Torah tzivah lanu Moshe
[Parshat V'Zot HaB'rachah, Deuteronomy, chapter 33, verse 4]
That's the perfect Torah quote
to lead us up to Shavuot.
But it also pretty much encapsulates my haskafah/religious perspective, because I take this quote much more literally than it's traditionally taken: I truly believe that Torah, Jewish law, was commanded to us by Moses, that is, by inspired human beings.
And, therefore, it can be changed by human beings.
My behavior is inconsistent, in that I observe many of the mitzot (at least after a fashion) while ignoring others. But obviously, this approach to Torah puts me at odds with my Orthodox readers, and probably many of my Conservative readers, as well. Still, traditional Judaism and Jews have my respect, and I deeply appreciate all those who've taken the time to try to explain a more tradition perspective to me. I have learned much from the comments posted here, as well as from posts and comments on other people's blogs. Truly, you have been my teachers.
On the remote chance that I haven't already either offended you and/or bored you to tears, you can read the rest of this discussion here.
Chag Saméach. I'm happy to report that I made it through the entire Sefirat HaOmer for the second year in row without missing a single day's count, thanks to the OU's Sefirah reminder e-mails. I strongly recommend this free e-mail service for next year for those who read their e-mail daily and need a reminder. Just print 'em out every night before Maariv (Evening Service), or print them at work, take home the print-out, and leave yourself a reminder message on your home phone. Save the one you print before Shabbat to use on Saturday night--just add one day.
That's the perfect Torah quote
to lead us up to Shavuot.
But it also pretty much encapsulates my haskafah/religious perspective, because I take this quote much more literally than it's traditionally taken: I truly believe that Torah, Jewish law, was commanded to us by Moses, that is, by inspired human beings.
And, therefore, it can be changed by human beings.
My behavior is inconsistent, in that I observe many of the mitzot (at least after a fashion) while ignoring others. But obviously, this approach to Torah puts me at odds with my Orthodox readers, and probably many of my Conservative readers, as well. Still, traditional Judaism and Jews have my respect, and I deeply appreciate all those who've taken the time to try to explain a more tradition perspective to me. I have learned much from the comments posted here, as well as from posts and comments on other people's blogs. Truly, you have been my teachers.
On the remote chance that I haven't already either offended you and/or bored you to tears, you can read the rest of this discussion here.
Chag Saméach. I'm happy to report that I made it through the entire Sefirat HaOmer for the second year in row without missing a single day's count, thanks to the OU's Sefirah reminder e-mails. I strongly recommend this free e-mail service for next year for those who read their e-mail daily and need a reminder. Just print 'em out every night before Maariv (Evening Service), or print them at work, take home the print-out, and leave yourself a reminder message on your home phone. Save the one you print before Shabbat to use on Saturday night--just add one day.
I'll be back online next Tuesday, after our son's graduation (with photos, I hope)! :)
posted by Shira Salamone at 2:41 PM
18 Comments:
Chag Semeach.
I don't think you offend your Orthodox readers, I think you just confuse them. Your approach is more work without payoff. The biggest payoff of Orthodoxy is the wonderful community you join (if you move into a wonderful community like we did, if you move into a crappy community, I don't get it).
Being Shomer Mitzvot is its own reward.
The areas you are diverging from established Halachah are the more minor and inconsequential ones.
Also, you point out the fallacy of egalitarianism in your celebration of them. You point out the Conservative minyanim where enough men don't show up to Minyan that they count women, and the men aren't educated enough to lead Davining, so the women to it. As you go down this path you see that if you walk into an Orthodox syngague, it's a men's club, while if you walk into a Conservative/Reform Temple, it's all women.
I noticed this when visiting my in-laws Conservative synagogue (was right-wing Conservative under the old Rabbi, more left-wing now). When I accompanies my father-in-law going to say Kaddish in the morning, one day I completed the legal minyan, others they had a co-ed minyan but not a legal one, so I left the room during parts of the service that required a minyan. (i did my best to honor my father-in-law, be helpful, while not flagrantly violating halachah... I stood in the front of the room facing a wall.
The Conservative Shul is a women's club. That in and of itself isn't a bad thing, but when my mother-in-law has to apologize to her choir for missing their Thursday night practice whenever we're visiting because she needs to get Shabbat dinner ready, it's kind of sad that the rest of the year she (and her fellow choir members, mostly women) are into Judaism so much that they get their early to sing in a choir, but not enough to have a Shabbat table at home.
That's what I think is sad about your (and most Conservative Jews) approach...
We had funny conversations about Kashrut practices with some people there... many of them took MUCH more stringent positions than we do... but they don't follow them. Conservative Judaism is failing in the marketplace, not the Yeshiva world. People that learned Judaism at home don't teach it to their children, who become Reform Jews. The Reform temples are filled with non-Jews (I'd estimate that AT LEAST a third of Reform members aren't halachically Jewish, just based upon intermarriage rates, etc.)...
That said, I'm glad you and your family have found what you want, and each mitzvah is important. I don't fault you for making sure to davin three times a day... but I'm trying to find it inspirational enough for me to do so... :)
Re the gender role reversal, I've noticed that, too, and I think it's too bad that getting a good balance seems to be so difficult.
And yes, I'll be the first to admit that public observance and private observance sometimes interfere with one another--it's awfully hard to be the one in charge of Shabbat at home if one also wants to davven. But there, again, more equitable role-sharing might help.
"The biggest payoff of Orthodoxy is the wonderful community you join (if you move into a wonderful community like we did, if you move into a crappy community, I don't get it)." Amen. I know all about, er, non-so-wonderful communities. In my opinion, the major advantage of being Orthodox is being part of a real community. The disadvantage, from my perspective, is that, as an agnostic who takes Jewish tradition seriously but not necessarily literally and who doesn't always accept what the rabbis have to say, would be the absolute necessity of keeping my big mouth shut in order to be accepted as a member of the community. I call myself a perpetual misfit for a good reason.
Hope you had a great chag.
I don't get the crappy communities... on the other hand, I'm thrilled that the exist, especially when the exist near me. If those communities collapsed, the people might move into my town and make our community crappy. :)
Well, the gender-based roles evolved in a somewhat sensible fashion. One really can't get the house ready for Shabbat and Daven Friday night with the Minyan. Or get lunch ready and be at the morning Minyan, at least not for the whole thing.
It's also kind of how men are... not a good thing or a bad thing, it just is. If women do it, men lose interest. When people evaluate gender differences in compensation, a pattern emerges that a field (particularly professional) emerges that is well paid and mostly male, women follow the proven path of getting a relavent degree and entering, and the field becomes more equal or even women dominated. However, as this happens, the field ceases to be high-paying... This pattern results in some of the financial equity issues...
Egalitarianism is theoretically fine (some exceptions under Halacha, but if anyone actually cared about them, you COULD find a way), but it fails miserably in practice. I realize that the general structural success of the conservative movement isn't your concern, but I hope you realize part of why Orthodoxy will not embrace more egalitarianism without kicking and screaming is that is doesn't provide good results.
What you saw with your conservative community and lack of involvement is pretty much everywhere. My wife and I like to joke that with my Reform background and her Conservative background, the only compromise was Orthodoxy... :) Like your issues as an agnostic, I'm an absolutest that takes his bullshit straight-up... If you want to hang with people that don't believe that the Torah is divine or important, I can hang in the Reform movement, it's intellectually interesting. But I wouldn't hang with a bunch of dish-rags like the conservative movement that believe one way and behave another... there is ZERO intellectual consistency in Conservative Judaism, and I wouldn't hang out in a contradiction.
Like I said, it's all in the community. I've had some pretty heated discussions and been called a heretic at times... Some of those people enjoy making their own Kiddush when a guest at our Shabbat table... I just let it all flow off my back. As long as I have somewhere to go with warm chollent and single malt scotch for Shabbat morning Kiddush, the rest kind of falls into the background.
I guess I don't understand where you're having all these deep conversations that you'd have to keep your mouth shut. I generally stay away from deep conversations except with my intelligent and educated friends who enjoy a challenging opinion that differs from what they learned in Yeshiva. The crew that you describe, the demands you follow their rules, doesn't accept when your opinion differs, etc., why do you hang out with those people, it seems like they are pretty crappy people. Why would you spend any time with them, let along time discussing Halacha with them?
I mean, the Agnostic thing is a pretty serious sin, so I wouldn't suggest bringing that up in any Orthodox community... but really, why are you spending any time with these people instead of just avoiding them? If I saw people like that walking down the street towards me I'd cross the street to avoid them, yet you seem to seek them out.
I deal with enough unpleasant people trying to earn a living, my time is my time, and not to be spent with people like that.
Alex, I think you'll find this post by Elie about why gender roles developed in Judaism quite interesting.
"Well, the gender-based roles evolved in a somewhat sensible fashion. One really can't get the house ready for Shabbat and Daven Friday night with the Minyan. Or get lunch ready and be at the morning Minyan, at least not for the whole thing."
From my perspective, the problem with gender-based roles is precisely that they're gender-based. While it's true that it's hard to davven the entire morning service and still have lunch ready, what difference does it make who makes lunch? Why can't the men stay home with the kids every other week while the women go davven?
And how does it come to pass that, so often, when women become involved in an activity, men lose interest, and/or, in the case of the professions, the salaries decrease? Sexism is alive and well, folks.
"Egalitarianism is theoretically fine (some exceptions under Halacha, but if anyone actually cared about them, you COULD find a way), but it fails miserably in practice." I'm not sure it's been tried for long enough that one could even know that.
What you saw with your conservative community and lack of involvement is pretty much everywhere." I've seen more involved Conservative communities. We're just in the wrong neighborhood.
"But I wouldn't hang with a bunch of dish-rags like the conservative movement that believe one way and behave another... there is ZERO intellectual consistency in Conservative Judaism, and I wouldn't hang out in a contradiction." Much as I complain about inconsistent behavior among Conservative Jews, I, myself, am not terrible consistent, so I, too, am guilty as charged.
"The crew that you describe, the demands you follow their rules, doesn't accept when your opinion differs, etc., why do you hang out with those people, it seems like they are pretty crappy people. Why would you spend any time with them, let along time discussing Halacha with them?" The people who are giving me grief are my fellow--actually, mostly my sister--congregants, so they're hard to avoid, especially since I'm on the Ritual Committee.
As far as the "agnostic thing" is concerned, I haven't seen enough evidence either to prove or disprove definitely that a supernatural god exists or does not exist. On the plus side, at least I haven't written off the possibly altogether. You might say I give G-d the benefit of a doubter. :)
And how does it come to pass that, so often, when women become involved in an activity, men lose interest, and/or, in the case of the professions, the salaries decrease? Sexism is alive and well, folks.
See, that's where you are wrong. Sexism in this case assumes that it is sexist (as in, discriminating against women) that salaries go down as women populate the field. However, I propose that women tend to follow the pack more and men deviate more from the norm (more exceptional business leaders are men than women, but more homeless people are men than women as well). The high reward comes with high risk, which will mean that people far from the median will be there. Because men TEND to have a wider deviation in areas of intelligence and risk taking, if we only look at fields at the high end and low end, they'll both be male dominated... Drug deals and gang members on the bottom, college professors and business leaders on the other end. That's not sexist, that just is. It may be cultural, it may be biological, but none of it stops that really intelligent woman from achieving great things (or the moron from achieving horrible things), but if male IQ deviation is higher, than fields requiring a 135 or 140 IQ are going to disproportionately get men, statistically speaking.
The risk differential is similarly logical. The fact is, a 30 year old man than spends 10 years pursuing windmills can wake up at age 40, marry a woman 10 years younger, and start a family as though those 10 years didn't happen. A woman who wakes up at 40 doesn't really have that option. This biological reality no doubt has, over the generations, resulted in women being more risk averse, because risk taking women don't have as many children.
Much as I complain about inconsistent behavior among Conservative Jews, I, myself, am not terrible consistent, so I, too, am guilty as charged.
I don't mean to establish guilt. The conservative movement holds that people should observe Kashrut and Shabbat by Conservative Tshuvot, I don't have a problem with that per se... however, I doubt more than 40% of Conservative Jews keep a Kosher home by those standards (mostly different on cheeses and Triangle-K), where as its close to 100% in the Orthodox world... outside the home I'd guess 80% of Orthodox Jews keep it to some extent (dairy-out isn't Kashrut, but it's at least acknowledging it), where as outside of the Rabbi/Canter as a Conservative Synagogue, there is usually 1-2 "frum Conservative" families that are observant, but that's it...
In some ways, the non-Orthodox "streams" are most similar to our families in the Old Country... everyone but the Rabbi was relatively ignorant, nobody was learned, and the rich guy in the community got the good seats... I know its popular to pretend that European Orthodoxy was all learned, but the very success of the Reform and Hassidic "heresies" demonstrates how not true that was... one just became accepted by the rest of Orthodoxy...
The people who are giving me grief are my fellow--actually, mostly my sister--congregants, so they're hard to avoid, especially since I'm on the Ritual Committee.
Dumb question, why are you on the ritual committee? It sounds like you just show up and get abused. My wife and I have been making an effort to step back from the "frummier" side of our friends, lest we find ourselves in a situation with nobody to go to a water park with on a Sunday afternoon. :) There is more to life than the Synagogue, perhaps a women's study group in an Orthodox grouping might help you find other women interested in the intellectual side of Judaism without the snipes from your ritual committee.
Then again, I've never been a committee person... Some people just LOVE committees... and for them, Conservative Judaism is wonderful, you have the most active committees of all...
As far as the "agnostic thing" is concerned, I haven't seen enough evidence either to prove or disprove definitely that a supernatural god exists or does not exist. On the plus side, at least I haven't written off the possibly altogether. You might say I give G-d the benefit of a doubter. :)
Well, if you're working on Mitzvot in order... :) you're in trouble missing out on #1... :)
I never really thought about God before becoming religious. I remember something that my wife found on Aish, a BT Woman who was asked when she started believing in God, and the interviewer was stunned that she said it was a few years AFTER becoming observant. It's funny, when you start observing some of the stranger Jewish customs... things you find really weird... and see how much they enhance your life... you find Hashem in the observance of Mitzvot.
"men TEND to have a wider deviation in areas of intelligence and risk taking . . . "
One might be able to make a case, as you do, that women often tend to be more averse to taking risks because it limits our likelihood of having children, but is there any scientific evidence that there are IQ deviations between males and females that tend to favor males?
"outside of the Rabbi/Canter as a Conservative Synagogue, there is usually 1-2 "frum Conservative" families that are observant, but that's it..."
I understand that there are Conservative communities in which observance levels are fairly high, but my personal experience is that Conservative Jews run the gamut. In my own local Conservative synagogue, I can count on one hand the number of congregants whom I believe to be shomer shabbat (Sabbath observant, in terms of halachah/Jewish religious law), and neither my husband nor I claims to be among them. This may also depend on where one lives. One of the biggest, and most unpleasant, surprises I got after our son entered school was that non-Orthodox New York City parents, surrounded as we are by Jews (even in very non-Jewish neighborhoods such as ours), nonchalantly send their kids to school on Yom Tov (holidays), whereas, in the town in southern New Jersey in which I grew up, that would have been an unthinkable violation of local Jewish communal solidarity standards. Even when we became teenage rebels and refused to go to synagogue, we were forbidden either to go to school or to be seen in public (such as at a movie) on a chag (holiday), lest our public rebellion jeopardize the right of other Jewish children to take off for Jewish holidays.
"why are you on the ritual committee?"
No choice--One of the egalitarians in our synagogue tends to be offensive, another doesn't attend services often enough to be taken seriously. I'm one of the few hard-core but reasonably respectful, and respected, egalitarians in the congregation, so I *must* be on the Ritual Committee to be a voice for the egalitarian point of view. As I said in one of my earliest posts, I think they put up with me because I'm such a hard-core davvener that I'm considered an *inside* agitator. :)
"Well, if you're working on Mitzvot in order... :) you're in trouble missing out on #1... :)"
Admittedly, being an agnostic is a bit of a problem for someone wanting to become more traditional. On the other hand, as your story indicates, there may be some logic to the Torah's statement "naaseh v'nishma, we will do and we will hear." Often, one learns from doing.
Re: the gender reversal, this has been particularly striking while trying to help family friends observe shiva. They would say kaddish if there were 10 adult Jews there (men or women), but their Orthodox daughter-in-law would not. This conflict came to a head earlier this week when the 5-year-old Orthodox grandson tried to head off a Shacharit crisis by calling 911 at 8am and telling the dispatcher they needed a minyan. (oy)
Bad Cohen has recounted the opposite recurring experience during his Brandeis days, davening with the Conservative Egal group, when the (male) student running the Orthodox minyan would come in, minutes before Shabbos, saying - "We don't have a minyan. I need nine." (Despite having just left a full room - full of women, that is)
Oh, my heavens--go try and explain *that* one to the 911 operator!
Re the room full of women, this is one aspect of gender roles that I can't remember having seen discussed often in Orthodox circles: the psychological impact of metaphoric (and, in some Orthodox synagogues, literal, or nearly literal), invisibility. By way of illustration, it's acceptable, in some Orthodox and right-wing Conservative synagogues for a ten-year-old boy to do g'lilah (wrap the Torah). For me, personally, this isn't simply a halachic issue, it's an issue of derech eretz (courtesy) and kavod (respect): How did it come to pass that it's considered
acceptable for a pre-Bar-Mitzvah-aged boy to be shown more honor than a woman who may be literally old enough to be his grandmother?
Some would see such an action as a simple consequence of women not being obligated to study (or to pray at set times), or in training to be obligated to study or to pray at set times. Others, like me, find it difficult to see such an action as anything other than a slap in the face. It's no picnic being relegated to the back of the bus--or the back of the shul. It's no picnic, for some of us, to raise our sons to do things that we ourselves are not permitted to do. It's no picnic when a rabbi writes in a book that "Women are guests in the synagogue. They're welcome guests, but they're guests."
There are, occasionally, moments when I wonder whether the rabbis truly believe that the *entire* Jewish people stood at the foot of Har Sinai. I've heard a legend that all Jews look vaguely familiar to one another because we saw one another at Sinai. Does that apply to women? Or was the Torah given only to men, with us having to learn about it second-hand, like Lot's wife at the destruction of Tz'dom and Amora (Sodom and Gemorrah) or Sarah overhearing Hashem tell Avraham that she was going to bear a son? I can think of only two times in the entire Torah when G-d spoke directly to a woman. Maybe he, too, considers us invisible.
No choice--One of the egalitarians in our synagogue tends to be offensive, another doesn't attend services often enough to be taken seriously. I'm one of the few hard-core but reasonably respectful, and respected, egalitarians in the congregation, so I *must* be on the Ritual Committee to be a voice for the egalitarian point of view. As I said in one of my earliest posts, I think they put up with me because I'm such a hard-core davvener that I'm considered an *inside* agitator. :)
So you're on the committee to fight for egalitarian issues at a non-egalitarian synagogue? Why not find somewhere else to go?
One might be able to make a case, as you do, that women often tend to be more averse to taking risks because it limits our likelihood of having children, but is there any scientific evidence that there are IQ deviations between males and females that tend to favor males?
Again, this is all about averages, not particulars. There is a real biological pressure put on women to not spend large amounts of time exploring. Further, there is some (a lot) of truth that as time goes on, a man's value as a mate goes up (more experience, more wealth), a woman's value goes down (as often picked for appearance)... These are biologically driven factors that will push women towards the median, while men are free to try and fail and end up all over the place.
I've seen several places claim it, and it appears consistent with what we are seeing, women are now the majority of college students (want to bet that within a few years the salary premium for a college degree goes WAY down), but when you look at hard sciences at elite schools, areas that are entirely IQ dependent, it quickly becomes 80% male. This does NOT suggest that men are "smarter" than women, given how quickly women have overtaken men in academic success in general, I would not be shocked if the median IQ for women is a few points higher than for men (let's pretend we have an actual way to measure IQ for the sake of argument).
If Average male IQ is 98, with a standard dev of 10, and Average female IQ is 102, with a standard dev of 5, then you would see more success of women to a basic level, but when you looked at things like, Physics PhDs at MIT, where lets pretend an IQ of 145 is necessary, then you're going to get WAY more men, just because as you go out deviations, the larger dev range overpowers the higher average. OTOH, if you took things that required above average intelligence, say, 105, you'd get VERY female heavy because of the higher median...
Remember, anything that touches the sex-linked chromosome will be more deviant on the male side... we don't have a second copy to temper it. Its why baldness is WAY more common for men.
Keep in mind, autism and other deabilitating mental diseases appear with the same ratio male:female as sex-linked defects like baldness. It's NOT unreasonable to assume that just like men deviate into the mentally incompetant ranges more than women, they would deviate into the genius ranges more as well.
This has no affect on either of us, because neither of us appears retarded or geniuses, but WOULD explain the extremes working out this way.
How did it come to pass that it's considered
acceptable for a pre-Bar-Mitzvah-aged boy to be shown more honor than a woman who may be literally old enough to be his grandmother?
See, you keep getting it all backward, it's VERY humanistic of you. You're focusing on the person, not Hashem. When wrapping the Torah, we are are showing honor to the Torah as given to us through Moshe Rabbenu from Hashem. You have decided that we are honoring the kid. Try to step back from the situations that upset you, and focus on what is going on.
I assume that the youth-based "honors" are the same reason we'll let pre-Bar Mitzvah Kohanim duchen with their fathers... they need to learn that Mitzvah, and they have an obligation at 13, so they need to learn before 13... how are we going to teach them if we don't let them learn.
There are, occasionally, moments when I wonder whether the rabbis truly believe that the *entire* Jewish people stood at the foot of Har Sinai.
Putting my heresy hat on, and taking a fundamentalist read of the Torah, and one can question whether their are such a thing as Israelite women. You're not supposed to marry off your daughter to non-Israelites, and vice versa, but the Patriarchs ALL did, because there were no Israelites. If we assume that multiple wifes was non uncommon early on (especially coming out of Egypt, as we lost an entire generation of males, so one presumes that multiple wives would be normal, plus all the early wars fought by Israelites), then we can explain early pre-unified Monarchy tribes. However, if the wars were not common, and polygamy remained common (given how hidebounds Jews of today are, I hardly expect that our early forefathers were the paragons of change and adaptation), you would need to take additional wives. If one wants to get REALLY heretical, one could suggest that the line prohibited taking non-Israelite wives was shoehorned in later, and wasn't in the original draft... but seeing all the Israelite men taking shiksa wives, and the daughters of Israel demanding to be allowed to marry non-Israelite men, one might have found the "other scroll" with that line in it.
While I understand why we are told that the written law defines matrilineal lineage, I'm not certain that I accept that that was ALWAYS the interpretation. Indeed, our line from the Patriarchs is CLEARLY patrilineal... While there is textual support for claiming the matrilinial line is always from Torah times, some outside the box thinking also points out the practical side of this... beyond the exilic issues of raped women, etc., it becomes rather simple.
If you take gentile wives, your kids are cast out. If you take a gentile husband, your children are tribeless (and thus have no land, income, etc.) and cast out. Therefore, no marrying out.
I know that we're told to accept that our sages are brilliant and beyond what we can ever accomplish. But when I read the "arguments" in the Gemara, they sound like arguments that I'd have with my friends if we were taking absurd positions to prove a point... but then again, the Gemara makes mre sense to me reading it as a bunch of discussions of learned Jews, not so different from us only more learned of the then much less numerous texts, not reading it and pretending that they are perfect.
"So you're on the committee to fight for egalitarian issues at a non-egalitarian synagogue? Why not find somewhere else to go?"
That's why I often davven at Ansche Chesed. But don't get excited--given where I live, my choice is *either* to pray at a synagogue within walking distance *or* to pray at an egalitarian synagogue. We're not in a position to move, at the moment.
"I've seen several places claim it, and it appears consistent with what we are seeing, women are now the majority of college students (want to bet that within a few years the salary premium for a college degree goes WAY down), but when you look at hard sciences at elite schools, areas that are entirely IQ dependent, it quickly becomes 80% male." Yeah, that's probably pretty close to the male/female ratio at RIT, our son's alma mater, but, on the plus side, the ratio was far worse years ago. My husband tells me that, when he was studying accounting (okay, not exacting a hard science, but still . . .), there was only one female in his class. Now that he's *teaching* accounting, he sees that the number of female students has skyrocketed. I'll add that my son's favorite physics professor was a woman.
But what difference does it make how well educated and accomplished women become if every time we enter a profession, the pay goes down? I don't give a hoot what the cause is, the end result is still discrimination.
"See, you keep getting it all backward, it's VERY humanistic of you. You're focusing on the person, not Hashem. When wrapping the Torah, we are are showing honor to the Torah as given to us through Moshe Rabbenu from Hashem. You have decided that we are honoring the kid. Try to step back from the situations that upset you, and focus on what is going on.
I assume that the youth-based "honors" are the same reason we'll let pre-Bar Mitzvah Kohanim duchen with their fathers... they need to learn that Mitzvah, and they have an obligation at 13, so they need to learn before 13... how are we going to teach them if we don't let them learn."
Yes, I understand that the boys are men in training, but you're right--I AM being humanistic. According to your logic, I'm not supposed to feel the least bit upset that a woman can go literally from cradle to grave without ever having had the opportunity to get close enough to a sefer Torah (Bible scroll) in synagogue to be able to read the klaf (parchment). We're supposed to be respecting G-d? Well, read the Torah carefully and tell me where *G-d* says that, when the Torah is to be given at Sinai, one should not go near a woman? We heard those words from the mouth of *Moshe.* That was what I was referring to when I said, as you quoted, “There are, occasionally, moments when I wonder whether the rabbis truly believe that the *entire* Jewish people stood at the foot of Har Sinai.”
Are women truly considered to be part of the Covenant or are we not? Were we actually at Har Sinai—or is the fact that Moshe was clearly addressing the men only an indication that we’re just the outside observers, relegated, generations before the law requiring the separation of men from women in worship, to the back of the crowd?
“Putting my heresy hat on, and taking a fundamentalist read of the Torah, and one can question whether their are such a thing as Israelite women.”
My question, too, but from a different angle: Are we truly part of B'nai Yisrael/the Jewish people, or is "Bet Yaakov/the "House of Jacob" (a traditional term for Jewish women, collectively) just the baby-makers thereof?
Are women truly considered to be part of the Covenant or are we not? Were we actually at Har Sinai—or is the fact that Moshe was clearly addressing the men only an indication that we’re just the outside observers, relegated, generations before the law requiring the separation of men from women in worship, to the back of the crowd?
While the stock answer is that you are part of the Covenant, and express your actions towards Hashem differently.
However, a fundamentalist read of Torah suggests that the Law was given through Moshe to the 12 Tribes of Israel. These tribes refer to the men of the tribes and their wives.
Given the social structure and the time period of the nomadic tribes leaving Egypt, and our understanding of tribal people and customs, is that the tribe refers to the men and their wives and children. That's a crucial distinction from the men and women of the tribe.
If a woman, daughter of a Levite, married a man from the tribe of Dan, she becomes part of his tribe. Therefore, are women part of the Israelite nation? From a Torah-only, tribal view, only in that they are the wife or unmarried daughter of an Israelite. With a tribal relationship, a woman that ran off and married a Moabite should be treated as a Moabite wife, although since we are not permitted to marry our daughters to non Israelites, we would consider her a captive and go and retrieve her.
However, in our post-Talmudic "religious" view of Judaism, we don't think in terms of tribes. In fact, unless you are a Cohen or Levy, we are identified in a Tribeless manner (Israelite).
But I think that the historical perspective of Tribal Judaism is important to understanding Torah, even if Halacha follows oral traditions and the Talmudic religious view.
My question, too, but from a different angle: Are we truly part of B'nai Yisrael/the Jewish people, or is "Bet Yaakov/the "House of Jacob" (a traditional term for Jewish women, collectively) just the baby-makers thereof?
Baby-makers thereof is adopting the anti-family secular derision of procreation as a "breeder" that inconveniences you, and has no place in a discussion of Jews towards Jewish law. It's your blog, but unnecessarily deriding the process by which our culture continues is unnecessary.
Women are part of the Jewish people, particularly as our wives and mothers that continue the people. The women are tasked with the roles of providing the Jewish home, which has been the central part of Judaism since the fall of the Temple. Arguably, post-Temple saw the explosion of responsibilities for women, as it went from basic pre-Talmud Kashrut, to maintaining the home and educating the children, as education replaced sacrifices as our methodology of worship.
On the secular front:
But what difference does it make how well educated and accomplished women become if every time we enter a profession, the pay goes down? I don't give a hoot what the cause is, the end result is still discrimination.
But that's non-sense. It's backwards. Pay doesn't go down because women enter (well it does, but only because as more people enter the market, the supply of specialized labor increases and EVERYONE's wages go down), women enter markets as the pay is declining.
Basically, in a free market, economic profits/rents go to zero as competition heats up. Profits are made by either entering a field with barriers to entry established by the government (fields like medicine and law are obvious ones here), or moving BEFORE the competition enters.
Individual women that enter a marketplace the way men do reap similar economic rewards. However, women that wait until the market is established and then enter after its become competitive will get the same situation as men that enter then, less profits.
Male and female social workers working similar jobs get the same pay based on hours worked. The difference is that men, seeking more income, will generally enter parts of the field that less applicants want to enter.
In the late 90s boom, men with computer skills flocked to IT, becoming a well paid but male dominated field. Women that entered, like their male counterparts, made a LOT of money. However, as the demand tapered off, and the supply of young kids out of college picked up in the marketplace, the salary premium for people with those skills dropped off.
The engineering disciplines and hard sciences are undersupplied markets, the demand for labor outstrips the supply, so premiums are there. Women that CHOOSE to enter these markets will receive the same benefits as men. Markets that demand a "college degree in the liberal arts" are MUCH less specialized (very few jobs require a BA in History, the college degree simply signals that you aren't a screw-up), and therefore there isn't a premium there.
Jobs become well paying when more people enter faster than the demand for that labor increases. These job markets are MUCH less risky... we saw mass layoffs in IT post-boom, many people are still not making the money they did in the boom ten years ago, and inflation adjusted, may never again, while we don't see mass layoffs in office managers and other semi-skilled liberal arts career paths.
As women TEND to choose those paths that are less risky and already established, they do not grab the rewards of entering the exciting field when it is well paying.
That's not discrimination, that's women choosing or being steered towards less lucrative fields.
Okay, I think I understand where you're going with the economics argument--"the early bird gets the worm," which, in this case, means the bigger paycheck, because, when a field is new and/or extremely specialized, there are fewer persons of either sex competing for the same or more jobs.
"The engineering disciplines and hard sciences are undersupplied markets, the demand for labor outstrips the supply, so premiums are there. Women that CHOOSE to enter these markets will receive the same benefits as men." I hope, as both a feminist and the mother of a newly-minted physicist, that you're right on both counts. :)
"My question, too, but from a different angle: Are we truly part of B'nai Yisrael/the Jewish people, or is "Bet Yaakov/the "House of Jacob" (a traditional term for Jewish women, collectively) just the baby-makers thereof?
Baby-makers thereof is adopting the anti-family secular derision of procreation as a "breeder" that inconveniences you, and has no place in a discussion of Jews towards Jewish law. It's your blog, but unnecessarily deriding the process by which our culture continues is unnecessary."
Point taken. I apologize to anyone whom I may have offended by such a poor choice of words.
I suppose that the intelligent thing for me to say at this point is that I'm no more comfortable with set gender roles in religious life than I am with set gender roles in secular life. The late former Prime Minister Golda Meir lead the State of Israel, but she wasn't allowed to lead a minyan. I will grant you that gender roles simply matters, but I, personally, am not convinced that that necessarily makes them a good idea.
Oops--let me try that again: I will grant you that gender roles *simplify* matters, but I, personally, am not convinced that that necessarily makes them a good idea.
I suppose that the intelligent thing for me to say at this point is that I'm no more comfortable with set gender roles in religious life than I am with set gender roles in secular life. The late former Prime Minister Golda Meir lead the State of Israel, but she wasn't allowed to lead a minyan. I will grant you that gender roles simply matters, but I, personally, am not convinced that that necessarily makes them a good idea.
I guess I will never understand the "not counted" in a Minyan complaint... I mean, I get it, women don't like being told "no, because you're a woman," I get that, it sucks. However, it really bugs me because it's SUCH a strange thing to obsess over.
When we were starting to become observant, my wife got annoyed at the separate women's section because she didn't like being "in the back", where the woman's section was usually behind about 7 rows of mens seats (at modern Orthodox synagogues that I've gone to, the men's section extends further back in one direction, and the women's section is behind a "short" section of men...
When I went with her to my in-law's egalitarian Conservative synagogue, I was laughing because the first 7 rows were empty, because it was the Protestant/Reform style "being preached to" Bima... I thought it was hysterical that she's offended to sit in row 8 if there is actually someone in the front 7, but likes them empty. She even laughed that she just didn't like being told to go to row 8, she wanted to choose it.
Similarly, the people I most hear bitching and whining about "women counting in a Minyan" only go to Shul for Chagim and the occasional (or sometimes frequent) Shabbat morning service... they liked to "count in the Minyan" when they showed up at 10:00 for the Torah service, when there was already an Minyan for an hour... they were proud to "count" when they weren't needed, not to show up and be counted.
When I used to go to weekday services at the local Aish, we'd sometimes get stuck at 7-9 people, and the Rabbi would go and call down the list of people that were occasionally there and get the Minyan completed... I never noticed any of the "egalitarian" people volunteering for that...
Counting in a minyan is a responsibility and obligation (I was in Tel Aviv one Shabbat, and was on my way to the bathroom and got roped into one of the Mincha minyans that was getting together early in the hotel before we ate lunch), my wife wasn't clamoring to get pulled into a minyan, she was happily reading a book.
I realize that there are a few women like yourself that Orthodoxy really doesn't "fit in." Women that want to learn to lead a service and show up to weekday minyan, etc. However, you're a fringe group.
Orthodoxy is more concerned with roping in (or retaining) women in their late teens/early 20s, floating around aimless, and encouraging them to get married, have a family, and reach fulfillment that way, than it is to find women who are more interested in leading services than having babies. If you invite the women to do the men's stuff, not only do the men leave, but the women lose interest in the women's stuff (popping out kids, taking care of them)...
It's sounds silly, but my wife's Shabbat attendance since our son was born 10 months ago has been, oh, 0%. Before that, it was around 50%. If going to Shul was a big part of her life and really important (counting for minyan, etc.), she might learn from that not to have anymore children, as it cramps her Shabbat life... why do you think groups like Chabad that have been traditionally wishy-washy or negative on the Eruvim put them up whereever they go? Without an Eruv, a woman with a child in a stroller has a crappy Shabbat, so we throw up Eruv's so women don't limit their children.
If I was a religious leader, then if I had to choose whether to accommodate you, or accommodate a woman with no religious education by giving her a clear cut way to be Jewish by starting a family and prepping Shabbat dinner, I think I would strategically be focused on getting twenty-something women to settle down and create more Jews...
I mean this non-judgmentally, I do not know you or your family or any situation, I'm simply suggesting that from a social policy point of view, Orthodoxy has decided to HEAVILY emphasize large families... and to have large families, women need to get their "Jewish fulfillment" from motherhood, not from "egalitarianism," because if they get fulfillment on the latter, they will have a disincentive to do the former.
I hope I'm making sense? I think that the BIGGEST reason that Orthodoxy has made gains over the past 30 years while Conservative has been shrinking (in terms of market-size) is that egalitarianism inadvertently discourages childbirth.
I DO NOT believe that any conservative Jewish leader decided that having Jewish children is "baby-making breeding," but by focusing on female Rabbanim, female choirs, females going to Shul, etc., they get the women actively involved, but got smaller family sizes.
Basically, here in Will Your Grandchildren Be Jews you see the facts. Whether they are right or wrong, the numbers speak for themselves. Absent a huge change (like Reform is trying with Patrilineal decent, and Conservative will no doubt try in the future), the Jewish community we become increasingly Charedi, because while the modern Orthodoxy is growing, they are being swallowed up by the right wing's higher birth rate, and the Heterodox movements depend on Orthodox dropouts to fill their ranks.
The Learning/Synagogue roles have normally appealed mostly to men because we are wired to establish competitive pecking orders. Your friend's post about minyan making men work together is spot on. However, any value system that encourages women to get validation from public roles will inadvertently discourage those private roles... When I was in a Reform Temple, the women lauded as "more religious" was the woman that read Torah, lead services, became a Rabbi, became a Canter... so that was the ideal, and people focused on that. In my Orthodox community, the women lauded as "more religious" do follow some interesting dress codes, but they also have lots of kids. When you see the woman dressed all Boro Park with 2-3 kids, it is kind of shocking and one assumes fertility problems. The "more religious" women are the ones with lots of kids.
You may not find that a personally rewarding value system, but if I was a Jewish thinker trying to shape my community to grow its numbers, I can't think of a better value system, can you? :)
For women interested in those public displays, Orthodoxy offers them very little... the MO New York circle has women's prayer groups, etc., but the rest of Orthodoxy doesn't. But it's decided that it's strategic goal was population growth, which it tackled with targeting intermarriage through limited interaction with gentiles through day schools, and larger families with restrictive rules on birth control and encouraging having more children. Like it or not, it worked, and conservative collapsed its numbers in a way they NEVER expected. They figured that driving on Shabbat was inevitable, inter-faith dating/marriage was inevitable, and thought that they had a compromise, but the numbers don't bear it out, so I think it is very unlikely that you will see heavy pushes for egalitarianism in Orthodoxy, because the left wing has the same low birth rates and therefore low growth of the liberal movements, and for various reasons, gets poached by Conservative and Chareidi.
"the people I most hear bitching and whining about "women counting in a Minyan" only go to Shul for Chagim and the occasional (or sometimes frequent) Shabbat morning service..."
Now you know why I'm still on the Ritual Committee. When one of the few other hard-core egalitarians insisted on joining the committee, I told her, in no uncertain terms, that if she didn't start showing up for shul on a Shabbat morning on something at least reasonably resembling a regular basis, she'd never be taken seriously. Her attendance has improved noticeably, but it's still nothing to write home about.
On the other hand, as someone who can never get up early enough to get to morning minyan on time, and who shows up on Shabbat and Yom Tov roughly in time for the Torah reading (because I can't keep up with the "speed-davveners" and decided, probably close to two years ago at this point, to davven Shacharit at home), I can't say a word about not being there in time to count for a minyan. Guilty as charged.
"If going to Shul was a big part of her life and really important (counting for minyan, etc.), she might learn from that not to have anymore children, as it cramps her Shabbat life...
. . . egalitarianism inadvertently discourages childbirth.
. . . by focusing on female Rabbanim, female choirs, females going to Shul, etc., they get the women actively involved, but got smaller family sizes.
"any value system that encourages women to get validation from public roles will inadvertently discourage . . . private roles..."
Public vs. private roles for women, and how this conflict affects our childrearing decisions, is a matter of serious concern. Here is my previous attempt to deal with this issue.
Still, it may be another generation or two before we see how the children of, say, members of partnership minyanim and/or women’s Tefillah groups turn out.
On the other hand, as someone who can never get up early enough to get to morning minyan on time, and who shows up on Shabbat and Yom Tov roughly in time for the Torah reading (because I can't keep up with the "speed-davveners" and decided, probably close to two years ago at this point, to davven Shacharit at home), I can't say a word about not being there in time to count for a minyan. Guilty as charged.
So my question is, why stake a claim on counting in a Minyan, wearing a Tallit, etc., just to get guilt trips. Internalizing that you are not obligated to do so would ditch the guilt and not affect your practices. Why not adopt a mindset and values consist with your behavior instead of a "rebellious" attitude inconsistent with it?
Still, it may be another generation or two before we see how the children of, say, members of partnership minyanim and/or women’s Tefillah groups turn out.
Agreed, my gut instinct tells me that they will follow the same path as the other attempts at egalitarianism, but who knows. Perhaps they will work and find themselves heavily incorporated into Jewish life.
Hassidism and Reform Judaism started at roughly the same period, and both were skeptically seen as heretical. The former showed the ability to retain and increase Jewish presence, the latter showed itself to simply encourage intermarriage and loss of Yiddishkeit. If the partnership minyans remain within the bounds of Orthodoxy and succeed, you'll see them everywhere, but an idea needs to succeed in order to be accepted.
The AP is running an article that suggests that academic research is showing that each executed murdered may result in as many as 18 fewer murderers, which challenges those that claim it is a two-wrongs not making a right situation.
I know of no such similar studies on whether the refusal to accept intermarried children in the Orthodox fold is part of the reason that there is a 3% intermarriage rate compared to 37% in the Conservative movement. In fact, all analysis that I've seen suggests that it is "day schools" that make the difference, but no real regression analysis. We know that from the limited analysis, day school educate APPEARS to have an effect, but without an analysis, the liberal movements are looking in the dark.
The Reform movement has embraced intermarriage on the belief that it will create more Jews and potential dues payers, as well as seeking to market their temples to the intermarried that want something Jewish. The conservative movement has decided on a two prong approach, 1) discourage intermarriage, but 2) if it occurs, accept the individuals and encourage conversion. The Orthodox established has refused to acknowledge intermarriage at all, and prohibit honors, aliyot, etc., to men "living with" a gentile. With regards to the women, it's more complicated, because any condemnation must be tempered by the fact that there are some innocent Jewish souls born in those "marriages" that require reaching out to.
The conservative movement, like Orthodoxy, believes that intermarriage must be avoided, but differs on the post-intermarriage question. Without analysis, one doesn't know if the refusal to acknowledge the gentile spouse simply creates more mixed marriages for the Conservative groups to reach out to and encourage conversion, creates people on their way to disappearing that will show up to a Reform temple twice a year, or actually discourages intermarriage.
Essentially, if the "shunning" of the intermarried writes off 1 Jew, but prevents 3 or 4 from intermarrying, then I would suggest that the shunning is moral and correct. However, if it does nothing, as liberal Judaism asserts without evidence, then it is immoral to turn our backs on Jews.
I would suggest that the 37% vs. 3% of Conservative vs. Orthodoxy suggests that the shunning is a part of it. On the surface, the right wing of Conservative and left wing of Orthodoxy are not THAT dissimilar, yet the results are NIGHT AND DAY.
What percentage of conservative Jews would consider keeping a Kosher home if it would prevent intermarriage? What percentage would observe Shabbat if it made the difference? I would suggest that both of those would be easier things to accept than 10k-20k day school education, yet the emphasis is on day school and not observance in the home.
"So my question is, why stake a claim on counting in a Minyan, wearing a Tallit, etc., just to get guilt trips. Internalizing that you are not obligated to do so would ditch the guilt and not affect your practices. Why not adopt a mindset and values consist with your behavior instead of a "rebellious" attitude inconsistent with it?"
Sigh. That's the problem with blogging--one's commenters keep one honest. Time to start setting the alarm clock for an earlier hour on our local shul's weekday minyan days (Monday, Thursday, and Sunday).
Despite the fact that I don't recognize patrilineal descent, I've heard too many stories of people--including my cousin's wife--converting years after marriage to be willing to shun the intermarried. I just can't do it.
"What percentage of conservative Jews would consider keeping a Kosher home if it would prevent intermarriage? What percentage would observe Shabbat if it made the difference? I would suggest that both of those would be easier things to accept than 10k-20k day school education, yet the emphasis is on day school and not observance in the home." That's an interesting point. But, while observing Sabbath and/or keeping kosher are certainly cheaper that sending a kid to day school, I'm not sure they're necessarily easier to accept. Shmirat Shabbat/Sabbath observance can be pretty difficult to adopt and adapt to if one is not from a traditional home. I'm not there yet. I'm probably making your point for you, but, in some ways, it's easier to let someone else make a Jew of your kid than to change your own life enough to do so yourself.
Alex, you'll be happy to know that I made it to minyan only about four minutes late this morning. (Gotta get there earlier, though, if I want to try to keep up with the baal t'fillah/prayer leader--it takes me a few minutes to put on tefillin.) Thanks for keeping me honest.
Post a Comment
<< Home