Is it a Halachic Obligation for Every Jew to Make Aliyah (Immigrate) to Israel?

Parashat Vaetchanan
Printable Version

The Spiking Aliyah Rate

The Aliyah rate – or at least the Aliyah application-rate – has been rising since Covid-19. My sister told me that she welcomed several new families, who managed to come on Aliyah this spring and summer, settling in her town of residence, Zichron Ya’acov. According to Rabbi Yehoshua Fass, co-founder and executive director of Nefesh B’Nefesh, interest in Aliyah has reached ‘staggering’ numbers. “The numbers show a spike in aliyah interest that the State of Israel has not seen since its establishment… Last year in the first three weeks of June, 5,000 households reached out to contact the Nefesh B’Nefesh Aliyah hotline. This year, nearly 25,000 families contacted the organization in that same time period. Most of it, is because the outcome of Corona has recalibrated the compass of many individuals who always thought and dreamt of coming to Israel.”  It seems to me that the Corona lockdown gave us a break from running around like a chicken without a head, being slaves to all of our various occupations. Closing down all our escape routes, made us rethink our priorities in life. I assume I’m not the only one who has been asking myself, “Why am I in this world? What is my individual mission? How can I redirect my life and activities to best achieve my personal goals?” It is no surprise that many Diaspora Jews have been re-evaluating whether they are supposed to remain in exile or rather take the leap of faith to join their extended family in the Promised land. The current situation is a clear sign that the birth contractions have begun and if we don’t want to miss the boat, it’s now or never.

 

Living in Israel: Obligatory or Recommended Mitzvah?

There is a difference in opinion whether the mitzvah of immigrating to Israel is a binding mitzvah that obligates every Jew or whether it is a recommended, optional mitzvah. In the last three decades, I’ve heard several Rabbis discouraging people from moving to Israel, or visiting Yishuvim outside of the green line, due to it being ‘dangerous’ in their opinion. An argument for the Chareidi view, that it isn’t obligatory to live in Eretz Yisrael is the ruling of the leading 20^th century Torah scholar, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, who held that although it is recommended to live in Israel,  “…at this time there is no personal obligation to immigrate. If so…Rambam would have said – it is forbidden to live abroad, unless there is a severe famine in Eretz Yisrael… – thus it is not an obligatory mitzvah… (Igrot Moshe, Even Ha’ezer 102). Rabbi Moshe Feinstein based himself on the fact that Rambam wrote, “One should always dwell in the Land of Israel,” yet, he did not list it as one of the 613 mitzvot. Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Bracha, explains that Rambam did not enumerate the mitzvah of Yishuv Ha’Aretz (settling in Israel) because it is more important than a regular mitzvah, and it is inappropriate to enumerate mitzvot that encompass the entire Torah (Eim Habanim Semeicha 3:7-10). Furthermore, in the time of the medieval Sages, it was life-threatening to move to Israel, due to severe famine and persecution, which permits even the residents of Eretz Yisrael to leave the land. Yet, even then, it is midat chassidut to remain (Rambam, Hilchot Melachim 5:9). According to Rav Melamed, our Sages could not imagine a time when Jews would be able to exist in the Land of Israel, but simultaneously, some would still claim that this was not an obligatory mitzvah. Consequently, they only discussed situations, in which it was life-threatening to live in Eretz Yisrael. But even in such a situation, Rabbi Yehuda Halevi wrote that Jews should have made much more of an effort to immigrate to Israel (Kuzari 2: 24).

Halachot Reflecting the Importance of Settling in Israel

The Talmud is replete with statements that support the obligatory mitzvah to live in Israel, for example: “At all times, a Jew should live in the Land of Israel – even in a city where the majority of its residents are idol worshippers, and not live outside of the Land – even in a city populated mainly by Jews, for anyone who lives in the Land of Israel is similar to one who has a G-d, while one who lives outside of the Land is similar to one who has no G-d” (BT, Ketubot 110b). This was codified as halacha (Rambam, Hilchot Melachim 5:12; Ishut 13:20). I understand this to mean that Hashem appointed a different angel or constellation to oversee every country, except for the Land of Israel, which Hashem Himself supervises directly. There are several halachot that reflect the vital importance of settling in the Land for Israel. For example, when one spouse wishes to immigrate to Israel – the other must comply, and if not, this justifies a divorce (Rambam, Hilchot Ishut 13:20; Shulchan Aruch, Even Ha’ezer 75:4). Regarding the nation’s responsibility to apply sovereignty over the Land and settle it, Ramban writes, “We were commanded to take possession of the Land, which the Almighty, Blessed Be He, gave to our forefathers, to Avraham, to Yitzhak, and to Ya’acov; and to not abandon it to other nations, or to leave it desolate, as it says, ‘Inherit the land and live in it, since it is to you that I am giving the land to occupy...’” (Bamidbar 33:53; Addendum to Sefer Hamitzvot of the Rambam, Positive Mitzvah 4). In addition to the general mitzvah that the Land be under Israeli sovereignty and that  all Jews live here, there is a mitzvah upon every individual Jew to live in Eretz Yisrael (Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, Peninei Halacha The Mitzvah of Settling the Land of Israel 1). The supreme importance of the mitzvah of settling the land is furthermore clarified by allowing us to transgress some of the Rabbinical laws for its sake. (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 206,11). For example, for the sake of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael the halacha permits buying land in Israel from a non-Jew on Shabbat (BT, Gittin 8b; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 306:11).

 

To Settle or Not to Settle Over the Green Line?

The leading Litvish Charedi rabbi in B’nei Brak, Rav Elazar Menachem Shach (1899 – 2001), criticized Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria as “a blatant attempt to provoke the international community,” and discouraged Jews from living in these communities. Rav Shach supported the withdrawal from land under Israeli control, basing it upon the principle of Pikuach Nefesh (‘saving life’). By repeatedly proclaiming that it was “permitted and necessary to compromise on even half of the Land of Israel” for the sake of peace, Rav Shach concurred with the leftist Shalom Achshav movement. Many Torah scholars, including Rabbi Shmuel Tuvia Stern opposed Rav Shach’s position, asserting that the latter had failed to provide halachic references supporting his opinion (Shmuel Tuvia Stern, She’elot uTeshuvot HaShavit vol.7). Likewise, Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner stated that “agreement to other-than-biblical borders was tantamount to denial of the entire Torah” (Shlomo Lorincz, Miluei Shlomo pp. 296-297). This concurs with the religious Zionist view, as represented by Rabbi Melamed, who explains that the mitzvah to settle the Land of Israel is obligatory upon both the individual Jew and the Jewish nation as a whole. The mitzvah of Yishuv Ha’Aretz obligates us not only to dwell in developed cities or towns, but to make the wasteland bloom as well. To complete this mitzvah, the Promised Land must be under Jewish rule with every part of it settled, cultivated and flourishing. The to settle the land is increased proportionally according to the degree by which the particular part of the Land is desolate of Jews. Those who live in areas such as Judea and Samaria, contribute doubly to the mitzvah, for they are not only strengthening the Israeli authority over the areas that the nations attempt to wrest away from the Jews, but they are also helping to ensure that all of the Land is cultivated and settled. Those who live in other places in Israel, that are more isolated from Jewish presence and are surrounded by enemies, are fulfilling the mitzvah to an even greater extent. Eretz Yisrael is only acquired through pain and suffering (Babylonian Talmud Brachot 5a). The greater the suffering, the greater the reward.

Moshe’s Yearning for the Promised Land         

Parashat Vaetchanan opens with Moshe’s recalling to B’nei Yisrael his fervent prayers begging for permission to enter Eretz Yisrael, and G-d’s denial of his request: 

ספר דברים פרק ג פסוק כג וָאֶתְחַנַּן אֶל הָשֵׁם בָּעֵת הַהִוא לֵאמֹר: (כד) אֲדֹנָי יֱדֹוִד אַתָּה הַחִלּוֹתָ לְהַרְאוֹת אֶת עַבְדְּךָ אֶת גָּדְלְךָ וְאֶת יָדְךָ הַחֲזָקָה אֲשֶׁר מִי אֵל בַּשָּׁמַיִם וּבָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה כְמַעֲשֶׂיךָ וְכִגְבוּרֹתֶךָ: (כה) אֶעְבְּרָה נָּא וְאֶרְאֶה אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַטּוֹבָה אֲשֶׁר בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן הָהָר הַטּוֹב הַזֶּה וְהַלְּבָנֹן:

“I entreated Hashem at that time, saying, O Hashem G-d, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your strong hand, for who is [like] G-d in heaven or on earth who can do as Your deeds and Your might? Please let me cross over and see the good land that is on the other side of the Jordan, this good mountain and the Levanon” (Devarim 3:23-25).

The word וָאֶתְחַנַּן/Va’etchanan – “I implored” has the numerical value of five hundred and fifteen. This teaches us, that Moshe prayed five hundred and fifteen prayers to be permitted to enter Eretz Yisrael (Midrash Devarim Rabbah 11:10). Moshe begged to enter the holy land not only to perform the mitzvot associated with the land, but for the sake of fulfilling his final mission. Moshe’s task was to institute longing for Eretz Yisrael, because without this yearning, we would be unable to actualize our hold over the land. “Hashem wanted to deepen the heart of the Israeli nation, so that even when they are in foreign lands, their eyes shall be raised to Tzion, and their hearts shall be filled with passion for the land of their forefathers…

Moshe Rabbenu’s numerous pleadings and prayers led to the development of an extra deep wellspring of yearning for Eretz Yisrael whose bountiful potency suits every generation. And since then, anyone who draws from Moshe Rabbenu’s wellspring, even if he is located at a distance, yearns for Eretz Yisrael…” (Rav Kook, In Mo’adei HaRAY”H p. 237). Although Moshe’s request to enter Eretz Yisrael was not granted to him personally, his prayers established the Jewish longing for Eretz Yisrael throughout the generations. Let us tap into this wellspring of yearning so that Moshe’s pain of being barred from entering the Promised Land will not have been in vain! 

Why did Moshe Explain the Torah in Seventy Languages?

Parashat Devarim
Printable Version

The Struggle of Accepting the Rabbinic Authority

I have an extensive email correspondence. I would say, I write between 30-60 emails daily. Several are much longer than a short sentence or a thumb’s up! People ask me all kinds of Torah questions. Some of them may take a bit of research to answer. One reoccurring theme – also from my students over the years – is the struggle of accepting Rabbinical authority. In our tolerant, democratic society, where anyone’s voice and vote have equal value, it is hard to comprehend how the Rabbis – who passed down the Torah from generation to generation – were on such a completely different level than you and me. It is complicated to understand the system of the Oral Torah and its transmission through the greatest Torah giants of the generations. And who, today, has the humility to fathom what it means to be a Torah giant? For me, it took many decades to understand, and to respect, the level of Torah wisdom and holiness that entitles one to such Rabbinic authority. This insight makes it unthinkable to disagree with any rabbi in the chain of the transmission of the Torah, from the Tana’im – rabbis of the Mishna (70-200 CE); the Amora’im – the rabbis of the Talmud (220-500 CE); the Rishonim, (The first ones) – Rabbis like Rashi, Rambam, Ramban all the way to Rabbi Yosef Karo, the author of the Shulchan Aruch (1563 CE). It is, therefore, jarring to receive emails from women – with a superficial Torah background – who have the nerve to blatantly disagree with authoritative rabbinic ruling. It is even harder to try to explain to such women – who lack the humility necessary to give proper respect – that their opinion is not on a par with, for example, that of the Rambam.

Does the Seventy Facets of the Torah Give Anyone Permission to Interpret the Torah?

Having said all this, the dynamic Torah does give leeway for a rainbow of interpretations, and for applying its eternal principles to every modern situation. This process of renewing the Torah was launched by Moshe, our teacher in the Book of Devarim, on the verge of entering the Land of Israel. Moshe elucidated the Torah once again, to ensure that also those who weren’t yet born when he first taught the law, or who were too young to understand, would hear the precious words of the Torah directly from him. Moreover, since many of the Torah laws only pertain to the Holy Land, Moshe needed to repeat these laws, now that they became applicable. This was. unfortunately, also his last chance, as he wouldn’t be leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. Therefore, at the opening of the Book of Devarim, also called Mishna Torah – ‘the repetition of the Torah’ – Moshe explained the Law as it states,

ספר דברים פרק א פסוק ה בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן בְּאֶרֶץ מוֹאָב הוֹאִיל משֶׁה בֵּאֵר אֶת הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת לֵאמֹר:

“On that side of the Jordan, in the land of Moav, Moshe commenced [and] explained this Law, saying” (Devarim 1:5).

He explained it to them in seventy languages (Rashi, Devarim 1:5; Midrash Tanchuma 2; Midrash Bereishit Rabbah 49; Sotah 32a). Haketav Vehakabbalah’s explanation, that Moshe gave them seventy interpretations to every passage intrigues me. Never having been a ‘black-or-white-person,’ I revel in the concept of the multilayered Torah. “Just as their faces are different, so are their opinions different” (Mishna Brachot 58:72). Thus, the Torah can be compared to a brilliant diamond, sparkling simultaneously in various colors that may appear contradictory. Yet, when we learn to view all these valid perspectives concurrently, we can really marvel at the depths of the truth emanating from the Torah. Each perspective adds its unique melody to the magnificent symphony of the whole, synthesizing not in conflicting dissonance but in holy dialectic: “As a hammer shatters a rock” (Yirmeyahu 23:29) – Just as a hammer can splinter a rock into many different sparks, so does the Torah extend into many different interpretations (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 34a). Yet, does the “seventy facets of the Torah” legitimize anyone to interpret it as he or she pleases? Aren’t there any parameter’s for kosher Torah interpretation? For example, numerous modern, reformed, reconstructionist, or Jewish renewal thinkers take license to reinterpret many Torah statements that differ from the popular sentiment of our times. For example, the following Torah statement, which seems extremely clear, without leaving any room for condoning male homosexual conduct, still elicits surprising modern interpretations: 

ספר ויקרא פרק יח פסוק כב וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁה תּוֹעֵבָה הִוא:

“You shall not lie down with a male, as with a woman: this is an abomination” (Vayikra 18:22).

I recently received an email with the following attempt to interpret the above mentioned verse in light of the tolerant spirit of our times: “I’ve done a bit of research, and the prohibition against male homosexuality in Leviticus is due to idolatry. It is only called an abomination due to following the spiritual practices of other nations, which is no longer relevant in today’s society. These days there is no homosexual idolatrous sex worship, so it’s a moot point. Therefore, it is no longer an abomination.”

Why can such a view not be considered a legitimate approach within the seventy facets of the Torah?

 

Parameters of Authentic Torah

Although the Torah is multifaceted, the concept of ‘the seventy facets of the Torah does not legitimize any idea or interpretation that you or I might come up with. There are seventy legitimate facets but not millions, not even hundreds. There are also several parameters that validate a true Torah view about which we say, “both these and those are the words of the living G-d!” (Babylonian Talmud, Iruvin 13b). The first validating fundamental principle is that any kosher Torah perspective must be based on belief in the Divine origin of both the written and oral Torah – transmitted to Moshe and passed down orally from generation to generation. As Rambam clarifies: “There has never been dissension [among the sages] regarding the laws handed down by tradition (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Mamrim 1:3-4). Thus, the Oral Torah that Hashem taught Moshe at Sinai הֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי – ‘Halacha to Moshe from Sinai’ remains undisputed. Any halachic ruling or commentary – that contradicts even one of these laws – is automatically disqualified from authentic Torah and is excluded from the seventy facets of the Torah. Together with the written laws given to Moshe at Sinai, Hashem also taught him the Oral Torah which included the thirteen hermeneutical rules, by which the Torah is interpreted. They were passed down and accepted by the Great Assembly in the times of the Mishna (Mishneh Torah, Transmission of the Oral Law 12-14). These thirteen principles of interpretation became the parameter for adapting Torah law to modern situations. The Oral Law eventually became transcribed in the Mishna compiled by Rabbi Yehuda the Prince [at the beginning of the third century CE]. The Talmud comprises an exposition explaining the text of the Mishna… deriving from it what is forbidden and what is permitted… all as it was transmitted orally from person to person, from the mouth of Moshe our Master, who heard it directly from Hashem at Sinai (Mishneh Torah, Transmission of the Oral Law 24).

The Intricate System of Determining Halacha (Jewish Law)

The authority of authentic Rabbinic Torah is decreed in the written Torah itself as the Torah cautions us, “According to the law they instruct you and according to the judgment they say to you, you shall do; you shall not divert from the word they tell you, either right or left” (Devarim 17:11). With this Torah verse, Hashem endorses the Rabbinic transmission of the Torah. From here, we also learn that just as we may not contradict the Written Torah, so must a Rabbi from the Talmudic period not contradict a Rabbi of the Mishna. Likewise, none of the Rishonim are permitted to disagree with the Amora’im. Neither may an Acharon (any Rabbi who came after the Tur Shulchan Aruch) oppose any of the Rishonim. Therefore, according to Torah law, I am prohibited to disagree with, for example, Rashi. Furthermore, the definition of a Torah observant Jew is to be bound by the Shulchan Aruch. Rabbi Yosef Karo, the author of the Shulchan Aruch, explains the intricate system of halacha and how he determined the authoritative halacha which unites Torah observant Jewry:

“Therefore, I thought that I ought to determine what is halacha and I will judge, which of the opinions, is correct because of the following purpose: We should have one Torah and one Law... And who is there that will dare to make new claims and proofs for what the law is. And who lives that will be haughty enough to place himself between the Mountains, the Mountains of G-d [previous scholars]? Who lives that will try to contradict their claims via proofs and claims or determine what is the right formulation of the law, which the scholars were incapable of doing? Indeed, due to our many sins, we have a limited intellect and are incapable of fully understanding what the scholars meant – all the more so, we are incapable of outsmarting them.... Therefore, I concluded that I would decide the halacha based on the  majority opinion of the three pillars upon which Israel leans for legal declarations: the Rif, the Rambam, and the Rosh” (Hakdamah of Beit Yosef, Introduction to Shulchan Aruch).

If the great Torah scholar and author of the Shulchan Aruch was so cautious to avoid making “new claims in halacha,” expressing the greatest reverence for the Torah sages preceding him, how much more so must we beware of  placing ourselves between the Mountains of prior sages, trying to contradict their ruling with our unverified claims?

Why Does the Torah Allow a Man to Annul a Woman’s Vow?

Parashat Matot/Masai 
Printable Version

Can a Woman Take a Vow to Become a Nazir?

In the spiritual community of Bat Ayin, we have several Nezirim – people who take upon themselves to abstain from any products of the grapevine and from cutting their hair. They also may not come into contact with the dead (See Bamidbar 6:1-8). Among the long-haired Nezirim of Bat Ayin, who make kiddush on beer, there is a woman as well. She is more hidden, never having occasion to make kiddush for the guests, with her long hair modestly covered. She told me, secretly, that her husband had encouraged her to join him in becoming a Nazir, in order to attain extra holiness. Almost 2000 years ago, Princess Berenice of Judea took a Nazarite vow. In the Torah, a person generally only made a vow due to a desperate situation, feeling the need for Heavenly assistance. This was the case with the barren Chana, who took a vow in order to conceive a son (I Shemuel 1:11). Interestingly, part of her vow was for her son to become a Nazir from the moment of conception. This implied that she took upon herself to be a Nazir throughout her pregnancy. The Torah explicitly permits a woman to make a vow to become a Nazir:

ספר במדבר פרק ו פסוק ב

דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה כִּי יַפְלִא לִנְדֹּר נֶדֶר נָזִיר לְהַזִּיר לַהָשֵׁם:

“Speak to the children of Israel, and you shall say to them: A man or woman who sets himself apart by making a nazirite vow to abstain for the sake of Hashem” (Bamidbar 6:2).

We learn from this Torah verse that a woman is empowered to take a vow.

Do the Laws of Vows Disempower Women from Carrying out Their Own Decisions?

Parashat Matot opens with the laws of taking vows. It includes the specifics regarding the vows taken by women. These rules can be summarized as follows: 1) Any woman may make a vow at any time and place; 2) A woman’s vow has the same validity as that of a man; 3) Even when a woman is subject to a man’s authority, she doesn’t need to receive his permission to make a vow, nor inform him of her will; 4) Under certain circumstances a father may annul his daughter’s vow and a husband, his wife’s vow. From the fact that the Torah does not prevent women from making vows, or require them to obtain advance permission, or give advance notification, we may conclude that the Torah wished to enable women to stand before G-d in any place whatsoever, just as men, and make their vows without intermediaries and without witnesses. These clear rules concerning women’s vows are presented in this Parashat Matot:

ספר במדבר פרק ל פסוק ד וְאִשָּׁה כִּי תִדֹּר נֶדֶר לַהָשֵׁם וְאָסְרָה אִסָּר בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ בִּנְעֻרֶיהָ: (ה) וְשָׁמַע אָבִיהָ אֶת נִדְרָהּ וֶאֱסָרָהּ אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ וְהֶחֱרִישׁ לָהּ אָבִיהָ וְקָמוּ כָּל נְדָרֶיהָ וְכָל אִסָּר אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ יָקוּם: (ו) וְאִם הֵנִיא אָבִיהָ אֹתָהּ בְּיוֹם שָׁמְעוֹ כָּל נְדָרֶיהָ וֶאֱסָרֶיהָ אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ לֹא יָקוּם וַהָשֵׁם יִסְלַח לָהּ כִּי הֵנִיא אָבִיהָ אֹתָהּ: (ז) וְאִם הָיוֹ תִהְיֶה לְאִישׁ וּנְדָרֶיהָ עָלֶיהָ אוֹ מִבְטָא שְׂפָתֶיהָ אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ: (ח) וְשָׁמַע אִישָׁהּ בְּיוֹם שָׁמְעוֹ וְהֶחֱרִישׁ לָהּ וְקָמוּ נְדָרֶיהָ וֶאֱסָרֶהָ אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ יָקֻמוּ: (ט) וְאִם בְּיוֹם שְׁמֹעַ אִישָׁהּ יָנִיא אוֹתָהּ וְהֵפֵר אֶת נִדְרָהּ אֲשֶׁר עָלֶיהָ וְאֵת מִבְטָא שְׂפָתֶיהָ אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ וַהָשֵׁם יִסְלַח לָהּ: (י) וְנֵדֶר אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה כֹּל אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ יָקוּם עָלֶיהָ: (יא) וְאִם בֵּית אִישָׁהּ נָדָרָה אוֹ אָסְרָה אִסָּר עַל נַפְשָׁהּ בִּשְׁבֻעָה:

“If a woman makes a vow to Hashem, or imposes a prohibition [upon herself] while in her father’s house, in her youth, if her father heard her vow or her prohibition which she has prohibited upon herself, yet her father remains silent, all her vows shall stand, and any prohibition that she has imposed upon herself shall stand. But if her father hinders her on the day, he hears it, all her vows and her prohibitions that she has imposed upon herself shall not stand. Hashem will forgive her because her father hindered her. But if she is married to a man, and she takes vows upon herself or imposes [a stringency] upon herself, by an utterance of her lips, and her husband hears it, but remains silent on the day he hears it, her vows shall stand, and her prohibition which she has imposed upon herself shall stand. But if her husband hinders her on the day, he heard it, he has revoked the vow she had taken upon herself and the utterance, which she had imposed upon herself, and Hashem will forgive her. As for the vow of a widow or a divorced woman, whatever she prohibited upon herself will remain upon her” (Bamidbar 30:4-11).

Women may find it disturbing that fathers and husbands can, under certain circumstances annul the vows of their daughters and wives. On the surface, this seems to undermine a woman’s ability to take responsibility for her own life, granting the father or husband authority and control over her religious life. Acknowledging the Divine source of all Torah laws, how can we, mature, liberated women, accept laws which seem to disempower our ability to carry out our own decisions?

For the Sake of Protecting the Woman

Whenever Torah law contradicts what is socially acceptable in the ‘free’ Western world, the eternal value of the Torah takes precedence over the ephemeral values of the Western world. However, there is a reason why Hashem causes certain perspectives to become more popular at certain times. Each wave of consciousness draws out another aspect contained within the depths of the wellsprings of Torah. Our need to affirm the importance of women in Judaism becomes an impetus for perceiving the Torah laws that seem to belittle women’s role in a deeper way. Keep in mind that although nullifying the vow of a daughter or wife removes the punishment, should she be unable to fulfill it; this does not prevent her from carrying out what she has sworn. Let’s say a woman takes upon herself to become a vegetarian. The ability to annul her vow does not give her husband the power to force her to eat meat. It only prevents her from being punished, should she accidentally come to eat meat. Moreover, not every vow can be nullified by her husband. Rabbi S.R. Hirsch explains that the right of the husband to annul her vow is limited to the vows through which the woman causes herself hardship and pain, or vows that pertain to their relationship. Due to the self-sacrificing nature of a woman, she could easily come to take upon herself more than she can handle. Her husband’s ability to annul her vow serves to prevent her altruistic nature from going overboard. Thus, the ability to annul her vow is a protection for the woman. (Chana Bracha Siegelbaum, Women at the Crossroads: A Woman’s Perspective on the Weekly Torah Portion pp 153-154). Don’t we all want a protective shoulder to lean on?

The Precautions for Taking Vows

Today, most people – be it men or women – avoid taking upon themselves any vow altogether. “It is taught by Rav Dimi, brother of Rav Safra: Anyone who makes a vow, even if he carries it out, is called a sinner. Rav Zevid said: What passage proves this? “If you refrain from vowing, you incur no guilt” (Devarim 23:23). It may be inferred that if you did not refrain [from taking vows], then there is a sin” (Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim 77b). Since obligations to Heaven are absolute and we never know if we will be able to carry out our vow, it is preferable to refrain from making vows altogether. Hence among Torah Jews, we often use the popular expression, בְּלִי נֶדֶר/B’li Neder – ‘without taking a vow’ to ensure that should we inadvertently be unable to keep a promise, we are not responsible for breaking a vow. Thus, it sems that the laws of annulling a daughter’s or wife’s vow is rarely applicable in our time.

Chesed must Override Gevurah and the Judgments of Vows

Let us take a look at the mystical Zohar to glean a deeper understanding of the Torah’s eternal laws. As is known in Kabbalah, the four-lettered name of Hashem, yud-heh-vav-heh, consist of two masculine letters: yud and vav and two feminine letters: the upper and the lower heh. The letter yud corresponds to the archetype of ‘Father’ and sephirah of ‘Chachma.’ He is the ‘husband’ of the upper heh, which corresponds to the archetype of ‘Mother’ and the sephirah of Binah. Likewise, the letter vav corresponds to the archetype of ‘Son’ and the six middle sephirot (from Chesed to Yesod). He is the ‘husband’ of the lower heh, which corresponds to the archetype of ‘Daughter’ and the sephirah of Malchut.

זוהר חלק ג דף רלב/א ועוד רזא אחרא, בתר דאתגזר גזרה בתרין אתוון דאינון ה’ ה’, תרין בתי דינין, מאן יכיל לבטלא גזרה דתרווייהו, י’ ו’, דאת ה”א אימא עלאה, י’ אב, ומה כתיב, (במדבר ל יד) כל נדר וכל שבועת אסר לענות נפש, דאיהי ה’, אישה יקימנו, ואישה יפרנו,

There is yet another secret. For after the decree is enacted in the two letters heh heh, which are the two courts OF BINAH AND OF MALCHUT, who is able to rescind the decree of both of them, if not the YUD VAV OF yud keh vav keh? For the letter heh is the Upper Mother, BINAH, and yud is father, CHOCHMAH. And what is written? “Every vow and every binding oath to afflict the soul (which is heh THAT IS CALLED ‘SOUL,’ HEB. NEFESH), her husband may let it stand or her husband may make it void” (Bamidbar 30:14); (Zohar 3:232a).

The feminine sephirot, are on the left side of the Tree of Life – the side of judgment, whereas the masculine sephirot represent the right – the aspect of kindness. Thus, the two hehs of judgment correspond to the upper and lower courts. Whereas judgment has the merit of teaching us to take responsibility for our actions – which have consequences – we and the world cannot endure too much judgment. This is due to our imperfect nature. If judgment were perpetually metered out for our transgressions, we and the world would not have enough merit to continue to exist. Therefore, Hashem ingrained within the fabric of creation the ability of the masculine kindness to rescind the decrees of the feminine judgements, when necessary. This principle is at its zenith on Rosh Hashana during the blowing of the shofar – called ‘the voice of the vav’ in order to annul the judgments of the two hehs (Zohar ibid.). Throughout the High-Holidays men and women alike annul vows taken unbeknownst to ourselves throughout the year. We must all annul any possible unfulfilled vows, that may stand in the way of being granted life for the coming year. Therefore, the opening prayer of Yom Kippur, the כָּל נִדְרֵי/Kol Nidrei – ‘annulment of vows’ is the highpoint of the Yom Kippur prayer service.

Annulling Vows – The Safety Net for Women and Men Alike

When we hear the Kol Nidrei prayer on Yom Kippur, we can receive forgiveness for any unfulfilled vows we may unintentionally have made. Not only women, but men too, need this safety-net of having our vows annulled. It is actually a Divine Chesed granted to all of us. Had Yiftach been a wife, he could have gotten his vow – to sacrifice his daughter – immediately dissolved. As a woman, I appreciate the privilege that I won’t have to go to the Beit Din to annul any unattainable stringency I may have inadvertently taken upon myself. I’m grateful for my supportive husband, who only has my best interest in mind. Even if he were to nullify my yearly juice-fast resolve, it wouldn’t prevent me from carrying out my yearly inner cleansing.  

Why Can’t Women be Rabbis?

Parashat Pinchas
Printable Version

Female Rabbis in Our Times

I have several female friends who are ‘ordained’ rabbis. They are leaders of congregations, officiate at weddings and burials, teach, preach, council in short function just as male rabbis do. One of them invited me as a guest speaker to her congregation many years ago. I still vividly recall her rainbow colored, knitted kippah with the word Shechina embroidered in bold blue! With or without the kippah, there are also female rabbis now in Orthodox Judaism. Since Rabbi Avi Weiss privately ordained Rabba Sara Hurwitz in 2009 and declared her the first female Orthodox clergywoman – then founded a school, Yeshivat Maharat, to train more – his school has ordained 21 women. A handful of other women have been ordained privately, before and after. Orthodox women lead synagogues now in New York and in Massachusetts. 29-year old Hadas Fruchter opened South Philadelphia Shtiebel with a grant from a new nonprofit established to seed female-friendly Orthodox synagogues, a sign of the rapidly growing institutional support for women in Orthodox leadership. As an orthodox woman, she gives her sermon from the women’s side of the gender-divided sanctuary. My friend Melinda (Mindy) Ribner who also considers herself orthodox, received a public ‘semicha’ from Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach to do her unique work. I’ve had students who were aspiring to become Rabbis, and countless women ask me, “Why can’t women be Rabbis according to the Torah?” Well, the answer depends on how you define the title, ‘Rabbi?’

What does it Mean to be a Rabbi?

If it is the title ‘Rabbi’ certain women seek, then they are surely on the wrong track, as the Torah strongly discourages both men and women from running after credit, title and honor. “If one seeks his own כָּבוֹד/kavod –‘honor,’ his ‘kavod’ runs away from him” (BT, Iruvin 13b). Seeking any kind of leadership is even shunned in the Torah. Moshe, our Rabbi – Israel’s greatest leader – tried by all means to flee the mantle of leadership. The greatest leaders and founders of the Mishna likewise dissuade us from seeking rabbinic leadership and authority:

משנה מסכת אבות פרק א משנה י

שְׁמַעְיָה וְאַבְטַלְיוֹן קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. שְׁמַעְיָה אוֹמֵר, אֱהוֹב אֶת הַמְּלָאכָה, וּשְׂנָא אֶת הָרַבָּנוּת, וְאַל תִּתְוַדַּע לָרָשׁוּת:

Shemaiah and Avtalion received [the oral tradition] from them. Shemaiah used to say: love work, loath becoming rabbis over others, and do not attempt to draw near to the ruling authority (Pirkei Avot 1:10).

Rather than actively seeking leadership, the greatest leaders in the Torah received leadership by being chosen by others. Hashem selected Moshe and persuaded him to lead the Jewish people out of Egypt and teach them Torah. As Moshe was the first official leader and Rabbi of the Jewish people, we can learn from his role, the definition of what it means to be a rabbi. Moshe’s greatest feat as a rabbi was receiving the Torah from G-d and explaining it with all its details to the Jewish people. Women, indeed, excel as teachers, counselors, spiritual guides, and more… not only of children, so what’s the orthodox problem with female Rabbis? In Parashat Pinchas, we learn about the daughters of Tzelafchad, who were praised for being wise, learned and righteous (Babylonian Talmud, Baba Batra 119b). They were alive when it became time to choose a new leader after Moshe. Why, then, did Hashem choose Yehoshua?

The First Rabbi to Receive Semicha (Ordination) in the Torah

Yehoshua was the first Rabbi to be ordained in the Torah. Hashem commanded Moshe to transfer his leadership to Yehoshua by laying his hands on his head. The Hebrew word for laying [the hands] סְמִיכָה/semicha is to this day used to refer to rabbinic ordination.

ספר במדבר פרק כז פסוק כב …וַיַּעַשׂ משֶׁה כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה הָשֵׁם אֹתוֹ וַיִּקַּח אֶת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וַיַּעֲמִדֵהוּ לִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן וְלִפְנֵי כָּל הָעֵדָה :(כג) וַיִּסְמֹךְ אֶת יָדָיו עָלָיו וַיְצַוֵּהוּ כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר הָשֵׁם בְּיַד משֶׁה:

…Moshe did as G-d commanded him, and he took Yehoshua and caused him to stand before Elazar the Kohen and before the entire congregation. And he placed his hands upon him, and he charged him, according to that which G-d said to Moshe” (Bamidbar 27:18-23).

“…and you shall lay your hand upon him.” Provide him with an announcer so that he can expound [halachic discourses] during your lifetime, so that all the congregation of the children of Israel will take heed: [meaning] that they will behave toward him with reverence and awe, just as they behaved toward you (Sifrei Pinchas 23; Rashi, Bamidbar 27:20). With all due respect to Jewish feminists and female Torah leadership – which I consider myself part of – who is more likely to be awe inspiring and affect reverence a male or a female rabbi? Rashi answers this question in his commentary on the verse: “Every man shall fear his mother and father” (Vayikra 19:3). “Here, Scripture mentions the mother before the father, because it is clear before Him that a child fears his father more than his mother [and therefore, by mentioning the mother first, Scripture emphasizes the duty of fearing her also” (Rashi, ibid.). Although we are a generation that gravitates towards love rather than awe, without reverence it is impossible to keep the congregation in check as it states,

משנה מסכת אבות פרק ג משנה ב

רַבִּי חֲנִינָא סְגַן הַכֹּהֲנִים אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי מִתְפַּלֵּל בִּשְׁלוֹמָהּ שֶׁל מַלְכוּת, שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא מוֹרָאָהּ, אִישׁ אֶת רֵעֵהוּ חַיִּים בָּלָעוּ.

Rabbi Chanina, deputy to the kohanim, would say: Pray for the welfare of the government; for were it not for the fear of it inspires, a man would swallow his neighbor alive (Pirkei Avot 3:2).

Is a Woman Fit to Render Halachic Rulings?

In addition to being an awe-inspiring leader and teacher, the main definition of rabbi is his ability to render a pesak halacha – authoritative halachic ruling. It is the job of the rabbi to apply the halacha to the particular case presented before him. A competent rabbi must completely detach himself from any personal preconceived notions of the case, and from his affinity with one of the people involved in a dispute, in order to render his cold, objective application of the Torah law to any given situation. Women are naturally warm, caring and subjective. We need these attributes to raise our children and protect the family. Even if today, many women may be able to develop their objective halachic ruling abilities by learning and engaging in Talmudic disputes, this is not to be recommended, because this will affect their natural femininity negatively. Women are in general disqualified from giving pesak halacha, because women’s main domain and specialty is to develop personal relationships and care for other people. Therefore, women have a greater ability to identify with others and show empathy. It is, thus, a positive phenomenon that women’s subjective sense remains greater than her objectivity. We can explain וְנָשִׁים דַּעְתָּן קַלּוֹת עֲלֵיהֶן – “Women’s da’at is light upon them (Babylonian Talmud, Kidushin 80b) in the light of women’s tendency to be more subjective than objective, as דַּעַת/Da’at is the ability to see the entire picture in a complete objective way. This objectivity is required for rendering a halachic authoritative decision, which does not necessarily consider the feelings of the individuals requesting the halachic ruling. A woman’s personal connection to the person she is asked to ‘pasken’ for, may influence her legal decision to deviate from giving the true objective Torah pesak. Hashem created her this way because the role of a woman is not to organize the public, but to build the coming generations within the family (Rav Aviner, Eishet Chayil).

Wasn’t Devorah a Female Rabbi?

Devorah, the Prophetess, is a role model for female rabbis. She served as an exceptional Jewish female leader, and judged Israel for possibly 60 or at least 40 years (Shoftim 5:31; Rashi ibid. 11:26). Yet, Devorah’s judgment differed from the regular process of rendering pesak halacha since it was based on her prophecy. She judged according to the Divine command. She did not decide the p’sak halacha on her own, but received the law in prophecy (Tosfot, Niddah 50a D”H Kol). She did not apply the halacha on her own to each case that was presented before her by the people who came to her for judgment. Rather she judged according to special Divine guidance for each situation, received directly from the Shechina. Devorah’s judging Israel was Hora’at Sha’ah (an exceptional case). This is clear from the verse “She judged Israel at this time” (Shoftim 4:4). At that specific time there was no one else who could lead Israel. The entire Jewish people were weak. Even Barak, son of Avinoam, refused to lead the warfare unless Devorah would go out with him to war. She agreed since there was no other choice. There is another possible reason why Devorah was accepted as a judge in Israel, which applies also today: “The Jewish people accepted her upon themselves” (Tosfot, Baba Kama 15a). Although a woman is generally disqualified because she is not suitable for judging, if people agree to accept her to become their judge, she is permitted to judge (Sefer Hachinuch, Mitzvah 77). This principle also applies to other cases where certain people are disqualified from judging. For example, a person is not permitted to judge a relative, to whom he would not be impartial. However, if a person says, “I trust your father’s judgement,” the father may judge between them, since they are both accepting him as their litigator (Chidushei Ran, Shavuot 30a). A woman may also answer halachic questions when a given halacha is clearly known and written in books. She then gives over what she read or what is already well-known halachic knowledge. Thus, a learned woman’s Torah knowledge may be relied upon to teach well-known halachic information, but not to apply this knowledge into making legal decisions in questionable areas. Having stated all that, it is unquestionable that in our time, female Torah leadership is vital. The voice of women in the Torah is needed to bring about redemption. With so much work ahead of women in Torah leadership, in teaching Torah, in mentoring, counseling healing and bringing back our lost children into the fold, can’t we leave the Rabbinic title and halachic rulings to the qualified men?