Orthodox Girls Wearing Tefillin

BlueRose52

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 10:53 am

Honestly, can't we all just admit that the real reason people are against this is because it's just not how it's always been done? Like so many other issues in Jewish law, there are authorities who forbid it, and there are those who permit it. Obviously, yesh al mi lismoch, so can't we just put aside the halachic argument and acknowledge that ultimately, the vehement objections to this activity are motivated much more in sociological dynamics rather than halachic ones?

Last edited by BlueRose52 on Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:04 am; edited 2 times in total

amother

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 10:54 am

BlueRose52 wrote:

I actually found Rabbi Fink's thoughts on this issue to be a really good analysis.
http://finkorswim.com/2014/01/.....deal/

Do you have another source besides Rabbi Fink? Sorry, but he says other things that I find highly problematic (and often ridiculous) and I'm MO.

I'm the mother of a teenaged boy and I wish he was interested in wearing tefillin. It's a struggle to get him to daven at all and he has to be dragged to shul. I like to think that if I had a teenaged girl I'd be proud that she wants to wear tefillin because at least it would show a commitment. I don't even know if my son wears his yarmulke when nobody's looking. Sad

(amother because of the thing about my son)

goodmorning

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 10:56 am

BlueRose52 wrote:

I don't know all the sources you mentioned, but I know some of them. As far as I know the Beis Yosef is silent on the matter, can you provide a source to back up your claim that he forbids it? Also, the mishna brura and aruch hashulchan both are against it for a simple reason, they say women don't keep their bodies appropriately clean. This is obviously something that is easily addressable to anyone who cares to do the mitzvah right.

Beis Yosef is silent in the Shulchan Aruch. In his commentary on the Tur (OC 38), he cites and explains the Kol Bo's citation of the Maharam's objection.

As to guf naki -- yes and no. Part of the argument is that keeping a guf naki is hard for both men and women. That is the reason why men no longer wear tefillin all day as they used to, even though that is the real mitzvah. The concerns about guf naki override the mitzvah to wear tefillin all day. Similarly, if women don't even have that obligation in the first place, certainly concerns about guf naki take precedence.

goodmorning

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:06 am

BlueRose52 wrote:

Weren't you the one who quoted Haym Soloveitchik's article about halacha being transmitted as a way of life, "imbibed from parents and friends, and patterned on conduct regularly observed in home and street, synagogue and school"? Why is it that when hareidim act in ways differently than their ancestors (e.g. larger shiurim) in accordance with classical halachic texts, that is viewed disparagingly because they are turning their backs on the halachic way of life of their parents, but when Modern Orthodox girls act in ways differently than their ancestors in discordance with classical halachic texts, that is supposed to be viewed with approbation?

imasinger

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:11 am

eema of 3 wrote:

Rashi's daughter is said to have worn tefillin. Also there was an article in one of the magazines within the last few months about "the female rebbe" and she also wore tefillin. (I forget her name at the moment)
There are numerous poskim and numerous points of view on everything. Some say you need a double hair covering, some say only a sheitel, some say only a scarf/tichel whatever, some say it doesn't all need to be covered, some say it doesn't need to be covered. What works for one may not work for another. I grew up lighting menorah, shaking lilac if I remembered, and I only said/did hosha'anas a few times. I got married, and in my husbands family, women don't light (had a whole discussion with my husband about if it's assur or not), women MUST shake and women MUST say/do hosha'anas. It is our job to get along and respect other people ways of life. What works for me works for me, but it may not work for you. These girls want to put on tefillin? There are poskim who say it is allowed, so as far as I'm concerned, kol hakavod to tem, as long as no one tries to get me to do it.

Was that connected to birkas hailanos? Smile

(Gotta love autocorrect).

amother

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:25 am

amother wrote:

^ That amother is right, though. And before anyone jumps down my throat for also posting anonymously, I'll explain that I'm about to be rather open about my past in a way that I don't want attached to my username.

Look, this phenomenon of women deciding they are so frum they need to put on tefillin? Been there, done that. I used to be part of the "Conservadox" movement, where we were all "egalitarian" (or something. Standard practice regarding tefillin, tallis, counting in a minyan, and probably other things I don't remember right now was that men must do xyz and woman have the option).

But no Orthodoxy that I know wants women to pretend to be men. I left the Conservative movement in large part to embrace my femininity, because I didn't want the responsibility of trying to be a woman and a man at the same time, and I couldn't believe that a G-d who had created both really wanted that from me.

And another point about these tefillin-wearers? Rav Moshe paskened that women may only do this l'shem shamayim, and unfortunately publicly just doesn't cut it, as all she's doing is making a statement. If these girls truly had the right motives and were wearing tefillin l'shem shamayim THEN NO ONE WOULD KNOW ABOUT IT. My extremely yeshivish Rosh Yeshiva told me that I may put them on if I want--IN PRIVATE and WITHOUT ANYONE KNOWING. (I don't, though, for what it's worth.)

Sorry, I'm not trying to yell--caps are for emphasis.

The girls didn't publicize their names. In fact, my son attends SAR High School, and HE was unable to tell me who the two girls were who were laying tefillin (and, in fact, we guessed who it might be -- wrongly, as it turns out). The students were told about it, as they felt that the student population was entitled to know. Period. They do not daven, and are not allowed to lay tefillin, in the general mixed gender minyan, by the way.

These girls don't want to be men. They want to be highly educated women. And they want to connect to Hashem in a way that is meaningful to them. If you think that means that they want to be men, then I feel very sorry for you. Cooking and having kids is not the only way to be a woman, or the only -- or even the best -- way for a woman to connect to Hashem.

I'm anonymous to protect my son's privacy, but have no doubts most people here know who I am.

amother

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:29 am

princessleah wrote:

I can't even with these comments.

As mentioned above, both girls are Conservative. I assume they have been putting on Tefillin daily since they were Bat Mitzvahed. Don't even dare to question their motives. They are obligated to be at a tefilah service daily by their school-- that is how the schools work. Also note they go to a ''women's tefilah'' service, which I find odd as an offering; if there is a minyan happening, why shouldn't everyone be at it?
But anyway, what should they do, put their tefilin on at home to hide their dirty little secret and then go to davening? When is the last time any of us went to shacharit services every day of the week?

Give me a break. I live in Riverdale, and there is no Conservative school here-- there is a Schechter in Westchester. A lot of the observant Conservative families here send their kids to SAR, and they have made an incredible effort to be welcoming to all kinds of families. The end result? Kids who are strongly shomer mitzvot when they otherwise might not have been to this extent.

Shame on anybody who derides or mocks that.

As part of an initiative to get the students more interested and invested in davening, SAR has been trying out a number of different minyans over the past two years. A women's tefillah. A tefillah where they daven very slowly, and consider each word. I tefillah where they daven quickly, and discuss an aspect of the tefillah afterwards. And a bunch of other ideas that they have tried out. The idea is for each student, and particularly those students who are not invested in the general minyan, to find something that calls to him or her.

Barbara

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:41 am

sky wrote:

Did Rashi's daughter's where tefillin? I don't think there is a strong source for that.

AIUI, its a bit of a legend.

However, the Talmud does apparently state that Michal, daughter of King Saul, wife of King David, wore tefillin. Eruvin 96a-b; Yerushalmi, Berachot 2:3 and Eruvin 10:1; see Tosafot, Rosh Hashanah 33a, s.v. haRebbi. (I'm taking this from an article, I assume the citation is accurate.)

But if you believe that laying tefilin in assur, do you also believe that all other time-bound mitzvot are forbidden to women? If not, explain the difference.

black sheep

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:50 am

I am wondering to myself and out loud what is the point in trying to enforce mass conformity.

many people have a reaction of "how could they do that?!?"
others react like "oh, nice that they are so committed, let them do what they want."
as for the first question, there is halachic basis for woman to wear tefillin if they want. now I can understand a specific school not allowing it, because schools do need a certain conformity, everyone cannot just do whatever they want and still have cohesiveness necessary to be an institution. but as a people, why can't we have diversity? what is the big deal?

and as far as questioning a woman's motive, absolutely no one has the right to decide what goes on in another person's mind. you can question someone's actions, you can never question their motives. motives are private and individual, and no one else's business.

BlueRose52

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:51 am

goodmorning wrote:

I do think you raise a good point of comparison. It's definitely worth thinking about further, but off the top of my head I can see at least one very fundamental difference: What he is discussing in that essay are things that in previous generations were commonly done and considered permitted, but in recent generations have been deemed verboten. Whereas with women wearing tefillin and other such cases it's a situation where something that simply wasn't done is now being adopted. As he himself writes, "An augmented tradition is one thing, a diminished one another."

This is an important distinction because when something wasn't commonly practiced in the past, it could be for a whole host of reasons. Just because it wasn't commonly done doesn't mean it was due to halachic restrictions. Women back then didn't do a whole bunch of things that women do today (for instance, very few women regularly davened), I doubt he'd say that women shouldn't be allowed to do that in later generations because it wasn't common then.

princessleah

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 11:58 am

This is from an interesting blog post from a 17-year old girl who wears teffilin, she is responding to Shmuly Boteach's comments:

Quote:

The second women-and-tefillin trope R. Boteach employs is to question women’s motivation. “Judaism is not in a state where we can play games with it… If it’s to demonstrate [women] can do everything men can do, it’s not a spiritual motivation, rather politics, and that’s not favorable to Judaism. Assimilation is catastrophic. Let’s never forget the bigger picture.” Setting aside R. Boteach’s ludicrous slippery-slope fallacy (women performing more mitzvot will lead to assimilation?), I will simply say to this: enough. I, and all other women, do not need to prove our motivation to you. We are seeking equality because it will bring us closer to God.

The dichotomy between religious and political motivations is a false one. Our demand to perform mitzvot to which we have been denied access is inherently political in a community where certain mitzvot, like tefillin, are indicators of power and masculinity. However, that does not make the mitzvah any less about God. Women’s performance of these mitzvot will enhance the Jewish community as a whole. By democratizing access to ritual practice, we can redefine “men’s mitzvot” simply as “mitzvot,” and thus change their function from an indicator of who’s a member of the “club” to an expression of commitment to God and Torah. By laying tefillin, I make a political statement about the moral and halakhic correctness of feminist innovation, evolution, and influence. This statement is a reflection of deep religious and moral convictions, and I am proud to make it.

You can read the whole post here: http://www.myjewishlearning.co.....ebook

BlueRose52

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 12:06 pm

imasinger wrote:

I have a harder time understanding why more people don't do a mezumenet, where there would seem to be a clearer halachic reason, than by why women don't put on tefilin or perform other time bound mitzvot.

Participating in a women's mezumen(et) is a perfect example which proves the point I was making above. It's quite clear that halachically women should do it, but they don't. Objections to these practices are fundamentally rooted in a sociological resistance based on the attitude of "it's just not done by women" rather than genuine halachic concerns.

Although I'll admit that many women might actually believe it's a halachic objection, even when shown that it isn't, most such women would still resist doing it.

Last edited by BlueRose52 on Thu, Jan 23 2014, 12:08 pm; edited 1 time in total

goodmorning

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 12:08 pm

BlueRose52 wrote:

This would make sense if not for the plethora of halachic texts that forbid or disparage women's wearing of tefillin. You can make the case that women didn't put on tefillin due to other considerations as well, but you can not separate the halachic part of the equation.

It is interesting to contrast tefillin with other mitzvos asei shehazman grama, such as shofar (and lulav) that have become accepted practice for women. Not only is there an absence of any sources that forbid women from fulfilling these mitzvos, but there are sources (R' Akiva Eiger, Chayei Adam) who mandate it because women accepted these mitzvos upon themselves as obligations. Historically, these were mitzvos practiced by women; our fulfilling of them is completely in accordance with that tradition.

(Regarding davening, the Magen Avraham tries to make the case that women fulfill their obligations with a short tefilah as per the Rambam/Shulchan Aruch. Although he himself paskens like the Ramban and obligates women in davening the full Shmone Esrei, he does make the case that women historically tired to fulfill their obligation to daven on some level.)

imasinger

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 12:08 pm

Princessleah, even though I am a lifelong feminist, I have a problem with someone saying that they are laying tefillin to make a political statement.

It shows disrespect for HKBH. Laying tefilin is traditionally described as a vehicle to get closer to Hashem. One can argue that point, and say that women need that vehicle (though many would also argue that they do not).

But to make the wearing of something holy into a political statement? To say that there is no difference between poitics and religion, since both are ideals, and they influence each other?

I question the depth of her spirituality.

Last edited by imasinger on Thu, Jan 23 2014, 12:11 pm; edited 1 time in total

Barbara

Thu, Jan 23 2014, 12:16 pm

goodmorning wrote:

I am aware of one text that forbids women laying tefillin. Every other source I am aware of says its OK, even if not recommended.

How many is a "plethora"? Twenty? A hundred? Let's settle on an even dozen. Pre-20th century. Halachic texts that forbid. Not say "its OK, but not recommended." Thanks.