Women and Men in Communal Prayer Halakhic Perspectives

KTAV Publishing House, Inc.

Contents

Acknowledgements................................................................................................................................xiList of Contributors............................................................................................................................xiiiEditor's Preface................................................................................................................................xviiIntroduction Balancing Tradition and Modernity: The Case for Women's Participation in the Synagogue Ritual Dr. Tamar Ross.....................1Chapter 1 Congregational Dignity and Human Dignity: Women and Public Torah Reading Rabbi Daniel Sperber.......................................27Chapter 2 Qeri'at ha-Torah by Women: A Halakhic Analysis Rabbi Mendel Shapiro.................................................................207Chapter 3 Aliyyot for Women Professor Eliav Shochetman........................................................................................291Chapter 4 Torah Aliyyot for Women Rabbi Shlomo Riskin.........................................................................................359Chapter 5 A Response to Shlomo Riskin Rabbi Mendel Shapiro....................................................................................389A Response to Mendel Shapiro Rabbi Shlomo Riskin...............................................................................................407Glossary........................................................................................................................................413

Chapter One

Foreword

This study began as an expansion of two lectures I delivered on the subject in 2002: one at a conference of the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance on February 17, 2002, and the other at an Edah Conference on November 10, 2002. An abbreviated Hebrew version, translated by my daughter Elisheva Sperber, was published in De'ot 15 (2003), 17-20, 44. An expanded English version of the lectures appeared in the Edah Journal 3:12 (2002), 1-14, translated by Joel Linsider. The present version is based upon a greatly expanded version of the Hebrew article, translated into English and edited for the present monograph. It is similar, but not identical to the volume I recently published in Hebrew, entitled Darkah shel halakhah: Qeri'at nashim ba-Torah: Praqim bi-mediniyyut pesiqah, Jerusalem, 2007.

In the course of writing this expanded version, I discovered numerous additional sources and references and also realized the need to elaborate and expand the discussion of various related questions-including both those related to various other halakhic issues related to women's mitsvah performance and those pertaining to more general issues of halakhic methodology. In order not to excessively interrupt the flow of the basic argument related to the issue at hand, these additional excurses and discussions have been gathered into a series of appendices, which constitute Part II of this volume. In addition, the references have been compiled into a bibliography at the end of the monograph, for the convenience of those who wish to read further on the subject. My thanks to Rabbi Jonathan Chipman, who, in addition to translating the Hebrew manuscript, edited and reorganized the entire study into its present form. Additional editing and rearrangement of the material were most ably done by Dr. Chaim Trachtman.

My intention here has not been to provide a halakhic ruling (pesaq), but rather to present the findings of my own study of the subject and to issue a call to the poseqim of our generation to examine the sources and findings presented here, and to arrive at their decision in their own way and according to their understanding. I would, of course, be happy if they were to lend their own support and agreement to my approach and my conclusions.

Daniel Sperber Jerusalem, Hanukkah 5770 - December 2009

PART I

WOMEN AND PUBLIC TORAH READING: A HALAKHIC STUDY

An Introduction of Sorts

I would like to introduce this discussion with a comment of R. Moses Sofer, known as the Hatam Sofer, in a responsum to R. Zvi Hirsch Hayyes (Orah hayyim 208). The latter, in the introduction to his Torat ha-nevi'im (Zolkiew, 1836), expressed the fear that "critics will come seeking and finding faults" of various kinds in his book. The Hatam Sofer, after showering praises upon Hayyes' book, responded with a story told in the Talmud (Beitsah 38a-b) concerning R. Abba, who, prior to going up to the Land of Israel, prayed, "May it be Your will that I may say a thing that will be accepted" (i.e., by the Sages of the place, so that I not be put to shame-Rashi, ad loc.). Indeed, the Talmud continues, when he arrived at R. Yohanan's study house in Erets Yisrael, the students made fun of him because of a certain argument he put forward concerning the subject being studied on that particular day. In contrast, the prayer of R. Nehunya ben Hakanah, in Berakhot 28a, is: "May it be Your will ... that no mishap [i.e., violation of halakhah] happen because of me, and that I not stumble in matters of halakhah, and that my colleagues may rejoice in me."

The Hatam Sofer inquires as to the difference between these two prayers. He answers as follows: R. Abba wished to find favor and approval on the part of those who listened to his words, and therefore he did not succeed. "What does it matter whether your words are accepted or not [by others]? Say what you have to say for the sake of Heaven! Hence he missed the mark." By contrast, R. Nehunya ben Hakanah prayed that he be guided toward the truth of the Torah, and he was not concerned with the approval of his listeners. As the Hatam Sofer put it:

May the discussion take place in a manner such that my opinion and line of reasoning is well-grounded according to my intellect. Thus, when my colleague argues against me, I shall examine in my mind to determine if his words are correct; and if his words do not seem right to me, I will insist upon my own opinion. What difference is it to me whether he agrees or not, seeing that it is not my purpose to turn his opinion toward mine.

Hence, R. Nehunya merited that his views were accepted. The Hatam Sofer concludes:

A person who knows in himself that his intention is entirely for the sake of the Almighty, may He be praised, and to magnify and make great the Torah, but withholds sustenance [i.e., what he knows to be true Torah] because of those who seek faults and mock and insult the angels of God-such a person commits a sin. And just as he would be punished for preaching [i.e., incorrectly], so too will he be punished for refraining [i.e., from teaching true Torah].

My grandfather of blessed memory, R. David Sperber z"l, was among those who followed the approach of the Hatam Sofer. In his Introduction to my grandfather's book, Mikhtam...