November 1, 2013 5:38 pm at 5:38 pm #1043613
Thank you streekgeek, I was kinda shy to be the new kid on the block here with no one even noticing 😉 ! Don’t know how smart you are cause I’m not following you long enough, but you’re definitely sensitive to others!November 1, 2013 8:30 pm at 8:30 pm #1043614
Yitayningwut: speak for yourself. If you don’t value halacha l’ma’aseh, you have a problem. If you are saying only Gemara b’iyun is valuable, you also have a problem.
Sure I value the study of halacha l’ma’aseh. That’s not the point.
The point is that you are expecting women to be satisfied with something no ben yeshiva would be satisfied with, and you consider that perfectly reasonable.November 1, 2013 9:39 pm at 9:39 pm #1043615
yitayningwut, rf’s point is perfectly reasonable. Men and women have different needs and expectations, as they should, when it comes to Torah study as well as most other things. The Gemora says a woman’s schar Torah comes from her husband and sons learning that she supports. Her role is supporter not scholar. Just as in the military the guys who manufacture the weaponry safely on the homefront are just as critical to the war effort as the guys on the frontlines. Without the guys behind the scenes the battle cannot be won. Different people have different roles and oftentimes those roles are defined by halacha itself. A Yisroel cannot do a Cohen’s job, as much as he might like to and as much as he might be capable of doing it. He must be satisfied with his own role in Avodas Hashem as it is defined for him not as he might have liked it to be.November 3, 2013 12:20 am at 12:20 am #1043616
No, it isn’t reasonable.
If rationalfrummie wants to come with a cut-and-dry claim that God does not want women to study Gemara b’iyun, that’s one thing. But he didn’t say that. He directly implied that the satisfaction derived from learning Nach and Halacha is the same as from learning Gemara b’iyun and that therefore women shouldn’t complain. That is a disingenuous claim, and it makes a joke of a serious issue.November 3, 2013 1:12 am at 1:12 am #1043617
There is plenty of satisfaction in studying Tanach with the meforshim as well as Halacha beiyun. Its not the same as Gemara but its quite enjoyable. There are plenty of people that really enjoy simply learning Chumash Rashi or Chumash with Ramban. Its an enjoyable limud. Theres plenty of gishmack things women can learn.November 3, 2013 1:59 am at 1:59 am #1043618
WIY – But there are plenty of people who enjoy learning Gemara more, so pretending it doesn’t have anything the other limmudim don’t also have is sweeping the matter under the rug. The fact is they are being denied something they just van’t get elsewhere. If you want to claim that such is Hashem’s will, fine. But let’s at least own up to the facts here.November 3, 2013 2:05 am at 2:05 am #1043619
Women can even learn Gemara. When they’re done Ein Yaakov then they can start the halacha parts.November 3, 2013 2:52 am at 2:52 am #1043620
Tell you what: personally, I’ve never really had any particular urge to learn gemara (my dad asked me if I wanted to when I was younger and I kind of wrinkled my nose and said it sounded too complicated), but I’d feel a lot better about not being able to (by the system, at least) if someone would give me a reason why. The discussion recently came up in a class in school led by a very well-known rav who was asked the question and said it wasn’t part of the mesorah. A girl then responded that until the time of Sarah Schenirer it was just barely part of the mesorah to teach women any Torah in-depth at all, but now it’s acceptable- would gemara ever gain that level of acceptability? He looked very uncomfortable and completely skirted the issue (which I’ve discovered usually entails repeating whatever was said already in an authoritative voice and then going into a whole convoluted mashal that doesn’t really apply in the hopes that by the time it’s over we’ll have forgotten the question already).
If the girl’s point was incorrect, then why didn’t he say so? If she was right, then why not give some other answer if there is one?
Is there a real answer besides mesorah and the whole thing about women’s brains working differently that we’ve chewed to pieces on that other thread? If women want to, why can’t they?November 3, 2013 3:09 am at 3:09 am #1043621
writersoul, the Bais Yaakov movement never permitted teaching girls Gemora or anything else that Chazal forbid us to teach them. And not all Gedolim agreed with the BY movement; the Hungarians objected to the teaching of Rashi to girls (and certainly Rambans and Maharals) on the grounds that that constitutes Torah shebal peh. Others said that since Rashi merely explains the pshuto shel mikrah – the simple meaning of the text, it would be considered Torah shebiksav in this sense. However, even the Litvishe Gedolim have mentioned that the BY movement has often overstepped their bounds in the emphasis on Meforshim, sometimes crossing the line into things that may not be learned. Rav Shach zt’l writes in one of his letters that teaching girls Meforshim in depth would be assur because of this, (the problem is quantifying “in depth”, which makes it easy to rationalize) and when a couple of seminary girls came to him to ask him to explain a Ramban or something to them, he replied that they should better spend their time delving into domestic arts.November 3, 2013 3:22 am at 3:22 am #1043622
Fine- so a) can someone give me a source for girls not being allowed to learn gemara and b) why wouldn’t he say that outright as opposed to going on a whole long diversion? Of course, this is something I should really bring up with him instead of random online people but the point still stands. I was talking about it to someone in my class and she said she thought he didn’t want to get us annoyed- but seriously, if you think something’s correct, then what other people think about it shouldn’t matter.
I’ll be really honest, setting aside whether it’s proper or not for Bais Yaakovs to be teaching whatever it is that they teach, I laugh inside when we learn all kinds of random things in-depth with sheets photocopied out of gemaras but that when it comes to bringing the sefer into the classroom- chas vechalilah.November 3, 2013 3:38 am at 3:38 am #1043623
Chazal say it shouldn’t be done and the Mechaber paskens it halacha l’maaisa. And see my previous post; in fact sometimes the BYs overstep what they may teach. That would explain the photocopied Gemorahs.November 3, 2013 7:01 am at 7:01 am #1043624
writersoul: Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah 1:13. It’s quoted in Shulchan Aruch YD 245 (maybe 246).
That said, the Drishah on that Siman in the Tur says that if a girl volunteers to learn on her own then it’s totally fine. While this P’sak is not publicized so much, most seem to assume like it. Some extend this Drishah to mean that if a girl volunteers to learn you are then allowed to teach her without any parameters. Many do not like this extension of the Heter. But most knowledgeable Rabbonim would not fault you if you opened up a Gemara on your own and started learning.November 3, 2013 2:44 pm at 2:44 pm #1043625
I was passing by the office of the principal of Sem one day and overheard them (mechanchos) arguing over the Drisha, Tur, Shulchan Aruch, R. Chaim… peeked in, saw them with their twisted thumbs… sevara.. kasha.. kler..November 3, 2013 5:36 pm at 5:36 pm #1043626
It would seem that the overeducating of girls has produced more bad than good as far as far as shalom Bayis is concerned. Many girls feel that they know just as much as their husbands sometimes they know more and it causes them to look down on their husbands and feel superior. This of course leads to serious shalom Bayis issues because the wife doesn’t hold her husband in high esteem.November 3, 2013 7:08 pm at 7:08 pm #1043627
It would seem that the overparticipating of men in household work has produced more bad than good as far as far as shalom Bayis is concerned. Many men feel that they can cook just as well as their wives sometimes they can cook better and it causes them to look down on their wives and feel superior. This of course leads to serious shalom Bayis issues because the husband doesn’t hold his wife in high esteem.November 3, 2013 7:29 pm at 7:29 pm #1043628
The Igros Moshe YD 3:86 says that the Chachamim commanded that women should not be taught Mishna since it is oral Torah and it is like teaching them tiflos(promiscuity) and it should be avoided. However, they can be taught Pirkei Avos since it has Mussar and has hanhagos tovas.
In The Sefer VaYoel Moshe(Satmer Rebbe) Maimer Lashon Hakodesh 33(page 436) says teaching Rashi to girls falls into the category of teaching tiflos and is an issur chamer Meod.November 3, 2013 8:18 pm at 8:18 pm #1043629
☕ DaasYochid ☕Participant
“It would seem that the overparticipating of men in household work has produced more bad than good as far as far as shalom Bayis is concerned. Many men feel that they can cook just as well as their wives sometimes they can cook better and it causes them to look down on their wives and feel superior. This of course leads to serious shalom Bayis issues because the husband doesn’t hold his wife in high esteem.”
No, it leads to shalom bayis issues because of the way the kitchen looks when he’s done.November 3, 2013 8:39 pm at 8:39 pm #1043630
JF, great point. Put that in Popa’s thread.November 4, 2013 3:48 am at 3:48 am #1043631
a) I can totally see JF’s point. I don’t like food cooked by other people in many cases. I dated someone for a few months who couldn’t even boil ravioli without them sticking (in Hillel’s day, something like that could be grounds for divorce). I’d be very happy with a marriage where I do all the cooking and the wife cleans.
b) I’m discussing women and torah study in a presentation I’m delivering at this year’s JOFA conference. Any understanding that teaching a woman torah is tiflut wouldn’t apply in a case where a woman has made her desire to learn known. The Chida paskens as such in Tov Ayin (#4) and I’ll be discussing his view in detail. Also, Rav Haim David haLevi supported women’s talmud study, and so did Rav Yitzchak Nissim. There are certainly very legitimate opinions, both within the Sephardic and Ashkenazic traditions, permitting this.
c) To come back to the original concern, with Rabbeinu Google, Artscroll apps, and the many websites out there, a person can find many sources easily.November 4, 2013 2:07 pm at 2:07 pm #1043632
It is interesting, by the way. I have heard several Gedolim speak that they are very upset about the fact that people think they can just look up a bunch of Shittos on Bar Ilan and thinking they can argue with major Poskim. “Being a Talmid Chacham is about much more than being able to use a search engine properly.”November 4, 2013 2:27 pm at 2:27 pm #1043633
Rayshis Chochma….Yiras Hashem!!!November 4, 2013 2:42 pm at 2:42 pm #1043634
Woah! I did not start this thread to ask why I can’t learn gemara. If I’m not mistaken Bais Yaakov Maidel did that some weeks ago…I just wanted to know if some posters are as smart as they come across. And seems that some are. That’s all.November 4, 2013 3:04 pm at 3:04 pm #1043635
streekgeek, if you post long enough, you’ll eventually meet a few, and then you’ll decide.November 4, 2013 3:08 pm at 3:08 pm #1043636
I’m definitely NOT. Many here can attest to that.November 4, 2013 3:46 pm at 3:46 pm #1043637
@torah613 – I know. Hence this thread. I was just wondering if these posters have photographic memories, or if they were posting from sefer or google…
@little froggie- Stop putting yourself down. It’s really bugs me when people do that. Or when frogs do that. Whatever.
If you happen to not be smart, I’m sure you have plenty of other qualities. Like justsayin posted before (thanks justsayin! appreciate the compliment 😉 ).November 4, 2013 5:36 pm at 5:36 pm #1043639
When you learn, the concepts shape your thinking. A great memory is required to quote the exact words, but to mention a general location, or a topic without a location, is not the work of memory. When The Frog uses Google to get the words of the Pasuk, obviously awareness of the Pasuk preceded the search. That kind of Bekius in Tanach I am unfortunately far from (as of now).
You might notice that sometimes Sam2 says that he feels like there’s a Gemara someplace. That is because, when you allow the Torah to create your attitudes, instead of twisting it to fit yours, you can eventually assume that the strong bias you have about a certain issue is not unfounded.
Pulling up a Sugya from here or from there is no different than how people pepper a conversation with anecdotes of their life. It doesn’t take a great memory, but it requires active participation.August 15, 2014 10:03 pm at 10:03 pm #1043640
I just noticed this thread (it was linked in a different thread). People were talking about girls learning. I noticed that (here and in some other threads that discuss this topic) no one mentioned the Riaz.
Piskei Riaz SotahPerek 1 Halacha 2:
??”? ???? ???? ????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ??’ ?????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ??????? ??????? ?????’ ?
Interestingly, all the other sources that have been mentioned about girls learning seem to hold like R’ Eliezer that b’etzem it’s bad, but certain circumstances can make an exception e.g. individuals, the times demand it etc. The Riaz however seems to lechatchila pasken like Ben Azzai:
????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ??
(Maybe Ben Azzai agrees to R’ Eliezer in theory in which case paskening like Ben Azzai would not necessarily be such a raya, although it would at least be a precedent for allowing factors to override the concerns.)August 15, 2014 11:03 pm at 11:03 pm #1043641
StreekGeek, simple cause they were jews.August 16, 2014 7:36 pm at 7:36 pm #1043642
The way the geometric progression of parentage works, we are all, or mostly related to those few legendary women who functioned as “behind the curtain” roshei yeshiva. They gifted us our smarts.August 16, 2014 7:38 pm at 7:38 pm #1043643
The way the geometric progression of parentage works, we are all, or mostly related to those few legendary women who functioned as “behind the curtain” roshei yeshiva. They gifted us our smarts.August 17, 2014 2:52 am at 2:52 am #1043644
twisted, I agree with youAugust 17, 2014 4:22 am at 4:22 am #1043645
i don’t think learning torah could possibly be bad unless you are forced to do it. as a female, i do occasionally look up things in the gemara, mishnayos, and plenty other sfarim, but only if i find them quoted in a different spot (ishei hatanach, mikra’os gedolos, sefer halacha, etc) and want to investigate further/clarify. i do sometimes get distracted and read the next gemara too, but i don’t think it’s the end of the world. i also have a fairly decent grasp of aramaic so it’s easier for me.
and speaking of bais yaakovs- when i was in high school we learned photocopied or written out gemaras left and right. usually it was shayach to whatever we were learning…August 17, 2014 4:28 am at 4:28 am #1043646
1z, love that.August 19, 2014 3:13 am at 3:13 am #1043647
If one can accept nishtaneh hateva that various physical processes changed then why can’t one say nishtaneh hateva in regards to the minds of women?August 19, 2014 2:40 pm at 2:40 pm #1043648
One could say it, except it would be in regards to the minds of men. I can’t get over how differently they think.August 19, 2014 3:52 pm at 3:52 pm #1043649
It could be in regards to both. But if we grant that it’s a possibility then there should be no objection to women learning.August 19, 2014 4:05 pm at 4:05 pm #1043650
PAA: Perhaps it is possible to say that. But there’s no realistic or scientific basis to say that. (I suppose nishtaneh hateva could mean people now eat differently or blow their noses differently than in the past; but in reality there’s no basis to say those things changed.) The seculars claim that women are not only currently intellectual equals but that they have always been intellectual equals, and that nothing changed physically or intellectually to make them more equal in contemporary times but rather they claim that they were suppressed in the past.August 19, 2014 4:12 pm at 4:12 pm #1043651
I don’t think there is an objection in general, it depends which society you’re referring to. There are many schools where both the girls and boys learn gemara in depth, no objection there. As for the BY schools, I don’t think there is an objection per se, its just the way things have been done since the first BY school was formed.August 19, 2014 4:49 pm at 4:49 pm #1043652
I must have missed this thread when it was first started. I’m insulted! WIY said he doesn’t think anyone here is a genius. Well, I have actually taken a real IQ test, and I happen to be a genius.
Being a genius doesn’t necessary mean you’re well learned. Quoting from Shas and Tanach doesn’t mean you’re a genius.August 19, 2014 4:54 pm at 4:54 pm #1043653
“I don’t think there is an objection per se, its just the way things have been done since the first BY school was formed.”
Do they not teach the past 90+ years of history because they didn’t teach it when the first BY school was formed?August 19, 2014 5:25 pm at 5:25 pm #1043654
Oh please. That is not a comparison.
I don’t know if they taught history back in Sara Schenirer’s days, but if they did or didn’t doesn’t make a difference. It’s taught out of necessity, no other reason, so yes recent history is taught too.
If someone would prove it necessary to teach gemara in girls schools I don’t see why anyone would make a fuss.August 19, 2014 6:58 pm at 6:58 pm #1043655
“The seculars claim that women are not only currently intellectual equals but that they have always been intellectual equals, and that nothing changed physically or intellectually to make them more equal in contemporary times but rather they claim that they were suppressed in the past.”
On what basis would someone state that currently, women are not intellectual equals? If there is no basis and you believe that thousands of years they were not equal then you can simply say nishtaneh hateva. The main argument that people use today in favor of women learning is that they have demonstrated intellectual equality, e.g. by becoming doctors, lawyers, scientists etc. (For the record I don’t know if “intellectual” is the precise word which should be used, but I can’t think of any one word which would be more precise.) Now if someone thinks that this is not true then let him/her hold that women are not capable of learning. But if someone thinks that it is true then why not say nishtaneh hateva to avoid any problems. Especially considering that it is very sensible that people’s intellectual/emotional capacity would change based on their life circumstances – i.e. someone who never had any education would have a much harder time learning gemara. So for instance, if all a woman ever had to do was cook and have children, then it would make sense that in certain regards she would be “intellectually inferior” (and presumably a man in that situation would also be inferior) but once women do the same things as men it would make sense that this would change.August 19, 2014 7:05 pm at 7:05 pm #1043656
“I don’t know if they taught history back in Sara Schenirer’s days, but if they did or didn’t doesn’t make a difference. It’s taught out of necessity, no other reason, so yes recent history is taught too.”
I apologize for not making my point clearer. My point was not about things that were changed by necessity. Let’s say that there was never any objection to teaching history and it was taught since the first day of the first Bais Yaakov. Would anyone say that from now on we can only teach the history that was taught at that time but nothing more recent? Probably not because there is no reason not to. Now when Bais Yaakov was started, the metzius was very different than it is today. Additionally, Bais Yaakov at all was a chiddush and controversial enough without introducing Gemara. So what they did then doesn’t really address today’s reality. Now if someone thinks that the reality is the same then fine, but they shouldn’t have any problem if other people disagree (which many of them clearly do as can be seen here in the Coffee Room). Unless they think that it is not possible for the reality to change. Which is why I brought up nishtaneh hateva.August 19, 2014 8:05 pm at 8:05 pm #1043657
What exactly in today’s reality dictates that women should be learning? What has changed since the original BY that would obligate girls to learn?
There is no reason why they shouldn’t but on the other hand, there is no reason why they should.August 19, 2014 8:23 pm at 8:23 pm #1043658
PAA: On the same basis that Chazal had. You’re suggesting that their lack of education is the cause of their lower intellectualism. But Chazal said farkert; their lower intellectualism is why they shouldn’t be educated. (Also, even today they don’t “do the same things as men” nor should they.) And why try to pigeonhole a nishtaneh hateva argument for essentially the purpose of trying to advance a political desire of equality.August 19, 2014 10:09 pm at 10:09 pm #1043659
“What exactly in today’s reality dictates that women should be learning? What has changed since the original BY that would obligate girls to learn?”
There are two seperate issues. 1)Is there a reason why women specifically nowadays NEED to learn 2)Do the reasons why in the past women were not supposed to learn still apply nowadays.
I was discussing the second issue. (I am more than willing to discuss the first issue as well, in a minute.)
“but on the other hand, there is no reason why they should.”
The reason why they should is to know the halachos.August 19, 2014 10:11 pm at 10:11 pm #1043660
“But Chazal said farkert; their lower intellectualism is why they shouldn’t be educated. “
No, Chazal said it is why they shouldn’t be educated in Torah. Meaning it is very possible that Chazal were saying that it is dangerous to take a woman who is completely uneducated and teach her just Torah. But if they are educated in all other regards then perhaps it would not be so dangerous for them to learn Torah.August 19, 2014 11:39 pm at 11:39 pm #1043661
“And why try to pigeonhole a nishtaneh hateva argument for essentially the purpose of trying to advance a political desire of equality.”
I might agree in regards to those who are trying to advance a political desire of equality. But there are plenty of others who aren’t.August 20, 2014 2:37 am at 2:37 am #1043662
A proof that women should be learning: ???? ??? ?? ??????August 20, 2014 2:28 pm at 2:28 pm #1043663
2)Do the reasons why in the past women were not supposed to learn still apply nowadays.
Which reasons are you referring to?
The reason why they should is to know the halachos.
The halachos are the same now as they were then, nothing changed there. We are learning the pertinent halachos the same way it was learnt back then, baal peh (or for some topics, using a kitzur). Why the need for change just because the times changed?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.