Berakhot 051

13:
In our discussion of the statement of our mishnah that "women … are excused from reciting the Shema", so far we have seen that the sages "excused" women from all positive mitzvot that are time-specific, and that the reason that they did so was because women were considered to be subject to the will of their husbands. (In Talmudic times a woman would have done almost anything not to remain unmarried – for social and economic reasons.) We must now turn our attention to our own attitude to this mishnah.

14:
There is no doubt whatsoever that the modern woman is in an entirely different situation from her more ancient counterpart, and a very logical case could be made for maintaining that this difference must reflect itself in their status under halakhah. However, first, I wish to relate to the position of women vis-à-vis the Recitation of the Shema from the 'heretofore' point of view. It transpires that even those women who view themselves (halakhically) as "excused" are not really excused! In its discussion on our mishnah the Gemara [Berakhot 20b] contains the following discussion.

However, women are not excused this most basic of religious duties! All Jews – men and women – are required to "accept Divine Sovereignty". While it could be reasoned that women do not have to recite the Shema in order to accept Divine Sovereignty upon themselves, this is not the tack taken by the later poskim ['decisors'].

To be continued.

Alan Ganapol concerning "women, slaves and children":

Maybe we are missing something by searching for the commonality in these three groups of individuals… well the only commonality that we have is their not being required to recite the Shema and Tefillin… But each is excluded for reasons that are specific to that group. Clearly, we are tempted to find the commonality but perhaps this leads us astray. Slaves and children have been clearly expressed, IMHO. But with regard to women let me offer a thought… I frequently find that among the many differences between men and women is what I see to be the male's greater need to concretize his beliefs with ritual. In general I find women can and often do connect on a purely spiritual and/or intellectual basis. As such, the exclusion of women (from the Shema and Tefillin comes as a result of their not needing these as spiritual ties… something that they already have. All of that coming from a progressive egalitarian Jew such as myself I am a bit surprised! Perhaps the difference comes from biology or maybe cultural… I'm not sure.

I respond:

I thought we had established that there is a logical commonality between these three groups: they were not seen as enjoying human autonomy. I would be very hesitant in generalizing about a differing psychological attachment of the sexes to beliefs and ritual. But even it could be proven to be 'scientifically' sound that most women don't need to concretize their beliefs – would that justify the exclusion of those who do not 'fit the average measurements'? Alan, my friend, if I didn't know your views better …

---

Richard Flom relates to my explanation A man is ALWAYS a free agent to do his parents' bidding, whereas a woman [i.e. wife] is not such a free agent because someone else has tutelary rights over her.

With regard to the first statement, I believe that "tutelary" is rather generous, for it describes a protective or guardianship relationship. The better word, to my mind, would be "proprietary", since that, it seems to me, is the true commonality among women, slaves and children, both in the Torah and in the Talmud.

I respond:

Richard is probably correct that I was being too generous. The rest of Richard's most interesting message will be part of our study tomorrow.

Next Shiur