Women Rabbis...לפי הלכה ?
I just read an article linked on the Am Echad weblog (www.amechad.blogspot.com) which blew me away. A woman has just received smicha - rabbinical ordination - from Modern Orthodox Rabbi Aryeh Strikovsky, after having received her Ph.D in Jewish Studies from Bar-Ilan University! Her name is Haviva Ner-David, and although she is not the first Orthodox woman to gain the status of ordination, she apparently is the first to use the title 'Rabbi' openly. I am fine with using the term 'Rabbanit'. I think it's a good idea that woman can achieve the status and recognition of scholarship and learning. I welcome your comments.
Comments
Please, enlighten me.
As far as I am aware, רבנית DOES mean 'rebbetzin', which implies 'the wife of the rabbi'. I personally am not comfortable with the term 'rav' for a woman, probably merely because I am not accustomed to hearing it; to me it is the masculine form of 'teacher'. I wasn't aware that the Reform use 'rabba': Do you mean רבא as in the ארמית ? I suppose that would be acceptable, although it means 'great' and not 'teacher'. Either way, it's recognition, n'est pas?
As I heard Rabbi Yonah Metzger answer someone at a recent speaking engagement, there are many roles that women CAN play as advisers to the Beit Dinim and even as Halachik advisers to women on issues pertaining to women, i.e. Niddah.
It is certainly a bold step to ordain an "orthodox" woman as a Rabbi, but I don't see potential for a trend. It will most certainly become so radical, as these feminist movements become, and will slowly slip out of the framework of orthodoxy.
Look, whether we like it or not, or whether it's humanistic or not, Halacha is Halacha.
Although, as you mention, there is ample precedent for women judging based on the account of Devorah:
1} It's not so simple that Devorah judged, rather it is very likely that she advised.
2} Even if it's true that she judged, it is by a Divine exception and cannot necessarily be learned out for the entire Torah.
3} Those opinions which were lenient in letting a woman judge, limited her abilities as a judge. She had no real jurisdiction and would only be acceptable if all parties were willing.
4} Because of the fact that women have not judged in many generations, this vitiates any legitimacy to judging now {Similar to the laws of Shechitah}.
To answer in short though it says in Shulchan Oruch Choshen Mishpat Chapter 35. See relevant Meforshim there where this is taken as a given.
I should mention that there are many instances where a woman is believed to say what she knows.
I'll get back to you regarding Devorah. My Tanach isn't as sharp as it used to be!
1} Devorah merely advised the Judges properly because of her immense wisdom.
2} This was a Divine exception to the rule
3} She was only permitted to Judge because she was accepted by everyone. {This is only according to the minority opinion that women can judge}
I am sure that you are aware that in our time, women in Israel are being trained to be 'to'anot' on halachic matters pertaining to women. I believe, also because of the 'crack in the cement' of not permitting women to be 'rabbanim', that '[halachic] times they are a changin'.
I think it's a wonderful idea whose time has come. And who knows, if this is also what will hasten the coming of Moshiach?
The only reason why I mentioned possibilities is because the Tosafos does give rise to this and therefore it is obviously a respectable query. However, Tosafos answers itself.
The To'anot issue is a long-coming and worthy cause. While it is revolutionary, it is respectable as long as it remains in line of decided Halacha. However, realize that there is a difference between being a solicitor and being a Judge.
Like I said before, this is Halacha and Judaism has to stick to the rules, even if we'd think otherwise.
From what I read, it would make more logical sense to assume that she got Rabbinical critisism because of he opposition to the settlements.
I agree with you in general, that Judaism to a great degree 'has to stick to the rules'. Look what has happened with bending the rules to the point of breaking, with the Reform and Reconstructionist movements. Conservatives wanted to keep to basic Halacha, but tweaked the 'rules' to enable them to drive to shul (and shul only - in theory). The problem is that Jews are so spread out in America.
But as Hashem told Moshe Rabbenu that b'not Tzlafchad could get his inheritance because there were no banim, we need a Sanhedrin to discuss issues within Halacha that may be subject to change. Only a Sanhedrin recognized by all (most) Jews would have that authority.