X hits on this document

Word document






92 / 157

Women’s Lib movement and the motivation of those who initiated them is impure; the shekhina resides in the home of a righteous woman and it is from there that her prayers will be heard. See also Resp. Mishne Halakhot, Mahadura Tinyana, V, O.H. sec 39. On the subject of women’s Megilla readings, see R. Menashe Klein, Resp. Mishne Halakhot, Mahadura Tinyana, I, O.H. sec. 550.

 65.R. David Cohen, personal written communication to Aryeh A. Frimer, Feb. 3, 1990; on the grounds “that they are clearly based on the Women’s Lib movement, which is [a violation of] be-hukoteihem lo telechu (see Tosafot, Avoda Zara 11a).” See also: R. David Cohen, “Legal-ease,” Letter to the Editor, Jewish Action 60:2 (Winter 5760) (1999), p. 87 where he writes regarding the question of men answering to a women’s zimmun: “It is my halachic opinion that women’s minyanim, Bat Mitzvah celebrations that simulate Bar Mitzvahs, and the like, are prohibited by the Torah because they are consequences of the feminist movement.…What was once considered commendable becomes improper when it is done to further an agenda which, to my mind, negates those forces of halachah and mesorah which have sustained us.” A similar view regarding the inadvisability of a women’s zimmun is stated by R. Efraim Greenblatt, Resp. Rivevot Efrayyim, VIII, sec. 494. Interestingly, for similar reasons, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein is cited as disapproving of women’s study of Torah she-be-al-Peh – even if the woman’s motivation is “le-shem shamayim le-hazek ha-yahadut she-la”; see: R. Aryeh Zev Ginzberg, Resp. Divrei Hakhamim, Hashkafa veDa’at Torah, sec. 4, no. 29. This is surprising in light of R. Feinstein’s responsum in Resp. Iggerot Moshe O.H., IV, sec. 49 (see also text after note 216), and his letter to R. Meir Fund, dated Sivan 14, 5743 (May 26, 1983), text appearing after note 217 infra, which indicate to the contrary.

 66.R. David Feinstein, interviewed by Aryeh A. Frimer, March 26, 1991; on the grounds that it is a sharp departure from normative Jewish custom.

 66*.R. Joshua Katz, Chief Rabbi of Ma’aleh Adumim, October 10, 2001, objected to pseudo-aliyot for women on Simhat Torah on the grounds that it is a sharp departure from “sanctified tradition.”  66**. R. Shlomo Aviner, “Iggerot Ketsarot,Iturei Kohanim, Volume 167 (Heshvan 5759), p. 22; on the grounds that it is a sharp departure from normative Jewish custom.

 66***. R. Haim David Halevi, Resp. Mayyim Hayyim, III, sec. 2; on the grounds that it is a sharp departure from normative Jewish custom.

 66****Rav Yisroel HaLevi Belsky, Einei Yisroel: Bereishis, pp. 342-343; on the grounds

Document info
Document views554
Page views555
Page last viewedSat Jan 21 18:17:25 UTC 2017