 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
Forum
-> Interesting Discussions
zaq
|
 Sun, Jul 02 2017, 10:44 am
|
OP, you are entitled to your peeves and you are equally entitled not to be bothered by other people's peeves. There is plenty to obsess about without obsessing about why we're not obsessed with other people's obsessions. At the same time, the fact that a given situation does not disturb you personally does not mean that it is a non-issue, that there is something wrong with those who do find it disturbing, or that it is not something that people should fight to change.
| |
|
| Back to top |
 11
|
goodmorning
|
Sun, Jul 02 2017, 12:30 pm
| Fox wrote: |
The problem is not that your life lacks spirituality. The problem is that the "man's world" (or patriarchy, if you prefer) as influenced by Greek philosophy keeps us from seeing how much Hashem values diapers, juice boxes, and the mayhem that accompanies childrearing.
I didn't bother responding to the other thread -- the word "apologetics" had already been tossed into the ring. But I personally have no difficulty believing that Hashem values the grind of childrearing more than the most heartfelt tefillos uttered in shul, and I think a lot of men would happily trade their religious responsibilities for the opportunity to stay home and spend time with their kids. |
The problem is that unless you're a Navi and can communicate with Hashem directly, it's very hard to guess what He values.
One approach might be to look at what his Torah says, or what Neviim, who actually have communicated with Him, say, but while Tanach is replete with pesukim about the beauty and importance of tefillah, pesukim about the value of diaper changing are curiously absent.
Another approach might be to look at what Chazal say; once again, although we find plenty of statements that value tefillah, I can't seem to find the ones that extol the virtues of juice boxes. When they say that there are דברים שעומדים ברומו של עולם, and Rashi explains that as referring to tefillah, are those statements of Chazal and Rashi examples of Greek influence? Ditto the statements that say that tefillah is the fulfillment of the mitzvah of ולעבדו בכל לבבכם, or the one about הקב"ה מצוי בבית הכנסת, etc. etc. etc.
It is theoretically possible that Hashem values the grind of childrearing more (!!!) than the most heartfelt tefillos, but I don't find the evidence of this belief very compelling. In fact, I find the statement of belief to be a denigration of that which He actually does value. You can say that raising children is wonderful without having to resort to devaluing Torah study and tefillah.
| |
|
| Back to top |
7
|
|
amother
Mint
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 12:00 pm
| zaq wrote: | | OP, you are entitled to your peeves and you are equally entitled not to be bothered by other people's peeves. There is plenty to obsess about without obsessing about why we're not obsessed with other people's obsessions. At the same time, the fact that a given situation does not disturb you personally does not mean that it is a non-issue, that there is something wrong with those who do find it disturbing, or that it is not something that people should fight to change. |
In retrospect I could have phrased it better. It was a little off the cuff. I think my point was more that I'd love to understand something that I really don't. No obsessing here.
| |
|
| Back to top |
1
|
|
amother
Papaya
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 1:44 pm
I am pasting here (and adding to) part of my comment on the other thread. For me, it is not about wanting a more public role and/or needing to be up front and center. It is about being valued and of equal worth in Judaism.
There are no Jewish milestones for girls, the way there are for boys, and that is because much/most integral part of Judaism (what makes Jews different from non-Jews) is not applicable to women. At best women can voluntarily perform those mitzvos - for less value and reward - as an eina metzuvah (e.g. kriyas shma, positive mitzvos associated with Shabbos and yomim tovim - shofar, lulav, sukkah, etc.). At worst, women are actively prohibited/excluded from those mitzvos (e.g. Tefillin, tzitzis, limud torah - to a greater or lesser extent depending upon the community, etc.). Much/most of the "important role" that is designated for women (e.g. running a home, raising a family, chessed, etc.) can be fulfilled by non-Jewish women, as well as Jewish women.
Upon bar mitzvah, everything changes for a boy. He can now put on tefillin. He can get aliyos, daven for the amud, read from the Torah and Megillah, be counted towards a minyan and zimun, etc. What changes (on the ground) for a girl upon bas mitzvah? Women are never part of the tzibbur, no matter how old they are.
When my young daughter complains that young boys are honored with gelila, but she will never have that opportunity, because she is a girl, I have nothing to reply - because she's right. There is no way for me to make her feel like an equally valued/respected member of Klal Yisroel, because women are not equal to men in Judaism, and that's a fact, which makes me very sad 😢.
| |
|
| Back to top |
8
|
heidi
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 2:36 pm
I'm basically with OP. I love being a mommy and all that it entails and wouldn't trade it for the world. Especially for a world that involved getting up for shul and having to wear tzitzit. "Inequality" doesn't bother me bcz., as another poster said,I've never had to be saved from drowning or had to have damages paid on me.
So I think all is right with the Jewish world.
BUT-- if G-d forbid I was an aguna or my husband decided it was time for a second wife or any of a bunch of things that the torah definitely makes life more difficult for women, maybe I wouldn't think life was so peachy.
| |
|
| Back to top |
6
|
tichellady
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 2:48 pm
| heidi wrote: | I'm basically with OP. I love being a mommy and all that it entails and wouldn't trade it for the world. Especially for a world that involved getting up for shul and having to wear tzitzit. "Inequality" doesn't bother me bcz., as another poster said,I've never had to be saved from drowning or had to have damages paid on me.
So I think all is right with the Jewish world.
BUT-- if G-d forbid I was an aguna or my husband decided it was time for a second wife or any of a bunch of things that the torah definitely makes life more difficult for women, maybe I wouldn't think life was so peachy. |
Not every woman who wants to be a mother or a wife has that option. And not everyone finds those roles fulfilling, but I'm glad you do.
| |
|
| Back to top |
5
|
|
amother
Mint
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 2:59 pm
| amother wrote: | I am pasting here (and adding to) part of my comment on the other thread. For me, it is not about wanting a more public role and/or needing to be up front and center. It is about being valued and of equal worth in Judaism.
There are no Jewish milestones for girls, the way there are for boys, and that is because much/most integral part of Judaism (what makes Jews different from non-Jews) is not applicable to women. At best women can voluntarily perform those mitzvos - for less value and reward - as an eina metzuvah (e.g. kriyas shma, positive mitzvos associated with Shabbos and yomim tovim - shofar, lulav, sukkah, etc.). At worst, women are actively prohibited/excluded from those mitzvos (e.g. Tefillin, tzitzis, limud torah - to a greater or lesser extent depending upon the community, etc.). Much/most of the "important role" that is designated for women (e.g. running a home, raising a family, chessed, etc.) can be fulfilled by non-Jewish women, as well as Jewish women.
Upon bar mitzvah, everything changes for a boy. He can now put on tefillin. He can get aliyos, daven for the amud, read from the Torah and Megillah, be counted towards a minyan and zimun, etc. What changes (on the ground) for a girl upon bas mitzvah? Women are never part of the tzibbur, no matter how old they are.
When my young daughter complains that young boys are honored with gelila, but she will never have that opportunity, because she is a girl, I have nothing to reply - because she's right. There is no way for me to make her feel like an equally valued/respected member of Klal Yisroel, because women are not equal to men in Judaism, and that's a fact, which makes me very sad 😢. |
But men HAVE to do all those things. Would you want to have more halachos that you have to keep on top of everything our religion requires both men and women to keep?
| |
|
| Back to top |
3
|
|
amother
Papaya
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 3:15 pm
|
Yes. I do want to be included in all those Mitzvos (especially limud Torah). I already learn as much as I'm able to. . . I daven three times a day. I go to shul (on time) on Shabbos morning - which is all that is acceptable in my community. I voluntarily do as many Mitzvos as possible, and I feel very bad that my actions are not worth as much, simply because of my gender 🙁
| |
|
| Back to top |
4
|
|
amother
Periwinkle
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 3:24 pm
| amother wrote: | | Yes. I do want to be included in all those Mitzvos (especially limud Torah). I already learn as much as I'm able to. . . I daven three times a day. I go to shul (on time) on Shabbos morning - which is all that is acceptable in my community. I voluntarily do as many Mitzvos as possible, and I feel very bad that my actions are not worth as much, simply because of my gender 🙁 |
or they are worth more by Hashem- because you are going 'beyond'.
but on the flip side - being at shul on time and watching the tzibur wait for a 'tenth' - is a very easy way to feel insignificant. But - you get to go to shul 'for you' and not for the community.
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
|
mommy3b2c
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 3:30 pm
| heidi wrote: | I'm basically with OP. I love being a mommy and all that it entails and wouldn't trade it for the world. Especially for a world that involved getting up for shul and having to wear tzitzit. "Inequality" doesn't bother me bcz., as another poster said,I've never had to be saved from drowning or had to have damages paid on me.
So I think all is right with the Jewish world.
BUT-- if G-d forbid I was an aguna or my husband decided it was time for a second wife or any of a bunch of things that the torah definitely makes life more difficult for women, maybe I wouldn't think life was so peachy. |
I just want to point out, that a man couldn't take another wife without his wife's approval. Multiple wives was never considered an ideal. If you look through tanach, most people only had one wife.
| |
|
| Back to top |
1
|
SpottedBanana
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 3:32 pm
| goodmorning wrote: | The problem is that unless you're a Navi and can communicate with Hashem directly, it's very hard to guess what He values.
One approach might be to look at what his Torah says, or what Neviim, who actually have communicated with Him, say, but while Tanach is replete with pesukim about the beauty and importance of tefillah, pesukim about the value of diaper changing are curiously absent.
Another approach might be to look at what Chazal say; once again, although we find plenty of statements that value tefillah, I can't seem to find the ones that extol the virtues of juice boxes. When they say that there are דברים שעומדים ברומו של עולם, and Rashi explains that as referring to tefillah, are those statements of Chazal and Rashi examples of Greek influence? Ditto the statements that say that tefillah is the fulfillment of the mitzvah of ולעבדו בכל לבבכם, or the one about הקב"ה מצוי בבית הכנסת, etc. etc. etc.
It is theoretically possible that Hashem values the grind of childrearing more (!!!) than the most heartfelt tefillos, but I don't find the evidence of this belief very compelling. In fact, I find the statement of belief to be a denigration of that which He actually does value. You can say that raising children is wonderful without having to resort to devaluing Torah study and tefillah. |
Interesting. However, first and foremost, raising children is chessed of a very large magnitude and chessed is one of the pillars upon which the world rests, etc.
Secondly, I have a theory: Torah, both TSBK and TSBP, was not meant lechat'chila meant to be studied from the text by women. We do it nowadays for many reasons including the fact that women are educated in secular subjects so they have a thirst for sophisticated Torah education (count me as one of them -- I went to Michlalah and my sefarim of choice are mostly medrash straight from the source and rishonim) but we cannot expect that they will discuss women's issues like how much Hashem values childbearing because these were never meant to be part of the Torah passed down from father to son. They were meant to be passed down from mother to daughter, in the home. Mothers were supposed to teach their daughters about the beauty of the Jewish woman's role (as well as the halachos applicable to women and the beauty of Torah in general). Women were never supposed to be opening up sefarim unless they were as wise as Bruriah or something, so sefarim will not say something like this. This IMO is why explanations about women's roles are deemed apologetics because we don't find them explicitly in Tanach, Chazal or Rishonim.
To see where we find them alluded to, read Miriam Kosman's book.
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
|
|
amother
Purple
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 3:57 pm
| mommy3b2c wrote: | | I just want to point out, that a man couldn't take another wife without his wife's approval. Multiple wives was never considered an ideal. If you look through tanach, most people only had one wife. |
Seems to me that most men in tanach had more than one wife.
| |
|
| Back to top |
3
|
|
amother
Copper
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 3:57 pm
| SpottedBanana wrote: | Interesting. However, first and foremost, raising children is chessed of a very large magnitude and chessed is one of the pillars upon which the world rests, etc.
Secondly, I have a theory: Torah, both TSBK and TSBP, was not meant lechat'chila meant to be studied from the text by women. We do it nowadays for many reasons including the fact that women are educated in secular subjects so they have a thirst for sophisticated Torah education (count me as one of them -- I went to Michlalah and my sefarim of choice are mostly medrash straight from the source and rishonim) but we cannot expect that they will discuss women's issues like how much Hashem values childbearing because these were never meant to be part of the Torah passed down from father to son. They were meant to be passed down from mother to daughter, in the home. Mothers were supposed to teach their daughters about the beauty of the Jewish woman's role (as well as the halachos applicable to women and the beauty of Torah in general). Women were never supposed to be opening up sefarim unless they were as wise as Bruriah or something, so sefarim will not say something like this. This IMO is why explanations about women's roles are deemed apologetics because we don't find them explicitly in Tanach, Chazal or Rishonim.
To see where we find them alluded to, read Miriam Kosman's book. |
If the Torah is universal and eternal, it should absolutely stand the test of time, culture changes, and different genders reading it.
Or are you saying it was written for a limited audience and time?
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
mommy3b2c
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 4:01 pm
| amother wrote: | | Seems to me that most men in tanach had more than one wife. |
Ok. Please name them. How many can you come up with?
I'll start with naming app those who only had one wife.
Moshe
Aharon
Amtram
Yosef
Mordechai
Efraim
Menashe
Yitzchak
Shaul
I'll think of more later. My baby just woke up.
| |
|
| Back to top |
1
|
SpottedBanana
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 4:11 pm
| amother wrote: | If the Torah is universal and eternal, it should absolutely stand the test of time, culture changes, and different genders reading it.
Or are you saying it was written for a limited audience and time? |
It was written for all times, but just because we do something bedieved (in this case, have women study Torah straight from the text in the past 100 years) doesn't mean the Torah had to be intended for that action. For example, the first perek of Beraishis contains only the name Elokim, whereas the second perek, with a seemingly different story of Creation, contains the name of Hashem. This has led many to believe that CH"V there were multiple authors of the Torah. But the Torah should have been designed for "critical thinkers," one might claim. Nope, not how this works. The Torah in the abstract was given to all Jews, of course, but the Torah as a text to be studied (IMHO) was given to men.
| |
|
| Back to top |
1
|
goodmorning
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 4:39 pm
| SpottedBanana wrote: | | Interesting. However, first and foremost, raising children is chessed of a very large magnitude and chessed is one of the pillars upon which the world rests, etc. |
Yes, of course, but Fox seemed to be speaking specifically about childraising (including contrasting it to "chesed projects" that singles do).
| Quote: |
Secondly, I have a theory: Torah, both TSBK and TSBP, was not meant lechat'chila meant to be studied from the text by women. We do it nowadays for many reasons including the fact that women are educated in secular subjects so they have a thirst for sophisticated Torah education (count me as one of them -- I went to Michlalah and my sefarim of choice are mostly medrash straight from the source and rishonim) but we cannot expect that they will discuss women's issues like how much Hashem values childbearing because these were never meant to be part of the Torah passed down from father to son. They were meant to be passed down from mother to daughter, in the home. Mothers were supposed to teach their daughters about the beauty of the Jewish woman's role (as well as the halachos applicable to women and the beauty of Torah in general). Women were never supposed to be opening up sefarim unless they were as wise as Bruriah or something, so sefarim will not say something like this. This IMO is why explanations about women's roles are deemed apologetics because we don't find them explicitly in Tanach, Chazal or Rishonim. |
That is an interesting theory.
However, a) it is a machlokes as to whether women are supposed to study Torah shebichsav (for e.g., the Taz, Bach, and Shulchan Aruch HaRav pasken that it is fine lichatchila). The Rema paskens that women are supposed to study the halachos that are relevant to them (וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם חַיֶּבֶת הָאִשָּׁה לִלְמֹד דִּינִים הַשַּׁיָכִים לְאִשָּׁה) which would certainly include a discussion of our roles! Moreover, the Torah is "morasha kehillas Yaakov" -- it is the inheritance of all ours. Even if we were not intended to study it, you would expect it to have something about our special unique role that Hashem values more than that of the men, if it would exist, if only to address our husbands, fathers, and sons with that information. For example, according to many opinions, a father is obligated in the mitzvah of chinuch for his daughter (possibly only d'rabanan), whereas it is less clear that a mother is obligated in chinuch (according to most opinions, she is not). How can a father fulfill his mitzvah to raise his daughter lacking insight into her role?
That is especially true since b) the "information" that is contained in the Torah is not limited to the group that is its "audience." For example, we have many sources about the Torah's attitudes about many topics that pertain to non-Jews, even though they are not supposed to study Torah. You would expect childraising to come up somewhere if it was so central to Jewish life. For example, you'd think that Eishes Chayil, at the very least, would describe in glowing terms how much her childraising is valued. Instead, we find a lot of descriptions of her success at business, but her children appear only to praise her.
c) This special role of women is something that should have halachic significance, which would be a natural place for its discussion. As an example, the idea that women are exempt from mitzvos asei shehazman grama because they are busy raising their children may be considered "apologetics" since it dates to the 1900s and is in contradiction to the explanation offered by many Rishonim. This is an obvious place where Chazal and Rishonim could have discussed the value of this unique role, if they thought it was correct.
At any rate, d) if one would like to posit that our lack of valuing of a women's role is due to Greek philosophy as opposed to the Torah's hashkafa, the burden of proof is on her to prove that the Torah demonstrates Hashem's valuing of diapers and juice boxes more (?!) than tefilah [and presumably, Torah study?].
| Quote: |
To see where we find them alluded to, read Miriam Kosman's book. |
I have and did not find it very satisfying, but I'm glad you enjoyed it.
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
|
goodmorning
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 4:48 pm
| amother wrote: | | Seems to me that most men in tanach had more than one wife. |
The vast majority of men in Tanach who had more than one wife either a) had difficulty having children (presumably due to wife's infertility) or b) were kings.
| |
|
| Back to top |
2
|
imasoftov
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 4:49 pm
| mommy3b2c wrote: | Ok. Please name them. How many can you come up with?
I'll start with naming app those who only had one wife.
Moshe
Aharon
Amtram
Yosef
Mordechai
Efraim
Menashe
Yitzchak
Shaul
I'll think of more later. My baby just woke up. |
Menashe and Shaul both had a concubine in addition to a wife.
It seems to me that there's no information one way or the other about the vast majority of men mentioned in Tanach and most of their wives (whether they had one or more) are not mentioned at all.
| |
|
| Back to top |
3
|
SpottedBanana
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 5:01 pm
| goodmorning wrote: |
That is an interesting theory.
However, a) it is a machlokes as to whether women are supposed to study Torah shebichsav (for e.g., the Taz, Bach, and Shulchan Aruch HaRav pasken that it is fine lichatchila). The Rema paskens that women are supposed to study the halachos that are relevant to them (וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם חַיֶּבֶת הָאִשָּׁה לִלְמֹד דִּינִים הַשַּׁיָכִים לְאִשָּׁה) which would certainly include a discussion of our roles! Moreover, the Torah is "morasha kehillas Yaakov" -- it is the inheritance of all ours. Even if we were not intended to study it (and whether, for example, women were not supposed to study Torah shebichsav is not clear), you would expect it to have something about our special unique role that Hashem values more than that of the men, if it would exist, if only to address our husbands, fathers, and sons with that information. For example, according to many opinions, a father is obligated in the mitzvah of chinuch for his daughter (possibly only d'rabanan), whereas it is less clear that a mother is obligated in chinuch (according to most opinions, she is not). How can a father fulfill his mitzvah to raise his daughter lacking insight into her role? |
Can you cite the source about fathers having a chiyuv to be mechanech their daughters? I'm pretty sure he shouldn't be teaching them real, lomdishe Torah -- this is "k'ilu melam'da tiflus." So maybe fathers fulfilled their chiyuv through teaching their daughters hilchos kashrus or hilchos Shabbos, but certainly not by sitting with them with a Rambam or Shulchan Aruch in hand.
| goodmorning wrote: |
That is especially true since b) the "information" that is contained in the Torah is not limited to the group that is its "audience." For example, we have many sources about the Torah's attitudes about many topics that pertain to non-Jews, even though they are not supposed to study Torah. You would expect childraising to come up somewhere if it was so central to Jewish life. For example, you'd think that Eishes Chayil, at the very least, would describe in glowing terms how much her childraising is valued. Instead, we find a lot of descriptions of her success at business, but her children appear only to praise her. |
Um...she sews for her family as well as for business. In any case, Eishes Chayil is in Mishlei -- it is understood by nearly all the meforshim as a mashal for Shabbos, the Torah, or the neshama, so "she changes her children's soiled clothing" wouldn't really fit; however, the message about how women are valued for the domestic arts as well as chessed comes across pretty clearly. Remember, I am not Fox -- I am not claiming that women are valued for childrearing; rather I am claiming that there is a reason that the idea of women being valued for chessed, tznius, and other internal-type things (including raising children) is not mentioned explicitly in Tanach, Chazal, or Rishonim, even though I believe this idea is true.
| goodmorning wrote: |
c) This special role of women is something that should have halachic significance, which would be a natural place for its discussion. As an example, the idea that women are exempt from mitzvos asei shehazman grama because they are busy raising their children may be considered "apologetics" since it dates to the 1900s and is in contradiction to the explanation offered by many Rishonim. This is an obvious place where Chazal and Rishonim could have discussed the value of this unique role, if they thought it was correct. |
But that would be ridiculous, because that doesn't apply to all women. What does apply is that women are meant to be internally focused, and most mitzvos aseh shehazman grama are done in shul -- tefillah betzibur, tefillin, tzitzis, shofar, lulav, talmud Torah.
| goodmorning wrote: |
At any rate, d) if one would like to posit that our lack of valuing of a women's role is due to Greek philosophy as opposed to the Torah's hashkafa, the burden of proof is on her to prove that the Torah demonstrates Hashem's valuing of diapers and juice boxes more (?!) than tefilah [and presumably, Torah study?]. |
You are just dismissing the core of my argument, which is that this sort of thing was not written about until recently. For a reason.
| |
|
| Back to top |
0
|
goodmorning
|
Mon, Jul 03 2017, 5:14 pm
| Quote: |
Remember, I am not Fox -- I am not claiming that women are valued for childrearing; rather I am claiming that there is a reason that the idea of women being valued for chessed, tznius, and other internal-type things (including raising children) is not mentioned explicitly in Tanach, Chazal, or Rishonim, even though I believe this idea is true.
|
In that case, we're in relative agreement. I'm not arguing that women have no role in Yiddishkeit; I was arguing against a statement that their role was greater than that of "male" mitzvos d'Oraisa.
I'm perfectly happy to agree that women are valued for all of the mitzvos that they do, including but not limited to chessed, and tznius, and I'm in full agreement that raising children affords women chessed opportunities on a frequent basis. (I would, however, argue that it is still clear that their role is lesser, for example, based on the discussion of the mishna in Horayos that states that one saves a man before a woman, in which it is made clear that a man's role is valued more because he is obligated in more mitzvos.)
| |
|
| Back to top |
3
|
| Related Topics |
Replies |
Last Post |
|
|
Bike Man
|
0 |
Sun, Apr 14 2024, 11:04 pm  |
|
|
PLEASE SAY TEHILLIM NOW, jewish man stabbed
|
10 |
Fri, Apr 12 2024, 10:33 am |
|
|
Get well package for man
|
1 |
Thu, Mar 28 2024, 7:35 pm |
|
|
Imperfect megillah reading...by a MAN
|
36 |
Mon, Mar 25 2024, 10:24 am |
|
|
Lakewood job for family man- Desperate
|
10 |
Sun, Mar 17 2024, 6:52 am |
|
|
Imamother may earn commission when you use our links to make a purchase.
© 2024 Imamother.com - All rights reserved
|  |
 |
|
 |
|
|
