Women at the Kotel

**Mediocrates** · 04-29-2003, 09:38 AM

So we're having a 'discussion' at home about a women's group that wants to be allowed to use the Kotel or part of it for their own service.

I'm sort of split 50-50 myself while my S.O. is very opposed.

Here are reasons for:

why not
the Orthodox don't rule everything
isn't pluralism part of the deal

Here are the reasons against:

slippery slope, who's next
can't make up rules on the fly
does not increase or maintain Judaism

Your thoughts?

Also on related front, should women be allowed to us tzitzit and tefillin? Are there any Conservative out there who have experienced the change from quasi-Orthodox w/ no women on the Bima, etc. to the Egalitarian service commonly used today? Was it a shock?

eyl · 05-09-2003, 03:43 AM

There was an article in Ma'ariv a view weeks ago on women at the Wall (The article in Hebrew can be viewed here). According to a rabbi interviewed in the article, there's no bar under the Halacha against women praying at the Wall (or, to answer your question, on laying teffilin and wearing tallitot); the problem is that the Orthodox rabbis and establishment are afraid that any loosening of strictures, even if it is within the Halacha, will cause Orthodox Jews to stray to Reform Judaism.

**Mediocrates** · 05-09-2003, 04:32 AM

Are they wrong? No one is saying Masorti or Reform is invalid - they're saying that if the Kotel is an Orthodox shul then those rules apply.

Does this enlarge or maintain Judaism?

eyl · 05-09-2003, 05:48 AM

Except that according to that article, even considering the Kotel as an Orthodox shul, women should still be allowed to pray there, according to the Halacha (note that at least according to their own testimony, the women involved are Orthodox, not Reform or Conservative).

**Mediocrates** · 05-09-2003, 06:30 AM

Yes that is correct of course. And all they would need is a curtain between them. It would seem, yes?

But on the other hand I do see the slippery slope argument. Who's next? How far do you bend the rules? I am only interested in enlarging or maintaining Judaism. I see pretty regularly Jewish congregations making up stuff on the fly, making up new rituals, rules, exclusions and generally becoming wrapped up in calling themselves self appointed experts. Where does it end? When we're all Unitarians? I don't think that the Orthodox have a fundamentally wrong approach.

eyl · 05-09-2003, 07:28 AM

Well, yes and no.

I do understand the slippery slope argument. OTOH, I'm not sure the Orthodox rabbis (at least in Israel) have a firm idea of the actual practises of Reform Jews (I've found that at least some of what I assumed to be true about them is in error). Maybe more to the point, if the Orthodox are unwilling to change or update Judaism (and there are some things which are desperately in need of changing, IMO) they can't turn around and forbid things the Halacha permits.

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Yes that is correct of course. And all they would need is a curtain between them. It would seem, yes?

But on the other hand I do see the slippery slope argument. Who's next? How far do you bend the rules? I am only interested in enlarging or maintaining Judaism. I see pretty regularly Jewish congregations making up stuff on the fly, making up new rituals, rules, exclusions and generally becoming wrapped up in calling themselves self appointed experts. Where does it end? When we're all Unitarians? I don't think that the Orthodox have a fundamentally wrong approach.

JustPat · 05-09-2003, 08:28 PM

Were the Temple still in place there would be no discussion for the structure and practice would answer the question. But, how are the women provided for under current conditions? How can they fulfill the desire of their heart if they are forbidden?

To me, it is not about updating Judaism or adjusting rules. It is more about giving those who seek to exercise their pursuit of G_d the freedom and ability to do so. How can a way be made without violating the Halacha is a problem left to the Rabbis and students of the Law.

Communication · 05-09-2003, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by JustPat
Were the Temple still in place there would be no discussion for the structure and practice would answer the question. But, how are the women provided for under current conditions? How can they fulfill the desire of their heart if they are forbidden?

To me, it is not about updating Judaism or adjusting rules. It is more about giving those who seek to exercise their pursuit of G_d the freedom and ability to do so. How can a way be made without violating the Halacha is a problem left to the Rabbis and students of the Law.

Great Comment! Thanks, JustPat.

**Mediocrates** · 05-10-2003, 09:20 AM

Judaism updates itself w/o forcing Orthodox to change. Why would you want to erase the differences among Orthodox, Conservative, Refrom, Reconstructionist and so on?

There are lots of things that are not Halacha which are left up to Rabbis, matrilineal descent for example..... As I said there are already mechanisms to do that don't require changes to Orthodox. Why would you want to change Orthodox?

(If the Temple were still in place there would probably be no Talmud)

Communication · 05-10-2003, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Judaism updates itself w/o forcing Orthodox to change. Why would you want to erase the differences among Orthodox, Conservative, Refrom, Reconstructionist and so on?

There are lots of things that are not Halacha which are left up to Rabbis, matrilineal descent for example..... As I said there are already mechanisms to do that don't require changes to Orthodox. Why would you want to change Orthodox?

Personally, I have problems with all of them, so if I had to chose one branch of Judaism out of a longing for community, I would probably go in wanting to "change" something about it.

There are problems with the battle for legitimacy and authority, which is not only something that occurs between the different branches but also within them as well. Such is Judaism, but as you mention yourself, Judaism updates itself without calling it a "change" so much as a "revelation" for how to interpret the original source material. I would say let the orthodox do as they please and if you don't like it, go to another branch, but the problem is that the orthodox are the most likely to confront issues relating to Jewish law and the opportunities to introduce a feminist perspective are very limited. Even when you see an arguably feminist perspective in the talmud, it's still written by men. Why should any man, whether he be reform or orthodox control how we express our spirituality? I understand the importance of seperating men from women during prayer, I'm very heterosexual myself, but there should be an option where we all learn from each other both in study and prayer. After all, the very model for how all Jews should pray was presented to us through a barren woman.

**Mediocrates** · 05-10-2003, 04:02 PM

Ok that's reasonable but not integral to liturgy is it? Particular directions or 'tolerances' about feminism and gay rights are not actually ensconced in anything uniqe about Orthodox or Masorti vs. anything elser. They are a reflection of the people who participate in them. For example Agunoth is a problem in the Orthodox community specifically because a Get is vital if the woman wishes to remain part of the community. OTOH gay rights tends not to be included in the issues that are of importance to people who insist on being Orthodox. I'm sure there is a discussion about this in O.U. but it's fairly low key.

I wonder if you are familiar with Rebbetzin Rachel Jungreis and the Shineni movement? It is an Orthodox spin on feminism.

Hmmm ....wanting to change Juidaism , how Jewish of you. In my heart I know that the long run survival of Judaism is dependent on Orthodox (of all kinds from O.U. to Lubavitch to Satmar and beyond) but it's tempting to wish there was a way to reconcile elements of others as well. I know at Edah there is a body of study that talks about pluralism within the context of putting fences around the Torah but I don't think this has progressed much in several years. I would like to see this amplified as a working discussion in Israel. Unfortunately their electoral politics tends to amplify the power of extremists so there is little reason for them to become less extreme.

JustPat · 05-10-2003, 09:29 PM

Considering the role of women in key points in Jewish history - Deborah, Huldah, etc - Would it not be most unwise to seek to limit thier involvement, be it in prayer, study, or practice?

**Mediocrates** · 05-11-2003, 06:29 AM

Yes ergo the story "Yentl", yes? This seems to be the main development of Conservative in the last 30 years, the Egalitarian orientation to it. Today women have the same obligations as men unlike a generation ago when a woman in Conservative still would not touch the Torah. This is what I like to see. But the overarching problem is that Conservative itself is not growing unlike both Reform and Orthodox so it seems that it's own middle of the road approach is missing the mark.

(BTW this is same conversation that some Conservative Southern Baptists have - I wonder if they can offer anything to this)

Communication · 05-11-2003, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by Mediocrates
Ok that's reasonable but not integral to liturgy is it? Particular directions or 'tolerances' about feminism and gay rights are not actually ensconced in anything uniqe about Orthodox or Masorti vs. anything elser. They are a reflection of the people who participate in them. For example Agunoth is a problem in the Orthodox community specifically because a Get is vital if the woman wishes to remain part of the community. OTOH gay rights tends not to be included in the issues that are of importance to people who insist on being Orthodox. I'm sure there is a discussion about this in O.U. but it's fairly low key.

I wonder if you are familiar with Rebbetzin Rachel Jungreis and the Shineni movement? It is an Orthodox spin on feminism.

Hmmm ....wanting to change Juidaism , how Jewish of you. In my heart I know that the long run survival of Judaism is dependent on Orthodox (of all kinds from O.U. to Lubavitch to Satmar and beyond) but it's tempting to wish there was a way to reconcile elements of others as well. I know at Edah there is a body of study that talks about pluralism within the context of putting fences around the Torah but I don't think this has progressed much in several years. I would like to see this amplified as a working discussion in Israel. Unfortunately their electoral politics tends to amplify the power of extremists so there is little reason for them to become less extreme.

How do I tread lightly in this thread? As I mentioned, I am critical of certain aspects of all the major strands (and nobody has even mentioned "renewal" Judaism, which is becoming an increasingly interesting strand competing with the reform movement) and I certainly posses my own prejudices. Regarding liturgy, I think I was reacting more to JustPat's comments. I'm not familiar with either the Rebbetzin Rachel Jungreis or the Shineni movements, but if you think that it's something I would be interested in, I'll certainly check them out. I'm always interested in what's going on as a whole.

As far as building a fence around the torah, I don't buy the argument that banning women from laying teffilin and wearing tallitot helps to keep Jews from moving towards reform Judaism. It's an exclusionary practice that does nothing to enhance orthodox Judaism. In fact, although women are technically considered exempt from the obligation to perform the mitzvah of tefillin, as eyl pointed out, there is nothing that should prevent a woman from performing it if she desires for herself a way to symbolize the tying of her physical and mental capacities to the service of God. Mikhal, King Saul's daugther, wore tefillin, as did Rashi's daughters, and none of the Sages objected. Moreover, they also ruled that there is nothing to prevent a woman from reciting the berakha as men do. Thus, allowing women to perform these mitzvot is not only consistent with Jewish tradition, but to outwardly ban the practice should be considered a break from our tradition.

*******deleted (poor judgement)******

JustPat · 05-12-2003, 11:52 AM

In all seriousness, are the issues of women particpating in various traditions related to the issues of "clean" and "unclean"? How many days a month would women actually be eligible to participate? Or is this more of a cultural issue where the women were wxpected to be raising babies and thus were not so much excluded, but rather, simply left out by the understnding that they were just too busy with daily life to be able to participate?