[Avodah] Women and tefillin

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:03:59PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
>> "Velo michu" is usually taken to mean that there was a hava amina
>> that something wrong was done, but the lack of actually protest
>> disproves it.

> Who "usually" takes it that way? ...

It is the only way to understand the next amud (Eruvim 96b) which
uses "ishto shel Yonah haysah olah laregel velo michu bah" as a source
supporting the idea that nashim somekhos reshus. Clearly "velo michu bah"
is being taken as synoynymous with "reshus".

The Maharsha ad loc compares Mikhal's case with sitting in a sukkah,
that both are einah metzuvah ve'osah, but rpermittedeshus.

The Rosh is explicit "'velo michu bah chakhamim' -- peirush: uvirtzon
chakhamim hayah."

Also, I already mentioned the Qorban haEidah on the machloqes om
the Y-mi as to whether or not they stopped here. He explains the
machloqes as arguing about whether there is an issur.

The AhS (OC 38:6) dismisses this Bavli as proof that women in general
may wear tefillin on the grounds that the chakhamim of her time knew
she was a tzadeqes gemurah veyade'ah lehazhir, but as a general rule,
no. According to the AhS the gemara is saying what Mikhal was doing
was permitted -- but only for Mikhal.

R' Tzadoq (Liqutei Ma'amarim pg 129, 2nd par.) also takes the phrase to
mean it's mutar -- but says Mikhal's case was a hora'as sha'ah, and the
heter didn't persist.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The mind is a wonderful organ
micha at aishdas.org        for justifying decisions
http://www.aishdas.org   the heart already reached.
Fax: (270) 514-1507