Women Are Absent

I find it interesting how we never hear a story about the beis din shel maala (Heavenly Court) that has a woman involved. If you know of any, please tell us ...

All those stories, about arriving in the next world and having one's deeds scrutinized, and piles of mitzvos and sins, and angels or tzaddikim getting involved in the judgment, and what it is like in the place of reward or punishment, never have a female as the protagonist! Why is this so? For that matter, I don't think I've read any stories about Jewish women who are nearly dead or apparently died, who come back to life to tell what they've seen in the next world.

I'm not talking about women who are no longer living coming to someone alive in a dream; there are stories like that.

For that matter, some of the questions that the Gemara (Shabbos 31a) says a soul will be asked do not apply to women. The questions are:

אמר רבא בשעה שמכניסין אדם לדין אומרים לו נשאת ונתת באמונה קבעת עתים לתורה עסקת בפו"ר צפית לישועה פלפלת בחכמה הבנת דבר מתוך דבר ואפ"ה אי יראת ה' היא אוצרו אין אי לא לא. Rava said: After departing from this world, when a person is brought to judgment for the life he lived in this world, they say to him ... Did you conduct business faithfully? Did you designate times for Torah study? Did you engage in procreation? Did you await salvation? Did you engage in the dialectics of wisdom or understand one matter from another? And, nevertheless, beyond all these, if the fear of the Lord is his treasure, yes, he is worthy, and if not, no, none of these accomplishments have any value. 

Did you conduct business honestly? (some women are in business; many aren't).
Did you set fixed times to study Torah? (not for women)
Were you involved in being fruitful and multiplying? (a man's mitzva)
Did you look forward expectantly for the redemption?
Did you engage in the pursuit of wisdom?
Above all else, does the person have fear of heaven?

Asking for Tzedaka

I received an email with a link to a fundraising effort of a seminary girl.  She was finishing a year of seminary and wanted to remain for a second year, which is known as Shana Bet.

The link brought me to a personal fundraising website that people use to raise money for things that are important to them.  So the girl writes how she scraped the money together for the first year of seminary and how important she thinks a second year will be for her.

Let me say at the outset, she sounded sincere and serious about making the most of another year of seminary.  However, without even getting into the issue as to whether a second year of seminary is something anybody should be funding, what bothers me about the appeal for money is just that - it's a hand held out for tzedaka. 

How is it different than sitting on a street frequented by religious Jews with a cup and asking for tzedaka? Or going around in shul and collecting money?

I think that the fact that the Internet puts a distance between people; after all, you are not seeing them face to face, makes the collectors forget the implications of what they are doing.  The same could be said for an appeal written and mailed, but the Internet is even more conducive because there is a website set up just for this, and you can easily email the link to numerous people.  There is no need to stuff envelopes, address them, and put stamps on them.      

Some years ago, a person introduced an Israeli girl to a crowd at a shiur and explained that she was here to raise money for her wedding.  I was so taken aback by this.  Did nobody care to protect her dignity?

Likewise, years ago, a woman came from Israel collecting money for her family.  I guess it was supposed to impress us that she came, rather than her husband.  After all, he was learning.  Again, I was appalled.  In the stories that I've read about beggars collecting money, they were men.  Money was raised for hachnosas kalla and widows but, as far as I know, the kallos and widows were not traveling about and knocking on doors with their hand out. 

In desperate situations, may none of us know from it, women might have to collect for themselves, but otherwise?

As to how I would feel if a yeshiva bachur made an Internet appeal for money to enable him to remain in yeshiva or someone in kollel made an appeal asking for money, again, I would wonder whether they would also hold out a cup on a busy corner of a religious neighborhood or collect money in shul. 

So it's two issues: 1) males or females collecting tzedaka from the public  2) a woman collecting tzedaka for herself.

Male Teachers in Girls' Schools

Beis Yaakov, from its inception, had female and male staff members.  Over the years it has always had male teachers in addition to the female staff.  Various high schools and seminaries have become associated with their male principals such as R' Mordechai Miller a"h of Gateshead, R' Binyamin Steinberg a"h of BY of Baltimore, Rabbis Teichman and Greenberg of BYA, Rabbi Aisenstark of BY in Montreal, etc.

With two recent seminary (in Israel) scandals that I know of, I've been wondering about this policy of male staff members having such a great involvement with female students.  Chassidishe girls' schools do not have male teachers.  They may have a male guest lecturer for a special occasion; otherwise, men are not interacting with the girls on a regular basis in the classroom, learning their names, marking their papers, answering their questions, etc.

Why are male teachers and principals deemed necessary in BY types of schools while Chassidishe girls' schools do not hire them? Are the Chassidishe girls losing out by not having male teachers and hashpa'ah? If not, why do BY schools have them, and if they are, is there a way to have male teachers while ensuring the utmost decorum and distance?

I'd like to hear what R' Wallerstein, founder of Ohr Naava and related girls' institutions, has to say about this!

Women and Tefilla

A question I've long had goes like this:

Women are exempt from the same tefilla requirements as men because they are exempt from mitzvos asei she'hazman grama (positive, time-bound mitzvos).  Women have household obligations, specifically, children to care for, and they cannot be obligated to daven as a man does. 

But if a woman takes a job which requires her to be at a certain place for set hours, then that would seem to demonstrate that she can do time-bound activities.  If so, why should she be exempt from tefilla like a man?

I was reminded of this question when I read an article in which a woman says davening used to be the focus of her day.  Even when she had a baby, she davened three times a day.  When she had a second baby, the demands of the newborn and the toddler did not allow her to daven much at all.  The way she put it, "Every weekday morning, I faced a marathon consisting of nurse-the-baby-feed-the-toddler-throw-on-some-clothes-change-and-dress-two-children-pack-up-the-diaper-bags-daven-fly-out-the-door ... all by 8:10."

She said she couldn't do everything and so, she gave up on davening.  She goes on to say how she learned that she could daven an abbreviated davening. 

So I don't get it.  She can work six hours a day, a time-bound activity, despite her childcare and household obligations which she delegates to others, and this exempts her from davening, a time-bound activity.  Why?

More on Mothering

A frum female doctor living in Israel, who is the mother of 13 children (7 of whom are married now), wrote a book about the tough choices she had to make between her family and her career.  While training to be a doctor, she gave birth to six children.  During her residency she had three more children.  She says she could not have done it without her husband and quite honestly says, "I am not a role model for anyone.  It was a terrible life.  It meant splitting myself into pieces, missing all the siyumim and siddur parties and so many milestones in my children's lives. 

In a Binah interview she goes on to say, "The most important thing a woman with children can do with her life is to be a mother ... Your children only have one mother, your husband has only one wife.  Had I known what this choice entailed, if I could it all over again, I would choose differently."

During the six years of her residency she would light candles by herself in the hospital, away from her family's Shabbos table.  She would leave her house at 6:35 a.m. and be gone for 30-40 hours. 
Her 3 1/2 year old son once said to her, "No mother does this to her children, no mother!"

While in medical school, she and her husband consulted with R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach z'l to ask him whether she should continue or quit.  He told her to continue since he felt she could perform a real service for the frum community where there were hardly any frum, female doctors.

She says that her children definitely suffered.  They wanted her at their school events.  Every mother was there, but her.  "I lost out on happy times with them.  Those precious years are gone forever."

The interviewer asked her what her adult children think of her, are they proud of her and feel pride in her work.  She said, "No, I don't think so.  I think what's most important is to have a real mother who is physically present.  But at the same time, they know that I do what I do l'sheim shomayim." 

As to a previous comment, "It is not "at his wife's expense" if she is willingly and eagerly supporting him to learn because she truly yearns for her husband to become a great talmid chacham, and is fully ready to sacrifice for that worthy goal" - when a husband goes off to learn, knowing that his wife who just gave birth will be traveling over an hour each way with two babies in order to interview for a job, whether she is fully behind that decision or does it because she feels it is expected of her, does not change the fact that his learning is at his wife and children's expense.  How he is able to learn with a clear head, knowing that his kimpeturin, nursing wife is spending the day in this way, in preparation for leaving her babies to be raised by others, is beyond me.

When it is only the adults affected by the decision, that is quite different than a decision that drastically affects the children who are brought into the world and are made to suffer for Torah study.  When in our history were mothers separated from their babies for the sake of Torah? Husbands have separated from their wives, like Rochel and Akiva for the sake of Torah, but not mothers and their young children.

No Career!

Continued from previous post

The only public speaker that I can recall saying it the way it is, is Rabbi Zecharia Wallerstein.  He quoted the pasuk about Sarah being in the tent, in response to the angels asking Avraham where she is.  Then he went on to say, "I can’t say it at Ohr Naava or I’ll lose nearly everyone, but the man should be out working and the woman home taking care of the house. No career! No guy should say he wants five or whatever years of support from his wife. What is his Torah learning worth if it’s at his wife’s expense?"

And the children's expense. 

I remember the shocked look on someone's face when someone suggested (facetiously, but to make the point) that mothers who opt not to raise their kids because they're busy working should give them up.  There are women out there willing to raise them ...

We used to hear the story of a gadol (it's hard to know who it really happened with) who was consulted about the chinuch of a person's young child, say a two year old.  The rabbi said, you are two years too late.  Chinuch begins at birth and before.  Maybe they don't tell this story anymore.

An Upside-Down World

A kimpeturin of Lakewood has a baby less than 5 weeks old.  She also has a 22 month old toddler.  She goes to New York to interview for a job in her field.  Why? Is she a new immigrant in dire need of supporting herself? Is she a single mother? No. It is because her husband is learning. 

She is not the first, not the last.  Plenty others do the same.  So what else is new ...

A woman writes to Binah magazine about being a kollel wife with three children and a full-time job out of the house.  She has a nightly walk with a neighbor and tries to get to sleep early.  I read this several times and wondered where her husband and children fit into her life. 

She thanks her husband for being Mr. Mom (not her phrase).  He gets the children ready in the morning, takes them to school, packs lunches and snacks, often cooks supper, shops for groceries, bakes and braids challa, and has cooked for Shabbos several times.

To borrow a term from R' Yosef, the son of R Yehoshua (Bava Basra 10), "Olam hafuch ra'isi" - I saw an upside-down world.

Yes, women have worked throughout the generations. The Eishis Chayil of Mishlei works.  Yet, it was a rare situation in which husband and wife switched roles and the mother traveled to support the family while the father raised the children and ran the home. 

A mother wrote that she received a note from her seven year old daughter:

"Dear Mommy, if it's not too hard and if you're not working, could you listen to me read for five minutes? We get points for this in school, and I only have one stamp.  Everyone else has a whole card already. Love ..."

And we will keep on reading "courageous" articles about post-partum depression, sad articles about the rise in divorces in the frum world, and disconcerting articles about children and their myriad of problems. 

Halacha and Women

As I finished the Artscroll book about Rebbetzin Kanievsky ( previous post ), I saw two pictures that caught my attention.  One shows her husband and sons sitting shiva.  The other shows her brothers sitting shiva.

So what struck me about the photos?

We recently read parshas Emor which says that a kohen hedyot must impurify himself for his parents, wife, siblings (including unmarried sisters), sons and daughters.

What struck me is how chashuva people, distinguished rabbis, men who don't waste time but spend it learning and teaching Torah, had to stop their learning (and avoda in the Mikdash) in order to mourn for ... a woman.  In Jewish law, men go through the identical mourning rites for their mother, sister, wife and daughter as women do for men. 

For those who question women's role in Judaism and how halacha regards women, this could be a powerful way to convey the Torah's respect for women.

Marital Advice from R' Manis Friedman

It's a crazy idea, he says, to think that once a couple is married they can be on their worst behavior because he/she loves you anyway.  No, he says.  Not true.  When you marry someone you have to be on your best behavior for the rest of your life!

There are people who are so nice and respectful for outsiders in their dress and speech, but to their own spouse they're not.  Why is there less respect for your spouse than for the repairman? It's a very mistaken notion, he says.

Marriage means you are going to put yourself into a situation in which you have to be the best you can be every single day.  If you don't get married, you don't have to be that good.

Once you decide you're marrying the person, decide what to tell him/her that will help him love you, not things that will make it hard for him to love you.

Being completely honest is not a good idea because sometimes being honest is cruel and thoughtless and with your spouse, you don't say things that will hurt him/her just because you want to be honest.  Say things that are helpful and supportive of the marriage.

In general, the rule is: the husband is there to make his wife's life easier, he won't do anything to burden her, and the same is true for the wife.  Any bad news, negative stuff, keep it to yourself.  If together you can work on a plan, if you want advice, for something practical, that's one thing; but just to unburden, no.

An example he gave is, R' Friedman's father was held up in his store and he never told his wife! Most husbands would tell.  R' Friedman asks, what is the wife supposed to do if he tells? She'll just worry.  She will suffer with him.  Out of consideration you can withhold information.

A Matter of Perspective

Yaakov is punished for hiding Deena from Eisav in parshas Vayishlach.  When you consider that Shimon and Levi were 13 when they killed the city of Shechem and Dina was younger than them; and when you figure out that Eisav was almost 100 years old, you realize that the Torah's idea of marriage and a husband and wife having a "relationship" is far different than ours. 

The most famous example of this is Rivka being 3 years old and Yitzchok 40 when they married.  Yaakov was 84 when he married Leah and Rochel.  The seemingly romantic scene when Yaakov kissed Rochel at the well occurred when Yaakov was 77. 

Our modern, Western sensibilities look askance at "child brides," and yet, Jewish girls in Yemen and Morocco were often married by 11-12.  The Chofetz Chaim married at 17.  It was commonplace for Eastern European Jews to marry in their mid-teens.

We seem to think we have some sort of monopoly on what is "proper" and what isn't, what is a perversion and what isn't.  Our views are colored by the culture we live in.  We would do well to remember that.

"She is in the tent"

I heard a recent shiur from Rabbi Zecharia Wallerstein (of Ohr Naava) which he gave to young men at Ohr Yitzchok.  Among other things, he spoke about the angels asking Avrohom where Sarah is and Avrohom responded, "She is in the tent," i.e. she is modest.

R' Wallerstein took the opportunity to say a most unpopular view, acknowledging that he could not say this in a talk to girls or he'd lose 80% of them.  He said that what he has to say is the truth though people don't want to acknowledge it and a rabbi saying it will be seen as hopelessly out-of-touch with today's reality.  What he said is:

Women belong in the tent, in the home, taking care of their home and children.  Men are supposed to go out and provide for their families.  Men should get up early and learn before they daven and then go to work and learn again in the evening. 

Sarah was in the tent.  She didn't serve the guests because it wasn't modest for her to serve men.  Sarah did not have a career.  She wasn't a PT, OT, or speech therapist.

Too many of today's children are being put on the bus and taken off the bus by foreign help.  Having this help around the house when the husband is there leads to serious problems.

To many of today's kids are on Prozac, seeing therapists, sleeping till 4:00 in the afternoon.

Women today are embarrassed to say they are a housewife.

Boys in shidduchim who say they want to be supported for years and expect their wives to do it, who don't change their plans when their wives are pregnant, not feeling well, what is their learning worth?

All the foregoing are R' Wallerstein's remarks.  I give him lots of credit for saying the unpopular truth.  Is anybody listening?

Double Standard

I read an article about language in which a Chassidishe woman was asked why there seems to be a greater emphasis on men speaking Yiddish than women.  Her answer was, "I think it's the feeling that we should keep the men purer, that it's more important for them to be less exposed to the outside world."

She's not alone in this feeling.  There are many homes in which the women do the shopping and deal with government agencies, banks, insurance companies etc. so as to spare the men the exposure.  This is not about sparing them bittul Torah which is another issue.  One woman I know drives the family car and does the errands so that her husband shouldn't have to look at the people around him.  There are communities where girls are taught English and English subjects in a serious way while the boys are not, and the reason is not about bittul Torah (at least not in some communities) but about chinuch al taharas ha'kodesh which applies to girls as well as to boys!

I'm puzzled by this.  In Jewish life, it used to be the men who "went out" of the home, often traveling to do business.  Women were sequestered to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the society they lived in with Jewish women in Moslem countries much more protected and isolated from the world around them.  In Eastern European countries women sold goods in the marketplace and shopped but this wasn't to spiritually protect the men who were also "out there" working.  There was always the idea of men protecting their women and girls, not only from outright danger but also in the sense of sheltering them and preserving their modesty.  I think it was in a book about Shvester Selma that it described how she traveled with a male chaperone because women in her society did not travel unaccompanied.

Yet there is a feeling that women need to spiritually protect their menfolk while they can read certain things and look at certain things.  Now they are probably right about the men not reading and looking at those things but that doesn't mean that the women should! There seems to be an attitude that women won't be affected, that it doesn't matter if they read and look, that women can go to non-Jewish supermarkets and see people in immodest attire and see the magazines at the check-out counter and nisht geferlech (it's not terrible).  They may not be affected in the same way but to say there is no effect?!

Something seems to be askew in our reasoning.