Israel – Women’s prayer quorum during the Purim holiday have become in recent years a widespread phenomenon in many religious communities in Israel, but a new Jewish ruling considers them illegal and forbidden.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
Chief Ramat Gan Rabbi Yaakov Ariel stated that “to begin with, forming a women’s prayer quorum is against the Halacha,” and accused the participating women of withdrawing from society on the basis of “social and feminist considerations”.
Rabbi Ariel, who is one of the leaders of Religious Zionism and a senior arbiter, warned against the phenomenon during an interview with Arutz Sheva (Channel Seven) and claimed the it is “not right” and “forbidden.”
According to Ariel, “it’s good that women want to be involved, but if a woman wants to be more god-fearing and pray in a quorum – she should do so in a men’s quorum. The Torah did not command women to pray in a quorum,” he added.
The rabbi did agree however that “if the husband was in the synagogue and the woman was looking after the children, she can go to a second quorum to listen to the reading of the Book of Esther, and if there is no man present – she may read it herself.”
Religious women’s organization Kolech criticized Rabbi Ariel’s ruling. A spokeswoman for the organization told Ynet: “The Halacha states that a woman may fulfill the duty of prayer for another woman. The same ruling was also stated in the Shulchan Aruch (book of religious law from the Rabbi Yosef Karo), by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and more.
“In accordance with these rulings, women public reading of the Book of Esther became popular and widespread in many national- religious communities and most women who take part in them do not consider themselves feminist,” she added.
Rabbi Yaacov Ariel has been known to rule on many issues that combine the Torah and Halacha with modern-day living, however on issues that are considered feminist he tends to rule more strictly and avoids making progressive and bold decisions.
Rabbi Ariel has gained popular support from the religious public that is often credited to his choice not to deal with or express his opinion on political issues.
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, on the other hand, is considered to be more lenient on women’s matters and ruled last year that a woman can fulfill the duty of praying for a man as well as a woman. He explained his ruling by saying that both genders are equally obliged to commit the mitzvah of prayer.
Most modern frum women are going to ignore Ariel and accept the paskin last year from Rav Yosef, shlita, who is considerably more accepting of women davening together in their own minyan. Ariel’s decision is a more of a political statement about feminism than a carefully considered and reasoned decision based on halacha. Those women who allow their husbands to go off to the shul and beis medrash to listen to megillah and then get drunk while leaving them at home with the yinglach are probably not among those who care about davening anyway so will obediently allow their husbands to do whatever they want.
There is no difference between Modern orthodox and the conservative movement.
Too ridiculous!
I guess Rabbi Ariel thinks that it is more in line with halacha for women to sit in another room where they can barely hear the megillah being read than for them to hear every word in one of these women’s minyans. It’s a shame he’s so close-minded.
it is much better for us when the modern orthodox are less frum because there is less confusion between bnei Torah and the modern – when we have “frum” zionists it is a big chillul Hashem.
Why is there so many people on here with hatred for Modern Orthodox. and all of it lies
This is unbeleivable that we still have to argue about such rediculnous things
A woman is allowed to layn megillah for other women. But these feminists do not appear to be yirei shamayim, all they want to do is confront and challenge men on all issues.
The first comment embodies the stance of the women who comprise the megila groups. On the one hand, you have Rav Yosef, who, though a Sfardi, apparently is the posek for these almost exclusively ashkenazi groups. On the other hand, they refer to “Ariel,” who, nebach, seems to have lost his smicha somewhere. Should we give tzedaka to Reb Meir Baal Hanes to help him find his semicha?
Then you have the assertion that Rav Yosef’s psak was halachic, while “Ariel’s” was political, as if opinions about the interface of feminism and halacha are exclusively political, pace Reb Moshe and many others.
Great introduction to Purim, though. Along the same lines, I would like to suggest that you make a special purim treat, that originates from the women’s league of the Mirrer Yeshiva: it’s a special Quiche for purim. We call it Quiche Mir.
at the risk of being hypocritical, this is not the forum for these matters – all and sundry mouthing off from their comfort zones – no real dialogue here- as william james said ‘when someone tells me they are thinking, in all reality, they are merely re-arranging their prejudices’
i wonder how many of the armchair pundits in the blogosphere would comment on say, quantum mechanics, whilst not possessing the necessary KNOWLEDGE to do so- peer review would laugh them out of the park!! But Torah and Halacha appear to be fair game – what a Bizayon!!!
so guys (and gals) shut up and stop displaying your ignorance and petty ploitical prejudices and GO LEARN – we have a beautiful, immense maginficent Divine Torah, approach it with awe and humility and a genuine desire to connect to the Da’as of HKBH in the most intimate manner possible, say the ‘asher Bachar banu’ with a reverence, trepidation and unbridled joy and discover the Ratzon Hashem.
ps it all seems to hinge on the understanding of a Korban Nesanel (machlokes between Sha’ar Hatziyun and RSZ Auerbach ZTL), but what do i know?!
Just go to a proper minyan already. What is the big deal? Why does everybody have to be so pushy about yiddishkeit all of a sudden?
So to sum it up:
Modern O. & conservatives are the same – or maybe not;
Harav Ovadia is an ashkanazi posek;
No european women covered thier hair;
European women were all illiterate;
European input doesn’t count because there were pogroms there;
Frum zionist over a biggoted Ben Torah – because they make a chillul H;
Somebody is an idiot – but not quite sure who yet;
A new segulah to get someone smicha.
And we’re the People of the Book?
Unless it’s all PURIM TORAH!!!!!!!
To #2 Wake up and smell the roses What on earth are you comparing??A banana and a peach??
To say that a woman can not read the megillah for another woman is revolutionary. It overturns thousands of years of halachic precedent. It is similar to the kinds of things that the Conservative movement does. Next, someone will say that a woman can not make kiddush for another woman.
Why don’t these tzodkinios first deal with other mitzvos first.
Like let’s start with d’araisos before we’re ‘super frum’ on a d’rabonon.
Yeah like let’s start being ‘super frum’ on hilcos Shabbos, then taharos hamishpocho, Tznius? (קול אישה, והיה מחנחה קודש). etc. You get the drift. Then NOONE with have a problem with they’re being ‘super frum’ on d’rabonons.
I’m sure if that was the case then Harav Ovadia shlita would revert back to being a sefardi posek & Rav Ariel would stop issuing ‘political’ psokie din. And my grandmother would be able to start reading again… And, and mabe no more idiotic posts.
Yeah, maybe – just maybe – Moshiach would be here laining the Megilah for us this year in the Beis HaMikdash. BBA
I’m a not sure where the Torah states that men need to daven with a quorum – this, as far as I am aware, developed probably following the story of the megillah.
As a matter of interest, the halacha allows for women to bensch together (with no men present) – there would, therefore, seem to be a case for allowing women to daven together if they so wish.
I am not sure that all this fuss is needed – each person should follow their rav’s p’sak and that someone else does differently should be ignored. The most important thing is to avoid disputes – especially as Purim with its mitzvos is meant to unify the Jewish people.
Even if a woman prays for another woman, it is not considered according to halacha to be a minyan and some prayers such as kedusha could not be said. Also, the purpose of having a minyan is that the shechina abides in a quorum of ten and the prayers are more readily accepted. So wouldn’t it be better if women did not have their own prayer quorums? Women are not required to daven in a minyan.
Dear Robert, Charlie hall and all the other “modern” yidden. Please explain and define modern orthadoxy also please explain exactly what was wrong with the reagular normal frum yidden like your great grandfarthers were, are you better than them? Were they not advanced enough? Modern enough?
To all the groise dayanim that cant understand how he could possibly pasken against women, the chofetz chaim paskens the same way see hilchos megilah 689- shar hatzion #15
The amount of misinformation spewed here is truly astounding:
1. Rav Ariel is not saying a woman cannot lein for a woman. What he is saying is that organizing a special women’s group leining is against the Torah because it a feminist attempt to make women into men.
2. Anyone, man or woman, can fufill Megillah without a minyan. But there is a preference to hear it with a minyan, if you can. So generally men go to shul to hear it. Women often cannot make it to the minyan because they are watching the children, so they hear it later, often in a small group or with a few women. (For that matter, a man who is, say, bedridden, could have the Megillah read to him at home.)
The problem is that the feminist groups want to organize “women’s leining” — specifically a group of woman who get together in a shul to lein. The problem is that if they can make it to the pseudo-women’s-minyan, then what is their excuse for not attending the real men’s minyan? None. So there is a reall halakhic problem with attending such a pseudo-minyan.
(ctd.)
(ctd.)
3. More broadly, there is a basic hashkafic problem with such minyanim: the feminists are trying to blur the distinction between men and women. They are trying to mimic a men’s minyan — but a group of ten women has no halakhic significance. For that matter, you can get 1000 women together, and they do not form a tsibbur the way 10 boys just over bar mitzvah do.
4. Minyan is a deoraysa concept. The gemara in Sanhedrin and Megilla learns it out from the ten meraglim — a double gezirah shava (TOCH TOCH, EDAH EDAH) Acc. to the gemara in Sanhedrin, and the halakkha paskened in the Rambam and Shulkhan Arukh, there is a difference between pharhesya and be-tsinna, defined as to whether the act is before ten men. This determines whether certain aveiros as yehareg v’al yaavor!
The rabbanan borrowed this concept for tefillah, include davar she be kedusha.
The basic idea is that ten men represent the edah — the whole of the Congregation of Israel.
5. The idea that women could count for a minyan because they are obligated in a particular mitzvah is held by a few poskim, but is forcefully rejected by the Vilna Gaon. It seems to be against the gemara in Sanhedrin.
Lets do our efforts at decreasing sinas chinam here. If we think it is wrong and they think it is correct, it will only create rift amongst klal yisroel to argue about it. They are not going to change their actions just because we are writing how terrible it is.