I confess to being unable to catch what the speaker is saying through her mumbley brit accent, nor do I quite understand how the three people standing between the bride and groom are related, but doesn't the video make for an interesting slice of Jewish life?
Showing posts with label women in Judaism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women in Judaism. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Monday, October 24, 2011
Sad news for women: A gematriah proves you are cursed
Zachar (male) in gematria is bracha (blessed); nekeiva (female) in gematria is klala (cursed)
Related Reading
- Texas sharpshooter fallacy
- Confirmation bias
- Clustering illusion
- Bible Codes: A Textual Perspective, by Jeffery Tigay
HT: A reader who did not provide me with express permission to reveal his name
Search for more information about material that causes heaving sighs at 4torah.com
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Profiles in Cowardice
When someone asks you to condemn violence against little girls, the correct response is "Sure. I condemn violence against little girls."
Here's the exact language of the petition this Rabbi was asked to support (translated)
Here's the exact language of the petition this Rabbi was asked to support (translated)
We, the undersigned, condemn all who performs acts physical or verbal harassment against any human being, but especially against girls wearing clothing that might not appeal to your personal taste.
We also call upon the leaders and rabbis of the Beit Shemesh to condemn in no uncertain terms all those who engage in such acts of harassment
It takes a special kind of rabbinical cowardice to refuse to sign your name to those words, and a special kind of crooked morality to justify that cowardice.
Background: This particular coward used to have some guts. The Google Machine tells me that Natan Slifkin prayed in his shul, and enjoyed this rabbi's full support at the height of Slifkingate. Later, this rabbi refused a prominent Bet Shemesh chesed organization permission to fund raise in his shul on the grounds that the organization's founder thinks child molesters should be reported to the police.
So by my count he is 1-2
Background: This particular coward used to have some guts. The Google Machine tells me that Natan Slifkin prayed in his shul, and enjoyed this rabbi's full support at the height of Slifkingate. Later, this rabbi refused a prominent Bet Shemesh chesed organization permission to fund raise in his shul on the grounds that the organization's founder thinks child molesters should be reported to the police.
So by my count he is 1-2
Monday, September 19, 2011
Yet another post on she lo asni isha
By Rabbi Zev Farber
Taken from here, without permission
(Rabbi Zev Farber was ordained (yoreh yoreh and yadin yadin) by YCT Rabbinical School. He is the founder of AITZIM (Atlanta Institute of Torah and Zionism) - an adult education initiative. Rabbi Farber serves on the board of the International Rabbinic Fellowship (IRF) and is the coordinator of their Vaad Giyyur. He is also a PhD candidate at Emory University's Graduate Division of Religion.)
Recently, my friend and colleague, Rabbi Yosef Kanefsky, wrote a blog-post describing how uncomfortable he has become with men reciting the blessing thanking God for not making them women. If I remember the original post correctly (it has since been deleted), R.Kanefsky felt that this blessing reflected an outdated view of women as something less than men. In our society that belief is no longer held and implying it would be discourteous to women.Therefore, he argued, the blessing should not be said nowadays.
The latter point, i.e. that the blessing should be dropped or changed is, of course, debatable, since where and when halakha is supposed to change is a tricky question. I myself have an article in the works on this subject, advocating an adjustment to our nussah, and I am looking forward to a constructive dialogue on this topic in our community.
R. Kanefsky’s first point, that the blessing reflects, or, at least, originally reflected, a viewpoint of women as being somewhat “less” than men is so patently obvious that it is amazing to me that it needs to be defended. And yet, the nature of our Orthodox world has become one where the patently obvious can be denied as if it were itselfabsurd. This can be seen from the numerous blog posts that have been written over the past week attacking Rabbi Kanefsky for not being “really” Orthodox (a favorite form of “j’accuse” amongst Orthodox bloggers nowadays). At best, some have chalked it up to his strong emotional nature clouding his judgment. I will not engage these posts or their authors directly because of their mean-spirited and inappropriate tone, but I do think a number of points need to be made.
Taken from here, without permission
(Rabbi Zev Farber was ordained (yoreh yoreh and yadin yadin) by YCT Rabbinical School. He is the founder of AITZIM (Atlanta Institute of Torah and Zionism) - an adult education initiative. Rabbi Farber serves on the board of the International Rabbinic Fellowship (IRF) and is the coordinator of their Vaad Giyyur. He is also a PhD candidate at Emory University's Graduate Division of Religion.)
Recently, my friend and colleague, Rabbi Yosef Kanefsky, wrote a blog-post describing how uncomfortable he has become with men reciting the blessing thanking God for not making them women. If I remember the original post correctly (it has since been deleted), R.Kanefsky felt that this blessing reflected an outdated view of women as something less than men. In our society that belief is no longer held and implying it would be discourteous to women.Therefore, he argued, the blessing should not be said nowadays.
The latter point, i.e. that the blessing should be dropped or changed is, of course, debatable, since where and when halakha is supposed to change is a tricky question. I myself have an article in the works on this subject, advocating an adjustment to our nussah, and I am looking forward to a constructive dialogue on this topic in our community.
R. Kanefsky’s first point, that the blessing reflects, or, at least, originally reflected, a viewpoint of women as being somewhat “less” than men is so patently obvious that it is amazing to me that it needs to be defended. And yet, the nature of our Orthodox world has become one where the patently obvious can be denied as if it were itselfabsurd. This can be seen from the numerous blog posts that have been written over the past week attacking Rabbi Kanefsky for not being “really” Orthodox (a favorite form of “j’accuse” amongst Orthodox bloggers nowadays). At best, some have chalked it up to his strong emotional nature clouding his judgment. I will not engage these posts or their authors directly because of their mean-spirited and inappropriate tone, but I do think a number of points need to be made.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
An Orthodox Woman who no longer says She Asani Kirtzono
Written by MFB, and taken from the comment thread on "Sometimes its ok to change the liturgy; sometimes it isn't"
I'm an orthodox woman who stopped saying the bracha of sheasani kirtzono about 15 years ago. Strangely enough, the fact that my husband and other men in my life say shelo asani isha every day doesn't bother me nearly as much as the idea of shelo asani isha as a "consolation prize" bracha. I guess I learned the explanation that shelo asani isha has to do with the number of mitzvot one is obligated to do when I was very young and just never really questioned it. (I thought that explanation is in the gemara, why do you say it was created long after?
[DB: I mis-communicated earlier.The Jerusalem Talmud and Tosefta say the the reason for the blessing is that women are not obligated in Mitzvot. The suggestion, I think, is that this makes men superior to women, just as free Jewish men are superior to non-Jews and slaves. Other sources rely on the reason given by the Tosefta and the Jerusalem Talmud though some also introduce social explanations, or suggest this is just a way of reaching 100 blessings. The business about women being on a higher spiritual level, came much later I think.]
Although now that I think about it, it does seem strange to say that the absolute number of mitzvoth is what matters rather than the amount of time one spends doing mitzvoth. (There are some mitzvoth that are performed very infrequently or take very little time to perform while others are done often and take up a good chunk of one's time)
The bracha of sheasani kirtzono always bothered me much more. It seems that the woman is acknowledging that it is somehow "better" to be a man, but is accepting her lower status as being G-d's will similar to how we accept other evils in the world that we don't understand as being somehow part of G-d's master plan. I never felt comfortable saying a bracha that implied that I wish I were a man. I am sure that being a man has some advantages that as a woman I could never understand (whether spiritual, practical or otherwise) but I do not think that being obligated to wear tzitzit, sit in a sukka and count sefirat haomer could possible make up for the spiritually uplifting experiences of pregnancy, childbirth and nursing a baby. But then again, what do I know, I'm just a woman.
I get that maybe 2000 years ago women might have actually felt that they had somewhat of a lesser status and therefore the bracha was appropriate, but what annoys me most is the modern apologetic spin given to it today. Women, we are told, have fewer mitzvot because they are on a higher spiritual level to begin with. So the bracha of sheasani kirtzono is thanking God for making us according to His will as higher spiritual beings. Huh?? By that logic are non-Jews on a higher spiritual level than Jews? Has any slave being offered freedom ever said, "thanks, but no thanks. I'd rather stay a slave with fewer mitzvot because it keeps me on a higher spriritual level?" And, as I said before, is spirituality measured by the actual number of mitzvot one does or by the kavana and amount of time spent absorbed in mitzvot?
When I got married 18 years ago I was under the mistaken impression that I should start davening in my husband's (Sephardi – edot mizrach) nusach (even though he didn't really care what nusach I daven in.) I noticed that in those siddurim women say the bracha of shelo asani isha without God's name (since it is a bracha that does not appear in the gemara.) I remember learning that these brachot are mentioned in the gamara in the context of trying to say 100 brachot a day and it seemed silly to me to say a bracha that I don't agree with and without God's name so it doesn't even help me reach the 100 brachot. Better to just have a piece of chocolate after I finish davening and make a bracha on that, so I just stopped saying the bracha altogether.
Truth is, the bracha I really want to say (but don’t because of halachic issues of changing the nusach of the tefilla) is one I saw years ago in a Conservative siddur. It had both men and women saying "sheasani b'tzalmo". Now, wouldn't it be wonderful to wake up every morning and thank God for creating you in His image?
Sorry for the long post. Just needed to vent a little.
I'm an orthodox woman who stopped saying the bracha of sheasani kirtzono about 15 years ago. Strangely enough, the fact that my husband and other men in my life say shelo asani isha every day doesn't bother me nearly as much as the idea of shelo asani isha as a "consolation prize" bracha. I guess I learned the explanation that shelo asani isha has to do with the number of mitzvot one is obligated to do when I was very young and just never really questioned it. (I thought that explanation is in the gemara, why do you say it was created long after?
[DB: I mis-communicated earlier.The Jerusalem Talmud and Tosefta say the the reason for the blessing is that women are not obligated in Mitzvot. The suggestion, I think, is that this makes men superior to women, just as free Jewish men are superior to non-Jews and slaves. Other sources rely on the reason given by the Tosefta and the Jerusalem Talmud though some also introduce social explanations, or suggest this is just a way of reaching 100 blessings. The business about women being on a higher spiritual level, came much later I think.]
Although now that I think about it, it does seem strange to say that the absolute number of mitzvoth is what matters rather than the amount of time one spends doing mitzvoth. (There are some mitzvoth that are performed very infrequently or take very little time to perform while others are done often and take up a good chunk of one's time)
The bracha of sheasani kirtzono always bothered me much more. It seems that the woman is acknowledging that it is somehow "better" to be a man, but is accepting her lower status as being G-d's will similar to how we accept other evils in the world that we don't understand as being somehow part of G-d's master plan. I never felt comfortable saying a bracha that implied that I wish I were a man. I am sure that being a man has some advantages that as a woman I could never understand (whether spiritual, practical or otherwise) but I do not think that being obligated to wear tzitzit, sit in a sukka and count sefirat haomer could possible make up for the spiritually uplifting experiences of pregnancy, childbirth and nursing a baby. But then again, what do I know, I'm just a woman.
I get that maybe 2000 years ago women might have actually felt that they had somewhat of a lesser status and therefore the bracha was appropriate, but what annoys me most is the modern apologetic spin given to it today. Women, we are told, have fewer mitzvot because they are on a higher spiritual level to begin with. So the bracha of sheasani kirtzono is thanking God for making us according to His will as higher spiritual beings. Huh?? By that logic are non-Jews on a higher spiritual level than Jews? Has any slave being offered freedom ever said, "thanks, but no thanks. I'd rather stay a slave with fewer mitzvot because it keeps me on a higher spriritual level?" And, as I said before, is spirituality measured by the actual number of mitzvot one does or by the kavana and amount of time spent absorbed in mitzvot?
When I got married 18 years ago I was under the mistaken impression that I should start davening in my husband's (Sephardi – edot mizrach) nusach (even though he didn't really care what nusach I daven in.) I noticed that in those siddurim women say the bracha of shelo asani isha without God's name (since it is a bracha that does not appear in the gemara.) I remember learning that these brachot are mentioned in the gamara in the context of trying to say 100 brachot a day and it seemed silly to me to say a bracha that I don't agree with and without God's name so it doesn't even help me reach the 100 brachot. Better to just have a piece of chocolate after I finish davening and make a bracha on that, so I just stopped saying the bracha altogether.
Truth is, the bracha I really want to say (but don’t because of halachic issues of changing the nusach of the tefilla) is one I saw years ago in a Conservative siddur. It had both men and women saying "sheasani b'tzalmo". Now, wouldn't it be wonderful to wake up every morning and thank God for creating you in His image?
Sorry for the long post. Just needed to vent a little.
Thursday, September 01, 2011
An invitation to a place that does not exist
Think there's "no such place as Palestine?" Well, guess again.
H.T Shmarya, who says the host is a high ranking Nateuri Kartanik.
H.T Shmarya, who says the host is a high ranking Nateuri Kartanik.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
A little more in defense of Rabbi Kanefsky
Here are the words that invited the right wing rabbis and bloggers to reach for their pitchforks and go on the march against Rabbi Yosef Kanefsky of Los Angeles:
But its worth acknowledging that Rabbi Kanefsky does have a rather obvious line of defense against those who use tradition as a veto.
Rabbi Kanefsky's critics claim that a blessing endorsed by the Talmud can't possibly be a Desecration -- after all its in the Talmud! - but a little light thinking shows the folly of this argument. Keeping slaves and beating wives are both endorsed by the Talmud, but can anyone doubt that a Desecration would result were Jews to endorse either practice today?
I suspect, at this point in history, that [saying the shelo asani isha blessing] constitutes a Desecration of the Name, God forbid. In time-honored rabbinic tradition, “better to sit and not do”.I've already said why I disagree with Rabbi Kanefsky. The blessing is universally given a harmless interpretation; when praying, the way we read the words today matters more than what the original authors had in mind. Also, you won't rid Orthodox Judaism of its de facto discrimination against women by striking these words from the prayer books. Minds that don't give the blessing a misogynistic reading won't be changed if the blessing disappears.
But its worth acknowledging that Rabbi Kanefsky does have a rather obvious line of defense against those who use tradition as a veto.
Rabbi Kanefsky's critics claim that a blessing endorsed by the Talmud can't possibly be a Desecration -- after all its in the Talmud! - but a little light thinking shows the folly of this argument. Keeping slaves and beating wives are both endorsed by the Talmud, but can anyone doubt that a Desecration would result were Jews to endorse either practice today?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)