Torah and Critical Thinking: Important for All
In response to some of the comments that appeared on the post,
Orthonomics: Critical Thinking: Important for All
I would like to clarify an issue -- actually 2 issues -- with what Hakethav Vehakbala said about women's obligation to attend Hakel (Vayelech 31: 12) You are probably familiar with the gloss on the verse given by Rashi (which is from the drasha of R' Elazar ben Azrya quoted in Chagiga 3a) that the men come to learn, while the women come to hear, and the children come to provide merit for those who bring them. On this last point, Hakethav Vehakbala makes a beautiful observation. He says that the children in question would be the very young ones, for it they are already at the age of learning, they would obligated to be brought in order to learn. So these would be the babes in arms -- to young to learn and also too young to be left home without their parents. He explains, the mothers would anyway take these babies along, who may have not yet even been weaned. Even though they would have brought them in any case, the commandment gives them the reward of doing something as a metzuve veoseh [someone who does as commanded by the Torah].
Now, most people are familiar with women not having the same tzivuy of learning Torah as men. However, Hakethav Vehakbala asserts that are metzuvos to learn all they need to know to keep the halachos properly. That is actually quite a lot, when you consider that only halachos pertaining to mitzvos like tefillin don't pertain to them, when just about everything else does. So a woman has to be thoroughly knowledgeable about hilchos Shabbos, Yom Tov, kashrus, brachos, niddah, business ethics, and more if only to assure that she does the non-time-bound positive mitzvos she must and avoid transgressing any of the negative mitzvos. And this is not just a nice or extra thing to do; it is a chiyuv -- an obligation!
Fascinating that Hakethav Vehakbala sees no contradiction between a woman who is utterly devoted to her children -- and would not just leave them behind with a babysitter while she goes on her own spiritual retreat-- and a woman who learns as obligated by the Torah. People have created this dichotomy in recent years as a reaction against feminism. If you remove that, the picture becomes quite clear.
Visit my site www.kallahmagazine.com -- not just for kallahs. You can also see posts at http://www.examiner.com/x-18522-NY-Jewish-Bridal-Examiner
Orthonomics: Critical Thinking: Important for All
I would like to clarify an issue -- actually 2 issues -- with what Hakethav Vehakbala said about women's obligation to attend Hakel (Vayelech 31: 12) You are probably familiar with the gloss on the verse given by Rashi (which is from the drasha of R' Elazar ben Azrya quoted in Chagiga 3a) that the men come to learn, while the women come to hear, and the children come to provide merit for those who bring them. On this last point, Hakethav Vehakbala makes a beautiful observation. He says that the children in question would be the very young ones, for it they are already at the age of learning, they would obligated to be brought in order to learn. So these would be the babes in arms -- to young to learn and also too young to be left home without their parents. He explains, the mothers would anyway take these babies along, who may have not yet even been weaned. Even though they would have brought them in any case, the commandment gives them the reward of doing something as a metzuve veoseh [someone who does as commanded by the Torah].
Now, most people are familiar with women not having the same tzivuy of learning Torah as men. However, Hakethav Vehakbala asserts that are metzuvos to learn all they need to know to keep the halachos properly. That is actually quite a lot, when you consider that only halachos pertaining to mitzvos like tefillin don't pertain to them, when just about everything else does. So a woman has to be thoroughly knowledgeable about hilchos Shabbos, Yom Tov, kashrus, brachos, niddah, business ethics, and more if only to assure that she does the non-time-bound positive mitzvos she must and avoid transgressing any of the negative mitzvos. And this is not just a nice or extra thing to do; it is a chiyuv -- an obligation!
Fascinating that Hakethav Vehakbala sees no contradiction between a woman who is utterly devoted to her children -- and would not just leave them behind with a babysitter while she goes on her own spiritual retreat-- and a woman who learns as obligated by the Torah. People have created this dichotomy in recent years as a reaction against feminism. If you remove that, the picture becomes quite clear.
Visit my site www.kallahmagazine.com -- not just for kallahs. You can also see posts at http://www.examiner.com/x-18522-NY-Jewish-Bridal-Examiner
Comments
וכל שכן לדברי הסמ"ג שכתב שהנשים חייבות ללמוד הדינים השייכין להם
And see R. Elhanan Wasserman's incredible implication (in his famous letter to R. Schwab on university attendance, printed in his קובץ שיעורים II:47 (par. 4)) that women who waste time may be guilty of Bittul Torah:
ויש להסתפק בטעמא דאין לעשותם קבע, אם הוא משום ביטול תורה, אם כן אפשר דלא שייך זה אלא באנשים ולא בנשים, מיהו באמת גם נשים חייבות ללמוד כדי לידע איך לקיים המצות שחייבות בהן