[Avodah] women reading megilla

[Chana Luntz]

RTK writes:

> But the posek (ROY?) who was quoted recently as permitting women to read
> the
> megilla for men (in the extremely remote case that no man could do it) was
> also quoted as saying IIRC that the woman who leins for men should read
> the
> megilla without the trop.

Where do you see this?  The piece from Ha'aretz that started this off
states:

"Yosef said that most rabbis forbid women to read the megillah on the
grounds that men are forbidden to listen to women sing, because a woman's
singing voice can stimulate sexual arousal. However, he said, he does not
agree that a woman chanting a sacred text is the kind of singing that
stimulates sexual arousal. The analogy rabbis have drawn between singing and
chanting sacred texts has "no value," he declared.

Yosef said women should not read for men if there are men capable of doing
the reading. But in a "small community" where there are no men capable of
chanting the text properly, it is permissible to bring a woman to read, he
ruled."

While one might not always want to rely on Ha'aretz's summary of ROY's
halachic position, I do not think this is an inaccurate summary of what is
found in his writings.

RRW then wrote responding to RTK:

> : True but that is AIUI ROY was factoring in -IOW chosheish - for BEHAG
> etc. : So he would not permit it lechatchila

And RMB then responded to both of them 
> ROY being ROY, he's not so much being chosheish for the Bahag and a
> bunch of Ashkenazi rishonim, as much as the mechabeir giving it as a
> yeish omerim.

But in all these quotes the implication (or explicit statement) was that
RTK's assertion that the issue for ROY was women singing and hence they
should do it without the trop was accepted.

The basis for ROY's discomfort is not as far as I can see based on the idea
that there is a problem of woman singing for men by chanting the trop, but
that the yesh omrim brings the Behag who holds that the obligation for men
and women are different.  The Behag holds that while men are obligated in
*reading* women are obligated in *listening* and therefore women cannot be
motzei men.

TO quote the Yalkut Yosef on this (I know somebody brought this, but I think
a lot of people, including me, could not read what was brought, because he
only sent it in Hebrew, and Hebrew comes out as question marks on my
digests), so I will write it in transliteration:

Yesh omrim she af al pi she hanashim chayvot b'mikra megila, ainun motziot
et ha anashim yadei chovatan. V'yesh cholkim v'omrim shehanashim y'chalot
l'hotzei et ha'anashim yedei chova.  V'af al pi she haikar k'dat ha'achrona,
nachon l'chush l'svara rishona, elea im ken b'shat hadchak.  Mikol makom,
ain issur b'zeh mishum "kol b'isha erva".

Or in English:

There are those who say that even though women are obligated in mikra
megila, they cannot be motzei men from their obligation.  And there are
those who disagree and say that women are able to be motzei men from their
obligation.  And even though the truth is like the last opinion, it is
correct to be concerned for the first opinion unless it is a shas hadchak.
But in any event, there is no prohibition in this of "the voice of a woman
is erva". 

The issue that the Yalkut Yosef grapples with in his footnotes, is why is it
that one should be choshesh for the first opinion.  As he brings in footnote
21 the general rule is that "stam, v'yesh omrim, halacha k'stam" - that is,
the general rule of Sephardi poskening that ROY and I think most other
Sephardi poskim follow is that if Maran (the Mechaber) brings two opinions,
one without any qualification (a "stam") and one beginning "yesh omrim" the
halacha follows the stam (and the most that tends to be said is that if one
wishes to be choshesh for the yesh omrim, tov aleha bracha - sort of like
the Rema's baal nefesh machmir).

That is why, BTW, that when my husband, whom most people know is Sephardi
(many years ago, before he met me - when he was first in Jerusalem) asked
whether he could be yotzei his obligation by one of these women's megilla
readings, he was told that he could, and while he shouldn't davka go and
seek one out, if it happened that the most convenient megilla reading in
terms of time or location was a woman's one, he didn't need to put himself
out by going to a men's one.  As it happens he has never taken advantage of
this psak (the fact that megilla tends to be read as part of either ma'ariv
or shachris tends to mean that he is in a location where a man's reading is
taking place anyway).  But in many ways ROY's psak is on the machmir end of
the spectrum, and can be considered a deviation from the norms of Sephardi
psak. [Of course, as RMF and others have brought, this is not the case for
Ashkenazim, as the Rema follows the Behag].

BTW, even in the Yalkut Yosef, you can see the contrast between this
paragraph and the next paragraph, which discussed the case where the only
person who is able to read megilla is a katan.  The relevant section reads
as follows:

"V'katan aino motzi acherim yadei chovatan, v'afilu im hegia l'chinuch.
B'shat hadchak hagadol yachol hakatan l'hotzei yadei chova, v'nachon
sheb'sha'ah she koreh hamegilla yikareu acherav mitoch hamegilla kashera
maleh b'maleh.

Or:

And a minor is not motzei others from their obligation and even if he has
reached the age of chinuch.  And in a great shas hadchak [shas hadchak
gadol] a minor is able to motzei others from their obligation. But it is
correct that at the time that he reads the megilla, they should read after
him in a kosher megilla word by word.

And the footnote states, after reciting that everybody pretty much holds
that a minor cannot be motzei an adult,  "m'kol makom, b'shat hadchak
she'ain ish sheyodea l'krot hamegilla yachol hakatan sh'hegia l'chinuch
l'hotzeiam v'chen ha'aleh b'shut ...."  "or in any event, b'shas hadchak
where there isn't a man who knows how to read megilla a minor who has
reached the age of chinuch is able to be motzei them and this is found in
the responsa ..."

But if a shas hadchak gadol is when there is no man around who can read the
megilla, then it does rather beg the question what a shas hadchak that is
not gadol is?

As a side note, the things that a minor can do under Sephardi psak seem to
be more general than the common Ashkenazi minhag am used to. My husband
keeps suggesting that it won't be long before my six year old boy can
technically be included in a mezuman, because the Sephardi psak is that one
need not wait until barmitzvah.  I confess I haven't looked in to this, and
am not sure what level of knowledge and understanding is needed (and I
suspect, whatever the technicalities, given that few people seem to know
this, it is unlikely to happen that often).  In addition, the gabbai in my
husband's shul is already telling my son that if he gets some of psukei
d'zimra down pat, he can do them for the shul on shabbas morning.  

> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha

Regards

Chana