Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Ensuring Equal Protection in the Jewish Court

One way to deflect dealing with an issue and feel like you have won the argument is to make an absolutely false statement that rings true, gets people nodding, and immediately halts any further discussion.  Here's an example: Automation take away jobs!  No, not really; it may shift emphasis on good skills for future jobs, and it certainly does create new jobs.  Moreover, since more can get done for less money and time, everyone benefits and whole new business opportunities are created.

Here's another favorite of mine: If men had babies, then !  Umm... whatever gender gets pregnant, carries the developing human, and then gives birth is the gender that I am going to call women.  The fact is that if having babies is important, then someone's going to have to take time off from job and career to do that.  If you believe in evolution (silly you), then you would have to note that billions of years of barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen cannot be reversed by a couple of hundred years of suffrage.

I can't (ok... won't) speak for other cultures, but the Torah obligated makes having children an obligation that is borne by men.  Yes; men.  Of course, to fulfill that obligation, a man has to convince a woman to bear his children.  This, perforce, is going to pose a variety of risks to her health and freedom.  First protection: a woman has no obligation in halacha to have children.  She is certainly encouraged, but by no means obligated.  Moreover, she is exempt from time bound positive commandments.  That is true even if she never has children.  If you think about it, you'll see that anything else would be devious way to coerce her to have children.  The Torah wants her to have a truly free choice about taking on that obligation.  Of course, once she accepts that, she is expected to live with that decision.

Our sages have also put protections in place for her.  For example, her husband is required to provide for her physical and emotional needs.  Because he is obligated in providing her physical needs -- food, clothing, housing, etc -- her wages go to her husband.  However, if she chooses, she may decide that she wants to take care of her own physical needs and keep her wages.  She protected either way and may determine for herself and according to her circumstances what works best for her.  Of course, if she decides to keep her wages, then she cannot demand support from her husband.  That is also done for her protection, to ensure that there is enough parity in the financial arrangements that neither side will feel they are "getting the short end of the deal" and thereby feel enmity.  Please note well: I am not making up apologetics; I am quoting to you from the reasons given in the meeting notes we have from those discussions when the laws were decreed.

Here I am claiming that men and women are treated fairly and equitably, with due consideration for their unique and special circumstances.  How, then, does the world have such a different perception?  I have so much chutzpah?!  Well, maybe; but the real answer is that "the world" is missing information.  I once kidded my daughter that I somehow managed to survive my childhood without ever having nor needing a mobile phone.  She replied directly on point: "But Abba, since those things didn't exist, there was a different infrastructure.  You didn't have mobile phones, but you had pay phones."  The view from the external world is based on partial information taken out of context.  As an aside, my progression toward Orthodox Judaism was spurred along by always finding that the Orthodox description of derivative religions agreed with those religions' own descriptions.  However, the derivative religions of Orthodox Judaism was very often contrary to reality, based on partial information and hearsay, with a does of just "axe to grind" added for good measure.  (Please, please don't take my word for that; check it out yourself.  I was as shocked as you will be.)

I will just end by noting that even though our Sages have ensured equity under the law for men and women; that is only for human adjudicated law.  Regarding the situation in the heavenly tribunal, I can only tell you this.  The default way to identify an individual is as Ploni son/daughter of Ploni's-Father.  (Akin to how we use the father's last name in marriage and for children by convention in America and most western countries.)  The exception is when praying for someone's health or welfare.  In that case, we use Ploni son/daughter of Ploni's-Mother.  Why?  Because it is taken for granted that a woman's standing in HaShem's eye is very likely greater than a man's.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aru...