Women's Customs and Various Halachic Issues

[noahidelaws]

BS"D There are many practical Halachic issues and customs related to women and which arise on a daily basis, and require clarification. Although many have been discussed on the Woman's Role thread, it seems that a thread should be devoted to this.

I would just like to point out at the outset that Jewish customs in general are little-understood, and they are mostly explained in Pnimiyus Hatorah (the "inner" i.e. mystical dimension of Torah). There are many customs for which the reason is not known or very little explanation is available for them.

I shall start the discussion with a quote from Tefillah Kehilchoso p. 396, where it is written that women are exempt from Kiddush Levono (sanctification of the new moon). Moreover, it is customary for them not to say it. This is despite the fact that the accepted practice for women and girls of Ashkenazic bacground is to perform even time-related Mitzvos, and with a Bracha (blessing), e.g. Lulav, Shofar. Kiddush Levono is an exception to this rule for since “they caused the deficiency (“pegam”) in the moon”, they do not sanctify it. (This is cited in Mishneh Brurah 426:1, 70:1, 106:4 from the Mogein Avrohom in the name of the Shaloh.)

Does anyone know of any sources for the saying of Techinos? This is a beautiful custom which ought to be revived. :)

[Jude]

Rivka Zakutinsky wrote a book called Techinos in which she selected certain techinos and translated them into English. I'm sure this book explains the origin of techinos and other info.

[ChachChach]

what are techinos?

[noahidelaws]

BS"D Techinos are prayers, mostly written by women, for women, in Yiddish, which was the vernacular of European Jewish women for over a thousand years. This was an accepted custom amongst European Jewry since the late sixteenth century. They are very heartfelt and personal, always in first person, and filled with statements of acknowledgment of our dependence on Hashem. They are really very beautiful. :)

[WanderingJew]

If you are already suggesting that we take up the customs of long ago, why not return to the "tzene Urene" that the women used to read?
Obviously we are living in different times.
Jewish women today are quite educated in terms of receiving a comprehensive knowledge of Yiddishkeit, that is not confined to kashering chickens and Tehilim.
P.S. what deficiency in the moon has been caused by women?

[noahidelaws]

BS"D <<If you are already suggesting that we take up the customs of long ago, >>

I am merely suggesting that this is a custom which is a valid minhag Yisrael, and thus could be revived. There are numerous customs which were not done which the Rebbe encouraged us to revive, and asked us to encourage other Yidden to do likewise. E.g., saying Tehillim according to the days of the month. Encouraging everyone to say Hareini mekabel and Ach tsaddikim, etc. etc. One of the explanations he always gave is that when there is an increase in the side of darkness, we must strive to overcome it by increasing in light. :)

<<why not return to the "tzene Urene" that the women used to read? >>

I heartily agree. :) In addition to all the other good things (mikro'ois gedoilois, Halacha, Sichos, ma'amorim, etc.) that women have more recently begun to study, we should return to the Tzena Urena. Artscroll translated Tzena Urena and it's quite nice. It's actually an anthology of midrashim and commentary on the Parsha, recommended for one and all, in any day and age!

<<what deficiency in the moon has been caused by women?>>

I believe that is a reference to the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, which was initiated by Chavo. Until then, the moon's light was the same as the sun's, but it was then diminished.

[WanderingJew]

What I was alluding to were the changes the issue of Jewish women, and their place in Yiddishkeit, have gone through since the Shtetlach in Russia where our Bubbes were brought up.
Tzene Urene may be wonderful and I'm not saying that it's not a beautiful sefer, as well as the other ideas you brought up.
I just want to point out that being that all of Tanach, Gemara, Chassidus etc is readily accessible to interested women nowadays, the way the women related to their Yiddishkeit in those days, when they were not able nor expected to read and study, is not really what people today are satisfied with.
They had to make do with these seforim because they were never taught to read Loshon Kodesh, to learn properly.
From a nostalgic point of view..that's another story ;)

[mendelp]

Chassidim relate that when the tzemach tzedek did not have a chumash to be ma'avir sedreh he used a tz'enah u'renah!

[BLewbavitch]

BH

<<I believe that is a reference to the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, which was initiated by Chavo. Until then, the moon's light was the same as the sun's, but it was then diminished.>>

I don't remember the moon being diminished having anything to do with Chava.

"Hameoros Hagedolim" says Rashi (Breishis 1:16) Shovim nivreu, venisma'ato halevono al shekitrega veomroh, "ee efshar lishnai melochim sheyishtamshu becheser echod"

They were created eaqual, and the moon was reduced because it complained and said, "it is impossible for two kings to use the same crown"

[ChilinInCali]

It's true that the pegam in the moon happened because of the moon arguing with the sun, but Hashem was goinez that oir in Gan eden, which means that it did not affect us humans because Odom and Chava lived in Gan eden. The reason we do not live in Gan eden, and are therefore affected by the miut halevana is only because of cheit eitz hadaas (Breishis raba 13, 2. see also Eitz yoisef, mahariz"v etc. ibid.).

[CybeRabbi]

<<<Chassidim relate that when the tzemach tzedek did not have a chumash to be ma'avir sedreh he used a tz'enah u'renah!>>>

It would be appropriate to provide a source for this, since apparently it is not consisent with Halacha. You can't be mavir sedre with tz'enah urenah, perhaps he used it for targum?

<<<I believe that is a reference to the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, which was initiated by Chavo. Until then, the moon's light was the same as the sun's, but it was then diminished.>>>

Correct, this is what says in Shlah (sahr Ho'osios ois kuf): "Mipnei shpegam ho-lvanah Gormoh ha-isho ha-rishona, dahynu chete Chava, umisrachkim mipnei habushe." (=because the defect of the moon was caused by the first woman, i.e. the sin of Chava, and they distance themself because of embarrasment.)

He continues writing, that altough they mended their ways at the Egel incident, when they didn't sin, however, the moon still remains flawed nonetheless.

However, it should be noted (is it noted in Tfileh Khilchoso?) that the Magen Avraham (O.C. simon 296, 13) offers a alternative explaination according the RMA, that perhaps the permission for woman to say a Bracha even on Mitzvahs which are time dependent, is only if the Mitzvah is an act outside the Baracha itself. Yet, when the Mitzvah is the Bracha itself, woman arn't allowed to say the Bracha. And since with Kidush Lvanah, the Bracha in itself is the Mitzvah, woman can't do it.

[WanderingJew]

So what's the bottom-line reason that women cannot participate in Kiddush Levana? :(

[CybeRabbi]

Since the second reason of Magan Avraham is based solely on RMAS opinion regarding Havadalah, about which he rules that woman can not make Havdalah themselves, since its a time- dependent Mitzvah. (so, we have to distinguish between different types of Mitzvos, those which woman may do (as esrog, Shofer etc.) and those they can"t (as Havdalah and Kidush Halvanah), see M.A there.)

So, since the later poskim (the A.R.) did not accept the ruling of RMA regarding Havdalah, so this logic is not accepted lahalacha, therefore we are forced to use the reason given by SHLAH, of pegam halavanah. (We have to infer what the reason of the AR is regarding Lavanah, since the appropriate simonim where Kidush Lavnah is dealt with, is missing in the A.R. S.A.)

[CybeRabbi]

Here is an interesting question: Can a woman say Kadish after her parents, if they didn't leave any male offsprings?

[mendelp]

In the frierdiker rebbe's sefer hazichronos he mentions a story of a girl saying kaddish.

[WanderingJew]

From my understanding, women are not obligated in mitzvos that have time constraints.
therefore any bracha said on the mitzva itself (asher kedishanu...) would be in vain.
For example, the mitzvah of hanachas Tefilin.
theoretically, acc. to Halacha,a woman may wear tefilin,
(as Rashi's daughters have), albeit without saying a bracha on it.
The validity of the Bracha is the issue at stake here.
Another example- Tefillos have time constraints, but no bracha on the mitzva, so women may and should daven.
Can i therefore say that theoretically, a woman may say Kiddush Levana without a bracha, since the problem is only saying the bracha, not the actual act of the Mitzvah ;)

[noahidelaws]

BS"D WanderingJew - As CybeRabbi explained, there are two reasons given by the Halachic authorities for the custom that women do not say Kiddush Levana:

1) Because they caused the deficiency in the moon - a custom.

2) Because there is no physical act associated with this mitzvah - a Halacha that since making a blessing on a non-time-related mitzvah is only permitted if there is an action involved, since there is no action in Kiddush Levana, women do not say a Bracha.

<<Can I therefore say that theoretically, a woman may say Kiddush Levana without a bracha>>

It would appear that this is not recommended, according to either reason:

1) According to the first reason, although it might technically be Halachically permitted for women to say Kiddush Levana with a blessing (and certainly without one), since it is the Minhag Yisrael (traditional Jewish custom) for women not to, since they caused the deficiency in the moon, it would be inappropriate for them to do so.

2) According to the second reason, in light of the fact that there is no action associated with Kiddush Levana, but the mitzvah is the blessing itself, it would appear that to say Kiddush Levana without a Bracha [i.e. without mentioning Hashem's name ("belo Shem Umalchus")], even if it would be technically permitted, would be rather pointless.

But there are many beautiful women’s customs :) that are kept now and others that can be revived (see one example in my first post). :)

[ChilinInCali]

Someone asked earlier that the pegam halevana was not caused by women, but rather by the moons complaint. I tried answering this by bringing the Medrash raba. But now looking at the mokor of the Mogen Avraham, in the Shala itself (btw thanks cyberabbi for the mokor, saw it in the sidur shala but didn't know where it's in Shala itself), it'sa liitle doichak to "kvetch es arain" in his words, so now were back to our question, how was the pegam halevane caused by women? My answer doesn't work in the loshoin of the shala.

[CybeRabbi]

<<From my understanding, women are not obligated in mitzvos that have time constraints.
therefore any bracha said on the mitzva itself (asher kedishanu...) would be in vain.
For example, the mitzvah of hanachas Tefilin.
theoretically, acc. to Halacha,a woman may wear tefilin,
(as Rashi's daughters have), albeit without saying a bracha on it.>>>

Minhag Ashknaz is based on Rabenu Tams opinion-- see Tos. Eruvin 96; a Rosh hashana 33 a -- that a Bracha can be said also on Mitzvos Rshus (=non obligatory), so woman say a Bracha on time dependent Mitzvhos -- see RMA Orach Chaim 589:6.

The Sphardim, however, don't observe any such Mitzvos according the Bes Yosefs view that woman should not observe them. (This is especially stressed by Reb Avadia Yoseph, who made it into a kind sphardic rite of being, other Sphardim, notably the famous Chidu (18 century sage), were of the opinion that even sphardic woman shall observe those mitzvos with a Bracha.)

[Another reason exists why woman can not do any Mitzvos time related even WITHOUT a brocha, since its Bal Tosif (=adding a Mitzva) see discussion in Gamara Eruvin ibid. But we don't accept that opinion, However it seems that was Rashis opinion, so the legend of Rashis daughters seems suspect]

About Tefillin, The Gemara says clearly (Eruvin ibid) that Michal, daughter of Shaul, wore Tfillin and the sages didn't discourage her.
Nevertheless, the RMA in Orach Chaim 38:3 rules, that woman shall not put on tefilin. The reason? Since you can't wear Tfillen without a guf noki, so men, since they are obligated to do the Mitzvah, the obligation will force them to have a guf noki for while, but If woman are not obligated, why do something that can, by not having a guf noki, undermine the Mitzvah?

And thats only the tip of the iceberg, there is so much more, but is not for a post.

[TakehBored]

Why don't you just bring the Alter Rebbe's reason "she'ein youd'ois lishmor atzmon binekiyus"? The same would apply to men, but b'leis breira we have a chiyuv.

[CybeRabbi]

Please reread post 13 and the sources therein.

[noahidelaws]

BS"D On this link you will find:
Kovetz Minhagim
An Anthology of Chabad-Lubavitch Customs
Regarding Pregnancy, Childbirth, Circumcision,
Redemption of The Firstborn, And The Birth of Girls

http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/kovetz-minhagim/

[Jude]

back to women and Rosh Chodesh - about the custom not to do certain melachos. The ones I know about are laundry and sewing. I don't know if this is universally observed or halachically obligatory. Cyberabbi?
My question is, so she doesn't do laundry and sew but she cooks, cleans the house, and shops! So what's the yom tov?
Also, I've heard women complain that not being able to do laundry makes life harder for them and is not welcome.

[akeret]

I don't know the reason why we refrain from doing those particular melachos, but one thought does occur to me.

In my great-grandmother's time, laundry was the most difficult task of the week, involving heating huge vats of water on a wood stove, 'stirring' the laundry with a special stick, scrubbing on a scrubboard, rinsing, wringing, and hanging the clothes.

I have heard that it was a day of hard physical labour, and perhaps that is one of the reasons women refrained from laundry on Rosh Chodesh!

Today, of course things are different. But if we must do something to make the day different and special, then why not do the same things our anscestors did?

[Jude]

Here's another issue, one which I assume is halachic in nature though that angle doesn't usually get mentioned. I'm referring to women who have their babies sleeping with them in their beds.

"Attachment Parenting" is a somewhat popular approach to childrearing in which babies sleep with Mommy and get carried around all day by Mommy, in the pursuit of bonding and being particularly responsive to baby's needs. It is maintained that having a baby in bed is not dangerous for the baby. On the contrary.

Yet, R' Mendel Futerfas is quoted as having said that he once stayed with a family while fleeing from the government, when his hostess, who had been sleeping with her baby, woke up in the middle of the night to discover, to her horror, that her baby was dead. Apparently she had suffocated the baby.

R' Mendel related how he heard her pacing back and forth, "What have I done, what have I done?" for hours. Then she switched to, "What do I do now, what do I do now?"

The two stages of teshuva were made very palpable for R' Mendel that night.

In an earlier source, I seem to remember learning that in the story with the two women who came to Shlomo Ha'Melech about the baby who had died, that the baby had died because the mother had suffocated him.

Any halachic sources on this?

[BLewbavitch]

BH

I think you are addressing a practical problem and this is not neccesarily a Halachic issue.

From my understanding, most mothers do sleep with their new-borns in their beds (at leat at certain stages of the child's life).

The question is, is it a danger to the child? (And if it is, why do a lot of women do it? And if it isn't what's the issue?)

[Jude]

it's practical and halachic because are you allowed to do something which some say pose no danger, while others say babies have actually died, for the sake of practicality?!
I can't imagine how a mother could sleep, knowing she might suffocate her baby :shocked:

[masbir]

Thats quite explicit in the posek there that she killed him in sleep, and the REDAK remarks that this is what happened.

[Jude]

but did the whole story happen? some say yes, some no

[RebLazer]

Originally posted by Jude
I can't imagine how a mother could sleep, knowing she might suffocate her baby :shocked:
How many babies (nit kein gedacht) have sustained serious injury, or worse, by being accidentally dropped when being carried? So what's the solution? Don't carry babies!?

For a mother to wake up repeatedly during the night, to carry her baby to her bed, or wherever, to be nursed, and then return the baby to its bed, is far more of a hazard, IMHO, than for the mother to sleep with the infant in her own bed.

Moreover, be'derech zachus, we can infer from the story concerning King Solomon, that it is perfectly acceptable. For if there was a measure of negligence, then King Solomon would not have returned the living baby to either mother. He would have put it up for adoption!

[Jude]

I'm surprised at your comparison. I see no connection between accidentally dropping a baby and putting oneself into a situation which lends itself to trouble

There are other solutions than getting out of bed repeatedly. Here are two: 1) have the bassinet or portacrib or whatever the baby sleeps in right next to the bed 2) there are attachments to the bed one can buy, rent, or make yourself that keeps the baby nearby by not in the bed

and if a mother chooses neither of those choices, but prefers to get out of bed (for some mothers do not want a baby in the room), it may promote more tiredness, but a hazard?! you mean sleep deprivation? like maybe she'll drop the baby because she's so tired :rolleyes: so try choice 1 or 2, but to do something which is inherently dangerous (which carrying a baby is not!), for the sake of convenience, doesn't sound particularly loving (at least not to the baby, self-love - yes!)

[paralub]

according to most modern orthodox rabbis, a woman can say kaddish for deceased parents - lo aleinu!!

[hishtatchus]

Jude- most mothers know their sleeping habits, if they will forget that someone else is in their bed or not. For a mother who does not move while asleep, she is not worried about rolling over. For a mother who tosses and turns... that's another story!

Also, sleep deprivation IS a Sakana. Besides the practical- driving when exhausted- there is also the health problems and increased stress that go along with it.

[Jude]

there is no reason in the world not to use choices 1 or 2

[hishtatchus]

Yes there is- you don't need to wake up completely to nurse a baby who is already in bed with you, but to take a baby out of a port-a-crib near your bed... Most co-sleepers have the same effect as a port-a crib near a bed- the baby must be carried onto the mother's bed in order to be fed.

[Jude]

the inconvenience (if there is one, I'm not convinced) is not worth the risk
know yourself and how you sleep? you don't want to discover how you sleep after the fact ... r'l.

[hishtatchus]

Did you ever try to wake up early?
If so, you know that you have a certain level of consciousness even when you are asleep. This can prevent you from Ch"V rolling over when sleeping with a baby.

[Jude]

except that SOME babies have been suffocated

[shoyn]

women do not put their nails to the light of the havdolo candle on motzash.

[Jude]

is this exclusively minhag Chabad? as far as I know, all (non-Chabad) women do put their nails to the light
also, while you're at it, would you give the reason why men (and many women) do this, and why women don't?

[shoyn]

this minhog is not exclusively chabad reason will be coming shortly.

[shoyn]

the ketzos hashulchan explains based on the Midrash that before the sin of aitz hadaas odom and chava's bodies were entirely covered by a layer of nail. THe sin caused the layer of nail to decrease and be just on the finger. Therefore women don't put their nails to the light of the candle so that they shouldn't be ashamed.

[maverick]

Can you please direct me, to the source where it says explicitly, that minhag Chabad is that woman don't view their nails besides the Ktzos Hashilcon who speaks about the general minhag noshim?

Thanks in advance.

[according to the reason of KH women should be most embarrased with long nails!]

[shoyn]

i never indicated that this minhog is a chabad minhog.

however, since there is no explicit chabad minhog (correct me if im wrong) about this matter then surely we should follow and accept the ketzos hashulchan.

[noahidelaws]

BS"D Rosh Chodesh is celebrated as a mini-holiday, with special prayers and finer food and clothing. But it is the Jewish women in particular, who observe Rosh Chodesh more meticulously. Rabbi Eliezer wrote: "When the men came to remove their wives' gold earrings for the Golden Calf the women refused to hand them over. They said to their husbands, 'We will not obey you in order to make an abomination which has no power to save!' G-d rewarded them in this world, in giving them a greater degree of observance on Rosh Chodesh, and He rewards them in the World to Come in giving them the power of constant renewal, which characterizes [the renewal of the moon on] Rosh Chodesh."

(On a more general note, the Jewish calendar is a lunar one, and our people are compared to the moon. Though our light is sometimes eclipsed by that of other nations, like the moon we are always present--at night and during the day. Our nation's history has its share of growth and decline, like the moon we wax and wane. But ultimately, these are just phases. For, though at times we seem to be as unimportant or insignificant as the sliver of the moon when it reappears, this is just a veneer.)