[Avodah] Fw: Partnership Minyanim by Aryeh and Dov Frimer
Ira Tick
itick1986 at gmail.com
Sun Jun 27 10:21:52 PDT 2010
A few thoughts/questions:
1) As already mentioned in the article near its end, the Rambam is a
da'as yachid regarding women and serara/minui. Which is worth mentioning,
because it lends further strength to the next question:
2) How can the Rav assume the Rema's support for the minhag that women
are not shochtot is based on the Rambam?
3) Even if kabbala is seen as a siman that a given position is a "minui
kahal," since when does kabbala become an ikuvah for minui kahal? If
a woman is in a position of responsibility on the community's behalf,
such as serving on a synagogue board, serving as a shul vice-president,
treasurer or secretary, or as a mashgicha, how does the absence of kabbala
prevent her service from being considered minui? These positions should,
especially based on the distinction between gerim and women at the end
of the article, be forbidden to women.
4) When drawing a distinction between converts and women, the article
notes that women all prohibited from serving in the capacity of minui
kahal - "community wide appointments" and from being entrusted with
serara - "discretionary authority," whereas converts are barred only
from serara. If that is the case, how is it that women are permitted
to serve in any of the positions mentioned above in, since those are
indeed communal positions and were only permitted to her by the Rav
because they lacked serara. Somewhere, the definition of serara and the
Rav's distinction within the Rambam between serara and minui kahal is
not completely clear.
5) The other distinction made between gerim and women was based on the
Netziv, who proved from the acceptance of Herod as a Jewish monarch
that a ger may serve with serara if the need arrises--his convert
status does not invalidate his position. This idea is interesting,
though no actual reason was given as to why that distinction should
be made. The real problem though is the proof in its support. The idea
that Herod was "accepted" as both Jewish and as the legitimate king is
inconceivable. The people of Judea accepted Herod firstly because they
had no choice and secondly because he appeased them by refurbishing the
Temple. Herod was never accepted by the rabbis, for he was their sworn
enemy, and they both questioned and openly mocked his conversion and
his claim to royalty. "Whoever comes and says I am descended from the
House of the Hasmoneans is a [gentile] slave."
And Chazal say that Herod was a necrophiliac.
More information about the Avodah
mailing list