Berakhot 133

8:
The 'indentured servants' referred to in our Mishnah are what is called in our halakhic literature Eved Kena'ani [Canaanite slave]. This were discussed at length when we studied Tractate Kiddushin. Let us sum up here – since it is necessary for our understanding of the discussion in the Gemara of this part of our mishnah – that the Eved Kena'ani was a non-Jewish servant owned by a Jewish master. At the end of his first year of service the servant had to decide whether he wished to be sold to a non-Jew or to accept Judaism. (A Jew was forbidden to own a non-Jewish servant for longer than one year.) If the servant chose to accept Judaism he was circumcised and bathed in a mikveh, and he was then subject to all those elements of Jewish religious practice that a Jewish woman was subject to. (This, incidentally, makes absolutely clear that all the apologetics about the nobility of the status of the Jewish woman in rabbinic literature is pious humbug: the Gemara makes quite clear [Kiddushin 30b] that the reason why women were excused from a large segment of the mitzvot is because "others are in control of her" time, activities and behaviour. The 'others' here were firstly her father and subsequently her husband. This (that they were under the control of others) is the characteristic that "women, slaves and minors" had in common. For the lengthy discussion on women and the mitzvot in Talmudic law I refer you to the discussion on Tractate Kiddushin 1:7.

9:
Our mishnah specifically excludes women, slaves and minors from the quorum of diners that should recite zimmun before reciting Grace after their meal. The exclusion of women must be understood not only in the light of what we have already written, but also in the light of their social status generally in the Graeco-Roman world at that time. In republican Rome – when it still practiced the 'ancient virtues' – only men reclined on couches to dine (round the outer edges of a U-shaped table). Despite everything that Hollywood spectaculars would have us believe, virtuous women would not be present, and if they did join the men at all they would sit on upright chairs (as we do) opposite the men inside the U-shaped table. In a Roman household generally, the womenfolk would preside over the meal of the rest of the household, which would include the servants and children, of course. The discussion in the Gemara [Berakhot 45b] shows that similar arrangements obtained in the households of Eretz-Israel. However, it does make one differentiation: the Gemara says that the womenfolk may recite zimmun among themselves and the servants may do so as well, but they may not do so together (despite the fact that their level of obligation is identical); furthermore children and servants may not recite zimmun together. The reason given for the separation of the women and the servants is to protect the Jewish women from the possible licentious overtures of the servants, and the reason given for the separation between the servants and the children is to protect the children from suspected paedophilic tendencies among the servants.

10:
It seems to me that the modern adult Jewish woman is essentially different from her Talmudic counterpart in that her society does not recognize any difference in the nature of the control over her will, activities and behaviour than obtains in the case of her father or husband. Thus the logic for excusing women from religious duties on these grounds does not apply in her case. Let me put it differently. The modern woman is a legal and social personality that is not addressed by Talmudic legislation – because such a woman did not then exist. Therefore, we must either force the modern woman into the role assigned her by heretofore rabbinic realities (as Ultra-Orthodoxy does today) or we must release her from being considered someone whose time, will and behaviour is in a non-voluntary fashion "under the control of others". I think that a growing segment of Conservative Judaism sees the modern woman more an more in the latter light. Thus, according to this rationale, her exclusion from zimmun with the menfolk is unjustified.

Ron Kaminsky writes:

Let us examine a theoretical situation where someone sits down to eat but only remembers that he should have made a blessing after he has eaten some of the food (or perhaps just bitten into it). What should he do in this situation?

I respond:

He or she should recite the blessing immediately they recall the duty – as long as they are still eating. Birkat ha-Mazon may be recited up to 75 minutes after the conclusion of a meal.

It can be pretty complicated to say all of the necessary blessings if you don't eat bread… The special place in the halacha for bread seems to me to be surprising, if not troubling. In many places of the world, bread is not viewed as "the food" but rather rice, which is not even one of the Seven Species, is thought to be "the food".

I respond:

I think we have had this discussion before. Try looking up our archives for the discussion in Berakhot 123 and subsequent shiurim.

I looked in [the] Siddur in the section on blessings, and I found a blessing "shekacha lo b'olamo" which it seems should be said when seeing especially beautiful trees or animals. Is it possible to extend this to a feeling of wonder at the beauty of creation which sometimes hits me when I contemplate nature given what we know about physics and biology?

I respond:

Yes. Go, go, go. (A full discussion on such berakhot must wait until we reach Chapter 9.

You wrote in Berakhot 131 that Certain 'levies' ['Matanot'] on agricultural produce grown in Eretz-Israel must be paid by the physical removal from the produce of certain amounts to be given to certain people. I have always been troubled by the fact that some of these levies now have to be destroyed (I guess an overactive training in "bal tashchit"… Is there any possibility of reinterpreting at least some of the levies so that they serve a (perhaps more) useful purposein the present day?

I respond:

The only levy that must be removed today is the Terumah which must be fractionally in excess of one percent of the whole. People removing Terumah privately may do so by peeling (a fruit or a vegetable): almost all raw foodstuffs have some part that we discard before cooking or eating. Be creative! All the other levies may be redeemed on a coin.