use on the altar. The northwestern one was the chamber of those with skin disease. The southwestern one: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: they used to store there wine and oil, and it was called the chamber of oil. It [the courtyard of the women] had originally been smooth [without protrusions in the walls] but subsequently they surrounded it with a balcony so that the women could look on from above while the men were below, and they should not mix together. Fifteen steps led up from it to the courtyard of Israel, corresponding to the fifteen [songs of] ascents mentioned in the Book of Psalms, and upon which the Levites used to sing. They were not rectangular but circular like the half of a threshing floor.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The halachah that requires men to be separated from women while davening in shul has its origins in the procedure followed in the Beis ha-Mikdash. Our Sages in the Mishnah(1) report that a major “adjustment” was made in the Beis ha-Mikdash during the festive holiday of Succos. The Talmud explains that the adjustment consisted of building a balcony over the men’s section so that the women could witness the festivities of Simchas beis ha-shoeivah. Had they stood where they normally did, the mingling of the crowds and the festive holiday air would have led to kalus rosh, excessive frivolity. The Talmud attests that the need for a balcony was so pressing that its construction was approved even though it is generally prohibited to expand or modify the original structure of the Beis ha- Mikdash. The Biblical source for the separation of men and women, says the Talmud, is found in the verse in Zecharyah in which the prophet foretells the eulogy of Mashiach ben Yosef, where men and women will be seated separately. If separate seating is required even at so solemn an affair as a eulogy, how much more so must separate seating be required on a joyous occasion!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know all that. My question is why the Shulchan Aruch, which obsessively deals with how to set up a shul, never mentions it.

      Delete
    2. Separated, yes.
      The mishnah is suggesting that the women's balcony was open without a barrier. The paleo-mechitza was added at a later date.

      Delete

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