132) THREE INTERESTING HALACHIC INTERPRETATIONS:

INTRODUCTION:

In this article, we are going to look at three well-known Halachic practices which many are familiar with – yet according to Peninei Halacha[1], they have a very different and surprising Halachic outcome.

I) CHECKING TEFILLIN TWICE IN SEVEN YEARS?

According to common perception, Tefillin must be checked by a sofer or scribe approximately every three and a half years. This is not just common perception but many people adhere strictly to this principle, and indeed are encouraged do to so.

The Peninei Halacha writes[2]:

(Loose translation is my own:)

“One must purchase Tefillin from a G-d fearing individual, who can testify to their Kashrut...In this matter, one cannot simply rely on the length of the beard of the seller or on his external (religious) clothing...

Once Tefillin are certified as Kosher, and have been carefully monitored during the production process – there is no longer a requirement to check them again. Ever!

As long as they (haven’t been tampered with and have remained) complete, they maintain their presumption of Kashrut and one may continue to recite a blessing over them.

This is provided that the Tefillin have (not been neglected but have) been worn on a regular basis. If they were not worn for some time there is the possibility that they may have become mouldy. (Only) in such an instance (where Tefillin have been neglected) is there the requirement to check them twice in seven years, as one would with Mezuzot.

Also, if the Tefillin got wet or one notices some or other blemish on the leather, they would have to be checked immediately and until that takes place one may not recite a Blessing over them.”

Accordingly, Tefillin which are worn regularly and show no ostensible signs of damage, never need to be checked, provided they were procured from a reliable source at the outset!

In a footnote, the Peninei Halacha continues:

“As we mentioned, as long as one uses Tefillin regularly there is no need to check them.

However, some Acharonim, including the Mishna Berurah, maintain that it is best to check them every number of years because the Tefillin can be damaged as a result of perspiration.

But I have seen in Hilchot Shlomo[3] in the name of R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach that modern day Tefillin which are made with more elaboration, would no longer be subject to this ruling as our Tefillin are made out of thicker leather than in previous generations.

On the contrary, regular checking of the Tefillin can cause damage as a result of the opening and closing (of the boxes).

Similarly, R. Auerbach holds that if Mezuzot are well sealed and closed, they too would not be subject to a regimen of checking twice in seven years.”

II) TAKING THE MEZUZOT TO BE CHECKED TWICE IN SEVEN YEARS?

Unlike Tefillin, there actually is an injunction to check the Mezuzot twice every seven years. However contrary to popular perception and practice, one does not always have to take the Mezuzot to a sofer to be checked every three and a half years.

The Peninei Halacha writes (Likkutim 1, p. 235):

“There are two different types of checking (pertaining to the Mezuzah):

1) The first is the expert inspection which takes place before the Mezuzah is sold. This is why it is crucial to purchase Mezuzot from a reliable source. During this inspection, the sofer checks each letter to ascertain whether each letter has been shaped according to Halacha. He also ensures that no two letters are touching, which would render the scroll invalid.

2) The inspection which takes place twice every seven years, is a cursory inspection which any individual can do because its purpose is just to ensure that there has been no visible external damage to the scroll. 

This would include checking for water damage and the visible peeling of the ink lettering which can delaminate over time. (Chatam Sofer, Yoreh Deah 283.)”

Accordingly, one need not take the Mezuzot to a scribe every three and a half years (and pay) to have them checked! Anyone can do a basic inspection to verify that no visible damage has occurred over that period of time.

Of course if one has any doubts about the condition of the scroll it goes without saying that a qualified sofer must be consulted.

III) CUTTING PART OF THE CHALLAH BEFORE SAYING ‘HAMOTZI’ ON SHABBAT?

Many cut the challah by making a small incision with a knife over the top, especially on Shabbat, just before reciting the Blessing of haMotzi.

The Peninei Halacha writes (Berachot p. 47):

“...The blessing of haMotzi should immediately precede the eating of the bread (without any interruption. In times gone by the crust used to be much thicker and harder. This sometimes caused an unnecessary delay between the blessing and the eating[4]).

Therefore our sages have advised that prior to the blessing (of haMotzi) one should cut a little (incision in the top) of the bread. This should (not be too deep but) were one to raise the loaf from the short side (next to the cut) the bread should not break. This would still be considered a ‘complete’ loaf (which is considered meritorious to recite a blessing over).

In this way, immediately after reciting the blessing, one could (cut or) break the bread (easily and quickly) and eat it...

However on Shabbat one should not cut the bread before reciting the blessing (of haMotzi), because on that day there is an additional injunction to say the blessing over two whole (complete and perfect) challot. 

Were one to cut the bread (as one would during the week) the bread would no longer be considered whole. [See Ramah 167, 1. Many have written that one should (nevertheless) mark the place of the cutting – Bach, Rashal, Mishnah Berurah 274, 5.]”

Thus, according to the Peninei Halacha, on Shabbat one should not pass the knife over the top of the challot before reciting the blessing, as that would render the bread less complete and therefore less worthy. (He does acknowledge, however, in his parenthesis that many do in fact mark the place of the cut, but seems to imply that the main view is not to do so.)

---

[1] The thirteen-volume series on practical Halacha presented by R. Eliezer Melamed.

[2] Peninei Halacha, Likkutim Alef, Tefillin ch. 14, p.214.

[3] Vol 1, 4, 36.

[4] This explanation in not offered in the text and I have placed it, therefore, in parenthesis.

069) Cigarettes and Halacha Don't Mix:

I finally found a clear, definitive and intelligent piece of writing about smoking and halacha. It’s from the Peninei Halacha, and it’s halacha like you’ve never seen it before.[1]

What follows is my loose translation and summary of the Hebrew text:

HISTORY :

In the past, doctors actually thought that smoking was healthy for a person. They often even recommended smoking a pipe, believing it aided in the digestion of food. It seems as if it they may have been correct, but they never knew that additionally smoking brings with it a host of other evils.

Already in the days of the Chafetz Chaim[2] (1839-1933), doctors were beginning to better understand that smoking could have negative and even fatal consequences. More than one hundred years ago, based on the available medical information of that era, the Chafetz Chaim prohibited habitual smoking. However, until more recently, most rabbis did not regard his prohibition as absolute, and considered it instead as an advisory.

HOW CONTEMPORARY MEDICINE INFORMS HALACHA:

Only within the last few decades has the consensus of medical opinion clearly and beyond any doubt, concluded that smoking is very dangerous.

Today we have to say that as a result of contemporary medical evidence, halacha dictates that smoking is absolutely prohibited, not just by rabbinic but by Torah law (as anything threatening health or life automatically assumes the weight of a Torah prohibition).[3] By extension, even a smoker has a Torah obligation to stop smoking.

Some even consider smoking prohibited under the proscription of suicide.

Smoking ‘hubbly bubbly’ would also be included in this prohibition as it has been shown to cause cancer and heart disease.

SCIENTIFIC STUDIES (Remember these are brought in a halachik sefer, not a medical journal!):

Smoking can cause three distinct illnesses:

1)      It can affect the lungs through bronchitis and emphysema, preventing them from absorbing oxygen. Most time this leads to a decline in physical fitness and sometimes even causes death.

2)      It can cause heart disease. Approximately one out of every four people who die as a result of a heart attack is a smoker.

3)      It can cause cancer. Comprehensive studies have concluded that smoking is one of the main causes of cancer. A smoker is twice more susceptible to contracting cancer than a non-smoker. Furthermore a smoker is seven times more likely to contract lung cancer than a non-smoker.

A scientific study has shown that a non-smoking spouse has three times more chance of contracting cancer from their smoking spouse, than a non-smoking spouse.

A study by an insurance company in America found that the mortality rate amongst forty-five year old smokers is 80 percent higher than amongst non-smokers of the same age. When it came to sixty year olds, the rate increased by 125 percent.

Another insurance company study showed that a smoker was more likely to have a motorcar accident than a non-smoking counterpart, because smoking affects the haemoglobin which limits the quantity of oxygen to the lungs thereby reducing the judgement capability of the driver. As a result of this study the company upped their premiums for smokers.

As a result of these relatively recent health findings, there is no question that halacha has to mirror them.

WHEN DOES A NON-SMOKER HAVE A RIGHT OF PROTEST?

With regard to the issue of whether or not one can ask a smoker to refrain from smoking in the vicinity, there are some halachik guidelines:

A person may do as he or she pleases in their own home and a guest has no right to request that the homeowner stop smoking. Similarly, a visitor may not smoke if the homeowner requests of the visitors not to smoke.

The Talmud[4] has long since established the principle that smoke in general (from whatever source) is considered a halachik form of damage. This means that a person who causes smoke to penetrate into the neighbour’s property can be liable for damage and disturbance. (It’s interesting to note that halachikly smoke was always considered something damaging.)

An individual therefore has the right to ask a neighbour to extinguish a fire that is producing smoke that causes annoyance to others in the vicinity. Based on this halachik precedent it would be quite reasonable to ask another to kindly refrain from smoking in a public place. The same thing would apply to office workers who may similarly request their fellow workers not smoke in their shared space.

Even if a person has been habitually smoking in a particular public space for a long time, fellow citizens still maintain their rights to request the offender move to a place further away.

SMOKING IN YESHIVAS:

Smoking does still occur in many yeshivas throughout the world. It’s interesting to see that Rav Tzvi Yehudah HaCohen Kook banned smoking in his yeshiva, Merkaz HaRav. Most students of that institution never smoked! (Apparently his letter requesting no smoking is still hanging at the entrance to the study hall.)

With the passage of time, The Ponnevitzer Yeshiva also banned cigarette smoking in their institution, and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein issued a ruling that it is prohibited to smoke in a study hall or synagogue because it disturbs others.

BEING POSITIVE AND PROACTIVE:

The good news is that when a person gives up smoking, after ten years the chances of contracting heart disease is about the same as a regular non-smoker - and after fifteen years the high risk of contracting cancer is also reduced to that of a regular person.

In the 1960’s, when studies exposing the dangers of smoking began to be publicised, sixty-four percent of all doctors were active smokers. And ten years later, the number of doctors who were still smoking, was reduced to sixteen percent.

We have a responsibility to actively educate young people not to smoke before they reach a ‘point of no return’ and become addicted to nicotine.  We should also protest against religious news papers that advertise cigarettes, as smoking is clearly a Torah prohibition.

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES:

Outside of Peninei Halacha, there are other references that may be of interest:

RABBI MOSHE FEINSTEIN:

In 1964, after the Surgeon General published his findings on the health risks of cigarette smoking, Rabbi Feinstein came out with the following ruling (loose translation and paraphrase):

“The truth is that one should not smoke. However since there are very many who do smoke, including Gedolim, it is difficult to say that smoking is an absolute prohibition. We have to conclude, therefore, that smokers fit in to the category of shomer pesaim Hashem, where ‘G-d watches over fools[5]’”.[6] 

Later on in the 1980’s, though, he did take a sharper view on the issue, and while not forbidding it, strongly advised against starting to smoke in the first instance. Apparently his son, Rabbi David Feinstein said that had his father been more aware of the medical dangers of smoking, he certainly would have prohibited the habit.

THE HALACHIK RULINGS BEGIN TO CHANGE:

As time moved on and the world got used to the idea that smoking was dangerous, many poskim changed their rulings and became less accommodating towards smokers.[7]

RABBI CHAIM DAVID HALEVI:

During the 1970’s one of the first rabbis to clearly prohibit smoking, was Rabbi Chaim David HaLevi, Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv. He went so far as to tell children to disobey their parents if they were asked to purchase cigarettes for them.[8]

RABBI AARON SOLOVEICHICK:

In the 1980’s, Rabbi Aaron Soloveichick ruled that there is no way we could ever permit smoking in our day and age given the vast scientific data currently available.

RABBI SHLOMO ZALMAN AURBACH:

Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Aurbach, believed a smoker fell into the category of a chovel (someone who intentionally injures himself) and said: “I make known that I have never joined with those who believe that smoking is permitted in our days.”[9]

RABBI YAAKOV ETLINGER:

An intriguing ruling, by Rabbi Yaakov Etlinger, involves the concept of permitting a possible dangerous activity if there is more than a fifty percent chance that one will emerge unscathed. In the early days some used this as a justification to permit smoking as it was still considered a relatively ‘safe’ practice. However, nowadays, with overwhelming evidence that fifty percent of smokers will die prematurely (never mind the other non-lethal side effects), his ruling takes on a distinctly different meaning.[10]

CONCLUSION:

There is no doubt that there is today an overwhelming body of scientific and halachik evidence militating against smoking. 

Even Rabbi Nachman of Breslov, writing as far back as the late 1700’s, said; “Don’t get into the habit of smoking...it is of no benefit whatever and can be hazardous.”[11]

-But he also said; “Never get drunk. Be careful never to drink more than your capacity...excessive drinking and drunkenness lead to harshness, anger impurity and evil.”[12]

I eagerly wait for more publication of scientific and halachik research into the dangers of drinking which, it could be argued, has become systemic in sectors of our community, and may be just as damaging as smoking.[13]

---

[1] Peninei Halacha by Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, Likkutim 2, p. 199, Section 7 Ch. 8

[2] Rabbi Israel Meir Kagan.

[3] See Tzitz Eliezer 15,39 and see Aseh Lecha Rav 2,1

[4] Bava Batra 23a

[5] In a fascinating interpretation of the Terumat Deshen, G-d’s protection is only over ‘fools’ and not scholars who should know better.

[6] See Igrot Moshe, Yoreh Deah vol. 2, 49

[7] These included Rav Elyashiv, Rav Ovadia Yosef, Tzitz Eliezer.

[8] Shu’t Aseh Lecha Rav vol. 2,1

[9] See Minchat Shlomo, vol. 2, 58

[10] See Binyan Tzion, vol. 1, 137

[11] Tzadik #427

[12] Siach Sarfei Kodesh 1, 151

[13] I thank Dr Stanley Tenzer for his input and help with some of the medical and other issues this article touched on.

067) Paying People To Study Torah?

In this article we will trace the development of the halachik attitude towards paying people to study Torah. (What follows is a loose translation and paraphrase of Peninei Halacha.[1])

FIRST PRINCIPLES:

Turning to First Principles, it is absolutely clear that Torah study has to be for the purist of motives without any semblance of financial gain or any other type of reward. One should certainly not use Torah study as a means of sustaining oneself financially, as that would be considered to be a misappropriation of its sanctity.[2]

So, in theory, there is to be no connection whatsoever between Torah study and any form of compensation for it.

This would require the Torah scholar to have to take care of his sustenance himself. The Talmud in fact praises the scholar who works with his own hands so as to sustain himself.[3]

HISTORICAL ADHERENCE TO FIRST PRINCIPLES:

The vast majority of Talmudic sages adhered strictly to these principles. Among them, for example, were Hillel HaZaken who chopped wood, Shimon HaPakoli who made cotton wool, Rabbi Yochanan HaSandlar who sewed sandals, and Rav Pappa who planted trees.

The community did aid these scholars to a degree, by facilitating the purchasing their wares, but not through direct payment to them without some form of legitimate transaction.

NEW DEVELOPMENTS THAT CHANGED THE STATUS QUO:

After the Talmudic period, the body of Torah literature began to expand dramatically in terms of sheer volume of learning material. In Talmudic times the scholarly emphasis was on analytical depth and broad principles whereas in the period of the Rishonim it shifted more to details[4]. And as we moved into the period of the Acharonim this expansion grew even more.

As a result of this great growth of literature, it was no longer possible to become a scholar unless one dedicated the entire day to amassing all this knowledge. This precluded the practicality of a culture of work, and gave rise to an environment where communities had to start supporting their Torah scholars.

During the period of the Rishonim, the vast majority of rabbis continued to sustain themselves by their own means.[5] However, we find that at the end of that period, the ideal of the scholar sustaining himself was rapidly fading, and regarded as a rare ‘gift’ and exceptional ‘midat chasidut’.[6] It was no longer possible for it to be considered the norm.

For this reason, the halachik authorities or Poskim started ruling (against First Principles) that a scholar should now be sustained by the communities, otherwise we would run the risk of losing sufficiently qualified Torah teachers. This type of halachik ruling became even more accentuated in the era of the Acharonim, where they said that even if a scholar (who was actively involved in the dissemination of Torah) had the ability to sustain himself, it would be considered sinful (‘avon hu beyadam’) if they did NOT accept payment from the community.[7]

ANTAGONISTS TO THE NEW RULE:

Even during the era of the Rishonim, there were many who weren’t happy with the way these new trends were developing.

One such outspoken individual was the Rambam who wrote; “Anyone who even thinks of studying Torah without working, and being sustained instead by charity, causes a desecration of G-d’s name...because it is absolutely forbidden to receive compensation for Torah study...And any Torah that is not accompanied by work, will ultimately not be worth anything and will eventually cause a person to steal from others.”[8] 

PROPONENTS TO THE NEW RULE:

Most others, however, were of the opinion that from a strictly halachik position, it was quite within the parameters of the law to pay rabbis as long as it was not a direct remuneration for services rendered, but rather along the lines of an ‘opportunity cost’ (sechar batalah).

This meant that you were compensating for an opportunity the rabbis would be missing, as a result of them studying instead of working.

This reasoning is particularly appropriate today, considering the great demands made by communities that expect the best scholarship from their rabbis who, now more than ever before, have so much more material to study and master.[9]

THE HALACHIK POSITION TODAY:

It is very important to point out that this expediency of paying scholars an ‘opportunity cost’, is ONLY to those who are ‘marbitzei Torah’ - i.e. those who are actively involved not just in the study of Torah but in the DISSEMINATION of Torah teachings.

This would not apply to those who only want to be involved in full time study, without contributing of their knowledge to others.[10] (There is a significant and growing segment of the Torah population today who fall into this category.) These people have no halachik basis to claim communal funding for their endeavours and the onus is on them to work in order to sustain themselves. (!)

As to the category of young yeshivah students, the responsibility is upon the community to provide scholarships to enable them to study. However, once they have obtained a reasonable amount of Torah skills and knowledge, it is forbidden for them to continue relying on such funding. The exceptional students ideally need to go into the rabbinate or learn some profession that will allow them to support themselves, and the others should acquire job skills that will make them employable.

YISACHAR AND ZEVULUN:

According to the Midrash[11] the tribe of Yisachar provided the Jewish people with 200 great courts of law. They were only able to achieve this because of the ‘partnership’ they formed with the tribe of Zevulun, who agreed to engage in trade in order to support their compatriots.

According to many, this formed the basis of a ‘Yissachar and Zevulun’ relationship that persists to this day, where people go out to work in order to support Torah scholars. This entitles the ‘worker partner’ to receive an equal share in the Torah that the ‘scholar partner’ has studied.

An interesting caveat, however, exists in that the ‘investor’ has to have been involved throughout the entire process of the scholar’s learning career.  He cannot simply come along at the end and pay to become a partner.[12]

 

It also needs to be pointed out that in order to become a ‘partner’, the ‘investor’ cannot just donate charity here and there to Torah institutions, but has to take care of the entire financial needs of the scholar he chooses to partner with.

He also has to enter into a formal agreement with the scholar. Some even go so far as to enter into a signed agreement with each other.[13]

OPPOSITION TO A POST BIBLICAL YISACHAR AND ZEVULEN SYSTEM:

In stark contrast to all this is the view of Rav Hai Gaon, who rejects any form of commercialisation of Torah study, even if both partners are sincere, because he maintains that Torah is not a commodity that can be traded with and it cannot be bought or sold.

He is so against this type of thinking and believes it is damaging to the person who mistakenly thinks that the complex system of Torah can be short-circuited by applying businesslike strategies.

CONCLUSION:[14]

Living in an age where Torah institutions and scholars are many and plentiful and in era where the expansion of Torah literature has grown exponentially, it is important not to lose sight of the original ethos that created the very concept of Torah study in the first place.

Today, when there are more people studying Torah than ever before, and while we enjoy the success of flourishing learning institutions, we need to constantly check to ensure that we are still aligned with the spirit of First Principles and not let monetary expediencies cloud that endeavor.


UPDATE:

The following are extracts from contemporary Yisachar and Zevulun documents that may be of interest:

"As is written in the holy sefer Ohr Hachaim, as well as in the Ksav Sofer and other prominent Jewish compositions – the learner does not loose his merit of Torah studying, while the donor receives full reward for the learning."

The truth, however, is that this document omits the many views that suggest that the portion of the scholar is halved and that the 'investor' similarly only receives a halved portion.


Here is an extract from a well marketed campaign to attract more 'investors':

"At Kollel (name removed by this writer), we provide you with the opportunity to enter into a personal Yissaschar - Zevulun partnership with one of our dedicated Torah scholars. His Torah study becomes your personal heavenly advocate. Together, you sign a contract in which the Torah scholar agrees to share the eternal reward of his Torah study in exchange for your financial support. In other words by giving him the opportunity to learn, he will be learning for the two of you. 

It's a win-win situation. You gain in two ways: the spiritual reward of your partner's Torah study in addition to the Almighty's blessing of material success for those who support Torah study."


UPDATE 2016/01/08

Here is another interesting Rambam:

Rambam sharply criticized the notion that Jews must financially help people study Torah: 

"All this is wrong. There is not a single word, either in the Torah or in the sayings of the [Talmudic] sages, to lend credence to it... for as we look into the sayings of the Talmudic sages, we do not find that they ask people for money, nor did they collect money for the honorable and cherished academies." 

[Commentary to Avot 4:5] 

---

[1] Likkutim 1, p.35  ch. 17; Parnasat Talmidei Chachamim.

[2] Avot 4,5. See commentary of Rambam and Bartenura.

[3] Berachot 8a.

[4] In the earlier generations when scholars were more concerned with depth as opposed to breadth, they welcomed the type of work they did as it had a repetitive and meditative effect on them enabling them to develop their concepts while they were working. This became difficult in later generations when the focus was more on breadth and required a different type of mind skill. Also, one needs to remember that market forces changed drastically as we moved into the modern era, and it became more and more difficult to sustain oneself by the types of jobs (e.g. chopping wood) that were popular and lucrative in earlier times. 

[5] This excludes those rabbis who took positions of communal leadership, who did receive remuneration (if they were not already men of means through their own doing). This was in order to allow such leaders a degree of dignity.

[6] See Beit Yosef and Ramo on Yoreh Deah 246, 21

[7] See Shach on Yoreh Deah 246, 20

[8] Rambam, Hilchot Talmud Torah 3, 10

[9] There are even references going back to Talmudic times where rabbis in positions of leadership and judges were remunerated. See  Ketuvot 105 a

[10] There is one exception to this, namely a philanthropist who of his own volition decides to fund fulltime learning. Such funding would not be considered ‘charity’, as the community has not been pressurised into contributing financially.  This would, however, only be in accordance with the letter of the law but not its spirit.

[11] Bereshit Rabbah 72.

It must be remembered that the source for the Yisachar-Zevulun partnership is from the Midrash and not the Talmud. None of the early halachik authorities including Rif, Rambam and Rosh consider this partnership to be permissible. Rabbenu Yerucham was the first to endorse such an agreement.

It is also of interest to note that according to Shulchan Aruch HaRav, the only time such a partnership would be valid is in a case where the mental capacity of the ‘investor’ is diminished so that he is unable to study for himself.

[12] This is what Shavna, Hillel’s brother tried in vain to do in order to acquire a half share in Hillel’s learning. He did not help his brother during the years Hillel battled poverty while trying to learn Torah.

[13] There is also much debate as to whether or not the reward of the scholar is halved as a result of the partnership. According to the Netziv, his ‘Torah share’ is actually halved - and according to Rabbi Chaim of Volozhin this mesiras nefesh (dedication) is the price he pays for the honour of full time study. However, according to Chida both partners receive an equal share, as Torah is like the flame of a candle which does not get reduced as it passes from one to another.

[14] These parting thoughts are my own and no longer a paraphrase of Peninei Halacha.

066) Women Studying Torah?

There is much talk today about the role of women in Judaism in general, and their relationship to Torah study in particular. This has become a very emotive matter with everyone weighing in on the issue and bringing their sometimes open, and other times hidden, agendas to the ‘fight’.

It may, therefore, be of value to remove all emotion and politics from the discussion, and instead turn to our multifaceted sources to unearth their definitive perspectives.

TALMUDIC SOURCES:

The Gemora quotes Ben Azzai who says that it is a mitzvah for a father to teach his daughter Torah. However according to R Eliezer and R Yehoshua it is forbidden for a father to so.[1]

RAMBAM:

Rambam rules like R Eliezer that is forbidden for a father to teach his daughter Torah.  But this refers to a case where the father takes the initiative and teaches his daughter Torah against her will. However, if she wants her father to teach her, he may do so, and so doing is meritorious.[2]

Others say that Rabbi Eliezer’s prohibition was originally only directed against very young girl children, and not against older mature girl children.[3]

Rambam also writes that the best way a person can come to have a meaningful relationship with G-d is through the study of Torah. This, he says: “...is open to all, old and young, male and female...”[4]

SHULCHAN ARUCH:

Women are obligated to recite the birkat haTorah (blessings over Torah study) and this would cover the learning of the fundamentals of Torah (Yesodei haTorah) which they do have an obligation to study.[5]

TAZ AND BACH:

The Taz maintains that women may study the written Scriptures but not the Oral Law.[6] And according to Bach this explains why women were present at the Hakel ceremony when the Torah was read out publically.[7]

CHAFETZ CHAIM:

According to the Chafetz Chaim[8]; “It seems that all of this (prohibition against women learning Torah) applied only in times past when all daughters lived in their father’s home and tradition was very strong, assuring that all the children would pursue their parent’s path...On that basis, we could claim that a daughter need not learn Torah but merely rely on proper parental guidance. But nowadays...it is certainly a great mitzvah to teach them Tanach and ethics...otherwise they may totally stray from G-d’s path...”[9]

RABBI AHARON LICHTENSTEIN:

According to Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein; “In my opinion, what is necessary for women to be adequately prepared from a Torah perspective for practical living is far more than what she is being taught today. Torah education for women must be strengthened, both quantitatively and qualitatively, including all aspects of Torah...In the same vein I am not opposed to teaching women Talmud...And it is even necessary to establish this as an integral part of the school curriculum, an actual shiur. This is the way I teach my daughter and so my wife was educated. This seems to me to be the recommended approach regarding the women of our generation.”[10]  

RABBI JOSEPH SOLOVEITCHICK:

In the 20^th century, a historic decision was made by Rabbi Soloveitchick enabling boys and girls to study the same texts and subjects at his Maimonodies School in Boston and at Yeshiva University’s Stern College for Women.

PENINEI HALACHA:

(Once again I present a loose translation and summary of Peninei Halacha who deals with the halachik technicalities very succinctly, and has some profound statements that both men and women may find of great interest.)

TWO DISTINCT HALACHIK IMPERATIVES:

We cannot get away from the fact that halacha presents two very distinct approaches to Torah study, required separately of men and women:

While both genders have an equal obligation to study the basic fundamentals and principles of Torah law and philosophy, it is from that point on that the roles diverge.

Once a woman has had a basic education in practical halacha, she no longer has an obligation to further her studies.

Men, on the other hand, even if they know the entire Torah by heart, still have an ongoing mitzvah to continue their study.[11]

WOMEN HAVE THE LUXURY OF CHOICE:

Once women have studied the basic fundamentals (Yesodei haTorah), even though they do not have the obligation to continue with the further detailed study of the intricacies of the law (Limud haTorah), if they want to they may exercise that choice. In fact a woman may even study Gemorah in great depth with all the accompanying commentaries (Gemorah beIyun), exactly as her male counterparts would do at an advanced institution of learning.[12]

In fact, if she chooses to do so, our Sages say that she gets a zechut (merit) for her efforts, even though she does not have a halachik obligation to do so.

Throughout our history, we have had a number of women who excelled in the Limud haTorah component and became Talmidot Chachamot (venerable scholars).

For the most part, however, historically women did not exercise this choice and were only educated up to the basic level of minimal fundamentals of Yesodei haTorah. This was the cultural norm for most of the earlier generations.

With the advent of the modern era where women began to assert themselves more and began doing things they never were able to do before, the necessity for them to learn more also became more pressing.

According to the Peninei Halacha, in our times women should be encouraged and assisted to explore more of their Judaism in greater depth and afforded the opportunity to exercise their choice to do, because on so many levels their contribution is more pivotal today than ever before.

In a nutshell, the only halachik difference between men and women apropos Torah study, is that women have the luxury to choose as to how much they want to study, while men have no such choice in the matter.[13]

The ideal, therefore, is actually for women to choose to study as much Torah as they can, in as much depth as they want.[14]

---

[1] Sukkah 20a 

According to the Yerushalmi , R Elazar ben Azarya says it is a mitzvah for a woman to listen to Torah but no mitzvah to study Torah in depth. (Sotah 3,4)

[2] See Peninei Halacha , Limud Torah LeNashim, Likkutim 1, p.34, Note 3.

[3] Torah Temimah Devarim 11,17

[4] Rambam, Hilchot Yesodei haTorah, 4,14

[5] Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 47,14

[6] Orach Chaim 47,10

[7] Bach, Yoreh Deah 246

[8] Rabbi Israel Meir HaKohen 1839 – 1933

[9] Likutei Halachot, Sotah 20b

[10] Excerpted from ‘Fundamental Problems Regarding the Education of the Women’ 1980

[11] I.e. In technical terms; both genders have an equal obligation to master Yesodei haTorah (the foundations and fundamentals of Torah), while only men have the further obligation in Limud haTorah. See KOTZK BLOG 64) Gemora Playing Second Fiddle?

[12] See Peninei Halacha, Likkutim 1, Limud Torah LeNashin p. 32

[13] “HaShoni bein gevarim leNashim, sheNashim tzerichot la’asok baTorah mitoch chofesh veratzon gamur”

[14] “HaIdial sheKol HaNashim yelumdu miretzonam et haTorah beIyun.”