X hits on this document

Word document






148 / 157

Tefillatam shel haYhudim,” Ma’ayanot, Tefilla (Jerusalem: Department for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora of the World Zionist Organization, 1964), pp. 9-11. For an adapted translation of the latter by Shalom Carmy and Menachem Kasdan, see “Jews at Prayer,” Shiurei haRav, Joseph Epstein, ed. (Hoboken, N.J.: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1974), pp. 82-85.

243.Similar comments have been made by R. Immanuel Jakobovits, L’Eyla 29 (Pesah 5750, April 1991), pp. 26-27—reprinted in Dear Chief Rabbi, Jeffrey M. Cohen, ed. (Hoboken, N.J.: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1996), pp. 86-88. See also Resp. Igrot Moshe, O.H. IV, sec. 49 and text near notes 214-216. Justice Menachem Elon’s remarks supra, text at note 225, regarding R. Feinstein’s motivational requirement, are equally relevant in relation to R. Soloveitchik’s analysis.

244.Surprisingly, R. Soloveitchik does not entertain the possibility that women attending women’s prayer groups are perhaps motivated by a sense of greater kavvana. See supra, notes 100 and 101, that a number of posekim maintain that greater kavvana supersedes tefilla be-tsibbur. R. Lichtenstein indicates that until approximately the time when the Rav’s wife, Tonya, fell ill (ca. 1963), the Rav was of the opinion that other spiritual considerations (e.g., the study of Torah, enhanced personal kavvana) could be of greater importance than participating in communal prayer. See also: R. Aharon Lichtenstein, haTefilla beMishnat haGrid Soloveitchick Zatsal,” Shana beShana, 5759 (Jerusalem: Heichal Shelomo, 1998), XXXIX, pp. 287-302, at p. 288. Later, however, the Rav modified his position. Although he continued to maintain that communal prayer was not in and of itself a halakhic requirement, he now attributed much more significance to tefilla be-tsibbur than he had hitherto. As a result, the Rav believed that one should not sacrifice tefilla be-tsibbur merely for increased kavvana; one should rather strive to attain the highest level of kavvana which he can within the communal prayer setting; see: R. Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff, The Rav: The World of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik (New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1999), I, pp. 186-188. As previously mentioned, the conversations with the Rav, which serve as the basis for this article, took place during the 1970’s and early 1980’s, somewhat after his change of mind. Consequently, for the Rav, greater kavvana could not serve as a valid justification for women’s prayer groups.

245.See discussion at the beginning of Section B at note 59.

246.Conversation with R. Kenneth Brander. R. Brander was the Rav’s shamash at the time the responsum appeared (1985) and was personally present at those times when

Document info
Document views481
Page views482
Page last viewedTue Jan 17 07:57:05 UTC 2017