- This topic has 114 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Here’s the quote:
It begins with a quote of the relevant Rambam and then asks:
??? ?? ????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????”? ???? ???
and answers:
??? ??? ??????? ????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ????”? ?? ????? ????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ???? ????????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ????? (??:?) “??? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??????? ?? ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ???? ?????? ???? ??????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????????? ?”? ???? ?? ?????? ??????” ?????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? (??????) ???? ?????? ????? (???? ?????) ?????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ???? ?? ??????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??????
Lior: Tehillim, I apologize. So I assume that you are blindly Mapkid on every concept referenced in Nach without thinking about the context. So, off the top of my head, you set aside some time every day to love, hate, collect stones, scatter stones, make war, make peace, etc.? You hand a woman fruit that came out of her hands? (I really wish I knew Mishlei and Tehillm better so I could make more ridiculous references.) You go out to meet armies approaching on horseback mentioning the name of God? You habitually look up to the sky asking for help?
I made my point. Context is everything. One cannot blindly quote Nach. By doing so, one tramples on the very lessons that Nach is meaning to teach. Yes, Kol Kevudah has meaning. No, it does not mean that we lock women indoors.
Huh? I wasn’t mechadesh a new pshat of a pasuk or even cited it as halacha based on it alone. I cited Shulchan Aruch/Rema/Rambam’s psak halacha.
I got my hands on a “Tzuras Hadaf” edition and I saw that the statement is indeed the Rema’s.
Lior: False. You distorted a Rambam to say what you wanted it to say. Please, quote the Rambam in full and tell us what you think it says and why.
No I did not. If you disagree feel free to post your interpretation of the *full* Rambam, something you thus far have failed to do.
If you don’t like my excerpt, here is a verbatim translation of the full halacha by Rabbi Eliyahu Touger:
Halacha 11
In a place where it is customary for a woman not to go out to the market place wearing merely a cap on her head, but also a veil that covers her entire body like a cloak, her husband must provide at least the least expensive type of veil for her. If he is wealthy, [he must provide her with a veil whose quality] is commensurate with his wealth.
[He must give her this veil] so that she can visit her father’s home, a house of mourning or a wedding celebration. For every woman should be given the opportunity to visit her father and to go to a house of mourning or a wedding celebration as an expression of kindness to her friends and relatives, for [this will have a reciprocal effect], and they will return the visits. For a woman [at home] is not confined in a jail, from which she cannot come and go.
Nevertheless, it is uncouth for a woman always to leave home – this time to go out and another time to go on the street. Indeed, a husband should prevent a wife from doing this and not allow her to go out more than once or twice a month, as is necessary. For there is nothing more attractive for a woman than to sit in the corner of her home, as [implied by Psalms 45:14]: “All the glory of the king’s daughter is within.”
“Indeed, a husband should prevent a wife from doing this and not allow her to go out more than once or twice a month, as is necessary.” [emphasis added]
R’ Mordechai Willig, in ??? ???? volume 38, wrote:
??????? ???? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ????”? ????? ??????? ???? ??? ?????? ????”? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??????
If you are going to insist that we follow the Rambam on women not leaving the home and thus not working, there if you are intellectually honest there would be no issue regarding women (or, for that matter, the government) supporting full time learners because the Rambam forbade learning Torah without a parnassah.
“One cannot blindly quote Nach. By doing so, one tramples on the very lessons that Nach is meaning to teach”
Actually it is worse than that. Our halachic tradition is based on the mishnah and gemara. By following Nach literally without regard to how it is interpreted by our sages you have placed yourself outside the pale of normative Rabbinic Judaism.
If women should stay home, they shouldn’t go to work. Someone has to work, because that is the way of the world.
If you are going to insist that we follow the Rambam on women not leaving the home and thus not working, there if you are intellectually honest there would be no issue regarding women (or, for that matter, the government) supporting full time learners because the Rambam forbade learning Torah without a parnassah
Is there a particular reason to think those two halachos are dependant on one another? I ask, because we follow a particular Rishon (or posek of any generation) for one halachah, but not for another, all the time, with complete intellectual honesty.
You obviously like that psak of the Rambam; you quote it often. You should have the intellectual honesty to realize that we don’t pasken that way.
First the Rambam says that a woman should go to places like funerals and weddings and to do Chessed. Then he says that, however, she should not go out Stam more than once or twice a month as might be necessary for other purposes than those.
(I haven’t read this whole thread.)
From last week’s (Chaukah) edition of Mishpacha magazine:
“Maran was opposed to women serving in the Knesset, but not because he didn’t respect women. He didn’t make a major decision without first consulting his rabbanit. Rather, he felt that the maximum effect and influence of a woman is davka when she is behind the scenes… The drama that takes place in the Knesset is good for men.”
-Rabbanit Yehudit Yosef, daughter-in-law and confidante of
Chacham Ovadiah, regarding the movement calling for a religious
woman to appear on one of the chareidi party lists
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.