January 5, 2009 9:33 pm at 9:33 pm #1161787flatbush27Member
i definitely agree to blahblah. we are just so horrible at driving. yesterday i was backing out of my driveway slowly and barely looking back and i hit my other car which i parked earlier and it was partially blocking my driveway. i hit my own car with my own car. i also believe men should definitely not drive because of shomer einayim. the number one rule of driving is you have to be looking everywhere. side to side, behind you, in front of you, above you. shomer ainayim means you dont have to see everything thats going on not just looking at inappropriate things. like if you hear something you dont have to turn around and see what happened. these days it is so simple to get around using public transportation and you just get one of those carts to get your groceries back home. people spend so much money at the supermarket buying stuff they dont need because they have and dont worry about getting it all home. if you have those cart things and take the bus you can only buy what you really need cause if you buy too much you cant get it home.January 5, 2009 9:50 pm at 9:50 pm #1161788AnonymousInactive
nah they always get in the way if the light might turn yellow theyll stop and they have to wait untill they cant see any crs for miles untill they turn their a general inconvienceJanuary 5, 2009 11:31 pm at 11:31 pm #1161789JosephParticipant
Josh, where did you come up with such rubbish? After getting married a woman must follow all her husband’s minhugim.January 5, 2009 11:42 pm at 11:42 pm #1161790beaconParticipant
flatbush27: you gotta be kidding me
blahblah: are you talking about 80 year olds?January 5, 2009 11:48 pm at 11:48 pm #1161791
Joseph, it is common sense that he is obligated to inform her before marriage of any Minhag that will have a major impact on her. Giving up the mobility of driving is way up there in terms of impact. This is much more than not eating Gebrokz (foods cooked with Matzoh meal) 7 days a year!!!January 5, 2009 11:54 pm at 11:54 pm #1161792dunnoMember
blahblah’s describing me lol. but i do have many friends who drive in a way that u would approve ofJanuary 5, 2009 11:58 pm at 11:58 pm #1161793charlie brownMember
your story reminds me of the fellow who, a couple of years ago, sued the city where he lives because a city vehicle pulled into his driveway and hit his car which was parked there. There was one catch – he is a city employee and he was the one driving the city vehicle at the time of the accident.January 6, 2009 5:33 am at 5:33 am #1161794The Big OneParticipant
every wife should be following her baal’s customs. that is what shulchan aruch states.January 6, 2009 11:15 am at 11:15 am #1161795
Your comment really had me holding my sides!January 7, 2009 2:04 am at 2:04 am #1161796eyesopenMember
In my town there are women who use their cars for chesed trips to drive people to hospitals, and medical appointments. They deliver Tomchei Shabbos, they help purchase and deliver clothing for the needy, they take kids to yeshiva in the morning and pick them up at night. They need their car to shop for food, run errands, banking, etc… If you live in NY, perhaps it is easier to get around because there is such a great public transportation system and a car is not as necessary. Try living without a car in LA, Florida, Denver, and many of the suburbs (moshavim) of EY that have a bus come by twice a day, maybe. Tznius has a lot to do with the minhagei hamakom, so if it is not mekubal for the woman to drive-she shouldn’t stand out, but if is the norm in the place where she lives, then she should drive.January 7, 2009 4:25 am at 4:25 am #1161797
“The Big One”, what you say about customs is generally true, but so is the requirement to disclose them before getting married, especially high impact customs.January 7, 2009 4:39 am at 4:39 am #1161798BogenParticipant
josh31, where did you come up with that one about so-called “high impact customs”? nothing of the sort mentioned in Shulchan Aruch. Sounds like something to sooth modern orthodox sensibilities.January 7, 2009 5:09 am at 5:09 am #1161799proud of KAJ WH TIDEMember
It is less tznius to be in a public train or bus being bumped by men and watched.A smart woman who knows how to manage a household,bring up children, work should also have the right to drive. If she believes it is wrong ,she should only live in a protected little village where she won’t need to go anywhere.January 7, 2009 10:05 am at 10:05 am #1161800PhyllisMember
I understand that a man has to inform he wife of his minhagim prior to marriage, however, lets not get carried away. Any mature girl would not get so frightened about the idea of not driving. In my opinion, leave petty things like this to “do as u please”. Save disagreements for bigger and better things…(Or just dont do them at all!)January 7, 2009 11:13 am at 11:13 am #1161801SJSinNYCMember
There are also exceptions allowed with the minhag thing – my husband davens nusach sephard and I daven ashkenaz. I ask my Rabbi if I could stay with Ashkenaz (davening sephard just trips me up- if it were totally different that would be fine, but its the random few words being changed here and there…)
My rabbi said that wasnt a problem.January 7, 2009 2:14 pm at 2:14 pm #1161802lesschumrasParticipant
tell me again about how jewishfeminist doesn’t need feminisim because we treat women with such respect. Among the many examples on YWN threads:
* women can’t drive without the husband’s agreement
* women can’t leave the house without the husband’s agreement
* Men are machmir on eruvim, particularly in Brooklyn, because it’s the
women who must remain housebound for years until the last child can walk
while the men are free to come and go
* Men determine for their wives what they can wear and what is considered
* Women are forbidden to learn Gemorra, and probably lack the mental capacity
* Women must walk behind men in a subservient position
* Men are forbidden from opening a door of any kind for a woman
Did I leave any out?January 7, 2009 2:54 pm at 2:54 pm #1161803Mrs. BeautifulMember
lesschumras, There are different things woman should not be doing, it is very obvious. I can add – Women should not wear pants etc…Does a/o have a problem with this?
There are many things men cant either do, listen to women sing etc.
I really dont see what u r trying to say? We are Jewish arn’t we? DO we question why both men and women cant eat pork?January 7, 2009 3:32 pm at 3:32 pm #1161804
“Any mature girl would not get so frightened about the idea of not driving”
Phyllis, were you serious when you posted that? Any mature girl who has been driving, would tell a man to take a hike if he forbade her from driving, UNLESS it was her own desire to refrain from driving. A mature BOY would recognize that driving is not a luxury, but a necessity nowadays for women, UNLESS he is willing to do the shopping, the carpooling, the general chauffeuring around, the doctor appointments, etc. Somehow, I think that once those guys had a taste of what their wives have to do on a regular basis, most of them would recognize the benefits of their wives driving ASAP.January 7, 2009 4:23 pm at 4:23 pm #1161805
I have no problem with someone holding that a woman shouldn’t drive but I think it is something that should be discussed beforehand (unless based on both sides backgrounds it is obvious.) It definitely has a big impact on life even as far as what kind of job she can take.
as an aside, someone told me that her brother doesn’t drive but his wife does. He has no intentions of learning how to drive because he would waste so much time doing errands. I was not impressed. I think that’s also a bit selfish.
What are you trying to say? Yes according to the torah ways those points generally are the way we do things.January 7, 2009 5:10 pm at 5:10 pm #1161806lesschumrasParticipant
I’m not saying that’s the way some people do things, but then don’t say women are treated with respect.January 7, 2009 5:45 pm at 5:45 pm #1161807
What are you trying to say? Yes according to the torah ways those points generally are the way we do things.
Excuse me,Intelligent, perhaps I misunderstand you, but where did you say it says in the Torah that a woman cannot leave the house without her husband’s permission?January 7, 2009 6:16 pm at 6:16 pm #1161808KeepinEntertainedMember
everyone just do as you like! if your husband allows it than gr8, lucky you, if not, live with it! but if it is something that means so much to a girl (maybe she really wants to drive for chessed) then it should be discussed prob while dating. I personally know i wouldnt like to give up the freedom that comes with being able to drive and wouldnt be very happy if my husband would demand such of me. guess its something to keep in mind with the list of wants/needs in a shidduch but like good looks it shouldnt be top priority!January 7, 2009 6:18 pm at 6:18 pm #1161809JosephParticipant
oomis, We’ve had mekors from Shlchan Orach, Rambam, etc. on this issue on at least 2 other threads months ago.January 7, 2009 7:33 pm at 7:33 pm #1161810
There are four sections to Shulchan Aruch. Have you studied all 4?
I have not studied all 4 either. There is also the “fifth section of Shulchan Aruch” called “being civilized” or “common sense”. And you do not suddenly yank the car keys from your new Kallah (bride)!!!
This is not a strictly “Modern Orthodox” concept.January 7, 2009 9:04 pm at 9:04 pm #1161811
I guess my answer was not a good one. I was going to point out that I only skimmed the points. I guess I should have read more thoroughly. It does not say anywhere in the torah that women have to walk in a subservient manner behind her husband (at least not that I am aware of and I don’t practice this) but I meant to say that yes, there are differences between men and women. A husband is the final decider. But his points are definitely exaggerated. One point that is true ist that as far as far as I know is that generally women have to listen to their husbands. In today’s modern world it’s hard to believe but that is the way it should be (of course within reason, abuse should never be tolerated.)
Women should ideally be treated with a lot of respect, just differently then men.January 7, 2009 9:14 pm at 9:14 pm #1161812PhyllisMember
Lesschumros, of course women ARE treated with respect. Women are the essence of the home. Women were given their own precious Mitzvos. Women are the backbone of their husbands.
There is no greater respect than that of a women that accepts her role as an Ikeres Habayis with love, dresses modestly despite the outside influences etc.
Yes, Kol Kevudah Bas Melech Pinima, so maybe that restricts her from certain things, but certainly not things that lessen her respect. In fact its the observance of these basic things u mentioned, that make the women respected.January 7, 2009 9:38 pm at 9:38 pm #1161813mdlevineMember
for those of you who drive in Monsey – for those who do not drive in Monsey, use your imagination.
I was driving from 59 down 306 towards Maple. The light was changing and I was 2 or 3 car lenghts away from the light going slow because of the weather and road conditions. the car behind me swing into the left turn only lane. sped up and went though the light straight (didn’t even turn left).
This was not the first time I have seen this on this intersection and NEVER was it a woman driver.
where are those red-light cameras when you need one?January 8, 2009 3:02 am at 3:02 am #1161814
1) Women should stay inside:
1. Shulchan Aruch (73:1): A man must give his wife clothing like women normally wear outside. A woman should not go outside much. The beauty of a woman is to stay inside – “Kol Kevudah…”
i. Gra (4): Hash-m did not create Chavah from Adam’s foot, lest she roam too much (Bereishis Rabah 18:2). “Ishtecha k’Gefen Poriyah” is only when she is modest “b’Yarkesei Veisecha” (Medrash Tehilim 128:3).
1. Rambam (Hilchos Ishus 13:11): A man must give his wife clothing like women normally wear outside in order that she can go to her father or a house of mourning or Simchah. She may go to these places to bestow Chesed to her friends and relatives, in order that they will come to her. She is not a prisoner who may not come and go. However, it is degrading for a woman to always be outside and on the streets. A man should prevent his wife from doing so. She should go outside once or twice a month, according to the need. The beauty of a woman is to stay inside – “Kol Kevudah Bas Melech Penimah”.
i. Source (Magid Mishneh): Bereishis Rabah (45:5) says that when the Torah discusses the detriment of women, it says that they go out – ‘Va’Tetzei Dinah”. The Sifri (Tetzei 242 (23)), regarding a Na’arah Me’orasah who was enticed to Zenus, says that a breach (going out in the city) calls to the thief. Bereishis Rabah (8:12) reads “Kivshuha” like ‘Kavshah’ to teach that a husband should prevent his wife from going out too much.
2. Rambam (Nedarim 12:11): If a woman vowed not to give water to her husband’s animals, he cannot annul it. A wife need not do this for her husband.
i. Kesef Mishneh: A wife must give straw to her husband’s animals, but she need not give water. This is because normally one leaves the house to go to the river or spring for this, and “Kol Kevudah…”
4. Rosh (Kesuvos 13:17): If a man married a woman from a city of the same quality as his own, even if he married her in his city we force him to live in her city. We learn from “Be’ulas Ba’al”… Another reason is because he can go to visit his friends, but she cannot, due to “Kol Kevudah.”
5. Rosh (Shevu’os 4:2): The Ri ha’Levi learns from our Gemara that we do not disgrace an honorable woman to go to Beis Din, due to “Kol Kevudah.” Rather, we send a Shali’ach of Beis Din to hear her claims. The Aruch and R. Chananel agree. The Ramban and Teshuvos of the Rif and Rav Sadya Gaon do not allow this. The Rif allows only that Beis Din send scribes to record her claim. The same applies to a Chacham for whom it is degrading to argue with Amei ha’Aretz in Beis Din; his honor is greater than a woman’s.
i. Teshuvos Maimoniyos (Mishpatim 5): The Gemara (Nazir 12a) says that women are Kevu’os due to “Kol Kevudah.”
1. (R. Yochanan): Avner told Do’eg ‘We learned that an Amoni and a Mo’avi are forbidden, but an Amonis and a Mo’avis are not!’
2. Question (Do’eg): If so, you should say that a Mitzri is forbidden, not a Mitzris!
3. Answer (Avner): Mo’avim are forbidden “Because they did not go out to greet you with bread and water.” This does not apply to women. It is normal for men to go out to greet, but not for women.
4. Objection (Do’eg): The men should have gone out to greet the men, and the women to greet the women!
5. Avner was silent.
6. Question: How can we answer?
7. Answer #1 (Chachamim of Bavel): “Kol Kevudah Vas Melech Penimah” (it is dishonorable for women to go outside, even to greet women).
8. Answer #2 (Chachamim of Eretz Yisrael): We learn this from ” … Where is your wife Sarah?” (It is praiseworthy that she stayed in the tent.)
9. (Beraisa – R. Yehudah): “Amoni” and “Mo’avi” are forbidden, not Amonis and Mo’avis;
10. R. Shimon says, “Because they did not go out …” – it is the way of a man …
11. Nazir 12a (R. Yochanan): If Reuven made a Shali’ach to be Mekadesh an unspecified woman and the agent died, Reuven may not marry any woman (Leah), lest the Shali’ach was Mekadesh Leah’s relative to Reuven.
12. Question (Reish Lakish): When a Hekdesh bird flies away, we are not concerned about other birds (lest it is the Hekdesh bird; we follow the majority. The same should apply here (most women are not Leah’s relatives)!
13. Answer (R. Yochanan): Because woman do not roam, the Safek is considered Kavu’a (fixed), so we don’t follow the majority.
15. Gitin 12a (Beraisa): If a wife was exiled to a refuge city, her husband must feed her. He can tell her to feed herself from her earnings only if she earns enough to feed herself.
16. Question: If she can earn enough, this is obvious!
17. Answer: One might have thought that due to “Kol Kevudah…”, she need not work and he must feed her. The Beraisa teaches that this is not so.
18. Shevu’os 30a – Question: What is the source that (women are invalid witnesses, so) Shevu’as ha’Edus does not apply to women?
19. Answer (Beraisa): “V’Omdu Shnei ha’Anashim” refers to the witnesses.
20. Question: Perhaps it refers to the parties in the case!
21. Answer #1: The Torah would not say “men”, for women also need to come for judgment.
22. Answer #2: If you prefer, you can learn from “Shnei” (masculine).
23. Question: What objection might one have to the first answer?
24. Answer: Normally women do not come to Beis Din for judgment (rather, they send a man to plead their case), due to “Kol Kevudah…”January 8, 2009 4:11 am at 4:11 am #1161815
A husband is the final decider
Not according to Sara, Rivka, Rochel, and Leah Emainu. Not according to Miriam, Tzipporah, Devorah, Rachav, etc.
And Zalman, BOY did you twist this: “The beauty of a woman is to stay inside – “Kol Kevudah…” That does not mean a woman has to stay inside, it means her real beauty is her INNER BEAUTY, that externals are not what are important. That her middos are part of her internal essence, and that is what is her true kovod. As to all the excellent quotes that you posted, many of them are observations of the times. Women do not wear burkas today, and walk with faces veiled, not Jewish women anyway. It is typical for women to leave the home. And you cannot have it both ways. Either it is assur for them to leave the home as you imply, or meritorious that they stay in, as you state, or it is
a good thing, because without women leaving the home and earning the parnassah, all those lovely yeshivah husbands in kollel would be unable to be there all day. So it is ok for women to do something that all the chachomim (according to your own excellently researched post) agree is NOT a good thing or tzniusdig, or b’kovodig, BECAUSE THEIR HUSBANDS WANT THEM TO. Kinderlach, can we say … never mind, I am refraining from using the expression that this type of thinking calls to mind.January 8, 2009 4:42 am at 4:42 am #1161816
uhh oomis, sorry for offending your very sensitive modern orthodox feelings. But everything in my preceding comment were verbatim quotes from the Gemora, Shulchan Aruch, Rambam and many other meforshim. NONE of it were my own words or chiddushim. So the problem you have you’ll have to take up with the Shulchan Aruch, not me.
And btw, Sara, Rivka, Rochel, and Leah Emainu looked towards Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yaakov Avinu for all their guidance.
Yeah, I know. Your MO Rabbi never mentioned any of this in his “Shabbat speeches”.January 8, 2009 5:54 am at 5:54 am #1161817
oomis, not that I intended to be strident with you, but aside from being incorrect the tone of your comment was acerbic and dismissive.January 8, 2009 6:20 am at 6:20 am #1161818
“And btw, Sara, Rivka, Rochel, and Leah Emainu looked towards Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yaakov Avinu for all their guidance.
Yeah, I know. Your MO Rabbi never mentioned any of this in his “Shabbat speeches”
No they did not, NOT when it counted the most. Sara threw hagar out with Avraham’s bechor Yishmael. She didn’t ask his permission. Rivka took the brachos meant for Esav out of Yitchak’s hands, and made sure Yaakov got them. She didn;’t ask his permission. Rochel took her father’s idols, to keep him from doing avoda zara. She didn’t ask Yaakov’s permission (and ended up dying for that, but then again, it was al kiddush Hashem that she did what she did, and that is why she is the one who is mevaka al baneha and no one else) Leah did not ask her husband’s permission to be with him. She gave her son’s flowers to Rachel, and then informed her husband that he was going to be with her that night.
BTW, you know nothing about me, yet you make what superficially sounds like pejorative comments about my MO sensitivities, and even more, you comment about my Rov, about whom you surely have no basis or right to make what appears to be a negative judgment. I will stack my rov and his shabbos drashas against yours any day. My rov is an extremely learned man a musmach of Torah Vadaas, and your “MO Rabbi” comment was unworthy and abysmally off-base. I understand that your comments all come from choshuvah sources, but are they all halacha l’maiseh, or opinions about women’s behavior, from a time when ALL women were totally subservient to men, and NOT treated at equal partners in their marriages? And again, I will reiterate, if what you say is halacha, then there is no excuse for even one kollel wife to be out working instead of running her home. Period.January 8, 2009 7:06 am at 7:06 am #1161819
The Shulchan Aruch, Rambam, etc. (amongst the other varied sources) is halacha lmaaisa. I apologize in advance for your MO sensibilities that are in sync with Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug and Susan B. Anthony, rather than the Chofetz Chaim, the Chazon Ish, and the Steipler Gaon.
Its just too bad that you view 3,000 years of glorious Jewish history as “women were totally subservient to men, and NOT treated at equal partners in their marriages.” For us Torah-based traditionalist, we will continue living in the ways of our holy zeidas and bubbes, as they have since Matan Sinai.January 8, 2009 10:27 am at 10:27 am #1161820
“Sara threw hagar out with Avraham’s bechor Yishmael. She didn’t ask his permission.”
I remember learning that H-m had to tell Avraham that Sara is right and Yishmoel and Hagar should be sent away. If Sara was able to accomplish this without Avraham’s permission/consent, why did H-m have to speak to him about this?January 8, 2009 1:59 pm at 1:59 pm #1161821
Thanks. It’s nice to see some people have their hashkofos intact despite modern propoganda.January 8, 2009 2:49 pm at 2:49 pm #1161822
EDITED at the request of the original poster
Zalman (if you will respond):
You are not new here, so you probably already have an answer to my question:
How do you reconcile “Kol Kavod Bas Melech” with Kollel wives working?
Also, do you have electricity? a Fridge? Internet? You are already not “living in the ways of our holy zeidas and bubbes, as they have since Matan Sinai”. You sound like you want the Jews to be Amish following Halacha, not Jews (Who invented “when in Rome, do as the Romans do”).
Lastly, with your shittos, what are you doing on the internet? Did you ask your Rav if you could be in the coffeeroom?
Get back to me after you ask.January 8, 2009 4:11 pm at 4:11 pm #1161823NechamaRugelachMember
SAVE THE TREES KEEP WOMEN OFF THE ROADJanuary 8, 2009 4:31 pm at 4:31 pm #1161825
Also, do you have electricity? a Fridge? Internet? You are already not “living in the ways of our holy zeidas and bubbes, as they have since Matan Sinai”. You sound like you want the Jews to be Amish following Halacha, not Jews (Who invented “when in Rome, do as the Romans do”).
Modern technology that works with the torah is fine. We don’t open a light on shabbos but we use lights. No one is saying that we have to live exactly the way Avraham lived but we can’t change our hashkofos because modern times are “different”.January 8, 2009 4:33 pm at 4:33 pm #1161826SJSinNYCMember
Intellegent, with all due respect, quoting sources does NOT mean that Zalman has his hashkofos intact despite modern propoganda.
How many women nowadays do you know who don’t visit friends? How many do you know who only go grocery shopping 1-2X a month? With refridgeration available, we should be able to go out less not more! Remember, we don’t pasken by everything written in the gemara – there are so many arguments and opinions in there, if we followed everything we couldnt possibly manage it! Some are physical impossibilites. (not sure if I am being clear here…just basically that the gemara isnt the bottom line – we have to follow the bottom line halacah)
Its unfortunate that many people have pledged to oust “modern propaganda” when as you yourself said on one thread, you couldn’t find anything halachically wrong with what I say. (don’t remember if you said you couldnt find anything or that you almost never find anything)January 8, 2009 5:18 pm at 5:18 pm #1161827
Mod: I meant all references (Zalmans & Oomis). If you leave theirs, please leave mine as well.January 8, 2009 5:28 pm at 5:28 pm #1161828
And women driving is an example.January 8, 2009 5:31 pm at 5:31 pm #1161829
Of course if your Rav asks you not to drive, Kol Hakavod.
Personally, I dont understand the minhag issue. How could someone have a minhag for their wife not to drive? (unless it was not to have a woman as a Baal Agalah, which is irrelevent to driving a car) 🙂January 8, 2009 5:58 pm at 5:58 pm #1161830
I am Moche for the Kavod of Oomis’ Rav, who is a Talmid Chacham and a Yarei Shomayim.
PS. Thank you mod either way.January 8, 2009 6:03 pm at 6:03 pm #1161831
That is not to say they should be in the street/Shuk! That falls under “Kol Kavod”. Driving is a personal thing with no interaction.
If you are from EY, as we have seen (in the news with the bochrim kicked out of yeshiva) the Gedolim there don’t allow men to drive, so there it is some other sort of svorah.January 8, 2009 6:18 pm at 6:18 pm #1161832
“The Shulchan Aruch, Rambam, etc. (amongst the other varied sources) is halacha lmaaisa. I apologize in advance for your MO sensibilities that are in sync with Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug and Susan B. Anthony, rather than the Chofetz Chaim, the Chazon Ish, and the Steipler Gaon. Its just too bad that you view 3,000 years of glorious Jewish history as “women were totally subservient to men, and NOT treated at equal partners in their marriages.” For us Torah-based traditionalist, we will continue living in the ways of our holy zeidas and bubbes, as they have since Matan Sinai. “
I stand by what I said before. I personally have nothing in common with the hashkafos of Ms. Steinem and Abzug, despite what you think. I find their views to be as stident and filled with self-righteous indignation as your own.You know nothing whatsoever about me, and the fact that for 3,000 years women were treated a certain way, was not always due to halacha, but to the tenor of the times. If you cannot see that, there is no further dialogue between you and me on this issue. We live in a time when we have modern conveniences (sometimes more like INconveniences), and the halacha reflects that evolution, as the rabbonim gain a greater understanding of how things work, i.e. electricity. Perhaps women did not drive wagons, though clearly they rode on camels, which could be considered as driving (before you protest, WHERE was Rochel Emainu sitting when her father came looking for the teraphim?). So it is not an issue of driving. It may have been less tsniusdig in the alte heim for women to drive a wagon in the open (though I cannot recall that women needed to do that driving, as they were homebound due to the nature of raising of their families when their husbands worked the land or did other jobs). But it surely is not untsniusdig for them to drive an auto, in which they are so encased, you cannot always tell if a man or woman is driving. In any case, do you also have a halachic objection to them riding a bike? What about walking in the street?January 8, 2009 6:44 pm at 6:44 pm #1161833
Some customs are clearly incompatible with each other. Women not driving and men in Kollel is impossible, unless they have a huge trust fund.
Communities in which women do not drive are those in which they never started driving and men are expected to provide the total family income and run all errands needing a car.
Nothing will push people away from keeping Torah and Mitzvos more than pushing impossible ideals.
Chassidic customs were intended to draw people towards Judaism, not create impractical barriers to living.
A woman who actually drives will feel “jailed” if she is suddenly told that she can no longer drive.
If the hardliners are triumphant and impose a full raft of impractical Chumros (stringencies), we will have a breakaway from Judaism (G-d forbid) worse than the Haskalah triggered breakaway 150 years ago in Europe.January 8, 2009 6:47 pm at 6:47 pm #1161834
I have a drivers licence and I go out of the house much more often than twice a month. (at least I should)
I saw something in Nefesh Chaya (a hebrew sefer that is a compilation of speeches from R’ shamshon Pinkes a”h). I think he says that it used to be that the house was a place of kedusha. Nowadays, that is not so women go out to look for something elsewhere.
Times are different. It’s true and certain things are different because of that. (I think women nowadays would go into deep depression if they were to stay home all the time except for once in a while) But some people are connotating that in previous generations women were mistreated and I think that is extremely wrong. They were treated the torah way and we don’t have to come with our pea size brains compared to those of previous generations and “correct” their wrong doings. That is what I am trying to bring out, I don’t know if I am clear.January 8, 2009 7:25 pm at 7:25 pm #1161837
You were not clear before (seemed you said the opposite), but thank you for clarifying.
I agree 100% that Jewish women in prior generations were treated with respect (which is the torah way)(and much better than the other women btw), and should be treated with respect today as well. If they wish to drive, why not? (assuming their rav has not stated it is “assur”, of course).
Postscript: “Kol Kavod” is a “Hanhaga”, not an “Issur”.January 8, 2009 8:16 pm at 8:16 pm #1161838
Lets get back to the orginal question from Mrs. Beautiful:
“Is it appropriate for women to drive? My husband claims not, but I dont see a difference if the woman is in the driver’s seat or the front passenger seat…”January 8, 2009 9:36 pm at 9:36 pm #1161839
“and the fact that for 3,000 years women were treated a certain way, was not always due to halacha, but to the tenor of the times.”
I think it is highly improper to criticize previous generations in this way. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you really mean to say.
I’m not sure what you were referring to, opposite of what?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.