Orthodox Women Rabbis... sorry, Maharats or whatever..

Women rabbis are not entirely new, it's just that they have been veiled. Lynn Kaye is the “Assistant Congregational Leader” at Shearith Israel in New York, Rachel Kohl Finegold is “Programming and Ritual Director” at Anshe Sholom B’nai Israel Congregation in Chicago, Elana Stein Hain is “Community Scholar” at Lincoln Square Synagogue in Manhattan, and Dina Najman is “Rosh Kehilla” of a small, unaffiliated Orthodox prayer group called KOE. These women give sermons, answering halakhic questions, and even co-officiate at a wedding. In addition, last year, the Hartman Institute caused a stir when they announced that they are opening a program for rabbinic ordination that will accept women applicants. Nishmat confers the title "Yoatsot (halachic advisors)" on specially prepared women who spend two years preparing to answer chailos in hilchos nidah. Women preparing to become Yoatzot Halacha are chosen for their extensive Torah scholarship, leadership ability, and deep religious commitment. They devote two years (over 1000 hours) to intensive study with rabbinic authorities in Taharat Hamishpachah. They receive training from experts in modern medicine and psychology, including gynecology, infertility, women's health, family dynamics and sexuality.

However when rabbi Avi Weiss conferred the title "Maharat" on Sara Hurwitz, he moved beyond what was done before. Mahranat stands for Manhigah Hilchotit Ruchanit Toranit. This title encompasses the three generally recognized rabbinic duties: Paskining shailos, providing religious inspiration and serving as an example of spiritual life, and teaching Torah. The breadth of the title and the clearly apparent strategy of conferring shemicha without calling it that name. Maharat received a bilingual document that looked suspiciously like semicha and the ceremony of granting her the title of "Maharat" looked and sounded just like conferral of semicha.

Ms. Hurwitz has prepared for her role well. According to JOFA IJewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance) Speaker's Bio: MaHaRa"T Sara Hurwitz is the Madricha Hilchatit, Ruchanit, and Toranit at the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale. She is also the Curricular Researcher and Writer for JOFA's Gender and Orthodoxy Curriculum Project. She graduated from Drisha Institute for Jewish Education?s 3-year Scholars Circle Program, received a B.A. from Barnard College, Columbia University, studied at Midreshet Lindenbaum in Israel, and served as a CLAL Fellow. Sara was co-director of Lights in Action, where she wrote curriculum, taught, and directed programs on college campuses. She has also taught at Drisha, the JCC of Manhattan, CLAL, and at various synagogues in the New York area. Sara continues to study halacha under the auspices of Rabbi Avi Weiss.

 

Not that this compares with the traditional education of a Posek. I don't know about that last sentence either. However, she is clearly a dedicated, charismatic and educated woman, with all the good intentions.

Just in case you missed the point, Ms. Hurwitz and other speakers, including Rabbi Maroof, one of the authors of the responsa supporting this step,  at this conferral ceremony clarified, explained and expounded that wink, wink - this is really a rabbinic degree,iIn Rabbi Weiss' words,  "a full member of clergy". The American Yated Neeman of this week wrote a a highly critical piece and correctly points out that the fiction and cover of Maharat being in some way different from a rabbinic ordination was blown by these speeches. The speakers said clearly and shouted out loud that they intend to give very woman, even a housewife in Bnei Brak an opportunity to become a congregational rabbi. The responsa permitting this can be found here.

Without getting into point by point discussion of the "teshuvot", I must point out that they are exceedingly faulty. They reason from aggada to halacha. They point to historical figures as precedent. They clearly argue for a position instead of anlyzing the issue. None of them fully discusses contrary sources, such as the immense literature of "Melekh vlo malka", even if only to refute them, as is cutomarily done by responsa literature, and all attempt tor reason from exceptions to the rule. Theseteshuvos as very scanty. Much of what they say is irrelevant to a fixed appointment and does not relate to what a Maharat actually does. As we all know, a teshuva is only as relevant as its facts. I do not disagree that a woman can teach... but can she be appointed as Maharat? THis is really the question! These teshuvos skip over that question. A rabbinic position is a position of authority and brings with it the ability to level fines and the power of Cherem and Nidduy and saying that it is not "srara" is an unsupportable assertion. A woman can be a judge, when the litigants agree,  but cannot be appointed as a judge over the community (R. Bin Nun believes that she can as long as the community is private and wants it).Yes, Devora judged Israel but she was exceptional, she judged ( or as Yerushalmi says, taught what halacha) those who came to her and did not issue hazmonos to those who did not, and all this means that the system has a place in it for exceptions. One cannot make exception into a rule!

Quite beyond this, for women to routinely become rabbis will fatally subvert the concept of tsnius, already almost forgotten and often ignored in Modern Orthodoxy. The sons of Eisav see nothing worng with allowing men and women to come close to the red lines in their interactions, but Semites build fences. Why do sons of Eisav not care? Because what they really believe is that crossing those lines is not so bad, nothing terrible. Post-exilic Judaism in on the contrary is characterized by deep and abiding conviction that Hashem's word is so important, so precious that any possibility of transgressing His word is a tragedy and that everything possible must be done to prevent transgressing halacha. In our day and age, interaction between sexes is the main battleground of these two contrary perceptions

Esau cared nothing for distinctions. He he was a self-made man and he disdained hierarchies and birthrights. He left his father's place and went to Seir, "away from Yakov his brother". So also did his civilizations ultimately rebelled against gender roles in the name of individual freedom and opprotunity. But this is not the Jewish way, if you will, not the Semitic way. Can one imagine Orthodoxy, or for that matter, Islam with no gender distinctions? I can't but the leaders of this misguided effort apparently can...and want to.

We are after all Semites. It is not natural for Semites to mix sexes, to have women stand on a bimah in front of men, to counsel men in secluded quarters and to serve as inspirational figures for men. Can you imagine?  Would not this naturally lead to the elevated feelings of reverence and love that a student feels for his spiritual teacher to become admixed with and tainted by laviscousness and impurity? And if not for some, than surely for many? The more impressive the woman, the greater the danger. And by the way, Devorah sat under a tree, so there was no yichud and the Maidel of Ludomir  and the daughter of Gaon Ali of Baghdad taught from behind the mechitza. Is that what is being done in Riverdale?

I do not for a moment doubt that those who lead this effort are well-intentioned, idealistic and see themselves as revolutionaries, leading the Orthodoxy into a better world. They are also mistaken. They are the vanguard of the coming schism - for once a Satmar Chossid or an Yeshiva man cannot drop into a Modern Orthodox shul to catch mincha or say Kaddish, we will have irrevocably split. This moment has already come for the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale, as soon as Maharat Hurwitz ascended the Bima for her first sermon.

Comments

[Ploni]

Is he hugging her, at the beginning of the second video? It sure seems so, then it's suddenly cut.

[yy]

powerfully lucid. Thank you!

[steve mcqueen]

I think you got to wait and see how this develops. There is no doubt a problem exists, that of motivating highly intelligent, well educated, women to find spiritual fulfilment in OJ. This is among the proposed solutions. Obviously a person can point to many flaws and potential problems but there are not many other possible solutions. it is good that extreme LW versions of OJ exist and it will be interesting to see in 20 years where this is headed. If it fails, the downside is small, if it succeeds the advantage is great.

[Rabbi Joshua Maroof]

With all due respect to your fine blog, you are completely mistaken in your analysis of my statements and my responsum. I would advise you to reread my teshuva, which in fact both mentions and affirms the halakhic prohibition of serara.

Please see my response to the Yated article, which, in addition to sending to the editors of Yated, I have also taken the liberty of posting on my blog.

[avakesh]

I tried to word my comments in such a way as to meet such objections, because the format is inadequate to engage in deep halachic analysis. I hope that you respond on your blog: since I am anonymous and you are not, I will refrain from any farter comments, but I would love to read it there, nonetheless. More, I think that it is warranted. This is why.

I did read your teshuvah and your understanding of serara is different from that of most poskim. You put forth a teleological argument to define the prohibition of serara as something that "ensures that women remain free of communal obligations so they can dedicate themselves to...family". You did not explain why even this understanding would not preclude a woman's rabbinic invovlement as it would, I imagine, any demanding occupation. The term serara does not seem to fit this definition very well. Such an understanding, at the very least, needs to be supported by a detailed analysis of sources. I would also have liked, as a matter of course, a detailed discussion of the sources starting from the Sifri and ending in contemporary teshuvos on the matter (the Yated's attack is lightweight in this respect as well, quoting only one teshuva on a related topic - but that's right wing and argument from authority). Without a detailed discussion, the entire effort looks like a quick perusal of one or two recent teshuvot as the total extent of preparation and analysis (this is apparent from other tshuvot on the question and not necessarily yours). For this reason a full and extensive teshuva should be prepared.

Finally, your reasoning does not go to the very core of the issue. I understand and agree with your point about women's conclusions in Torah study being accorded respect. But, are they Psak and how do they differ form Psak? What exactly is the title of Maharat and why the Manhiga component, ruchanit component and hilchatit component not constitute "serara". Your teshuva permitted women to be Judaic Stuides teachers, nothing more. Also, if all a Maharat does is share her conclusions with students, do the rules of pesak, such as that "what one Rav permitted, another one cannot prohibit", apply to her psak?

You write that: "My participation in Sara Hurwitz’s ceremony was motivated by my desire to acknowledge her significant attainments in Torah study and to celebrate the fact that women with Torah knowledge can have a positive and lasting impact on the spiritual growth of our communities, provided that they operate within the framework of halakha. If my presence at that event was misconstrued as a tacit endorsement of Open Orthodoxy, its institutions or its peculiar interpretations of Jewish law, then I am profoundly regretful of my decision to attend."

if such is the case, if you inadevrtently lend support to rabbinic ordination to women which you in actuality oppose, you should withdraw this teshuva as correct but inapplicable to the case for which it was written.

I would like to see heavy duty scholarship that thinks through all these issues and comprehesively addresses them. As long as it is not done, the Yated's anlaogy of drawing a target and then writing around it will continue to resonate.

I have read your blog and you are a talmid chacham of first rank, and as a congregational rabbi also a Morah D'Asra whose Psak is binding in your community. So are the other mashivim recognized talmidei chachamim with their areas of expertise. Of the three of the mashivim, Rabbi Maroof has the best qualifications for writing a teshuva. But writing abiding decisions is different from academic scholarship or expertise in Tanach. For this effort to be taken seriousely, we need to hear from experts in the area of Psak.

Now some unsolicited advice. I am certain that other indivuduals have been approached and declined. It would be good to hear also from them. The right wing will dismiss you and not engage in any halachic discussion. Although you write on your blog that you identify with center- right/Yeshivish Orthodoxy, your views will be almost surely dismissed with a condescending reference to a teshuva or two from the last generation and a reference to Masorah. You should initiate a debate within the left wing. The very act of argument and disagreement will validate your approach. I recommend that all voices be heard. One should not act from a-priori conclusions in matters of emes, and if convincing arguments can be presented
in halachic, hashkafic and cultural spheres, I and others are prepared to listen. But we must hear more.

Note: Rabbi Maroof's response to the Yated article is at: http://vesomsechel.blogspot.com/2009/07/my-response-to-yated-neeman.html#links

[pierre]

can you send me if you have it a copy of my initial comment to this post that I don't see? thank you
p.s.

[viagra online]

Hi guys I from Russian and I like this comment " I am profoundly regretful of my decision to attend."