Dr. Sperber: Part 2

Dr. Sperber's book is concerned with the permissibility of women receiving aliyot in relation the role of the posek, the rabbi who makes halachik decisions. As such, his book is essentially one of case-studies in the halachik process, with women's aliyot being the central case-study.

Before I go on, I should say all translations, as well as paraphrases and analyses of the text, are unauthorized and are my own. Thus, any inconsistenices are the results of my flaws, and should not be attributed to the work itself.

Dr. Sperber starts off his book with a baraita brought in Megillah, 23,a: "All can be appointed to receive one of the 7 aliyot, even a woman and even a minor, but the sages said a woman should not read in the Torah because of "kavod hatzibur", communal respect.*" This is mirrored in a parallel source, Tosefta Megillah 3, 11, Lieberman edition, page תשכו 356: "All may receive on of the 7 aliyot, even a woman or a minor, but we do not bring a woman to read in public".

Dr. Sperber explains the Tannaitic material as follows (this is a translation as well as a paraphrase of his words on pg. 19): From a primary perspective, everyone can read (for receiving an aliyah included actually reading from the Torah in those days)**, including women. This was the halachik situation at one point, before "the sages said" otherwise, in the 3rd century CE, or later. What did the sages said? They said that it is becoming of a woman to not read....If there were no problem of "communal respect", then the halacha would remain in its primary form, that is to say, that women would be able to be called to the Torah and to read from the Torah.

Dr. Sperber then brings a ruling of the Gaonic rabbi, David Pardo, in his work חסדי דוד על תוספתא מגילה, קו עמוד ד, ליבורנו 1776 דצ ירושלים תשלא: "Even though they said a woman should not read from the Torah because of communal respect, if she has already received an aliyah, she should not stop, because according to the essence of the law she is permitted to read. And this is the language of the source in front of us, that we do not bring a woman to read, but if she has gone up on her own initiative, we do not stop her, for this enactment was only made because of communal respect".

Personally, reading this passage, I wondered if perhaps the entire concept of partnership minyanim and women services can be classified as the case of a woman who "has gone up of her own initiative", since the prayer arrangements were not initiated by men, ie the community did not "bring a woman to read", but by women who felt that larger participation was essential to their religious experience ie "has gone up of her own initiative", and that whether or not this trend is a good thing, once it has started, "once she has gone up...we do not stop her".

To return to the Dr. Sperber text: Dr. Sperber then goes on to cite the book ספר הבתים by Rabbi David Barabi Shmuel Kochavi, that a woman may read from the Torah in a prayer service that takes place inside a house, for "communal respect" only applies to a synagogue situation.*** Dr. Sperber also cites Ranni Yaakov Emden in his book "Migdal Oz", in which he says that if the Torah is being read in the house of a woman who has recently given birth, then the woman may read from the Torah, for "communal respect" applies only to "large congregations/great masses of people", and refers to not makig women's reading from the Torah a frequent occurence.****

Dr. Sperber than goes on to cite Rabbi Benzion Abba Shaul, (אןר לציון, חב, אורח, פרק ט, י"ם, תשנג, עמ פו), that the reason the Shulchan Aruch included the beginning of the baraita, that women may receive an aliyah, despite ultimately concluding that they may not do so due to communal respect, is in order to teach that in a place where there is no fear of communal respect being violated, such as a situation where one family is praying together, and the woman is the head of the household, then women may read from the Torah and receive alioyt. He concludes however, by saying that the matter requires further study.

The implication of this halachik responsa is that in any situation in which communal respect is not violated by having a woman receive an aliyah and read from the Torah, she may do so, and the family situation cited was merely meant to serve as an example of one such case. Carrying this implication to its larger conclusion, if in synagogues today, there is "no fear of communal respect being violated", then women may read from the Torah and receive aliyot in modern synagogues.

In the next section, Rabbi Dr. Sperber attempts to delineate a definition of communal respect and to see if the concept applies to today's synagogue situation.

First however, he concludes by examining the phraseology of the beraita: ""The sages said" expresses a language of "That is not appropriate", as opposed to "That is forbidden". The phrase...indicates a tradition of stringency. An examination of other times the phrase "The sages said" appears in the Talmud, makes a clear impression (if not an absolute proof), that the saying of the sages is not in the realm of a new decree of something forbidden stemming from the power of the rabbis, but rather, a practical enactment in a halchik policy designed to prevent a certain outcome."

* An alternative, perhaps more accurate translation: "respect for the congregation".
** Today, aliyot work as follows: Each week, on the Sabbath, a portion of the Torah is read out loud, during prayer services. This portion is divided into 7 sections. An official reader appointed by the community reads out loud, chanting the words according to a specific tune known as trop. For each of the seven sections, an individual is invited up to the bimah, the stage upon which the Torah is read. This individual then recites blessings over that section of the Torah reading, and stands until the official reader has finished reading the section out loud. It used to be that there was no official reader. Instead, 7 individuals would be called up, and would each both recite the blessings over their portion and read their portion out loud, according to the tune of the trop.
*** This may be an extra support to partnership minyans that take place in houses. Indeed, most often, the alternative prayer services set up to be more inclusive of women do not take place in the main sanctuary. Does this lessen the "communal respect" issue?
**** In Rav Emden's words I wonder if we might seek a lessen for sensitivity to the needs of women who have just given birth or are the primary caregivers for young children. Today, if a woman has just given birth, her husband goes to synagogue to recite certain public blessings on her behalf, while she usually stays at home with the baby. Perhaps Rav Emden's words speak of a situation of bringing prayer-services to the woman, so she does not have to miss out because she can not leave the house. In general, a model of domestic worship, in which public prayer convenes in the private sphere, may be a way of enabling more women with young children to be part of public prayer. This is not to deny the need for men to shoulder more child caregiver burdens, so that the norm is for childraising to be an equal parnership, with couples having the option of deviating from that norm and choosing for one parent to be the primary caregiver, as opposed to the current norm in which the mother is the primary caregiver. It is to acknowledge however, that given current reality, finding molds of communal prayer that accomodate this reality may be productive for the moment, and that biology does not make it likely that this reality will change for mothers with infants.

Dr. Daniel Sperber

I recently read a book by Rabbi Dr. Daniel Sperber, who is an expert on the development of Jewish law. The book is entitled "The Way of Halacha", and it was published in Hebrew, by "Reuven Mass" press, in Jerusalem, in 2007. It was a present from my friend Z. It is called דרכה של הלכה in Hebrew. To my knowledge, there is no English version available. I will try to summarize some of his arguments. Because the book is long, this may take me a few posts. In general, there may be times when my posts are summaries of articles/books I think are relevant to the Modern Jewish experience as it pertains to gender/sexuality, because I intend for this blog to be a sort of resource-bank as well as a forum for sharing my opinions (and discussing them - please feel free to comment on posts :) )

I will note before I begin that while Dr. Daniel Sperber does conclude that women in today's day and age are allowed to peform aliyot, he himself does not institute the policy of women's aliyot* in the synagogue where he is the rabbi. I think this is a recognition that while it is up to religious leaders to formulate theories and laws of religious change, and provide opportunities for such change for those who desire it, change can not be imposed, but ultimately must come from the bottom up. Thus, it is important to find a theoretical framework for women who want aliyot to feel comfortable pursuing them, without forcing women who do not want aliyot to take them. Of course, feminist theory argues such women only do not want the aliyot because they themselves have internalized the views of their male opressors. Had they only not been brain-washed, they would surely want to read from the Torah in public. Such a theory however, deprives women of agency, thus being mysogynist in its very attempt to be feminist. It is also elitist and imperialist, in that it imposes its own value-system on a subjugated population. Thus, it opresses in its attempt to liberate.

* To receive an aliyah (plural: aliyot) is to read in public from the Torah scroll during prayer services.

Miscellaneous Updates

There has been much going on in the world of gender, especially in the world of Judaism and gender, but business and laziness have prevented me from blogging. I apologize to my readers, and will try to be more regular* about blogging in the future.

First of all, Eshel, the an Orthodox GLBTQ group, held an extremely succesful shabbaton that was positively reported on by major Jewish publications, including the Jewish week.

Second of all, The Jewish Press, a more religiously right-wing paper, has recently been publishing some encouraging articles. They currently have a column about infertility, aimed at helping women who are experiencing difficulties in conceiving, which is very important given that infertility once was both stigmatized and taboo in more right-wing communities. They also recently published a letter about open-mindedness and shidduchim, which gives a male perspective about a system often cited for its negative impact on women: http://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/47238/

There was even an article urging parents to not force their children to date before they are ready. There is also a column on women's impact on Jewish history, and most recently, an article on the female Rennaissance artist Artemisia Gentileschi, whose stunning painting of the Esther story can be seen at the Metropolitan Museum of Art: http://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute.do/47303

The Jewish Press also has a decent number of female columnists, even though they mostly write about stereotypically feminine issues such as home, family and relationships.

I think it is important to note the progress at the Jewish Press, since, as a Modern Orthodox Jew, it is very easy to judge the yeshivish community. I personally do not often read the Jewish Press, but believe it is important to occasionally read Jewish publications from different sectors of Judaism, including the yeshivish community.

Third of all, I discovered that I actually know someone who was likely killed by domestic violence: Shelley Danishevski Covlin, who went to my synagogue and who I ate meals with a few times in the communal sukkah. I realized she had passed away, but did not know that it was suspected her husband, who she was involved in a divorce and custody battle with, had killed her - cause of death was strangulation.

I hope her death will cause the Orthodox community to be more aware of domestic violence, but I also hope that she will be remembered not just for the way she died, but for the way she lived, and how she was both a succesful career woman and a wonderful mother. I admire the efforts that my synagogue, Lincoln Square Synagogue** has made to memorialize her.



** Also called "Wink and Stare synagogue" for its progressive mechitza, which is half-glass. Here is a picture of the main sanctuary. Men and women can both see what takes place on the bimah, which is in the center. They can also both see what goes on on the opposite side of the mechitza. This photo was lifted from a cute love-story that took place thanks to the partially invisible mechitza. Full story can be seen here: http://www.seraphicpress.com/archives/2005/06/

* Does that phrase make me sound like a fiber commercial?