over the past 35 years with literally hundreds of women and many rabbis throughout the United States actively involved in or associated with Orthodox women’s tefilla groups; see also note 235, infra. The collection, Daughters of the King: Women and the Synagogue, Susan Grossman and Rivka Haut, eds. (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1992), includes several articles and personal vignettes written by Orthodox women involved in tefilla groups which shed light on the question of motivation. See also Norma Baumel Joseph, “Reflections on Observing Rosh Chodesh with my Women’s Tefilla Group,” in Celebrating the New Moon: A Rosh Chodesh Anthology, Susan Berrin, ed. (Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson Inc., 1996), pp. 111-116; Norma Baumel Joseph, “Women in Orthodoxy: Conventional and Contentious,” In Women Transforming American Jewish Life, Ed. Riv-Ellen Prell (Detroit:Wayne State Press, Fall 2007), pp. 181-209. In a Letter to the Editor, Jerusalem Post, July 24, 1973, Sharon L. Haselkorn discusses the motivation of the women involved in one of the first women’s services held at Harvard Hillel in the Spring of 1973. The published letter is abridged, and we thank Dr. Haselkorn for sharing with us the full text of her letter, dated June 28th, 1973. In addition, the reader is referred to the letter of Joseph and Sharon Kaplan, Sh’ma 7/122, November 26, 1976, regarding the beginnings of the Lincoln Square Synagogue’s Women’s Tefilla Group. For a critique of Orthodox Feminism and Prayer Groups, see R. Nisson Wolpin and Levi Reisman, “Orthodoxy and Feminism: How Promising a Shidduch,” The Jewish Observer 30:3 (Nissan 5757, April 1997), pp. 8-15; Levi Reisman, “Feminism – A Force that Will Split Ortodoxy,” The Jewish Observer 3:4 (Iyar 5758, May 1998), pp. 37-47; R. Emanuel Feldman, “Orthodox Feminism and Feminist Orthodoxy” Jewish Action, 70:2 (Winter 5760/1999), pp. 12-17.
3**. See, for example, Gitelle Rapoport, Letter to the Editor, Tradition, 33:2 (Winter 1999), p. 82.
4.This paper has consciously avoided a discussion of the various additional halakhic and legal issues raised by the attempt of several women’s groups to hold prayer services at the Western Wall (Kotel). These issues, while germane to prayer services at the Kotel, are not necessarily relevant to women’s prayer services in general, inasmuch as they result, in large part, from the specific language of the Israeli Statute under discussion, Rule 2(a)(1a) of the Regulations for the Preservation of Jewish Holy Places (Amendment), 5750-1989 (K.T.  no. 5237, pp. 190-191). The halakhic and legal