Discrimination Against Women

This week's Parsha, Pinchas, talks about the situation with the daughters of Tzelafchad. Their father passed away and he had no sons. They approached Moshe and asked why they should not inherit their father's property. Moshe inquired of G-D and Moshe told them that G-D concurred with them and they should inherit their father. This, seemingly, shows the inherent bias against women found in society. Interestingly enough, the Torah Temimah talks about this by the verse in Bamidbar 27:1,

א. וַתִּקְרַבְנָה בְּנוֹת צְלָפְחָד בֶּן חֵפֶר בֶּן גִּלְעָד בֶּן מָכִיר בֶּן מְנַשֶּׁה לְמִשְׁפְּחֹת מְנַשֶּׁה בֶן יוֹסֵף וְאֵלֶּה שְׁמוֹת בְּנֹתָיו מַחְלָה נֹעָה וְחָגְלָה וּמִלְכָּה וְתִרְצָה:

1. The daughters of Zelophehad the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph, came forward, and his daughters' names were Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.

The Torah Temimah brings in a Sifri that says, "Since the Daughters of Tzelafchad heard that the land would be divided among the tribes and not among women they all went to seek advice. They were told that G-D's mercy is not like that of flesh and blood. Flesh and blood have more compassion on men than women, but G-D has mercy on everyone equally as it says in Tehillim (Psalm 145) "And His mercy is on all his handiwork."

The Torah Temimah says that he was unable to find a place that explicitly says that flesh and blood is more compassionate to men than women. However, he does bring several Gemoras that prove this point.

He says, "The Gemora in Horayos on 13a says that a man is ransomed before a woman. This is most probably[, according to the Torah Temimah,] because he has more kedusha (holiness) since he is obligated in all the Mitzvos and the greatness in a man due to his role in settling the land. Also, in Baba Basra on 16b it says that praiseworthy is the person that has male children and there is the Gemora in Niddah 31b that says when a boy comes into the world peace follows." There are many more, but these are just examples that prove the bias against women.

The question here is why does the Torah Temimah bring up this Sifri and what can it teach us about this bias against women? Is the point here that we should treat women differently than they are being treated by the Gemora or that women should be treated like this?

First, let's explain some reasons why these Gemoras are not as bias as they seem. The Gemorah is speaking about why men are redeemed before women. Now, the Torah Temimah says it is due to their holiness, that might be true, but it is mainly because the man will be sodomized whereas the woman will be raped. The Gemora is telling us that it is worse for a man to be sodomized than for a woman to be raped. The Next Gemora, Baba Basra, speaks of having male children vs female children. The reason why it is better to have male children is mainly because a father has to worry about his daughter much more than his son. The daughter usually costs more money, needs more protection by the father and other things that create a lot of stress for the father. However, with a son, there is a lot less stress and worry for the father.

However, even though the Gemorah is not as biased as it would seem, there are still problems. The point of the Sifri, I think, is that men should not be biased against women. Obviously, this has been a problem for a long time, throughout the history of man. It was not until recently that women have had the right to vote and other such privileges (Still, in some places in the world women still do not have these rights). The Sifri is telling us an important lesson, all people are created by G-D, no one is more special than anyone else. Discrimination is something more abhorrent than any of the abominations talked about in the Torah. We should all strive to be like G-D, merciful and charitable on ALL creations equally.

However, because of all this discrimination against women for the past 5000 or so years, there has been a turn around. Women do not just want to not be discriminated against, but some want to change the role of women completely. They want to make women into men, which makes no sense. Obviously, men and women are different. Their emotions are different, their bodies are different and their capabilities are different. G-D made Adam and Eve and meant for them to live eternally in the garden of Eden. However, they sinned and were banished. The Torah tells us (Genesis 3:16-17) that Eve was now to have pain in child birth and Adam was to live by the sweat of his brow. These punishments highlight the very different roles of men and women.

It is truly remarkable that Moshe did not know the law in the case of the daughters of Tzelafchad. Why did Moshe have to ask G-D for the ruling in this case? It seems obvious, in light of the Sifri, Moshe did not understand the difference between the role of the women and discriminating against women. I mean, even today we think they are the same thing, but to the opposite extreme. People say, "How can you say a woman should raise her family, that is sexist!" What these people fail to understand is the same thing that Moshe failed to understand, just because women have specific roles and purposes in life does not mean they are to be discriminated against. Women have just as much right to a fair trial and to their opinions, but G-D endowed them with the capabilities to raise children and nurture a family, among other things. G-D did not give these abilities to men, but to women. A woman's physiological makeup makes her more capable to raise a family and properly care for them. This could be the reason why it is so rare for a father to win sole custody of a child in court when there is a divorce. However, just like women are made to compliment men where men are lacking so too men were made to complement women where women are lacking.

This is not to say G-D does not want women to get jobs. I am not speaking about that at all. I am talking about the different roles within the Jewish religion for men and women. Men have an obligation to perform all time bound commandments as well as non-time bound commandments. Women have no such obligation. Why is this the case? Aren't men and women supposed to be equal? The answer is yes, but G-D, in his infinite wisdom, realized there are needs of children that demand a lot of time. The woman was given the special capabilities to raise the children and nurture them. This is why women are allowed to perform all time bound commandments, but are not obligated to do so, because they have a different purpose in the Jewish family. No one should prevent a capable woman from performing time-bound commandments, but it would be ludicrous to COMMAND women to do such things. As hard as all of the commandments are on men, imagine if women, who usually have less time if raising a family, were forced to perform all the commandments that are required of men. It would be disastrous.

In the end of the day it seems like the message from G-D to the children of Israel is this: True, men and women have very different roles in the Jewish family. However, this in no way effects their rights in court or how they are to be treated. Men and women are supposed to be equal in matters of law. Just because a woman is a woman does not mean she should lose her court case to a man. Everyone has the same rights and the judge has the responsibility to recognize these rights and act accordingly.

Do you really feel qualified to make that kind of accusation against Rav Elyashiv and Rav Aron Leib Shteinman?

Over at Cross-Currents, Rabbi Dovid Landesman wrote an article on why he thought the supreme court's decision was dangerous for the religious people in Israel and how it could mean that a religious Jew can not be part of the government, aka the State of Israel. In all honesty, I think he makes some very valid points. However, the first paragraph really bothered me and it had NOTHING to do with his article. Rabbi Landesman said (bold part is the issue here),

Events in the last twenty-four hours have caused my inherent uncertainties about life in Israel to resurface. This afternoon I attended the mass demonstration [peaceful and orderly, thank God] in support of the parents from Emanuel who were sentenced to jail terms for contempt of court in refusing to re-enroll their daughters in the local Beis Yaakov as per the decision of the Israeli Supreme Court. My conflicts began as I made my way toward Rechov Yirmiyahu where the rally was to take place. I passed a young man wearing a knitted kippah, holding a placard that read “sinat chinam” (needless hatred). I asked him to whom he was referring and he answered, “the demonstrators.” The early afternoon sun was brutally hot, so it was critical that I try hard not to loose my cool. I calmly asked him, “Do you really feel qualified to make that kind of accusation against Rav Elyashiv and Rav Aron Leib Shteinman?” Noticing his perplexed demeanor, I walked away, wondering why he did not understand what I wanted from him.

So according to Rabbi Landesman, if you thought, or your Rabbi thought that this Immanuel issue highlighted the issue of discrimination, which Rabbi Landesman admits is rampant throughout the Charaidi world, you are going against Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman and how is that possible?!?! Apparently, Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman do not just know Torah better than anyone else, but they understands discrimination better than anyone else.

However, that is not what makes this comment so absurd in my mind. Yes, people can argue that Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman are the final authority on anything that come out of their mouths. This is, in fact, why the whole Rabbi Slifkin controversy took place. However, ignoring that and even admitting that the Gedolim are infallible, Rabbi Landesman has a problem. He asks this "young man" are you qualified to say the opinion of Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman is Sinaat Chinam. However, Rav Landesman says in the very next paragraph,

"Permit me to share my feelings and fears with you. As a caveat, I am convinced by evidence that I have personally witnessed through the years that there is a great deal of prejudice within the Ashkenazi Torah world against Sefaradim."

This itself goes against Rav Elyashiv, as conveyed by his Gabbai:

"After that Rav Elyashiv's gabbai spoke, followed by Rav David Batzri, a sephardi mekubel. In his speech he said that there has never been any discrimination against Sephardim amongst Torah Observant Jews. All Torah Observant Jews learn the Rambam together with Tosfos, the Beis Yosef with the Rema, the Arizal with Baal HaTanya, and the Mishnah Brurah together with the Ben Ish Chai. He said that discrimination against Sephardim was introduced by the Secular Zionists when they took the yaldei teheran and cut off their peyot and forced upon them the gods of secularism." (Found here)

However, maybe there is an excuse for Rabbi Landesman, he just didn't know Rav Elyashiv held this way and would be willing to change his mind and admit Sephardim have never been discriminated against had he only known this was the opinion of Rav Elyashiv. That is a possibility.

Getting back to the deeper point, the belief that a Rav understands matters that have nothing to do with Gemorah knowledge better than anyone else. I was not raised to think that a Rav's word is similar to the word of G-D. I have been raised to follow the traditions of Judaism. Regular Jews should not be making up halacha, but following the traditions that have withstood the ages. I am a big believer in this idea that, although everyone should be involved with asking questions, learning Torah and coming up with ideas, before coming to any conclusions a Rav should be consulted. For example, a regular Jew that decides to research the Aniskakis worm controversy should do so. This person should come up with their own insights and ideas. However, the psak halacha should always be consulted with that person's Rabbi. Does he need to just ask and receive an answer? No. However, he should enter into a conversation with the Rabbi and express his views and ask the Rabbi if they are valid or not and the Rabbi should be able to answer the questions. Ultimately, the Rabbi decides the halacha within the parameters of the tradition.

However, in matters of science, where the Rabbi knows much less than some others, why would anyone consult the Rabbi? For example, I want to understand how gravity works, should I consult my Rabbi? Doesn't that idea sound ridiculous? So, the Rabbi is the last word on halacha, but what about other things? Should a person having psychological issues go to his or her Rabbi for help or should they go to a psychologist who is trained to help people with these disorders? Here, in the case of Emanuel, who is equipped to understand the situation best? Is it Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman? It could be that a Charaidi person better understands the situation best merely for the fact that there are more Charaidim living in Emanuel than anyone else. Maybe this young man came from Eilat and just heard the Charaidim are protesting and he decided to counter protest. However, it is possible that this young man research the case and its intricacies much more than anyone else and came to the conclusion that this is based on the discrimination that Rabbi Landesman ADMITS TO EXISTING in the Charaidi world. Therefore, by Rabbi Landesman's own admission, this young man "is qualified" to disagree with Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman.

Also, I would not say that Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman are showing Sinaat Chinam (baseless hatred) here. I believe that Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinamn were not basing their views on the discrimination. I in no way think Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman are pro the discrimination that exists throughout Israel against Sephardim. However, I think they were told the situation by someone who wanted them to be pro the rally. In order to do that it was probably presented as religious Jews being persecuted by the non-religious state. Therefore, I think the question of Rabbi Landesman, that the young man was calling Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman haters, does not make sense.

However, let's just say Rav Elyashiv and Rav Shteinman, ch'v, were pro the discrimination against Sephardim. Is there any precedence for Rabbi's to err and make the wrong choices? Does anyone recall the burning of the Rambam's books? There were several great Rabbonim that took place in this horrific act. They were great scholars, but erred in how to deal with that situation. This is not my opinion, but many great Rabbis of that generation and subsequent generations admit to this mistake.

Nevertheless, I think that, as a religious Jew, it is an unfortunate thing that Israel is not governed by religious law. Do I think if the government was run by the Charaidim it would be better? No. I wish we had a righteous king that did not have any bias against fellow Jews and could govern, using the Torah, justly and fairly. Hopefully, the Moshiach will come soon and put an end to all this bickering.

Equality Before the Law

In the book The Biblical View of Man it discusses justice. In this section it mentions an idea that one would think should be obvious. However, in this day and age it seems like this simple idea does not get proper attention. It says,

"Equality before the law is also proclaimed in order to protect the rich from the results of the poor winning unjustified sympathy. Thus, parallel to 'you shall not subvert the rights of the needy in their disputes' (Exodus 23:6) there is also the commandment 'nor shall you show deference to a poor man in his dispute' (Leviticus 19:15)."

This seems to be something that escapes people nowadays. People are always ready to demonize the person with the upper hand. Don't get me wrong, I believe that the poor man's rights should be protected, like mentioned in Exodus. However, it seems like for some reason that people are considered undeserving unless they are the underdog. This article can illustrate my point:

"Conversation at a South Side fire station heated up when the topic turned to affirmative action. 'White firemen are mad because blacks get extra points added to their tests,' declared a white lieutenant perched on the bumper of a fire truck. If it were not for department policies that favor minorities, he said, he would have had his silver lieutenant's bars sooner.

The white officer did not get any sympathy from his black coworkers. 'These white folks are mad because they won't have as many jobs,' said the station's captain, who is black. 'What about all those years they were leaving us out, when the promotions were 100 percent white? Whites thought everything was fine and never said a word.'

True, there were horrible conditions back in the day where blacks were discriminated against, but did these white officers discriminate against those blacks? No, it was the whites of several years ago. However, this station captain thinks it is fine to "payback" the whites. That seems like revenge and not equality. Is that the American way? Is that justice?

Another situation happened recently at another fire station. The article can be found here: "WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court appeared divided Wednesday over whether a Connecticut city's decision to scrap a promotion exam for firefighters because too few minorities passed violates the civil rights of top-scoring white applicants.

As is often the case with closely fought social issues at the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy appeared to hold the key to the outcome. He seemed concerned that New Haven, Conn., scuttled the test after it learned that no African Americans and only two Hispanic firefighters were likely to be promoted based on the results."

These issues reveal a very telling problem in our society, discriminating against the majority in order to give an advantage to the minority. How is that fair? Shouldn't everyone be equal? Just because there has been discrimination against minorities in the past, does that mean that the majority should be discriminated against in the future? Is that how to fix the problem? Or maybe the real answer is to make everyone equal, that way there is no discrimination. This is what the Torah is telling us. That real justice discriminates against no one and treats all equally.