| Part of a series on |
| Women in Society |
|---|
|
Society
Business · Education · Workforce · Politics (in Australia) · Military · Legal rights · History · Nobel Prize · Animal advocacy
|
|
Science and technology
|
|
Arts and humanities
|
|
Religion
|
|
Popular culture
|
| Feminism portal |
The role of women in Judaism is determined by the Hebrew Bible, the Oral Law (the corpus of rabbinic literature), by custom, and by non-religious cultural factors. Although the Hebrew Bible and rabbinic literature mention various female role models, religious law treats women differently in various circumstances.
Contents |
Relatively few women are mentioned in the Bible by name and role, suggesting that they were rarely in the forefront of public life. There are a number of exceptions to this rule, including the Matriarchs Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah, Miriam the prophetess, Deborah the Judge, Huldah the prophetess, Abigail who married David, and Esther. In the Biblical account these women did not meet with opposition for the relatively public presence they had.
According to Jewish tradition, a covenant was formed between the Israelites and the God of Abraham at Mount Sinai. The Torah relates that both Israelite men and Israelite women were present at Sinai, however, the covenant was worded in such a way that it bound men to act upon its requirements and to ensure that the members of their household (wives, children, and slaves) met these requirements as well. In this sense, the covenant bound women as well, though indirectly.[1]
Marriage and family law in biblical times favored men over women. For example, a husband could divorce a wife if he chose to, but a wife could not divorce a husband without his consent. The practice of levirate marriage applied to widows of childless deceased husbands, but not to widowers of childless deceased wives. Laws concerning the loss of female virginity have no male equivalent. These and other gender inequalities found in the Torah suggest that women were subordinate to men during biblical times, however, they also suggest that biblical society viewed continuity, property, and family unity as paramount.[1] However, men had specific obligations they were required to perform for their wives. These included the provision of clothing, food, and sexual relations to their wives.[2]
Women also had a role in ritual life. Women (as well as men) were required to make a pilgrimage to the Temple in Jerusalem once a year and offer the Passover sacrifice. They would also do so on special occasions in their lives such as giving a todah ("thanksgiving") offering after childbirth. Hence, they participated in many of the major public religious roles that non-levitical men could, albeit less often and on a somewhat smaller and generally more discreet scale.
Women depended on men economically. Women generally did not own property except in the rare case of inheriting land from a father who didn't bear sons. Even "in such cases, women would be required to remarry within the tribe so as not to reduce its land holdings."[1]
Classical Jewish rabbinical literature contains quotes that may be seen as both laudatory and derogatory of women. The Talmud states that:
While few women are mentioned by name in rabbinic literature, and none are known to have authored a rabbinic work, those who are mentioned are portrayed as having a strong influence on their husbands, and occasionally having a public persona. Examples are Bruriah, the wife of the Tanna Rabbi Meir; Rachel, the wife of Rabbi Akiva; and Yalta, the wife of Rabbi Nachman. Rabbi Eliezer's wife (of Mishnaic times) counselled her husband in assuming leadership over the Sanhedrin.
Like most women in Europe, Jewish women in the Middle Ages had exclusively household roles and arranged marriages; child brides were common. Jewish women were generally prohibited from holding formal leadership roles with authority over men. Regarding European Jewry, Avraham Grossman wrote, "Throughout the Middle Ages, which continued for about a thousand years, we do not find so much as a single women of importance among the sages of Israel... Moreover, over a period of a thousand years, not a single Jewish woman wrote a halakhic, literary, theoretical, mystical, or poetic work, with the exception of a handful of poems written by Jewish women in Spain."[13] Middle Eastern Jewry, on the other hand, had an abundance of female literates. The Cairo Geniza is filled with correspondences written (sometimes dictated) between family members and spouses. Many of these letters are pious and poetic and express a desire to be in closer or more frequent contact with a loved one that is far enough away to only be reached by written correspondence. There are also records of wills and other personal legal documents as well as written petitions to officials in cases of spouse abuse or other conflicts between family members written or dictated by women.[14]
After the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492, women became virtually the only source of Jewish ritual and tradition in the Catholic world in a phenomenon known as crypto-Judaism. Crypto-Jewish women would slaughter their own animals and made sure to keep as many of the Jewish dietary laws and life cycle rituals as possible without raising suspicion. Occasionally, these women were prosecuted by Inquisition officials for suspicious behavior such as lighting candles to honor the Sabbath or refusing to eat pork when it was offered to them. The Inquisition targeted crypto-Jewish women at least as much as it targeted crypto-Jewish men because women were accused of perpetuating Jewish tradition while men were merely permitting their wives and daughters to organize the household in this manner.[15]
Rabbeinu Gershom instituted a rabbinic decree (takhanah) prohibiting polygamy among Ashkenazic Jews. The rabbis instituted legal methods to enable women to petition a rabbinical court to compel a divorce. Maimonides ruled that a woman who found her husband "repugnant" could compel a divorce, "because she is not like a captive, to be subjected to intercourse with one who is hateful to her."
The rabbis also instituted and tightened prohibitions on domestic violence. Rabbi Peretz ben Elijah ruled, "The cry of the daughters of our people has been heard concerning the sons of Israel who raise their hands to strike their wives. Yet who has given a husband the authority to beat his wife?" Rabbi Rothberg ruled that "For it is the way of the Gentiles to behave thus, but Heaven forbid that any Jew should do so. And one who beats his wife is to be excommunicated and banned and beaten." Rabbi Rothenberg also ruled that a battered wife could petition a rabbinical court to compel a husband to grant a divorce, with a monetary fine owed her on top of the regular ketubah money. These rulings occurred in the midst of societies where wife-beating was legally sanctioned and routine.[13]
Religious developments included relaxation on prohibitions against teaching women Torah, and the rise of women's prayer groups in France and Germany. These changes were accompanied by increased pietistic strictures, including greater requirements for modest dress, and greater strictures during the period of menstruation. At the same time, there was a rise in philosophical and midrashic interpretations depicting women in a negative light, emphasizing a duality between matter and spirit in which femininity was associated, negatively, with earth and matter.[13]
The rise and increasing popularity of Kabbalah, which emphasized the shechinah and female aspects of the divine presence and human-divine relationship, and which saw marriage as a holy covenant between partners rather than a civil contract, had great influence. Kabbalists explained the phenomenon of menstruation as expressions of the demonic or sinful character of the menstruant.[16] Mystical understandings of what occurs to men's souls in the afterlife and on Shabbat differed significantly from what was understood about what occurs to women's souls.[17]
| Part of a series of articles on |
| Jewish feminism |
|---|
| Advocates |
| List of Jewish feminists |
| Groups |
| JOFA · National Council of Jewish Women · Shira Hadasha |
| Issues |
| Agunah · Feminism · Jewish marriage · Minyan · Mitzvah · Partnership minyan · Women in Judaism |
Orthodox Judaism sometimes prescribes different roles and religious obligations for men and women. There are different opinions among Orthodox Jews concerning these differences. Most claim that men and women have complementary, yet different roles in religious life, resulting in different religious obligations. A minority within the Orthodox tradition believe that some of these differences are not a reflection of religious law, but rather of cultural, social, and historical causes. In the area of education, women were historically exempted from any study beyond an understanding of the practical aspects of Torah, and the rules necessary in running a Jewish household – both of which they have an obligation to learn. Until the twentieth century, women were often discouraged from learning Talmud and other advanced Jewish texts. In the past 100 years, Orthodox Jewish education for women has advanced tremendously.[18]
Some Orthodox rabbis view contemporary efforts at change as motivated by sociological reasons and not by true religious motivation. They also view these suggested changes as a break with the accepted norms of observance, and do not allow women to engaging in activities traditionally reserved for men.[19] For example, Orthodox, Haredi, and Hasidic rabbis discourage women from wearing a yarmulke, tallit or tefillin.
In most Orthodox synagogues women do no to give ad'var Torah (brief discourse, generally on the weekly Torah portion) after or between services. Furthermore, a few Modern Orthodox synagogues have mechitzot dividing the left and right sides of the synagogue (rather than the usual division between the front and back of the synagogue, with women sitting in the back), with the women's section on one side and the men's section on the other.[20] This is often seen as more equal since the women are not farther away from the service than the men.
The importance of modesty in dress and conduct is particularly stressed among girls and women in Orthodox society. Many Orthodox women only wear skirts and avoid wearing trousers, and some married Orthodox women cover their hair with a wig, hat, or scarf. Judaism prescribes modesty for both men and women.
In accordance with Jewish Law, Orthodox Jewish women refrain from contact with their husbands while they are menstruating, and for a period of 7 clean days after menstruating, and after the birth of a child. The Israeli Rabbinate has recently approved women acting as yoatzot, halakhic advisers on sensitive personal matters such as family purity.
Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, a leader of profound influence in modern Orthodoxy in the United States, forbade women from serving as presidents of synagogues or any other official positions of leadership, and from performing other mitzvot (commandments) traditionally performed by males exclusively, such as wearing a tallit or tefillin. Soloveitchik wrote that while women do not lack the capability to perform such acts, there is no mesorah (Jewish tradition) that permits it. In making his decision, he relied upon Jewish oral law, including a mishnah in Chulin 2a and a Beit Yoseph in the Tur Yoreh Deah stating that a woman can perform a specific official communal service for her own needs but not those of others.[21]
Women's issues garnered more interest with the advent of feminism. Many Modern Orthodox Jewish women and Modern Orthodox rabbis sought to provide greater and more advanced Jewish education for women. Since most Modern Orthodox women attend college, and many receive advanced degrees in a variety of fields, Modern Orthodoxy generally believes that their Jewish education should equal their secular education. An entire genre of Orthodox feminist literature now exists, and has caused changes within some Orthodox synagogues and communities (The Status of Women in Halakhic Judaism, Berman, Tradition, 14:2, 1973.). Orthodox girls' and women's Jewish education has expanded tremendously in the past 30 years. Of some controversy are the questions of whether girls and women should or may learn Talmud. While all segments of Modern Orthodoxy strongly support women's education, the permissibility of Talmud study for women is still not accepted among most of Modern Orthodoxy.
Separate Jewish women's prayer groups were a sanctioned custom among German Jews in the Middle Ages. The Kol Bo provides, in the laws for Tisha B'Av:
In Germany, in the 12th and 13th centuries, women's prayer groups were led by female cantors. Rabbi Eliezar of Worms, in his elegy for his wife Dulca, praised her for teaching the other women how to pray and embellishing the prayer with music. The gravestone of Urania of Worms, who died in 1275, contains the inscription "who sang piyyutim for the women with musical voice." In the Nurnberg Memorial Book, one Richenza was inscribed with the title "prayer leader of the women."[22]
Orthodox women more recently began holding organized women's tefila (prayer) groups beginning in the 1970s. While no Orthodox legal authorities agree that women can form a minyan (prayer quorum) for the purpose of regular services, women in these groups read the prayers and study Torah. A number of leaders from all segments of Orthodox Judaism have commented on this issue, but it has had little impact on Haredi and Sephardi Judaism. However, the emergence of this phenomenon has enmeshed Modern Orthodox Judaism in a debate which still continues today. There are two schools of thought on this issue:
Traditionally, women are not generally permitted to serve as witnesses in an Orthodox Beit Din (rabbinical court), although they have recently been permitted to serve as toanot (advocates) in those courts. This limitation has exceptions which have required exploration under rabbinic law as the role of women in society, and the obligations of religious groups under external civil law, have been subject to increasing recent scrutiny.
The recent case of Rabbi Mordecai Tendler, the first rabbi to be expelled from the Rabbinical Council of America following allegations of sexual harassment, illustrated the importance of clarification of Orthodox halakha in this area. Rabbi Tendler claimed that the tradition of exclusion of women's testimony should compel the RCA to disregard the allegations. He argued that since the testimony of a woman could not be admitted in Rabbinical court, there were no valid witnesses against him, and hence the case for his expulsion had to be thrown out for lack of evidence. In a ruling of importance for Orthodox women's capacity for legal self-protection under Jewish law, Haredi Rabbi Benzion Wosner, writing on behalf of the Shevet Levi Beit Din (Rabbinical court) of Monsey, New York, identified sexual harassment cases as coming under a class of exceptions to the traditional exclusion, under which "even children or women" have not only a right but an obligation to testify, and can be relied upon by a rabbinical court as valid witnesses:
The Rabbinical Council of America, while initially relying on its own investigation, chose to rely on the Halakhic ruling of the Haredi Rabbinical body as authoritative in the situation.
Leaders of the Haredi community have been steadfast in their opposition to a change in the role of women, arguing that the religious and social constraints on women, as dictated by traditional Jewish texts, are timeless and are not affected by contemporary social change. Many also argue that giving traditionally male roles to women will only detract from both women's and men's ability to lead truly fulfilling lives. Haredim have also sometimes perceived arguments for liberalization as in reality stemming from antagonism to Jewish law and beliefs generally, arguing that preserving faith requires resisting secular and "un-Jewish" ideas.
Modern Orthodox Judaism, particularly in its more liberal variants, has tended to look at proposed changes in the role of women on a specific, case-by-case basis, focusing on arguments regarding the religious and legal role of specific prayers, rituals, and activities individually. Such arguments have tended to focus on cases where the Talmud and other traditional sources express multiple or more liberal viewpoints, particularly where the role of women in the past was arguably broader than in more recent times. Feminist advocates within Orthodoxy have tended to stay within the traditional legal process of argumentation, seeking a gradualist approach, and avoiding wholesale arguments against the religious tradition as such.
Although the position of Conservative Judaism toward women originally differed little from the Orthodox position, it has in recent years minimized legal and ritual differences between men and women. The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS) of the Rabbinical Assembly has approved a number of decisions and responsa on this topic. These provide for women's active participation in areas such as:
A rabbi may or may not decide to adopt particular rulings for the congregation; thus, some Conservative congregations will be more or less egalitarian than others. However, there are other areas where legal differences remain between men and women, including:
The CJLS recently reaffirmed the obligation of Conservative women to observe niddah (sexual abstinence during and after menstruation) and mikvah (ritual immersion) following menstruation, although somewhat liberalizing certain details. Such practices, while requirements of Conservative Judaism, are not to be widely observed among Conservative laity.
Prior to 1973, Conservative Judaism had more limited roles for women and was more similar to current Modern Orthodoxy, with changes on issues including mixed seating, synagogue corporate leadership, and permitting women to be called to the Torah. In 1973, the CJLS of the Rabbinical Assembly voted, without issuing an opinion, that women could count in a minyan, although it continued to hold that women could not serve as rabbis or cantors. In 1983, the Jewish Theological Seminary of America (JTSA) faculty voted, also without accompanying opinion, to ordain women as rabbis and as cantors.
In 2002, the CJLS adapted a responsum by Rabbi David Fine, Women and the Minyan, which provides an official religious-law foundation for these actions and explains the current Conservative approach to the role of women in prayer.
In 2006, the CJLS adopted three responsa on the subject of niddah, which reaffirmed an obligation of Conservative women to abstain from sexual relations during and following menstruation and to immerse in a mikvah prior to resumption, while liberalizing observance requirements including shortening the length of the niddah period, lifting restrictions on non-sexual contact during niddah, and reducing the circumstances under which spotting and similar conditions would mandate abstinence.[27][28][29][30]
In all cases continuing the Orthodox approach was also upheld as an option. Individual Conservative rabbis and synagogues are not required to adopt any of these changes, and a small number have adopted none of them.
Prior to 1973, Conservative approaches to change were generally on an individual, case-by-case basis. Between 1973 and 2002, the Conservative movement adapted changes through its official organizations, but without issuing explanatory opinions. Since 2002, the Conservative movement has coalesced around a single across-the board approach to the role of women in Jewish law.[31]
In 1973, 1983, and 1993, individual rabbis and professors issued six major opinions which influenced change in the Conservative approach, the first and second Sigal, Blumenthal, Rabinowitz, and Roth responsa, and the Hauptman article. These opinions sought to provide for a wholesale shift in women's public roles through a single, comprehensive legal justification. Most such opinions based their positions on an argument that Jewish women always were, or have become, legally obligated to perform the same mitzvot as men and to do so in the same manner.
The first Sigal and the Blumenthal responsa were considered by the CJLS as part of its decision on prayer roles in 1973. They argued that women have always had the same obligations as men. The first Sigal responsum used the Talmud's general prayer obligation and examples of cases in which women were traditionally obligated to say specific prayers and inferred from them a public prayer obligation identical to that of men. The Blumenthal responsum extrapolated from a minority authority that a minyan could be formed with nine men and one woman in an emergency. The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (CJLS) declined to adopt either responsum. Rabbi Siegel reported to the Rabbinical Assembly membership that many on the CJLS, while agreeing with the result, found the arguments unconvincing.
The Rabinowitz, Roth, and second Sigal responsa were considered by the JTSA faculty as part of its decision to ordain women as rabbis in 1983. The Rabbinowitz responsum sidestepped the issue of obligation, arguing that there is no longer a religious need for a community representative in prayer and hence there is no need to decide whether a woman can halakhically serve as one. The CJLS felt that an argument potentially undermining the value of community and clergy was unconvincing: "We should not be afraid to recognize that the function of clergy is to help our people connect with the holy." The Roth and second Sigal responsa accepted that time-bound mitzvot were traditionally optional for women, but argued that women in modern times could change their traditional roles. The Roth responsum[32] argued that women could individually voluntarily assume the same obligations as men, and that women who do so (e.g. pray three times a day regularly) could count in a minyan and serve as agents. The JTSA accordingly required female rabbinical students wishing to train as rabbis to personally obligate themselves, but synagogue rabbis, unwilling to inquire into individual religiosity, found it impractical. The second Sigal responsum[33] called for a takkanah, or rabbinical edict, "that would serve as a halakhic ERA," overruling all non-egalitarian provisions in law or, in the alternative, a new approach to halakhic interpretation independent of legal precedents. The CJLS, unwilling to use either an intrusive approach or a repudiation of the traditional legal process as bases for action, did not adopt either and let the JTS faculty vote stand unexplained.
In 1993, Professor Judith Hauptman of JTS issued an influential paper [9] arguing that women had historically always been obligated in prayer, using more detailed arguments than the Blumenthal and first Sigal responsa. The paper suggested that women who followed traditional practices were failing to meet their obligations. Rabbi Roth argued that Conservative Judaism should think twice before adopting a viewpoint labeling its most traditional and often most committed members as sinners. The issue was again dropped.
In 2002, the CJLS returned to the issue of justifying its actions regarding women's status, and adopted a single authoritative approach, the Fine responsum,[34] as the definitive Conservative halakha on role-of-women issues. This responsum holds that although Jewish women do not traditionally have the same obligations as men, Conservative women have, as a collective whole, voluntarily undertaken them. Because of this collective undertaking, the Fine responsum holds that Conservative women are eligible to serve as agents and decision-makers for others. The Responsum also held that traditionally-minded communities and individual women could opt out without being regarded by the Conservative movement as sinning. By adopting this Responsum, the CJLS found itself in a position to provide a considered Jewish-law justification for its egalitarian practices, without having to rely on potentially unconvincing arguments, undermine the religious importance of community and clergy, ask individual women intrusive questions, repudiate the halakhic tradition, or label women following traditional practices as sinners.
Reform Judaism believes in the equality of men and women. The Reform movement rejects the idea that halakha (Jewish law) is the sole legitimate form of Jewish decision making, and holds that Jews can and must consider their conscience and ethical principles inherent in the Jewish tradition when deciding upon a right course of action. There is widespread consensus among Reform Jews that traditional distinctions between the role of men and women are antithetical to the deeper ethical principles of Judaism. This has enabled Reform communities to allow women to perform many rituals traditionally reserved for men, such as:
Concerns about intermarriage have also influenced the Reform Jewish position on gender. In 1983, the Central Conference of American Rabbis passed a resolution waiving the need for formal conversion for anyone with at least one Jewish parent who has made affirmative acts of Jewish identity. This departed from the traditional position requiring formal conversion to Judaism for children without a Jewish mother.[35]
The 1983 resolution of the American Reform movement has had a mixed reception in Reform Jewish communities outside of the United States. Most notably, the Israel Movement for Progressive Judaism has rejected patrilineal descent and requires formal conversion for anyone without a Jewish mother.[36]
Reform Judaism generally holds that the various differences between the roles of men and women in traditional Jewish law are not relevant to modern conditions and not applicable today. Accordingly, there has been no need to develop legal arguments analogous to those made within the Orthodox and Conservative movements.
The equality of women is a central tenet and hallmark of Reconstructionist Judaism. From the beginning, Reconstructionist Jewish ritual allowed men and women to pray together — a decision based on egalitarian philosophy. The halakhah had to be changed to rid Judaism of these inequities. It was on this basis that Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan called for the full equality of women, despite the obvious difficulties reconciling this stance with norms of traditional Jewish practice.[37] The Reconstructionist Movement ordained women Rabbi from the start.[38] In 1968, women were accepted into the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, under the leadership of Ira Eisenstein.[39] The first ordained female Reconstructionist rabbi, Sandy Eisenberg Sasso, served as rabbi of the Manhattan Reconstructionist Congregation in 1976 and gained a pulpit in 1977 at Beth El Zedeck congregation in Indianapolis. Sandy Eisenberg Sasso was accepted without debate or subsequent controversy.[40] In 2005, 24 out of the movement's 106 synagogues in the US had women as senior or assistant rabbis.[41]
The Reconstructionist Community began including women in the minyan and allowing them to come up to the Torah for aliyot. They also continued the practice of bat mitzvah.[42] But other changes in the role of women, such as serving as witnesses, leading services,[43] public Torah reading, and wearing ritual prayer garments like kippot and tallitot.[44] Reconstructionist women rabbis have been instrumental in the creation of rituals, stories, music, that have begun to give women's experience a voice in Judaism. Most of the focus has been on rituals for life-cycle events.[45] New ceremonies have been created for births,[46] weddings, divorces, conversions,[47] weaning, and the onset of menarche and menopause. The Recontructionist movement as a whole has been committed to creating liturgy that is in consonance with equality ideas and practices and that reflects a new role for women's celebration.[48][49][50] Another major step: The Federation of Reconstructionist Congregations has also developed educational programs that lead toward the full acceptance of lesbians,[51] as well as rituals that affirm lesbian relationships.[52][53] In Canada, the reconstructionist Rabbis does officiate at same-sex wedding.[54]
The reconstructionist Judaism will a big importance for the community implication of her members. Several members of the Reconstructionist community have focused on issues like domestic violence.[55][56][57][58] Others have devoted energy to helping women gain the right of divorce in traditional communities.[59][60] Many have spoken out for the right of Jewish women to pray aloud and read from the Torah at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, the Women of the Wall group.[61]
When the roles of women in religion change, there may also be changed roles for men. With their advocacy of patrilineal descent in the 1970s, the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association supported the principle that a man who takes responsibility for raising a Jewish child can pass Judaism on to the next generation as well as a woman. The children who receive a Jewish education are allowed whatever is the sex of their Jewish parent.
General
Publications
Particular issues
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||