What does the Lubavitcher Rebbe say in the Sichos of Iyar-Tammuz 5744, Vol. 21, pp. 69-72 (English)?
ChabadShlucha: No, that isn’t it. I’m not troubled by anything. I simply pointed out that the definitions you were posting on the other thread regarding this subject is incorrect. Even according to the Lubavitcher Rebbe.
As an aside, women’s lib/feminism is antithetical to Judaism. This thread started in 2015, as can be seen on the datestamp of the OP. None of the posts are denigrating Bnos Yisrael; they are direct translations from the Maharal and other Achronim.
So, just to be clear joseph, would you make the assumption that anyone who self-identifies as a femenist cannot be an orthodox jew?
Netziv (Bereishis 1:27):
In the image of G-d all of nature in its entirety was included with in him. From the moment that it occurred in thought and speech that nature should be that way G-d was called Elokim, i.e. the G-d of Nature. And since all nature was included in man, he was thus in the image of Elokim. But this is only true for the elevated man as he was before the sin. And afterwards male and female He created them. This verse is not saying that gender was different in man from the other species, so this teaches us that they were in fact two creatures as I will explain later. And since the male of the human species is not comparable to the female as it states in Koheles( 7:28) I found one man out of a thousand but not among woman. In other words the elevated man is like one who is in the image of G-d and that is one man out of a thousand. In contrast amongst women, they are like the second man who has the name of man but not the spiritual level.