March 1, 2009 2:27 am at 2:27 am #1217999
SJS, Shulchan Aruch, etc. says it IS tiflus.March 1, 2009 2:40 am at 2:40 am #1218000
Kollel = Torah = necessity.March 1, 2009 2:54 am at 2:54 am #1218001
Joseph, for the moment, lets put aside the women learning…
Do you really think the only place of Torah learning is in Kollel? Thats what your mathematical statement seems to imply.March 2, 2009 12:53 am at 12:53 am #1218002
Kollel is a form of Torah. There are many other forms of Torah. There are also multiple forms of kollel. In Europe, the big gedolim who sat and learned were supported by their wife. Was their learning less because they weren’t supported by a father-in-law? The tannaim and amoraim who worked and learned are still quoted in the gemara despite the fact that they worked for a living. Additioanlly, the Yeshiva knesses yisroel (later to become “Slabodka” was started as a kollel, but became a yeshiva when they realized they could pay for 4 bachurim for the price of 1 kollel yungerman. Finally, the Chazon Ish was willing to lose the draft deferment for Yeshiva students to keep the sheirut le’umi law from passing. As he said, “Torah can survive without yeshivas, but yeshivas can’t survive without Torah”. and if that’s what he said about yeshivas, kolellim would go double. I’m not saying kollel isn’t important. It’s very important. But the days of the wife sitting at home and the in-laws paying the bills are gone. Kollel will go back to being done the way it was meant to be- pas bemelech tochal. The in-laws just don’t have the cash anymore. I work for a tzedakah, and I can tell you that the free-flowing cash just doesn’t exist anymore. The community will have to triage its financial tzedakah priorities, and kollel has to come on bottom of aniyey ircha (10% unemployement in many communities R”L), yeshiva ketanas, mesivtas, and yeshivos gedolos.March 2, 2009 1:25 am at 1:25 am #1218003
Jothar, sounds like your tzedaka org is competing with the Kollelim for the greenbacks, lol.March 2, 2009 7:48 pm at 7:48 pm #1218004
I’m glad you think it’s funny, Joseph. I envy your temimus. Every tzedakah now is chasing a pool of shrunken resources, Joseph. the S&P500 is now at levels not seen in 13 years. Many of the high-flying investments have crashed. The home loans that many baalei battim used to get to finance their children in kolel are no longer available. 10% of people are unemployed in many communities. In Israel, they are experiencing a double whammy of government funding cuts and a lack of outside dollars, to the point where large families are bringing home half a chicken for shabbos and splitting it for their entire family. People who used to provide fopr both their families and many others are now in serious trouble. The money has to be triaged. Yeshivas will have to start making significant cutbacks or close. There just is no money for every son-in-law to be a maggid shiur. This is economic reality. Hashem provides, but the litvish poverty model of kollel life is making a comeback. Hashem provides, but that doesn’t mean we should be wasteful with spending.March 3, 2009 1:24 am at 1:24 am #1218005
Torah is unaffiliated with the performance of the S&P 500.March 3, 2009 1:46 am at 1:46 am #1218006
Torah is unaffiliated with the performance of the S&P 500.
Joseph, we agree! (Although, Hashem may be punishing our gluttony that was made possible by the S&P…but sort of a different discussion).
Kollel however, WILL suffer because a lot of parents cannot afford to help anymore.March 3, 2009 1:59 am at 1:59 am #1218007
SJS, The truth is Torah does better in times of poverty than in times of wealth.March 3, 2009 2:16 am at 2:16 am #1218008
Joseph, which is sort of sad when you think about it. We don’t connect as well to Hashem when things are great – when they are hard, its much easier to turn to Hashem.
Ames, I don’t think thats literal.March 3, 2009 2:45 am at 2:45 am #1218009
Torah is learned whether in poverty or in wealth. Supporting a family in learning takes money though.March 3, 2009 3:43 am at 3:43 am #1218010mazal77Participant
I don’t know, but if people keep losing their jobs, they maybe forced to go back to Kollel anyway(I don’t think a unemployed Husband should be home, fighting is sure to result). Materialism/Gashmiut is considered the Eigel Ha’Zahav nowadays. My own personal thinking is, Hashem is causing all these Financial instituitions to crumble (Sorry to scare everyone) to get us to trust in Him. One way or the other, EVERYONE’S Bitachon is going to be surely put to the test. It’s sink or swim time.March 3, 2009 3:50 am at 3:50 am #1218011
Thank you mazal.March 3, 2009 3:13 pm at 3:13 pm #1218012
It is quoted in some sifrei mussar that wealth is one of the hardest nisyonos is finding Hashem.
The whole point of galus is find out who we’re not and who we should not be in order to become who Hashem wants us to be. With the incredible loss of wealth in such a short period of time, I have heard in the name of an odom gadol, is a lack of Hester Panim, and we can find Hashem much more clearly through less gashmius.
I still maintain that a boy is looking to date a girl and not a chavrusa!March 3, 2009 3:25 pm at 3:25 pm #1218013
Well said mazal77.
kiruvwife- which is why most Gedolim live like paupers. Ever been to R’ Aharon Leib Steinman or R’ Chaim Kanievsky’s flats? It’s a mussar shmooze.March 3, 2009 3:32 pm at 3:32 pm #1218014
noitallmr–yes I have-and definitely one of the best mussar shmuessin I’ve heard/seen. The feeling I walked away with was–“these homes seem so free and emancipating–only the ol of Torah!”March 3, 2009 11:39 pm at 11:39 pm #1218015
Joseph, the Aruch HaShulchan says before quoting the Gemara, that “Even though they recieve a reward: (quote from Sotah 20a, followed by Sotah 21b, which is the phrase about “one who teaches his daughter Torah (shebaal peh) it is as if he is teaching her matters of transgression,) connotating that it is surely unadvised for one to teach his daughter Gemara, but if one’s daughter learns Gemara, she still gets a reward. The Aruch HaShulchan says that “Because their minds are ??, and they find in the Torah meaningless matters, because their minds are inadequate (for Torah study, even though they get a reward). But like most poskim, the Aruch HaShulchan rules that one’s daughter can learn Torah Shebichsav. In the Tur it says the opposite of what the Shulchan Oruch says, that Torah shebaal peh is not tiflus, and Torah shebichsav is. The Birkei Yosef notes that it is most probably a printer’s error.
I looked in the Shach and the Taz, and they both say that one’s daughter should not learn Torah shebaal peh, the Taz in the beginning noting the same observation of the Birkei Yosef, the printer’s error in the Tur, and that the Tur intended to say the same thing as the Shulchan Oruch, of course intending to say as well, like the Birkei Yosef, that he is with the Shulchan Oruch in this case. The Taz also notes that Lechatchila one’s daughter can learn Torah shebichsav, because the king would read Sefer Devorim to every Jew,, including women and children, and not only the men. The Shach on ???:? says nothing but an explanation of “One who is commanded and does is greater than one who is not commanded and does,” thus also deciding like the Shulchan Aruch and the Tur.
The Birkei Yosef notes that in the Machloikes with R’ Eliezer and Ben Azzai in Sotah 21b that if one is obligated to teach his daughter Torah shebaal peh, that we pasken like R’ Eliezer, and so for anyone who says that Ben Azzai says te opposite, we pasken like R’ Eliezer due to the opinions of R’ Yehoshua and R’ Elazar ben Azariah, if I understood the Birkei Yosef correctly.
The Rambam says on the matter: ????? ????? ???? ?:?? A woman who learns Torah, she has a reward, but not as big as a man’s, due to the fact that she was not commanded to. The one who is not commanded and does, his reward is not as big as the one who is commanded and does. Even though she gets a reward, our Chachamim commanded that one should not teach her. So we can see that the Rambam is of the opinion that it is an issur to not teach one’s daughter Torah shebaal peh, as consistent with his idea, that is stricter than other posikm’s, that lechatchila one should not even teach one’s daughter Torah shebichsav, but bedieved it is not like teaching tiflus.
The Shulchan Oruch HaRav quotes the Gemara in Kiddushin, that a woman is not obligated to learn Torah, because it says to your sons, not to your daughters, in ????? ?:?. Later he quotes the Rambam in what was mentioned in the previous paragraph. It seems like a contradiction, but in reality the unobligation is for Torah shebichsav, and the quote from the Rambam is for Torah shebaal peh. So, basically the Sulchan Oruch HaRav says that Lechatchila one can teach Torah shebichsav, but holds by the strict opinion of the Rambam that it is an issur to teach Torah shebaal peh. however, still the Shulchan Oruch HaRav says women need to learn Hilchos Nidah, Tvilah, and other things that apply for women.
The Bach says the lechatchila teaching a woman Torah shebichsav is OK, because if she dosen’t know Torah, how would she know how to fulfill all the mitzvos? Also, the Bach says that a woman can learn by hearing, but can not teach by stating, asserting. Hearing is merely at the time of its command (she can hear a command or public reading, but not learn on her own, like the public reading of Sefer Devorim. But a woman should still learn the things that women need to learn, and so she should say Birchos HaTorah every day.
The Rema says that a woman should learn the things applying to a woman, and she is not obligated to teach her son Torah (presumably both shebichsav and shebaal peh). But if she does help her son or husband so they can dwell in Torah part of their reward is given to them. This last sentence of the Rema can either refer to a Yissachar- Zevulun relationship, one works, and other learns, benefit divided, or when she helps: for example answering a question or learning together. The Rema also says not OBLIGATED. Not obligated, means you don’t have to do it, but you can. A woman will still get reward for learning even though she is not commanded, as R’ Chanina says: “The one who is commanded and does his reward is greater than the one who is not commanded and does.”
The Beis Yosef says on the Tur: With reference to this it is taught: If her merits suspend her (from dying from frinking the waters) (Sotah 20a). It is said in the Gemara (Sotah 21a) If you say, the merits of Torah, she is not commanded and does! The explanation of Rashi on this is that she is not commanded and does, and so her reward is less than one who is not commanded and does. And what is written (to support this)? One who does something without being commanded, his reward is not like the one who is commanded and does. (This all implies that even if a woman learns Torah she gets a merit, but not big enough to save from death, as the Gemara says: “A merit can save for 1, 2, or 3 years.”
Last of all, what is the context of R’ Eliezer’s machloikes with Ben Azzai? Ben Azzai says: One is obligated to teach his daughter Torah: in regard to what? In regard to her merits from the learning saving her from immediately dying from Mei Sotah, suspending her death for 1, 2, or 3 years. R’ Eliezer only says it is folly, in regard to it is worthless. It will not save her. According to Rashi’s interpretation of promiscuity, it advocates promiscuity, for she can do any immoral acts and not die for a couple more years.
*This is all according to my understanding of the text.
My entire post is intended to prove that women are unadvised to learn Torah Shebaal peh, but it is not a strict issur.March 4, 2009 12:40 am at 12:40 am #1218016
Yasher koach!March 4, 2009 12:44 am at 12:44 am #1218017
Yasher koach!March 4, 2009 1:34 am at 1:34 am #1218018
If it is unadvised for women to be learning Torah she’b’al peh should women refrain from reading David S’s post?March 4, 2009 3:16 am at 3:16 am #1218019
Thank you very much for the compliment Joseph, and also, I directed the post at you in the beginning of the essay because I thought you were of the opinion that it is an issur to teach one’s daughter Torah shebaal peh, please forgive me if I was wrong in my assumption or was rude in my wording.
YW Editor, I am sorry for reposting, but I had to add onto my previous post a major detail that clarified my post, and so I copied and pasted it again.
Thanks, DavidMarch 4, 2009 3:44 am at 3:44 am #1218020
There are poskim that pretty much hold all Torah shebaal peh is assur to teach to ones daughters. See the post I quoted on the first page of this thread.March 4, 2009 2:37 pm at 2:37 pm #1218021
Wow David- you make me feel like an Am Ha’aretz!March 4, 2009 6:25 pm at 6:25 pm #1218022
DavidS, the Prisha on the Tur states a woman may learn on her own. The seminaries follow a more lenient ruling, and teach “soft” Torah shebaal peh (Rambans etc) but not hard-core gemara.March 4, 2009 9:06 pm at 9:06 pm #1218023
As long as were in the same boat ames!March 4, 2009 9:30 pm at 9:30 pm #1218024
watch out- the boat has a holeMarch 5, 2009 1:06 am at 1:06 am #1218026
thanks for the compliment noitallmr :D, but now I am a bit embarassed I made you feel like an am haaretz 😀
Thanks, DavidMarch 5, 2009 1:14 am at 1:14 am #1218027
kiruvwife that is right, but I heard there are some poskim who say that hearing shiurim is not same as learning or being taught, and so listening to predigested information is muttar. ( I can’t quote any poskim right now, but i’ll look into the matter. If anyone could help me in finding sources to support my assumption, that help would be appreciated)
Thanks, DavidMarch 5, 2009 2:29 am at 2:29 am #1218028
The Maharatz Chayos also says on Mesechta Sotah 21a, that a woman can listen (aka to shiurim, predigested information), but not learn (aka from the sefer). So acquiring knowledge from shiurim and from information given by others, in a predigested form, is OK, but, however, learning straight from the sefer is unadvised.March 5, 2009 2:51 am at 2:51 am #1218029
Thank you, that information was very helpful.March 5, 2009 3:08 pm at 3:08 pm #1218030March 5, 2009 4:03 pm at 4:03 pm #1218031
So? After reading all these posts- a girl or a chavrusa?
I say girl.(woman-to satisfy e/o)March 5, 2009 4:55 pm at 4:55 pm #1218032
I personally think a learned girl, but not so learned that she can be a chavrusaMarch 5, 2009 8:24 pm at 8:24 pm #1218033
Is it an advantage for one’s wife to be clever? Think before hitting the send post button!!!March 5, 2009 9:01 pm at 9:01 pm #1218034tzippiMember
Depends. Is her being clever stimulating, compensating or what?March 5, 2009 9:41 pm at 9:41 pm #1218035
clever in what way?March 5, 2009 9:46 pm at 9:46 pm #1218036
if clever in not the smart clever, but the devious clever, surely not!March 5, 2009 9:48 pm at 9:48 pm #1218037squeakParticipant
Yes, as long as she is clever enough not to let on….March 6, 2009 2:18 am at 2:18 am #1218038ZalmanParticipant
Isn’t noitallmt a Brit? The Brits use “clever” as American’s use “smart”.March 6, 2009 2:42 am at 2:42 am #1218039squeakParticipant
see my post, which answers your questionMarch 6, 2009 8:00 pm at 8:00 pm #1218040Will HillParticipant
Girls usually want to marry someone taller than them, so they have someone to look up to. The same concept applies regarding intelligence. A girl wants to be able to look up to her husband in all areas.March 8, 2009 2:54 pm at 2:54 pm #1218041
Zalman- you gotta be new to the CR if you were not sure if I was from the U.K!!!
Check out my profile!March 9, 2009 8:16 pm at 8:16 pm #1218042
girls want someone taller than them so that they can wear heels.
they must be crazier than I thoughtMarch 9, 2009 8:29 pm at 8:29 pm #1218043
I wanted to marry a guy taller than me because I find men who are my height to be “half a man” – some women have no problem with this, but its just not natural to me. By nature, men are taller than women (as a general rule, I too know a woman over 6′).March 9, 2009 8:39 pm at 8:39 pm #1218044kapustaParticipant
areivim this time apology DEFINITELY not accepted 🙂 JK (happy now?)March 9, 2009 8:50 pm at 8:50 pm #1218045
how can I not be happy when purim is less than 2 hours awayMarch 9, 2009 9:10 pm at 9:10 pm #1218046kapustaParticipant
areivim as ames put it GON (groan out loud) 🙂March 10, 2009 2:18 am at 2:18 am #1218047an open bookParticipant
kapusta: N?March 11, 2009 3:29 pm at 3:29 pm #1218048an open bookParticipant
that makes more senseMarch 13, 2009 8:20 pm at 8:20 pm #1218049Will HillParticipant
Rare is the girl who doesn’t want to marry someone taller and (usually) older than her.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.