Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Some Questions and Answers on Egalitarianism Prepared by Rabbi Jarrod Grover, Beth Tikvah Synagogue Updated - November 17, 2016 1. What are practical consequences of adopting egalitarianism? When it comes to participation in public ritual acts, women and men over the age of Bar/Bat Mitzvah will be treated equally. A public ritual act includes, among other categories, leading services and counting in the minyan. We are already Torah-egalitarian, meaning that women are already eligible to have aliyot and read from the Torah at Beth Tikvah. All minyanim under the auspices of Beth Tikvah will count women equally with men, and women will be permitted to lead all parts of the prayer service. There are certain other halakhic innovations which are related to egalitarianism, but upon which I have not consented to any change. These include changes to our liturgy (i.e. adding the matriarchs to the amidah), identity status (i.e. patrilineal descent, bat kohen/levi), and legal matters (i.e. women serving as judges, witnesses, or giving a get). 2. Under what halakhic basis are we becoming egalitarian? The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS), which issues responsa on matters of law for the Conservative Movement, first issued a responsum permitting women to be counted in the minyan in 1973. Since then, nearly all synagogues in the Conservative Movement have become egalitarian. However, in 2014, Rabbi Pamela Barmash authored a responsum which sought to clarify questions of egalitarianism and the equality of women in the observance of the mitzvot. (This responsum is available here: https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/20112020/womenandhiyyuvfinal.pdf). Rabbi Barmash challenged the way earlier Jewish sources which dealt with women's obligations have been read. It submitted that the only reason women were exempted from certain mitzvot was because women were of a lower social standing than men in the early Rabbinic period. If we no longer view women as having a lower social standing than men, it would be incoherent for us today to allow them to be exempted from the mitzvot. Her responsum was submitted and approved by the CJLS by a vote of 15 in favor, 3 opposed, 3 abstentions. Addenda to the Barmash teshuva were also issued by several rabbis, and are available online. I found Rabbi Pamela Barmash's responsum to be persuasive in that she frames the discussion on gender to be about mitzvot, and women's obligation in them. She gives examples of laws adapting to changes in custom and social reality throughout Jewish history, which can serve as models for the changes she is suggesting in her paper. In two areas I found her proposal to be lacking. Firstly, she assumes that women's freedoms, rights and equality are universal values held across different Jewish communities. Second, she asserts that we can obligate women in the mitzvot without the consent of the community. I believe that the halakhah requires the men and women in a particular community to affirm these principles, rather than having them imposed upon them. Because of this requirement to consult the membership, I have ruled that adopting egalitarianism is a permissible change for the Synagogue, but not a required change. 3. Does this mean that women will have to wear tallit and tefillin? If women at Beth Tikvah are equal in standing and equal in obligation to men, then women are responsible for the mitzvot of reciting the Shema and the Shemoneh Esreh, wearing tzizit and donning tefillin, residing in a sukkah, taking up the lulav, hearing the shofar, counting the omer, and studying Torah. In our synagogue, this will be our educational principle and model. That said, I am not prepared to permit the congregation to become egalitarian if such a change is not implemented with the values of pluralism, respect, and tolerance. Men have been obligated in the mitzvoth for centuries. Women are just now starting to begin the process of learning about the mitzvoth and how to observe them. Many women in our community may be hesitant, and others may even reject the idea that they are obligated like men in the first place. The changes we are speaking of will not happen overnight. It is my halakhic determination that even if the congregation becomes egalitarian, no woman at Beth Tikvah shall be forced to immediately begin observing a mitzvah from which she was previously exempted. Perhaps this position will change some time in the future when we will see the fruits yielded by our egalitarian approach to the mitzvoth. But for now, we are just beginning to take our first steps. Let us be understanding and inclusive. 4. Doesn't Judaism forbid counting women in the minyan? While the Talmud (B. Berakhot 47b) considers and rejects the possible inclusion of a child or a slave for a minyan, it does not consider or reject the inclusion of a woman. Later commentaries on the Talmud (the Rishonim) discuss whether a woman may count, and for various reasons rule to exclude. This exclusion is most often based upon women's different level of obligation when it comes to prayer. This is why I believe that only when men and women see themselves as equally commanded in the mitzvot are women eligible to be counted in the minyan just like men. 5. What if a woman does not want to be counted in the minyan? Or does not want to observe a mitzvah? Is she sinning? If the community affirms that women are equal in standing and in obligation, then our ritual policies must follow these principles. Just as all adult Jewish males are counted to be part of the minyan, and have no choice in the matter, so will all adult Jewish females be counted as part of the minyan. As was said above, my ruling on egalitarianism is dependant upon policy changes incorporating the values of pluralism, respect, and tolerance. No woman shall be forced to immediately begin observing a mitzvah from which she was previously exempted. If a woman chooses to rely on an opinion from a valid halakhic authority that contradicts my halakhic opinion and exempts her from the mitzvot, then she is certainly not committing any sin by failing to perform them. However, if a woman accepts my logic, and the logic of Rabbi Barmash's teshuva, and believes that she is equally obligated in the mitzvot with men, then just like men, when she does not perform a mitzvah, she has committed a transgression. 6. Why is the congregation being consulted when this is a matter of halakhah (Jewish law)? Indeed, there are certain matters of halakhah which do not require congregational consultation. These apply when there are instances of Jewish law being violated, or Jewish law not being upheld. Neither applies to this case. It is permissible for Beth Tikvah to remain Torah-egalitarian. And it is also permissible for Beth Tikvah to become egalitarian - so long as it affirms the equality of women in socialstatus and in obligation. Therefore, a process of consultation, and a formal vote, is required in order to sanction any change. 7. How can we accept the equality of men and women when in so many areas of Jewish law, men and women are treated differently? The intention of my ruling is not to make Judaism into an androgynous religion. Such a position would take us in very radical directions, inconsistent with the message of the Torah, which asserts many differences between the sexes. Whether each “gendered” matter in Jewish law has halakhic basis today deserves critical evaluation on a case by case basis. Sometimes, the basis for these differences are biological or legalistic, and overturning them is without basis or biologically impossible. However, on the specific matter of women's participation in ritual acts, Rabbi Barmash has determined that the primary basis for differences between the genders is the lower social standing of women in society. It is this fundamental assumption which has been challenged in our day, and it is why these specific exemptions need to be revisited. 8. Is there not a prohibition against hearing a woman’s voice? Rav Yaakov Yehiel Weinberg (1884-1966) addresses this issue in his collection of responsa called Sridei Esh. The context for his ruling is a youth group that often had boys and girls together singing Shabbat songs at their gatherings. It is a lengthy essay where he points out that “those who sing holy songs do this for the sake of heaven, in order to awaken religious feelings among the girls…”. He also quotes the Tosafot saying “better to uproot one letter from the Torah, that the Torah not be forgotten from Israel.” He cautions that only the Sages can determine when this is appropriate, but states that the situation of women’s participation is one such time. He writes, “In this matter, in which there is no real prohibition, but only a custom of the pious and instance of special modesty, it is permitted to look for supporters…”. In his following paragraph, he adds one last plank in the platform, saying that these girls “have a certain level of self-respect, and would regard it as a disgrace and an exile from the community, were they forbidden to participate in singing Shabbat songs.” His responsum has been the basis for many groups, both Orthodox and Conservative, to allow women’s voices to be heard in prayer. 9. What about women wearing a kippah? Covering one’s head is not a commandment found in the Torah or the Talmud. Instead, it’s a sign of reverence for God, a custom that became popular in the Middle Ages, and has stuck around since. The spirit of egalitarianism is about encouraging both men and women to wear a kippah. In fact, Beth Tikvah already has certain policies with regards to men and women covering their heads at certain times and places. For the time-being, there are no changes being proposed with regards to these policies, in line with the spirit of tolerance and inclusiveness which animate my ruling. 10. Why is the implication of the congregation vote at the special meeting? The Constitution of the Synagogue mandates that any change to the "mode of worship" be affirmed through a general meeting by at least two-thirds of those in attendance. The Board has determined that becoming egalitarian constitutes a change in the "mode of worship," and therefore requires a vote. This vote does not affect the practice of the Synagogue, which may only be changed by Rabbinic approval. It is my intention, however, to immediately issue a halakhic rulings following a successful vote. Women would immediately begin to count in the minyan, and be eligible to lead all parts of the service. 11. Isn't changing Jewish law a "slippery-slope?" As Conservative Jews we believe in legal development. But we do not do so recklessly. We affirm that our tradition evolved as a result of the careful balancing between tradition and change. It was never intended to be frozen, and it was never intended to be reformed without respect for the chain of tradition. I do not see grounds to permit changes to Jewish law because certain observances are "outdated" and "inconvenient." That is a sure path to a weakened and impoverished Judaism, doomed to irrelevancy. However, I will continue to argue for halakhic change when I believe that a Jewish law diminishes the humanity or dignity of another person, for example in matters of gender or sexuality. I will do so when I believe that the presence of a tradition impedes Jews and would-be Jews from engaging in Jewish life and living - this motivates my decision to marry a Kohen with a divorcee, and do outreach for those seeking to enter our faith. And I will do so when advances in science prompt us to rethink long-standing beliefs, such as the permissibility of organ transplantation, in-vitro fertilization, or for that matter, eating swordfish. If this is a "slippery-slope," then it is the slippery-slope upon which Judaism has rested for millenia, and upon which Conservative Judaism has staked its fate. ~ ~ ~ Please note that I am interested in further comments and questions to assure that all matters of concern related to egalitarianism have been addressed. Always feel free to send me e-mails with those requests.