Explaining to girls that only boys light the Chanukah Menorah

Home Forums Yom Tov Chanukah Explaining to girls that only boys light the Chanukah Menorah

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 157 total)
  • Author
  • #1438913


    However, he uses the term of: טפילות לאנשים – Not k’Gufo so i’m not so sure, but based on the sevara I don’t see where there is any “טפילות ” to any Ish if not married.

    I will have to lookup the עולת שמואל inside and see…



    APY –

    “the mishna berura is clear. it means a persons wife. ishto kigufo doesnt refer to a father/daughter, sister/brother relationship. but, he is free to drei a kup. its a slow day today.”
    He must have skipped Siman תרעא

    Read my last posts links (pending now) – it is very clear that it is indeed pertaining to single girls. (Though it is a total different reason.)

    Case closed!



    @APY/Daas –

    Ah, Baruch sheKevanty!

    I looked it up and he basically says the above reasoning I mentioned, that by Nashim (i.e. singles – he clearly quotes the A”R reason of “k’gufo” and asks the above points: that it only pertains to married women ) we are not machmir to be Mehadrin like the Rambam’s shitah

    He claims that the Ikar haDin is like the sefardim do, but we are machmir like the Rambam as a per mere “minhag” that all light, and thus the very “minhag” when initiated was never applied to Nashim in the first place , the reason they are not machmir (especially if not like the Rambam who holds Nashim are incl in Mehadrin – see Pri Chadash) he uses the term that they are טפילות which is not at all the term of k’gufo’, it means that their very Chiyuv is based on “Af” hen Hayu BeOso haNes’, hence we are not Machmr on the “Minhag” to do the other shitah of Mehadrin.
    Makes perfectly sense now why Nashim are exempted from lighting their own.

    Here is the link:

    I always say, most questions and difficulties are solved by looking up the sources. May it be Rashi quoting a Midrash or a Toras Kohanim etc. or anything else, you need to look up the source to find the true meaning.


    ☕ DaasYochid ☕

    GAON, apashutayid, see the עולת שמואל inside.



    Judaism is a middle eastern religion and the Ashkenazi have turned it into a liberal let women do everything western religion. Is it any wonder why the reform and the weakening of Judaism came from Europe. In the middle east where Judaism comes from the men were unquestionably in charge of everything relating to halakha and religion while the women took care of keeping home in tact. Regardless of the minhagim of lighting the chanukah there is a sense today that we must justify why only men do certian mitzvot as if we are being put on trial…Bias Ya’akov graduates fight with their husbands because they think the one minhag they learned in their school is torah lemoshe mi sinai and wont listen to her husband who knows that is not the case. My grandparents alav hashalom from Yemen were an example to me, my grandmother was no push over and my grandfather did not treat her as a slave but their roles were clear my grandfather was in charge of everything to do with religion and my grandmother ran the home…she never asked why she could’nt put on tefilin or light the menorah and he never dared tell her how to cook, clean, who to invite for a meal, which simkha they would attend etc. They were married for nearly seventy years aleihem hashalom; they fought their fare share and had great times too. Today the women want to be men and the men want to let them. This is why Torah Judaism is becoming like a debate on the view or some other garbage talkshow and why half of every frum marriage now ends in divorce and more Jewish singles cant or wont marry.


    ☕ DaasYochid ☕

    Judaism is a middle eastern religion

    Chas v’chalilah! It’s a G-d given religion (if we can even call it a religion).

    Your grandparents from the Middle East were just as likely to have been affected by their culture as people in the Western world by Western culture.



    “Judaism is a middle eastern religion ”
    “In the middle east where Judaism comes from the men were unquestionably in charge of everything”

    Hmm so in other words, each region was affected by their society and your ancestors were influenced by Islamic culture? So you have no concrete proof that this is proper Judaism other than that is how it was done by your tradition?

    As Daas has pointed out, unlike all other A”Z fake regions – Judaism stands on its OWN – and there is enough in our holy Talmud and scriptures and sforim to properly know how women should conduct themselves.

    Yes – we tend to be influenced by our surroundings, hence that it is our duty in Judaism to overcome all and seek advise by our Poskim and sages.

    “Bias Ya’akov graduates fight with their husbands because they think the one minhag they learned in their school is torah lemoshe mi sinai and wont listen to her husband who knows that is not the case.”

    Unfortunately, some Bais Yaakov girls nowadays are more knowledgeable in some tradition and halacha than many boys are. (after all it does say Al Titosh Toras IMACHA – not Avicho 🙂

    As for your grandmother, she probably could barley read a pasuk…(correct me if i’m wrong)



    The Chasan Sofer explains that the women also have a part in Chanukah Menorah, the yevonim wanted to eliminate Rosh Chodash to eliminate the Yomim Tovim. Women don’t work when the candles are burning, commemorating 8 biblical yomim tovim where light the candles. The Chasam Sofer explains that women don’t light because they originally lit outside and it was not proper for women to mix with men.



    Guess we need to start thinking about Chanukah soon, but the simple answer probably is based on tznius. Since whoever is making the bracha usually says it in a loud singing fashion, it’s not tznius for older girls to do so in the presence of men. So even if the only ones there are family, to start saying when yes to do and when not to do is a little dicey. So better for them to be yotzei with men. At what age to start that is probably based on how you run the rest of your hold his tznius life. To have them say it but do it quietly doesn’t seem to be a better option, at least to me.


    Yabia Omer

    Baruch Hashem by us, only the head of the household lights for the whole family. And BH our women and girls don’t bentch lulav and never had this desire or need to do it. It has nothing to do with subservience. My mother, grandmother etc are all strong women and never had this odd desire to do Mitzvos shehzman graman. Anyone who grew up this way will get it innately.



    There’s nothing wrong with subservience. People are subservient to Hashem. Avodim are subservient to their master. Rabbonim are subservient to Gedolim. The hamon hoam are subservient to Rabbonim. Yisroelim are subservient to Kohanim. And women are subservient to men.

    There’s nothing different about the last mentioned subservience than with any of the previous ones. Whereas no one has problems with all the previous exemples of subservience, the only reason the latter example raises any hackles is due to the influence of the gentile world that unfortunately surrounds us and has influenced too many of us into sharing their corrupt values. And the latter example is something that the gentile world over the last hundred years has changed to promoting egalitarianism that was never a societal value, even by them, beforehand.



    Joseph, subservience of women toward men is a goyishe cconcept, influenced by medieval Christian and Islamic rreligions. In Judaism men and women have DIFFERENT roles but it doesn’t necessarily make women subservient to men. In fact, in many places in the Torah and and Rabbinical writings men are encouraged to listen to their wives. And wives are told to listen to their husbands…

    Basically in Judaism it is not one gender that is forced to be subservient to the other, rather compromises should be made in marriage and sometimes the woman (or women) should be listened to and sometimes it’s the man ( or men).

    The problem with today’s society is not that women don’t want to be subservient to men ( thank God we outgrew that mentality). The problem is that women don’t respect nor appreciate their roles and constantly feel “deprived ” by their roles and they think they’ll be happier off taking on men’s roles. This is the liberal world today and it has by now gone the opposite way too with men taking on womens’ roles. This crazy mentality has rubbed off on our frum communities where women feel that they need to take on men’s roles. The Torah makes it clear that men and women are different and we need to respect our differences and fulfill our roles.



    The current philosophy of women would exclude King David from being a Jew. A maovis is allowed to join because it is improper to give water and sustenance among the men as women belong inside. The women don’t believe in this modesty so women would also not be allowed to join.



    Philosopher: Please identify which, if any, of the following are from medieval Christian or Islamic religions:

    Bereishis 3:16, Bereishis 18:12

    Tehilim 45:11-12, which the Menoras Hame’or 2:176 says teaches us that a wife should not view her husband as an equal but rather as her master.

    Shulchan Aruch, Y.D. 240:17, which explicitly states wives are subservient to their husband.

    Ben Yehoyada, Menachos 43b, which says so as well.

    Rambam, Hilchos Ishus 15:20, which states a wife must do all her deeds according to what her husband says, she should fear him and he should be in her eyes as a ruler or king.

    אגרות משה אורח חיים חלק ד סימן עה

    As far as listening, Bava Metzia 59a says a husband who listens to his wife on matters of religion/ruchniyos issues will end up in gehenom.



    Joseph your question/ obsession has been addressed many times on many threads. I don’t feel a need to answer again except that this is the Internet where people can think your unfortunate twisted perspective on men bashing women represents Yiddishkeit. It’s ironic that because you detest the male bashing in popular culture you constantly strive to engage in women bashing – except you try to cloak it in Torah hashkafa, which it isn’t and which the male bashing never attempts to do.
    so I guess if anyone feels that they want me to address this again, I will just to clear it up.

    Gutten moed everyone including Joseph. Nothing personal just don’t like seeing distortions represented as Torah. Especially where there is chillul Hashem involved.



    Chabadshlucha: I didn’t address this comment to you, nor in the past have they been addressed to you despite your consistent sticking your two-cents into discussions way above your head. This was addressed to Philosopher, so you needn’t feel a need to pipe in or announce that you won’t address. In the past when you’ve purported to supposedly challenge the multitude of direct and explicit Torah sources I cited and sourced (that anyone can lookup themselves rather than relying on me), you’ve never been able to do so and instead stumbled and hemmed and hawed with vague non-answers based on your personal feelings and what you openly admitted were your personal reinterpretations of sources that you said you have no source other than your own feelings for.

    Gutten Moed and Gutten Erev Shabbos.



    Since as philosopher said, the view is that we have different roles, and personalities etc, in some ways men will be superior, in some ways women. So to bring sources that only show one without the other and then conclude that men are better full stop is wrong and misleading. In many of your sources it actually does show where women are superior / men are obligated to women as well, and you only bring the male on top piece.

    As far as my way of writing, I write what I’ve learned but don’t look up and list every source as that would take much more time and lengthen my posts very much. But if you ever ask me on something I say that you want the source, im happy to provide. I’m pretty sure I’ve written when I’ve inferred something on my own and challenged you to counter it by proving it isn’t in line with the seforim (you didn’t). Some is pure contextual logic and unless you counter it and show why it isn’t the case/ the logic isn’t sound,, there’s no reason to say that I didn’t address it properly.

    Anyhow my main point is please think about the dangers of posting these kind of posts that aren’t in line with mainstream hashkafa and can cause the serious outcomes mentioned above (especially after its been brought up and discussed by you in so many threads already).



    You’re right you didnt address it to me and honestly I’m perfectly happy to leave it to philosopher or anyone else who is willing to address. I saw he didn’t address the sources you posted so that’s why I said I can wroite up a response of needed, although im happy to leave it if people realise its just your view but not mainstream Judaism.

    The reason why I constantly give my two cents about this is because I want to counteract several serious problems that can arise from these kind of posts:

    1) a non Jew / not frum / traditional yid can read your post and come away with the mistaken understanding that Jewish men view and most therefore probably treat their wives and daughters and women in general like maidservants/ inferior
    and not as equals.this is a chillul Hashem as it has never been the case among the Torah giants of today, nor is it Torah hashkafa.

    2) a fresh baal/as teshuva / even a frum bais Yaakov maidel who never learned and isn’t able to learn, the sources you post, can come away with negative feelings towards Yiddishkeit for the same reason or negative feelings about her role in Am Yisrael if she is fooled into thinking her role is inferior.

    3) a man who isn’t sufficiently learned / brought up in a frum environment can read your posts and base his hashkafa and attitude towards his wife etc. to be overcontrolling and then tell her this is Torah ( I know of a case like this -not from your posts but from the ideas within which he must have come across in some way. His wife didn’t know any better. When she eventually found out the truth they almost got divorced, and bh reconciled after he changed his behaviour.)

    Shoo I really really think if after all the discussion on many threads something isn’t sitting right with you even though you see that its not mainstream hashkafa etc, you should not keep posting these kind of things, but should look up a hashkafa book on the matter which addresses all these sources and more (I can recommend one I know, I’m sure there are others).



    Edit: Torah giants throughout history



    Edit: So, not shoo



    To clarify: im not saying that Torah says women should never do any work that a maidservant would do, quite the opposite and that is one of the main ways she endears herself to her husband and they have great sholom bayis – its by serving him in various ways.HOWEVER he for his part greatly respects her (more than himself as the same Rambam you quoted above goes on to say) and treats her like a queen and equal.

    I think a great example of this is Rabbi Akivas wife Rochel. She worked really hard, in extreme poverty, and then raised the children herself did all housework etc while her husband left to learn for 24 years. However he made it clear that all the Torah he and his students had acquired was in her merit and he bought her a golden crown as soon as he could afford it to make up for the difficult times she slaved away. This represents the ideas above.



    Chabadshlucha, I am a woman and am not sufficiently learnt enough to bring down the exact sources that would point to the superiority of women. But as we know, in some places it is bought down that women are on a higher spiritual plane than me and therefore are exempt from many mitzvos because we don’t need these mitzvos to bring us closer to Hashem. But I’m too busy, especially now with cooking for Yom Tov meals, and honestly too lazy as well, to do all the research and post the relevant sources.

    To Joseph I say, if I were to post these sources that state that women are superior and are smarter in certain ways because of our binah yesierah and bring the sources stating that men should listen to their wives and that women are superior spiritually to men, would it not be ridiculous of me to quote these sources and make a blanket statement in general are superior then men?

    According to the Torah AND Rabbinical sources,men have strengths and weaknesses as separate genders AND as individuals. No one is superior or subservient based on their genetics. We build ourselves spiritually through our actions. Therefore, if a man is not acting the way he’s supposed to or making ridiculous and irrational demands of his wife, then a wife listening to such a husband and being subservient to him, then is nothing more than a chossid shoita. No person can be degraded because we are not suberservient to the other gender. We are only suberservient to Hashem!




    Although we do have the curse of vhu yimshol bach which does result in women being more easygoing and usually more willing to let the husband win in arguments (or think he won) because they care for the general relationship more than being right.

    But it’s not a halacha women must give in all the time..it’s a curse. I’ve never seen men insist that they cannot use air conditioning or work in an office because of their curse of earning their bread by the sweat of their brow… It’s a curse not an ideal.



    Joseph, my last question addressed to you was missing words so I will repeat the question. Would it make sense for me to quote sources from the Torah and Rabbinical writings stating how women are superior with our binah yeseirah and our higher level of spirituality and that men are supposed to listen to their wives, and then state according to all these sources women are superior and smarter and men are “required” to act according to their wives wishes?

    Quoting a source out of context or without sufficient explanation bought down by the Rabbis does not mean much, or is the very most only part of the picture. Consider the fact that Chava was created out of Adam’s rib and there are meforshim stating that because she was created out of Adam, Adam (i.e. men) is master over Chava. But there are meforshim stating the opposite, that Chava ( i.e. women) is a force that is K’NEGED Adam so she can keep him in check if he strays. In other words, there are meforshim saying men are the masters and there are meforshim saying women have the last word. And they are ALL correct. Different situations call for different applications.

    Don’t be so fixated on men being masters. If you have any women in your life, wife or daughters, they are not subservient to you, period.


    Avi K

    1. Actually, if the husband cannot be home when the time to light comes the wife should light.

    2. Rashi says that Noah was able to invent the plow because Adam’s curse expired. perhaps Chava’s also expired at that time.



    Chabadshlucha, what you write regarding women in general giving in (and everything else you wrote as well) is so true. Women generally do care more about their relationships. And usually women also care more how things affect the entire family as well and will therefore give in so that the family can function normally instead of being in a state of war or tension. And this is takeh a curse, as you write. There is no halacha stating that women must give in. But at the same time women are givers as Hashem is gives to us (as the Sages teach us this is what the bracha sheusani kirtzono means), so although it is a curse because it is not easy to give in, we still thank Hashem for creating us as givers.



    CS: You’re contradicting the Torah. I brought you numerous Torah sources which all say the same thing. You’ve brought a grand total of zero Torah sources that contradict even one thing in any of the numerous Torah sources I cited. Zero, zilch, nada. All I did was cite the Torah and explicit Torah sources. You’re telling us that your bubbe heard a maaisa that somewhere is some rabbonic source that you can’t quote, or done remember where, it says the opposite. Well, I’m challenging you to directly quote <b>verbatim</b> what it says and where it says it. Because you can’t. And the reason you can’t is because it doesn’t exist.

    You’ve been influenced by 21st century Western goyishe values. Without those values you wouldn’t have gotten all bent out of shape by simply having the aforementioned Torah sources cited to you.

    But, yes, go ahead and bring down specific Torah sources from the Rishonim or Achronim about bina yeseira, women being smarter, or whatever else you think or imagine that they say. I’m not sure why you’re harping on this superior point. No one said anything about being superior. The only point made is that the Torah says women are subservient. And the point was made directly citing numerous Torah sources. It is mentioned directly in the Torah, Chazal and ruled as Halacha by Shulchan Aruch. There are no dissenting or opposing views, period. Nowhere in the Torah or in Torah sources.

    Are you similarly bothered when it is mentioned that Yisroelim are subservient to Kohanim?

    Women's Bina Yeseira

    טז אֶל־הָֽאִשָּׁ֣ה אָמַ֗ר הַרְבָּ֤ה אַרְבֶּה֙ עִצְּבוֹנֵ֣ךְ וְהֵֽרֹנֵ֔ךְ בְּעֶ֖צֶב תֵּֽלְדִ֣י בָנִ֑ים וְאֶל־אִישֵׁךְ֙ תְּשׁ֣וּקָתֵ֔ךְ וְה֖וּא יִמְשָׁל־בָּֽךְ:

    Shulchan Aruch:
    אחד האיש ואחד האשה שוין בכבוד ובמורא של אב ואם אלא שהאשה אין בידה לעשות שהיא משועבדת לבעלה לפיכך היא פטורה מכבוד אב ואם בעודה נשואה ואם נתגרשה או נתאלמנה חייבת:

    Kibud Av V’Eim is one of the Aseres Hadibros. One of the absolutely core obligations of every Jew. A basic tenet of our very being. Yet a wife is halachicly absolved of one of the very Ten Commandments because her obligation to serve her husband takes precedence over her obligation to serve her parents. The reverse is not the case for a husband, whose obligation of Kibud Av V’Eim takes precedence over his obligations to his wife.



    Joseph, you are really sick. And that is one reason I don’t bother with bringing sources for people like you. Because it’s a waste of my time and energy. You are denying that these sources which I spoke about, exist. This is a blatant lie. As I said, you are fixated on women being subservient to men.

    Where exactly am I contradicting the Torah? Every question in the Torah has 36 answers, some seemingly contradicting one another. But these seemingly contradicting answers are paradoxes where when you look closely, all these teritzim are correct and do not contradict each other at all, there are just many different facets to one reality. But you are too sick to see these differences in this case ( and I suspect in all of your opinions as well) and see only side: your very own opinion.

    Unlike you who you seem to have plenty of time because you have female subservients serving your every whim ( which according to your distorted view of halacha they are “obligated” to do so) I am very busy cooking for the seudahs and also including after Yom Tov I’m very busy with work. But if I have a little time I will try to bring the sources which EVERY person with a little knowledge of Judaism, knows exists. The reason I will try to quote these sources are for other people, not you, to see they exist. You are too sick to be honest and I try to stay away from arguing with sick people.

    The reason I write women are “superior ” spiritually is because in the Torah and writing of Chazal and meforshim there are an abundance of sources WHY women are not obligated in mitzvos shehazman grama. Every kid knows this besides for you who are fixated on the fact that women are exempt from certain mitzvos only because they are “subservient” to their husbands. They are NOT in any way, shape or form subservient to their husbands. However women are exempt from certain mitzvos because of their role in taking care of the needs of their husbands AND family AND the fact that we are spiritually superior. The role of a women is not to be the husband’s slave which is what you indicate women are when you are so obsessed that in certain places men are called masters over women. As I said, quoting sources out of context as you do presents an incomplete picture. What exactly does “masters” mean? And “master” is an English word, the word you are translating from Loshen Hakodesh can have completely different meaning when in context. If anything, you sound like the Christians taking one word or sentence from the Bible and mistranslating and misconstruing from what the Torah REALLY means. Does the word “masters” which you “translate” from Loshen Hakodesh, that may or may not be the exact and correct and completete translation, mean that women are slaves to their husbands, or that Yisroeilim are slaves to Cohanim and obligated to obey their every whim? Of course not. Let’s see a Yisroel obeying a Cohen’s wishes simply because it is written that Cohanim are “masters” over Yisroeilim. You are simply a very BIG fool to think that that is what the Torah means with the Loshen Hakodesh equivalent of the word/words you translated to “master” .



    We may possibly be able to clear this up pretty quickly. Joseph what do you mean by women being subservient to their husbands that apply today (not in other centuries in different circumstances)?



    @philosopher busy here for yt too, but am familiar with the quotes Joseph brought. I’ve learned beraishis I’ve learned the whole hilchos ishus and nashim in Rambam. And the last gemara as well all makes sense within context. Just a quick note for now happy to go in depth in specifics after yt:

    The mastery or enslavement of women Joseph speaks of is as you said missing context. A wife is not subservient to men. But you her husband she does have obligations some of which are / were servile and are based on what is considered a woman’s job at the time (no one washes their husbands feet and face today because while back then that was normal for wives and am expression of endearment today it would just be weird and demeaning as it isn’t the norm today.)

    Her obligations are described as mishubedes enslaved. He also has his obligations to her in fact his are recorded explicitly in the Torah and there are others brought in chazal.

    If either fail in their obligations they can get a divorce – he doesn’t whip her or rape her if she refuses to do her responsibilities but he can claim the right to divorce. She
    can also file for divorce in beis din if he fails his obligations to her.

    They both need to respect each other. Men have a need to be respected as an officer as the Rambam says she should view him. Ie that she respects him as in looks up to him. Women want to admire their husbands and don’t need to be looked up to in return but need their husbands to treat them with proper dignity as human beings and equals, as the Rambam says he should respect her MORE than himself.

    Anyway gotta get back to menu planning..
    Gut yom Tov to all!!



    Philosopher: My previous comment was addressed to CS, not to you. See the very first word in the post. Secondly, you don’t provide sources because none exist, so you have none to provide even if you wanted to. See the thread I linked to in my last post titled “Women’s Bina Yeseira”. It provides many actual Torah sources that contradict what you’re claiming without sources. Especially the canard that any legitimate Torah source says that women are spiritually superior. Again, see the thread I linked to refuting that canard. My arguments in this discussion about subservience is the *only* one supported by the Torah and Torah sources. Thirdly, I very much appreciate your kind words regarding my comment in the other thread we mutually posted in. Fourthly, as difficult as it may be to believe, I completely love every poster here (excluding heretics, which applies to no one in the current discussion), including those who vociferously and strongly take issue with my comments, as complete brothers and sisters.

    And fifthly, I am correct about what we are arguing about here. 😎

    P.S. If you think I am mistranslating anything you are free to easily look it up with the very specific and direct citations I kindly provided. You will then find otherwise.



    As I said, to quote pesukim and claim that one’s own view of the meaning of the posek translates into “halacha” is a dangerous view. According to the “translation” of masters or rulers in the Torah, a rebbi can be called a master over a student as could a Cohen be a master over a Yisroel. Does this give an halachik right to a rebbi or Cohen to use the student or the Yisroel as a servant ? Is the student or Yisroel a personal servant to their master or masters? It’s such a ridiculous insinuation that it is laughable, just as it is laughable that a husband is master over his wife or rules over his wife in a way that she is a servant to her husband. It’s despicable and ridiculous to think along those lines in terms of supposedly physical power the Torah supposedly gives for the “masters” over the “subservients”. That is not what the Torah means and anyone who has any understanding of Judaism understands the relationship of Rabbis and students and Cohanim and Yisreolim and anyone with a healthy mental capacity also understands that the relationship of a husband and wife in Judasim has no relation to a master and slave type of relationship.

    The fact that it says in Bereishis 3:16 that the husband will rule over the wife is not any indication of any halacha that the wife must do her husband’s bidding discriminately, nor it is not any indication that a husband and wife relationship means that the wife is a servant to her husband. This posek means that women were cursed, after Chava convinced Adam to eat from the eitz hadas, that men will be a stronger force in marriage. Men were cursed as well to toil in the fields for their bread ( i.e. work hard for their parnasoh). It is a curse, not a halacha, that men are masters in marriage.

    Bereishis 18:12 That Sara Imaeinu called her husband “master” is an indication of respect to her husband and not an indication that she was a servant or had a servant/master type of relationship with Abraham Avinu.



    The bottom line is that a bfeirush posek in the Torah HaKedosha clearly tells wives that their husband will rule them. Tehillim adds, as explained by the Menoras Hame’or, that a wife should not view her husband as an equal but rather as her master. The Rambam clearly writes al pi Halacha that a wife should fear her husband and view him as her ruler and king. The Shulchan Aruch paskens that a wife is so subservient to her husband that she no longer has obligations of Kibud Av V’Eim since she must serve her husband instead of her parents. That’s a major chiddush that she’s absolved of one of the Aseres Hadibros, a m’doraisa, on account of her duties to her husband. These are halachos; obligations of hers.

    None of this is contradicted or disputed anywhere in any Torah sources, period. And, in fact, we can early find dozens of more meforshim, Rishonim and Achronim all saying the same. And that, despite 21st century Western values, is the bottom line as far as Jews are concerned. I mean them all in the same context the poskim and meforshim said them; I merely cited them as close to verbatim as I could.

    How else do you explain why a wife’s obligation of Kibud Av V’Eim is eliminated whereas a husband’s obligation of Kibud Av V’Eim is not eliminated? Or that Rambam, Menoras Hame’or, Ben Yehoyoda, and numerous numerous other poskim and meforshim rule that a wife must view her husband as her king/ruler/master while not reciprocating that all encompasing obligation from him to her. And that no poskim disagree with these halachic rulings. Yes, they very much mean she must do her husband’s bidding. Rambam says this very explicitly. And how else do you explain that in Loshon Kodesh the very word for a husband is “בעלה”!

    No one is saying or ever said that a husband doesn’t have duties to his wife. But they are not equal. So please stop adding that red herring. One is subservient and the other is not, despite as objectionable that concept sounds to contemporary Western ears. Slavery also it’s objectionable to modern people yet is very much supported, and rightly so, as a Torah value.

    And the aforementioned poskim and meforshim do cite the pesukim in Bereishus that I cited as the basis for these halachic obligations. (No, not merely a curse.)

    To summarize, after we’ve been going in circles, wishing both ChabadShlucha and Philosopher, as well as all my many fans, admirers, plain readers and observers as well as my detractors, a happy, healthy and ruchniyos good year and ah gutte kvittel. And with the womenfolk happily accepting their proper subservient role in life and the menfolk treating their wives and children as a Yid is expected to with the utmost love and respect bringing up Yiddishe doiros in the derech as our zeidas and bubbes have for thousands of years. (Not as slaves of 21st century goyishe values.)

    Ah gutte kvittel!



    By the way, for those making so much out of the term “shi’abud”, a husband is also meshu’abod to his wife, for the value of the kesubah.

    And he promises “va’ano EFLOCH…yosichi lichi, kehilchos guvrin yehudo’in DEFOLCHIN…linsheihon bekushto”, “I will WORK … for you, as is the LAW of Jewish men, that they WORK … for their wives in good faith”.

    The key here is that shi’abud means an obligation, not necessarily slavery. Just as “kinyan” doesn’t necessarily mean property, and wives are obviously not property, since they cannot be sold.



    CS, I have actually heard someone claim that epidurals, or any other pain management during childbirth, are forbidden because the Torah says “be’etzev teildi bonim”! This is how ridiculous people get when they confuse a curse with a commandment. I asked this person whether he keeps everything that’s in the tochacha, ch”v. After all, leshitoso all of those terrible pesukim must also be commandments.



    Joseph, I use strong words because I strongly suspect that you are mistreating the women in your life. The fact that I’m unwilling to look up the sources in this busy time is totally NOT proof that these verses I spoke about don’t exist in the Torah or Rabbinical writings.

    The FACT is that you are denying that what I wrote exists, just because I haven’t quoted the exact sources (at this point in time, I should add) and you SELECTIVELY choose only those sources that appear as if the Torah says that the husband is master OVER and rules OVER the wife. It is very misleading.

    I have no problem with people having different opinions and I strongly advocate for that (and thanks for saying thanks). BUT that does not mean that the Torah’s sources can be used to advance one’s agenda of mistreating people.

    So just to clear up what may be my misconception regarding your view of the Torah’s view on the relationship between men and women, I ask you the same question as Chabadshlucha asked you. What do you mean by women being subservient to men?



    Why did Hashem call a husband his wife’s “בעל” in Loshon Kodesh? That means master/boss/etc.



    Philosopher, your facts are absolutely incorrect as I’ve repeatedly proven with multitudes and multitudes of Torah sources (with many many more saying the same, if you so care for real actual meforshim, Chazals, Rishonim and Achronims.)

    Gut Yur to you and your mishpacha. (And please treat your menfolk in a Torahdik manner.)

    P.S. As I’ve answered already above, I mean simply and only exactly what the Shulchan Aruch, Rambam, the Torah itself and the others I’ve quoted, and others that yet remain to be cited stating the same, say. Nothing more and nothing less.



    To Philosopher:
    Don’t assume misogyny and old fashioned stupidity are mutually exclusive as our resident troll is patently capable of manifesting both of these admirable qualities simultaneously. However, he will likely have more misappropriated quotes in support of his misguided positions than you might possibly be able (or willing) to track down to refute.



    KotonHadorah: You’re free to lookup every source I provided. If you know how to open a Sefer it is very easy with the very specific citations I kindly provided.



    A source that showcases this relationship even with the areas that are the mans domain:

    In a well known gemara (men can fill us in on the exact page) it discusses three questions a husband should ask his wife as
    shabbos comes in. I think they are : have you separated challa? Maaser? Lit the candles?

    In the ensuing discussion, one of the chachamim says that I always asked these questions in a very soft tone. Another responds of course! Otherwise I wouldn’t be listened to…

    Divrei chachamim bnachas nishmain.

    So even when the husband should be the master if he acts despicably, his wife will not respect him. The same is true of the reverse of course. Even though a husband is obligated to give his wife emotional support if she is cold and nasty she can’t expect that. The most either can do is file for divorce with a beis din who will examine who is at fault. But in a Jewish marriage both parties are expected to be mentchen and respect each other.



    Truth is any source can be construed in multiple ways to create injustice or the opposite and you often have to see how it plays out in real life. For example, people in the Jewish world were saying that halacha cvs allows child abuse because abusers tend to touch children without adults around and halachically children are not witnesses… But now with the swing liberalism has taken, we are seeing how much evil can be done when uncorroberated allegations are taken as fact, despite the lack of witnesses, and can be used to destroy people who have led righteous lives for as long as anyone knows…

    And abusers don’t typically stop with one victim unfortunately and are eventually caught…

    So something that may have been seen as condoning evil cvs is now being seen as protecting innocent people.

    We can say the same here. Muslims and Jews seem to have similar laws of modesty, similar language and emphasis with the husband being the head of the household and the wife glorified as the mother etc… Yet look into Muslim society and you see that they don’t protect women with their modesty, they degrade them, beat them, and even honour kill them. So the whole talk of the modesty being a women’s protection of her honour etc is a sham.

    Contrast that with the relationship between Jewish men and their wives, now and throughout the generations and you see mutual respect of each other and complementing roles, with the exceptions here and there that occur in any body of people.that is all the proof you need of what master means.



    @milhouse first of all nice to hear from you on here. Are you a newcomer?
    Second of all thanks for providing a source that shows of a place where it seems that Jewish marriage is only the men being servile / slaves (to use Joseph terminology) aka obligated to the woman and where the woman doesn’t respond likewise. Just quoting that as reference to the roles of men and women in a Jewish marriage would of course be twisted but that’s exactly what Joseph does with his quotes on women / s obligations without context.



    The Rebbe said a series of Rashi sichos where he analysed the depth of rashi, Rashis difficulty with the posuk and the many gems and lessons within. There is allot shakla vtarya there and often it ends off with a beautiful lesson.

    One such memorable lesson I remember is on the Rashi of vayita oholo where rashi comments that the word is written ohola, her tent, to hint that Avraham pitched his wife’s tent before his own.

    The Rebbe asks where rashi based his chiddush from and why he didn’t quote a source for the ben chomesh lmikra. He answers that the ben chomesh lmikra doesn’t need a source and doesn’t see it as a great chiddush because he sees Avraham Avinus behaviour reflected in his own home by the way his father treats his mother.

    So Joseph can bring a bunch of sources from today till next year, bringing more and more to prove that the man ought to be master. We normal people who have been brought up in healthy frum homes and/or are in healthy marriages (I wouldn’t be so worried about Josephs wife, he is most probably either a bachelor or divorced) know that we respect our husbands as the heads of the home and take their guidance especially in spiritual matters seriously (assuming they are spiritually healthy. If not we strive to help them grow with encouragement). They in turn ask for our opinions and consult us on household matters and we both make sure we are on the same pages with chinuch etc. Some things we have more of the decision making role some things our husbands but we strive to discuss things together and come to decisions together in mutual respect. That is the Torah way and has been the way of healthy Jewish homes since the first.



    I think this is why Joseph cannot answer our question with any concrete example of what he means by subservient today: because all he likes to do is bring sources that show the husband is the head of the home, which we all agree with but then uses insulting language and insinuating that are not real or twisted out of context.

    For example (here’s one source I’ll fully address aside from the Rambam one I addressed already ) he brings how Sara calls her husband master.
    Yet he very well knows (unless he was just cherry picking sources and is ignorant of the rest of beraishis) that in beraishis 18:3 Avraham calls the three men he wants to invite as guests his masters. So this shows it was just a common expression of respect back then but would sound demeaning and degrading today.

    So Joseph you want to know what the Torah is telling us? There should be mutual respect. Sara addressed her husband in a respectful manner by addressing him as if he was higher than her (just like he did with the Arab guests) and he, in another example, pitched her tent first. He converted the men, she, the women.

    No one has an issue with this. We just don’t like when you twist your sources as you attempted to do above by just quoting Sara addressing Avraham as master and leaving it at that to imply that a woman is a status below a man and should be treated as such. As you do with all your sources.

    OK I’ll do one more.

    “As far as listening, Bava Metzia 59a says a husband who listens to his wife on matters of religion/ruchniyos issues will end up in gehenom”

    True. The Torah also says to Avraham “whatever Sarah says, listen to her.”

    I’m sure you knew that. It’s famous because it centers on the discussion of whether to send away yishmael and is simple chumash not an obscure gemara.
    How do both make sense?

    Simple. To me at least. (The Rebbe said the last part so I didn’t make it up but it’s also logical sense.)

    Since the woman’s role is centered around the materialistic down to earth needs of her family, she tends to focus on that. So she will be pushing her husband towards materiality, to make more money say, instead of to learn more

    So generally, the gemara was giving the good advice that a husband should be a head in spiritual matters of the home and not follow his wifes guidance.

    But if she is a woman like Sara (and this is how all Jewish women will be by moshiachs times, the Rebbe adds which is why it is written in kabbala on the posuk of aishes chayil ateres baala, and nikeiva tosoveiv gever) then she will be able to see things on a loftier spiritual plane (with regards to
    ruach hakodesh as rashi comments on that episode) and her husband should listen to her.

    So it depends. Reading the memoirs of gluckel of hameln showed me this prototype of Jewish women. Simple emuna but very materialistic.

    However today from what I see it seems to be the norm for many homes that the wives encourage the husbands to learn more, go to Minyan etc. especially with the education girls receive today which they didn’t have back then. It’s not just now, there have always been great women who led their husbands spiritually in the right direction. Sara and Avraham with yishmael. Rivkah with the brochos. Rachel and Rabbi Akiva. Etc.

    So again what would be the lesson of the source you brought there? That if you are married to a wife whose values are materialistic, then don’t take her guidance in spiritual matters or that will lead you to gehennom. However even in such a situation she would have more of a say on house decorating, what house to live in etc because that’s more her domain.



    The Netziv denies that men own their wives, as I assume Joseph is trying to “prove” with his continuously saying men are “masters” over their wives. And which point I refuted by showing that “masters” does not technically mean that others, whether they are wives, students or Yisroeilim are “subjegated” to the whims of their “masters” and obligated to biddings of their supposed their “masters” i.e. husband’s, Rabbis, and Cohanim, indiscriminately…The word “masters” is an English word. The original Loshen Hakodesh words that can translate to word “master” come in many forms, but the point is that these words define a PART of a relationship and doesn’t necessarily mean that the entire relationship revolves around a “master” subjegating his “servants” rather that within certain relationships there are certain rights one has, or certain rules that one must obey, to be able for the relationship to function correctly.

    The Netziv says that proof that the husband does not own the wife is the fact that a husband is obligated to support a wife (Kesubos 58b) however a wife can opt out of this partnership by declaring herself independent (so that her wage will not have to go to her husband) and the husband is not obligated to support her anymore. This is in direct contrast to a slave who has no opt out options of declaring himself financially independent.

    The Netziv says that a husband only owns SPECIFIC rights to his wife, these rights I will not bring up here, one can do their own research if they desire to do so. However, these rights have nothing in common with a women being “subservient” to her husband, as Joseph would like us to believe.

    Many Rishonim state specifically that husband’s do not own their wives, for example see Rashba on kiddushin in 6b.

    I am NOT a Torah scholar, nor do I have the time at this point in time to look up the MANY sources on this issue. However, I am simply bringing these sources now just to show that there are out there.

    If I have more time, I will more research.


    • Gadolhadorah, I’m not sure what happened while I was wrinting my previous comment, I may have pressed submit and it will show up soon, incompleted.

    I don’t see anything submitted other than this post -33

    I also belive that Joseph will bring more sources supporting his OPINION but since he is denying that there are many great Rabbonim saying the opposite than he is trying to prove, I will therefore not be directly responding to his posts with his “proof” because I can’t argue when someone who is dishonest. I am not claiming that his sources saying a women must obey her husband is incorrect, I am just discussing in which context it means. As we know, this issue is not black and white where one can make a blanket statement that women are subservient to their husbands.

    And pesukim straight out of the Torah, without the meforshim to explain what they mean, in most instances, do not show clear, relevent halacha. That’s how the Karuim ended up completely irrelevant today and they are not considered Jews anymore because they “paskened” halacha from Tanach. We cannot pasken halacha without input and clarity from our great Rabbis.

    Therefore, because of his denying that sources exist that prove and pasken that women are not owned by men and by quoting pesukim from the Torah that don’t prove halacha but can be TEITCHED whichever way he chooses to, at this point I will not address my arguments directly to him.



    Why do some people bother.



    The Nitei Gavriel in perek beis, halacha tes (hilchos chanuka) brings down a psak regarding an almana who is supported from nicsei yesomim, that the yesomim must provide her with funds for neiros chanuka and enough for her to light according to the mehadrin opinion if she chooses. His sources are brought down.

Viewing 50 posts - 101 through 150 (of 157 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.