DOCSLIB.ORG

Engaged Couples, צעירים, and More,Daily

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Engaged Couples, צעירים, and More,Daily and ,צעירים ,Engaged Couples More and More ,צעירים ,Engaged Couples Marc B.Shapiro Continued from here 1. Regarding engaged couples having physical contact, this is actually the subject of a section of the book Penei Yitzhak by R. Hezekiah Mordechai Bassan. Here is the title page. This book was published in Mantua in 1744 by Menahem Navarra who was a descendant of R. Bassan. Navarra, who was at this time a doctor, not a rabbi, was nevertheless very learned in Torah matters. (He would later be appointed rabbi of Verona.[1]) Navarra included three essays of his own in the volume, the second of which is called Issur Kedushah. In this work he criticizes members of the Jewish community for allowing engaged couples to have physical contact before marriage. Here are the first two pages of the work. Navarra and the others I have referred to are only dealing with an engaged couple touching before marriage, but not with actual sexual relations. Yet this too is mentioned many centuries before A .בני טבעות Navarra. Ezra 2:43 and Nehemiah 7:46 refer to commentary attributed to R. Saadiah Gaon[2] explains this as follows: בני טבעות: שקלקלו אבותם גם [צ”ל עם] ארוסותיהם קודם שיכניסו אותם לחופה והיו סומכין על קדושי טבעות ומקלקלין עם ארוסותיהן. What this means is that after kiddushin, which was effected by ring), but before actual marriage (the two used to be) טבעתa separated, sometimes for many months), the engaged couple would have sexual relations. The children who resulted from As S. H. Kook .בני טבעות this were referred to negatively as points out,[3] R. Saadiah’s explanation is also mentioned by R. Hai Gaon.[4] R. Hayyim Benveniste, in seventeeth century Turkey, also speaks about how engaged couples would have physical contact. This shows again that there was a divergence between what the halakhah requires and what the people were actually doing (much like you find in a large section of Modern Orthodox society today). Here are R. Benveniste’s words:[5] להתייחד שניהם כמו שנוהגים פה תירייא ואיזמיר, שאחר השדוכין אחר עבור קצת ימים מתייחדין החתן והכלה ומכניסים אותה לחדר וסוגרין אותן הסגר מוחלט כמו שמסגרין הנשואה אחר ז’ ברכות, מנהג כזה רע ומר הוא, ואיכא איסורא מכמה פנים . ועוד שנכשלים באיסור נדה, וברוב הפעמים תצא כלה לחופתה וכריסה בין שיניה, וכמה מהם הודו ולא בושו שבאים עליה שלא כדרכה. אלא א-להים הוא יודע שטרחתי הרבה לבטל מנהג זה פה תיריא ועלה בידי, ועשיתי הסכמה בחרמות ונדויים על זה, ולסבת בעלי זרוע בעלי אגרופין אשר אין פחד א-להים לנגד עיניהם חזר המנהג לסורו רע. There are a few different points that are of interest in what R. Benveniste writes. The first is that he says that in the וכריסה בין majority of cases the bride arrives at the huppah This means that she is pregnant. Even if there is some .שיניה exaggeration here, R. Benveniste is telling us that many Jewish women were getting pregnant before marriage. Readers might recall my post here where I mentioned R. Ovadiah Bertinoro’s assertion that most Jewish brides in Palermo were pregnant at the time of their wedding. R. Benveniste mentions how he was able to improve matters by using the power of the herem to keep people in line, but that his success was short-lived as powerful members of the community were able to undermine his authority. This shows us, just as we saw in the text I quoted from R. Eleazar Kalir, that parents were often happy when their children had physical contact before marriage, and they opposed what they regarded as the overly puritanical approach of the rabbis. When R. this means ,באים עליה שלא כדרכה Benveniste refers to those who that some of the couples had a sexual relationship, but wanted the woman to be a virgin at the wedding. R. Jonah Landsofer (Bohemia, died 1712) also testified to the problem we have been discussing:[6] בבית ישראל ראיתי שערוריה איכה נהיית’ כזאת שאין איש שם לבו להוכיח בשער בת רבים על התקלה וקלקלת שוטי’ שקלקלו והרגלו הרגל דבר עד שנעשה טבע קיים לבלתי הרגיש ברעה אשר ימצאם באחרית הימים והוא אשר נעשה בכל יום ערוך השלחן וצפה הצפית מיום שגומרין שידוכין בין בחור ובתולה מושבים אותם יחד ומוסרי’ הבתולה לזנות בית אביה בחיבוקים ונשוקים ומעשה חידודי’ וכל הקרואים והמסובי’ מחזיקי’ בידו. Because the masses had no interest in what the rabbis had to say about this matter, R. Landsofer concludes that one need not even rebuke them, as they won’t listen anyway. Not long ago I heard a rabbi going on about the holy communities of Europe of a few hundred years ago, about their support of Torah, the respect they gave to the rabbis, and their commitment to halakhah. All of this is true, but if you look a little closer you find that these communities were actually very much like contemporary Modern Orthodox communities, in that together with a commitment to halakhah, many people also felt that they could determine which halakhot could be ignored. Or perhaps they didn’t even think they were violating halakhah. Maybe they assumed that the rabbis were making their lives difficult with extreme humrot. Either way you look at it, it is very obvious that there were many in traditional Jewish societies who created their own standards of practice which did not always correspond to what the rabbis insisted on, and they had no interest in changing their ways because of what the rabbis were saying.[7] While the standard rabbinic view has always been that bride and groom are not to have any physical contact until after the wedding ceremony, the rabbis in Germany were a little more lenient. Sefer Maharil records that the practice was for the bride and groom to touch before marriage, but only on the morning of the wedding, a time that also included celebration.[8] בעלות השחר ביום הששי היה קורא השמש לבא לבה”כ . ומביאים הכלה וחברותיה. וכאשר תבא עד פתח חצר בה”כ הלך הרב והחשובים והיו מוליכין את החתן לקראת הכלה. והחתן תופש אותה בידו ובחיבורן יחדזורקין כל העם על גבי ראשן חטין ואומרים פרו ורבו ג”פ. והולכין יחד עד אצל פתח בה”כ ויושבין שם מעט ומוליכין הכלה לביתה. This detail, that the groom held the bride’s hand prior to the wedding, is found in a number of other German sources.[9] I don’t know how this practice of holding the bride’s hand before the wedding ceremony can be reconciled with what appears in Tractate Kallah, ch. 1: כלה בלא ברכה אסורה לבעלה כנדה. here means a woman who is betrothed but not yet כלה The word married. R. Hayyim Joseph David Azulai, Kisei Rahamim, Kallah, ch. 1, comments on this passage: כלה בלא ברכה אסורה כלומר אפי’ לחבק או ליגע בה כנדה. I also find it noteworthy, and strange from our perspective, that Sefer Maharil tells us that for the wedding ceremony the rabbi would bring the bride to the groom, holding her by her robe:[10] והרב היה תופס אותה בבגדיה והוליכה והעמידה לימין החתן. R. Israel David Margulies (19th century) cites this text from Sefer Maharil and correctly notes that in medieval times the brides were much younger than in his day. He assumes that the typical bride was under 12 and a half years old, and therefore there was no problem of impure thoughts with such brides.[11] ואיזה הירהור יהי’ בכלה קטנה או נערה כזאת, ולכן לקח אותה הרב בעצמו אצל מפתן הבית מן יד הנשים, והביאה אל החתן ושארי הנשים נשארו ולא היה להם שום עסק בבהכ”נ ולא היה חשש הרהור במקום קדשו. 2. Recently I heard a shiur where the rabbi said that if there is a Torah or rabbinic commandment to do something, only the talmudic sages can, as an emergency measure, forbid the action. The classic example is the Sages telling us not to blow the shofar if Rosh ha-Shanah falls out on Shabbat. There is nothing controversial in what the rabbi said, and I think most would agree, even if there some exceptions to this general rule. The rabbi further noted that post-talmudic authorities cannot make gezerot as this power is also reserved for the talmudic sages. This viewpoint is shared by many, yet there are important authorities who disagree, and perhaps more significantly there is evidence of post-talmudic gezerot. I mention this now, after Passover [this post was written a few weeks ago], since those who reviewed the laws of Pesach would have seen Shulhan Arukh 453:5 which states: האידנא אסור ללתות בין חטים בין שעורים. “Nowadays, it is forbidden to moisten either wheat or barley [for grinding].” If you look at the Mishnah Berurah he explains that while the Sages forbid moistening barley because it will easily leaven, according to the Talmud it is permitted to moisten wheat. In fact, according to the Talmud, Pesahim 40a, Rava held that it .מצוה ללתות :is an obligation to wash the grains of wheat The Mishnah Berurah explains that it is the geonim who forbid moistening wheat since we are not expert at doing it properly, and it might come to be leavened, or we might delay removing the wheat after the moistening (before grinding) and this might lead to leavening. If the geonim forbid something that the Talmud permitted (or even required), isn’t this to be regarded as a gezerah? 3. Let me now mention something relating to Sukkot, which I had hoped to post closer to the holiday, but as the rabbinic .מה שהלב חושק הזמן עושק ,saying goes Shulhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim 649:4 states: גנות הצעירים של עובדי כוכבים וכיוצא בהם מבתי שמשיהם מותר ליטול משם לולב או שאר מינים למצוה.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Halachic and Hashkafic Issues in Contemporary Society 91 - Hand Shaking and Seat Switching Ou Israel Center - Summer 2018
    5778 - dbhbn ovrct [email protected] 1 sxc HALACHIC AND HASHKAFIC ISSUES IN CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY 91 - HAND SHAKING AND SEAT SWITCHING OU ISRAEL CENTER - SUMMER 2018 A] SHOMER NEGIAH - THE ISSUES • What is the status of the halacha of shemirat negiah - Deoraita or Derabbanan? • What kind of touching does it relate to? What about ‘professional’ touching - medical care, therapies, handshaking? • Which people does it relate to - family, children, same gender? • How does it inpact on sitting close to someone of the opposite gender. Is one required to switch seats? 1. THE WAY WE LIVE NOW: THE ETHICIST. Between the Sexes By RANDY COHEN. OCT. 27, 2002 The courteous and competent real-estate agent I'd just hired to rent my house shocked and offended me when, after we signed our contract, he refused to shake my hand, saying that as an Orthodox Jew he did not touch women. As a feminist, I oppose sex discrimination of all sorts. However, I also support freedom of religious expression. How do I balance these conflicting values? Should I tear up our contract? J.L., New York This culture clash may not allow you to reconcile the values you esteem. Though the agent dealt you only a petty slight, without ill intent, you're entitled to work with someone who will treat you with the dignity and respect he shows his male clients. If this involved only his own person -- adherence to laws concerning diet or dress, for example -- you should of course be tolerant. But his actions directly affect you. And sexism is sexism, even when motivated by religious convictions.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Bakeries Which Are Open on Shabbat Be Supervised? a Response to the Rabinowitz-Weisberg Opinion RABBI HOWARD HANDLER
    Should Bakeries Which are Open on Shabbat Be Supervised? A Response to the Rabinowitz-Weisberg Opinion RABBI HOWARD HANDLER This paper was submitted as a response to the responsum written by Rabbi Mayer Rabinowitz and Ms. Dvora Weisberg entitled "Rabbinic Supervision of Jewish Owned Businesses Operating on Shabbat" which was adopted by the CJLS on February 26, 1986. Should rabbis offer rabbinic supervision to bakeries which are open on Shabbat? i1 ~, '(l) l'\ (1) The food itself is indeed kosher after Shabbat, once the time required to prepare it has elapsed. 1 The halakhah is according to Rabbi Yehudah and not according to the Mishnah which is Rabbi Meir's opinion. (2) While a Jew who does not observe all the mitzvot is in some instances deemed trustworthy, this is never the case regarding someone who flagrantly disregards the laws of Shabbat, especially for personal profit. Maimonides specifically excludes such a person's trustworthiness regarding his own actions.2 Moreover in the case of n:nv 77n~ (a violator of Shabbat) Maimonides explicitly rejects his trustworthiness. 3 No support can be brought from Moshe Feinstein who concludes, "even if the proprietor closes his store on Shabbat, [since it is known to all that he does not observe Shabbat], we assume he only wants to impress other observant Jews so they will buy from him."4 Previously in the same responsum R. Feinstein emphasizes that even if the person in The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly provides guidance in matters of halakhah for the Conservative movement.
    [Show full text]
  • Angels and Demons: Managing Our Good & Evil Inclinations
    Shavuot 5780: Self-Guided Torah Study Experience Angels and Demons: Managing Our Good & Evil Inclinations By Rabbi Avi Heller, OU Regional Director for New Jersey In the comic books, the bad angel stands on one shoulder with a pitchfork and the good angel on the other with a halo. In Judaism, we call these two influences the “yetzer ha-tov”, the inclination to good and the “yetzer ha-ra” the inclination to evil. But those urges and desires are not imposed upon us from without; they are part of who we are and how Hashem created us. If God created us this way, there must also be a way to succeed in life with both the good and evil parts within us. With your chavruta, make your way through the following few sources. (The sources should take you around 30 minutes to read through and discuss.) STEP 1: Read these 2 verses about the creation of human beings from B’reisheet 1:27 and 2:7: ַו ִיּ ְב ָרא ֱאS ִקים ׀ ֶאת־ ָֽה ָא ָדם ְבּ ַצ ְלמוֹ ְבּ ֶצ ֶלם ֱאS ִקים ָבּ ָרא ֹאתוֹ ָז ָכר וּ ְנ ֵק ָבה ָבּ ָרא ָתֹא :םֽ (1:27) And Elokim created mankind in (h)is image, in the image of Elohim He created him, male and female He created them. ַו ִיּי ֶצר ה‘ ֱאS ִקים ֶאת־ ָֽה ָא ָדם ָﬠ ָפר ִמן־ ָה ֲא ָד ָמה ַו ִיּ ַפּח ְבּ ַא ָפּיו ִנ ְשׁ ַמת ַח ִיּים ַו ְי ִהי ָֽה ָא ָדם ְל ֶנ ֶפשׁ ַח ָֽיּה: (2:7) And Hashem Elohim formed mankind as dust from the ground and He blew a soul of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living spirit.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Bulletin Series Jewish Law and Economics Game Theory in The
    Research bulletin Series on Jewish Law and Economics Game Theory in the Talmud Robert J. Aumann Dedicated to the memory of Shlomo Aumann, Talmudic scholar and man of the world, killed in action near Khush-e-Dneiba, Lebanon, on the eve of the nineteenth of Sivan 5742 (June 9, 1982) Abstract A passage from the Talmud whose explanation eluded commentators for two millennia is elucidated with the aid of principles suggested by modern mathematical Theory of Games. ________________ * Institute of Mathematics, Center for rationality and Interactive Decision Theory, and Department of Economics, the Hebrew University in Jerusalem Game Theory in the Talmud1 By Robert J. Aumann l. A Bankruptcy Problem A man dies, leaving debts totaling more than his estate. How should the estate be divided among the creditors? A frequent solution in modern law is proportional division. The rationale is that each dollar of debt should be treated in the same way; one looks at dollars rather than people. Yet it is by no means obvious that this is the only equitable or reasonable system. For example, if the estate does not exceed the smallest debt, equal division among the creditors makes good sense. Any amount of debt to one person that goes beyond the entire estate might well be considered irrelevant; you cannot get more than there is. A fascinating discussion of bankruptcy occurs in the Babylonian Talmud2 (Ketubot 93a). There are three creditors; the debts are 100, 200 and 300. Three cases are considered, corresponding to estates of 100, 200 and 300. The Mishna stipulates the divisions shown in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intersection of Gender and Mitzvot Dr
    The Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies Walking with Mitzvot Edited By Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson ogb hfrs andvhfrs Rabbi Patricia Fenton In Memory of Harold Held and Louise Held, of blessed memory The Held Foundation Melissa and Michael Bordy Joseph and Lacine Held Robert and Lisa Held Published in partnership with the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the Rabbinical Assembly, the Federation of Jewish Men’s Clubs and the Women’s League for Conservative Judaism. THE INTERSECTION OF GENDER AND MITZVOT DR. RABBI ARYEH COHEN TO START WITH A COUPLE alakhah, or Jewish Law, it has been often noted, is as much a pedagogical system as a legal system. The goal of the Hmitzvot as codified and explicated in the halakhic system is to create a certain type of person. Ideally this is a person who is righteous and God fearing, a person who feels and fulfills their obligation towards God as well as towards their fellows. Embedded into this goal, of necessity, is an idea or conception of what a person is. On the most basic level, the mitzvot “construct” people as masculine and feminine. This means that the halakhic system, or the system of mitzvot as practiced, classically define certain behaviors as masculine and others as feminine. The mitzvot themselves are then grouped into broad categories which are mapped onto male and female. Let’s start with a couple of examples. The (3rd century CE) tractate Kiddushin of the Mishnah begins with the following law: “A woman is acquired in three ways, with money, with a contract and with sex.” The assumption here is that a man “acquires” a woman in marriage and not the reverse.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Perspectives on Reproductive Realities by Rabbi Lori Koffman, NCJW Board Director and Chair of NCJW’S Reproductive Health, Rights and Justice Initiative
    Jewish Perspectives on Reproductive Realities By Rabbi Lori Koffman, NCJW Board Director and Chair of NCJW’s Reproductive Health, Rights and Justice Initiative A note on the content below: We acknowledge that this document invokes heavily gendered language due to the prevailing historic male voices in Jewish rabbinic and biblical perspectives, and the fact that Hebrew (the language in which these laws originated) is a gendered language. We also recognize some of these perspectives might be in contradiction with one another and with some of NCJW’s approaches to the issues of reproductive health, rights, and justice. Background Family planning has been discussed in Judaism for several thousand years. From the earliest of the ‘sages’ until today, a range of opinions has existed — opinions which can be in tension with one another and are constantly evolving. Historically these discussions have assumed that sexual intimacy happens within the framework of heterosexual marriage. A few fundamental Jewish tenets underlie any discussion of Jewish views on reproductive realities. • Protecting an existing life is paramount, even when it means a Jew must violate the most sacred laws.1 • Judaism is decidedly ‘pro-natalist,’ and strongly encourages having children. The duty of procreation is based on one of the earliest and often repeated obligations of the Torah, ‘pru u’rvu’, 2 to be ‘fruitful and multiply.’ This fundamental obligation in the Jewish tradition is technically considered only to apply to males. Of course, Jewish attitudes toward procreation have not been shaped by Jewish law alone, but have been influenced by the historic communal trauma (such as the Holocaust) and the subsequent yearning of some Jews to rebuild community through Jewish population growth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Marriage Issue
    Association for Jewish Studies SPRING 2013 Center for Jewish History The Marriage Issue 15 West 16th Street The Latest: New York, NY 10011 William Kentridge: An Implicated Subject Cynthia Ozick’s Fiction Smolders, but not with Romance The Questionnaire: If you were to organize a graduate seminar around a single text, what would it be? Perspectives THE MAGAZINE OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES Table of Contents From the Editors 3 From the President 3 From the Executive Director 4 The Marriage Issue Jewish Marriage 6 Bluma Goldstein Between the Living and the Dead: Making Levirate Marriage Work 10 Dvora Weisberg Married Men 14 Judith Baskin ‘According to the Law of Moses and Israel’: Marriage from Social Institution to Legal Fact 16 Michael Satlow Reading Jewish Philosophy: What’s Marriage Got to Do with It? 18 Susan Shapiro One Jewish Woman, Two Husbands, Three Laws: The Making of Civil Marriage and Divorce in a Revolutionary Age 24 Lois Dubin Jewish Courtship and Marriage in 1920s Vienna 26 Marsha Rozenblit Marriage Equality: An American Jewish View 32 Joyce Antler The Playwright, the Starlight, and the Rabbi: A Love Triangle 35 Lila Corwin Berman The Hand that Rocks the Cradle: How the Gender of the Jewish Parent Influences Intermarriage 42 Keren McGinity Critiquing and Rethinking Kiddushin 44 Rachel Adler Kiddushin, Marriage, and Egalitarian Relationships: Making New Legal Meanings 46 Gail Labovitz Beyond the Sanctification of Subordination: Reclaiming Tradition and Equality in Jewish Marriage 50 Melanie Landau The Multifarious
    [Show full text]
  • Welcome to the DAT Minyan! D'var Torah by Rabbi Sacks
    Candle Welcome to the DAT Minyan! Lighting (earliest) 6:13p Shabbat Ki Teiztei (latest) 7:18p August 29, 2020 - 9 Elul, 5780 Bara Loewenthal and Nathan Rabinovitch, Co- Presidents Havdalah 8:16p We invite men and women to sign up for by Rabbi Sacks our in person minyanim, located at The D’var Torah Jewish Experience and the Polotsky Our parsha contains more laws than any other. Some of them have residence. For those unable to make it, we generated much study and debate, especially two at the beginning, the law of the captive woman and that of the “stubborn and rebellious son.” There encourage everyone to join us for our virtual is, however, one law that deserves much more attention than it has daily davening and learning opportunities. generally received, namely the one placed between these two. It concerns All davening times are published on our the laws of inheritance: website. If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, To join us virtually, download the ZOOM and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife app to your computer or phone. The he does not love, when he wills his property to his sons, he computer log in is: must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife https://us02web.zoom.us/j/94819261580? he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the pwd=MXpoOExuVlRubFltZmN5ZGlFQlVaZz wife he does not love. He must acknowledge the son of his 09 unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double share of Meeting ID: 948 1926 1580 all he has.
    [Show full text]
  • The Religious Implications of an Historical Approach to Jewish Studies
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 482 214 SO 035 468 AUTHOR Furst, Rachel TITLE The Religious Implications of an Historical Approach to Jewish Studies. PUB DATE 2001-00-00 NOTE 59p.; Prepared by the Academy for Torah Initiatives and Directions (Jerusalem, Israel). AVAILABLE FROM Academy for Torah Initiatives and Directions,9 HaNassi Street, Jerusalem 92188, Israel. Tel: 972-2-567-1719; Fax: 972-2-567-1723; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.atid.org/ . PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC03 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Curriculum Development; Discourse Communities; *Jews; *Judaism; *Religion Studies; *Religious Factors; Research Methodology; Scholarship IDENTIFIERS Historical Methods; *Jewish Studies; *Torah ABSTRACT This project examines the religious implications of an approach to "limmudei kodesh" (primarily the study of Talmud) and "halakhah" (an integration of academic scholarship with traditional Torah study and the evaluation of the educational pros and cons of a curriculum built on such a synthesis) .In the concerted effort over the past century to develop a program of "Torah U-Madda" that synthesizes Torah and worldly pursuits, Torah scholars have endorsed the value of secular knowledge as a complimentary accoutrement to the "Talmud Torah" endeavor, but few have validated the application of secular academic tools and methodologies to Torah study or developed a model for such integrated Torah learning. The Torah scholar committed to synthesis seeks to employ historical knowledge and methodological tools in the decoding of halakhic texts as a means of contributing to the halakhic discourse. Traditional "Talmud Torah" does not address the realm of pesak halakhah, but it is nonetheless considered the highest form of religious expression.
    [Show full text]
  • Women's Testimony and Talmudic Reasoning
    Kedma: Penn's Journal on Jewish Thought, Jewish Culture, and Israel Volume 2 Number 2 Fall 2018 Article 8 2020 Women’s Testimony and Talmudic Reasoning Deena Kopyto University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/kedma Part of the Jewish Studies Commons, Near and Middle Eastern Studies Commons, and the Religion Commons This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/kedma/vol2/iss2/8 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Women’s Testimony and Talmudic Reasoning Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License This article is available in Kedma: Penn's Journal on Jewish Thought, Jewish Culture, and Israel: https://repository.upenn.edu/kedma/vol2/iss2/8 Women’s Testimony and Talmudic Reasoning Deena Kopyto Introduction Today, being a witness is often considered a burden – an obligation that courts force people to fulfill. In contrast, in Talmudic-era Babylonia and ancient Israel, testifying was a privilege that certain groups, including slaves, women, and children, did not enjoy. While minors should be barred from participating in courts, and still largely are today, the status of women in Talmudic courts poses a much trickier question. Through this historical and Talmudic analysis, I aim to determine the root of this ban. The reasons for the ineligibility of female testimony range far and wide, but most are not explicitly mentioned in the Talmud. Perhaps women in Talmudic times were infrequently called as witnesses, and rabbis banned women from participation in courts in order to further crystallize this patriarchal structure.
    [Show full text]
  • In This Issue
    THE JEWISH OBSERVER IN THIS ISSUE SHARING THE BURDENS OF OUR FELLOWS THE JEWISH OBSERVER 7 (ISSN) 0021-6615 IS PUBLISHED MONTHLY, EXCEPT JULY & AUGUST AND A COMBINED ISSUE FOR JANUARy/FEBRUARY. BY THE ACUDATH ISRAEL OF AMERICA, .., BROADWAY. NEW YORK. NY 10004. PERIODICALS POSTAGE PAID IN NEW YORK, NY. SUBSCRIPTION $25.00/ YEAR; 2. YEAHS, 548.00; j YEARS, 16 S69.00. OUTSIDE OFTHE UNITED STATES (US nYNDS DRAWN ON A US BANK ONLY) $I5.00 SURCHARGE PER YEAR. SINGLE COPY $3.50; OUTSIDE NY AREA $3.95; FOREIGN $4.50. 42 THE CLUlTERED POSTMASTER: SEND ADDRESS CHA!'\GES TO: TEL 212-797-9000, FAX 646-'154­ 1600 PRINTED I~ THE ljSA LETTER FROM JERUSALEM RABBI ~ISSON WOLPIN. Eaitor 19 LESS QBVOUS LESSONS Editorial Board FROM THE MAYORAL RABBI ABBA BRUDNY RABBI JOSEPH ELIAS Yonoson f?Qsenb/~JlTi JOSEPH FRIEDENSON RABBI YISRO'El. MEIR KIRZNER RABBI NOSSON SCHER\.-fAN PRO'F. AARON T\VERSKI HIGHER LIGHTS OF CHANUKAH Founders THE CVJDtES :HF DR. ERNST L. BODENHEIMER Z"L 23 ~.ND RABBI MOSHE SHERER Z"L Rabbi Yonason Go/dson Management Board 27 WAKE Up AND NAFTOLI HIRSCH. ISAAC KIRZNER. RABBI SHLOMO LESlN. DAVID SINGER, NACHUM STEIN 31 P,-[J.\SE KEEP THE SHADES DOWN! MRS. LEAH ZAGELBAUM. AdvelTising Manager Rabbi Sho!orn Srn.ith PUBLISHl':D BY .A POEM BY AGUDATH ISRAEL OF AMEHTCA 32 Zos U.S. TRADE DISTRIBUTOR REAlLY MISSING A POEM BY Bracha fELDHEIM PUBLISHERS 33 II ISH YWUDI"; THE LIFE LEGACY' OF A TORAH BRITISH REPRESE!'i'TATIVE M.l: BlBELMAN Grosvenor Works Mount Pleasant Hill 39 REMEM!3ERlt~G THE PONOIfEZHER London ENGL4ND CHAPTER OF FRENCH REPHESE!\!TATIVE RABBI ISHAEL) HEPRESENTATIVE INTNL MEDIA PLACEMENT Boltshauser) BELGIAN REPRESENTATIVE MR.
    [Show full text]
  • Gay-Orthodox.Pdf
    "JONATHAN" AND "DAVID" are naomi observant Jews. They belong to the same Orthodox synagogue in New York City. From time to time, other synagogue members invite them to Shabbat lunch. Periodically, Jonathan and David host a fam­ ily for Shabbat in the Manhattan apartment they share. Occasionally, someone who doesn't know them well will try to interest one or the other in a nice Orthodox girl. After all, Jonathan and David are sin­ gle professionals in their early 40s—ripe material for a sbiddach (match). But both men always respond, politely, that they are not interested. That's because Jonathan and David are already committed. To each other. Jonathan is a social worker. But that does not define him in the Orthodox Jewish world nearly as emphatically as his sexuality. That is why he is not openly gay in his Orthodox community (and why he, and several other gay men interviewed for this arti­ cle, asked that their real names not be used). "I am not keeping [it] a secret," says Jonathan, "but I also don't feel I have to make a statement. People don't need to know everything about me— especially something that is so personal." More and more, gay and lesbian Orthodox Jews seem to be taking Jonathan's approach: acknowledg­ ing they are gay, even if they don't advertise it. And in response, a growing number of underground support groups geared specifically to Orthodox Jews are crop­ ping up both online and in Jewish centers in cities such as New York, Los Angeles, and Miami.
    [Show full text]