A friend, Dr. Irv Birnbaum, is the Gabbai of the minyan where I daven Shachris. An alumnus of Bobov in Crown Heights and holder of a doctorate in Chemical Engineering from Princeton, his coruscating intelligence is not his most distinguishing attribute. In any case, it annoys him that people daven in the Ezras Nashim, especially when we only have nine people in the main shul, because there is a serious problem of tziruf. But even without the problem of tziruf, there is a problem of pirud. He feels that there is a maaleh of rov am, there is a sense of achdus, that is diminished when some daven behind the mechitza. They might not realize that there are poskim that hold that kedushas ezras nashim is less than the main shul, so it's not in their best interest either, because the kedusha of the place is a factor in the effectiveness of tefilla. (Please see the comments here regarding Kedushas Ezras Nashim.)
The other day, Irv referred to the people behind the mechitza as Mechusar Kippurim. Why? Because the Mishna in Keilim says that a mechusar kippurim has to stay in the Ezras Nashim.
The other day, Irv referred to the people behind the mechitza as Mechusar Kippurim. Why? Because the Mishna in Keilim says that a mechusar kippurim has to stay in the Ezras Nashim.
הר הבית מקודש ממנו, שאין זבים וזבות נידות ויולדות נכנסים לשם.
החיל מקודש ממנו, שאין גוים וטמא מת נכנסים לשם.
עזרת נשים מקודשת ממנו, שאין טבול יום נכנס לשם, ואין חייבים עליה חטאת.
עזרת ישראל מקודשת ממנה, שאין מחוסר כיפורים נכנס לשם, וחייבין עליה חטאת.
עזרת הכהנים מקודשת ממנה, שאין ישראל נכנסים לשם אלא בשעת צרכיהם, לסמיכה לשחיטה ולתנופה.
Excellent!
Another classic example in the geshmakkeh shtoch genre is this story.
A rov was besides himself because of the kiddush club. As soon as Krias Hatorah began, week after week, the same people would go to the kitchen and have a lechaim. He chastised, he begged, he cried, he excoriated, but his words did not make a bit of a difference.
One week, he got up to speak and he had a big smile on his face. He said that he had a revelation. "I could never could understand why people walked out for the heiligeh Krias Hatorah. It upset me terribly, but then I realized something - I have no tayneh on them! Not at all! They are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. They are taking the words of the davenning seriously! Every time we take the sefer Torah out, we say קומה השם ויפוצו אויביך וינוסו משׂנאיך מפּניך. They are doing what they are told to do!They are being told to leave, so they leave!"
NOTES:
I
The vast majority of poskim (Rosh Yosef Chulin 28a/EA OC 151:1, Aruch Hashulchan OC 154:7,) including Reb Moshe (אורח חיים א' סי' נ"א, and mipi hashmu'ah,) hold that Ezras Nashim has Kedushas Beis HaKnesses. But even those that say that Kedushas Ezras Nashim is less than Ezras Yisrael (Chayei Adam 86:15, Ha'Elef Lecha Shelomo OC 76, Avnei Nezer OC 33:4) are absolutely not deprecating the tefilla of women. That would be absurd. The tefilla of women is at least equal to and often more potent than that of men (see Rashi Breishis 21:17 and 25:12.) Their point is that being kovei'a makom for general mitzvos does not make a chalos kedusha on a place. If you decide to do netillas lulav in a particular spot, it does nothing for that spot. Tefilla of men, which requires a minyan, is different. The minyan is a kviyus that is mashreh shechina, like the mikdash. Since women don't have a din of minyan, their keviyus may not be poeil on the place.
II
In Note I, I wrote "The tefilla of women is at least equal to and often more potent than that of men (see Rashi Breishis 21:17 and 25:12.)" I believe that to be true. If it were practical and appropriate, I believe men would be well advised to go to tzidkaniyos for brachos. True, with women it's harder to tell who's a tzidkanis because they don't give lomdisheh shiurim or have thousands of talmidim, which Chazal (BB116a) seem to associate with effective tefilla, but I'm convinced that for women's tefillos, there's a whole different dynamic involved, something involving the difference between עבד לפני המלך and שַׂר לפני המלך.
III
Even if you hold that the Ezras Nashim has Kedushas Beis Haknesses, that does not make it the same room as the men's shul. The mechitza separates them as far as tziruf to create a minyan. (Proof: combine the words of the Aruch HaShulchan in OC 154:sk7 and his words in OC 55:sk20, despite 55:sk24.) Lack of tziruf means pirud.
I was wondering if you were merely relying on the Hebrew to veil that possible inference. Are women't tefilos more powerful? The only instance I can think of for that is Chana. When Hagar prayed for Yishmael; her tefillos counted for less than his. When Yitzchak and Rivka both prayed for a child, his were the ones answered.
ReplyDeleteNo, Ma'am. Think about your two examples. Both support my assumption. Hagar and Yishmael. Chazal found it difficult to understand why his was answered and not hers, and on that basis postulate (Rashi in 21:17 and MR there) that מכאן שיפה
Deleteתפלת החולה מתפלת אחרים עליו והיא קודמת להתקבל. And Yitzchak and Rivka? The Gemara in Yevamos 64b brought in Rashi Breishis 25:21 that the reason Yitzchak was answered and not Rivka was tzadik ben tzadik. What's the question? Maybe he was answered because he was the great Yitzcak Avinu and she was just a woman, and you can't compare a woman's tefillos to a man's. Clearly, the Gemara found it puzzling that her tefillos weren't answered at least as much as his and had to find an explanation.
Any more rayos that I'm right?
Sarah complains to Avraham in our parsha that he davened for himself and not her, and therefore he had Yishmael while she was still barren. Surely Sarah davened for herself, yet in her eyes at least G-d responded to Avraham and not to her, this despite "shema b'kolah" her being his superior in ruach ha'kodesh. Of course she might have been/was mistaken -- perhaps Avraham did pray for her and for whatever reason G-d chose to delay her having Yitzchak -- but I'm just pointing out her hava amina. Why would she have thought that G-d would listen to Avraham's tefilos above her own? I don't know that it has anything to do with gender -- I have no idea. Just raising the question in light of all your other examples.
DeleteI hear your point. But see Megilla 27b, the story with Rav Huna's poverty and Rav's bracha. When the bracha was fulfilled, Rav was annoyed, and said, "When I gave you the bracha, why didn't you say v'chein l'mar??" Rashi says "you should have considered that it might be an eis ratzon, and if my bracha would be mekuyam, your "vchein lemar" would have been too."
DeleteThe point I'm making is that just like Rav complained to Rav Huna, Sarah's complaint was that now that we see that his tefilla was answered, that it was an eis ratzon, why didn't he daven for her?
So it's not always talui in whose tefilla is better. Sometimes you just hit the eis ratzon.
I don't think this undermines the other Rashis. In the other cases, it says Hashem listened to the man, and that itself implies that Hashem davka did not listen to the woman, which leads to the question. Here, it may just have been the luck of the draw.
I realize this is not such a great answer. But my other rayos are good.
I have heard bshem Rabbi H. Schechter shilt"a that just as curtains separate between levels of kedusha in the mishkan (and dividers in the mikdash) so to do they separate levels of kedusha in a shul.
ReplyDeleteAs the principal of a girls' High School, I have often had occasion to discuss the need for decorum, etc. in the room in which they daven.
ReplyDeleteHere's the Aruch hashulchan that I always use as my intro.
סימן קנד סעיף ז: העזרות של בית הכנסת – אין להם דין קדושת בית הכנסת, אפילו מתפללין בהם באקראי. אבל אם מתפללין שם תמיד – יש עליה קדושת בית הכנסת. וכן בית הכנסת של
נשים – יש עליה קדושת בית הכנסת, כיון שהנשים מתפללות שם.
Yehuda O.
This is a machlokes achronim. The famous opinion that says it does NOT have kedushas bhk is the Chochmas Odom in Aku'm 86:15 says it does not, based on the svara I mentioned that kedushas bhk is based on tziruf l'minyan; But everyone else, pretty much holds that it does. I know that Reb Moshe held it does have kedushas bhk. then you have the Aruch Hashulchan Rav YO mentioned, you have the PMG OC 50:4 that equates it to the bhk; Also the Shoel Umeishiv 2:22 at the end; the Divrei Chaim (the original one, not R Chaim Brown) in 2 OC 14 says it has kedusha but it's less, because the men's section is used for mitzvos that are obligatory for them, like shofar and kedusha and kaddish.
DeleteI'm just saying that it makes more sense to daven in the men's section. That's where men belong, that's the kviyus for men, and it seems contrary to the idea of kviyus makom (this week's parsha, Avrohom Avinu,) for men to daven there.
I should have mentioned - there are important nafka minahs in the issue of kedushas ezras nashim. Kapandria. Mezuzah with a bracha. Sleeping there, maybe even eating a seudas reshus. I'm sure you can think of more.
DeleteNafkos minah [/pedantry]. :)
DeleteAnother good reason not to daven in the ezras noshim is the issue a friend of mine raised - if a woman should want to come to davening (for specific purposes such as to hear a davar shebikdusha after birth, or just because she would like to join tefillah betzibbur) she will likely be discouraged by the presence of men in "her" area. Most people will not feel comfortable asking the men to leave. How can we do that to a bas Yisroel?
Good point. Although my wife is not a feminist, she is annoyed when people walk through the EN when they have an alternate route, because if she were to walk through the main shul it would be considered a pirtza (except in MTJ, where that's the only way to get to the EN.) And, as you say, there's a discomfort, a sense of a breach. And basically, it's just annoying. But I admit that I daven there once on the rare occasion when I come late. I don't know about your community, but I can't remember a time that a woman came to weekday shachris. Mincha yes, but shachris, not that I remember. Except the vasikin minyan. For some reason, you find the occasional woman there.
DeleteReb Avrohom, find me one sefer not printed in the last twenty years that uses nafkos minah even once and pedantry will earn you a Romanian Salami.
DeleteTo be honest, I can't remember the last time I saw the plural of nafka minah spelled out, rather than just abbreviated in the same way as the singular.
DeleteThank you. And I've already shared the Kiddush Club Vort with a number of Talmidei Chachamim, all of whom enjoyed it very much.
ReplyDeleteYes, it's a classic. My father used to like to say stories involving sharp torahdikkeh kishron from R Aizikel Charif, (who is known elsewhere,including among his descendants, as Reb Aizel Charif,) and the Kotzker Rov.
DeleteI never took that to mean that they assume women's tefilos are stronger. Rather the assumption is that a woman has greater longing for a child and then great compassion for her child than anyone else. Certainly, the latter fits with why Avraham was given the test of the akeida and not Sarah and why he didn't even tell her; she would likely have failed to sacrifice her son. So it's not woman as spiritual being but woman as maternal figure and all that it entails at play there.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI deleted the comment b/c it left out the part that quoted Avrohom Wagner's observation on the effect on women when men go in their section. So kudos to my cousin, and here's the comment:
ReplyDeleteYES! This is exactly why the YI of Woodmere posts signs for men not to go into the Ezras Nashim during davening. Also I've been on this receiving end more than once in my life, and in retrospect, I regret backing down. I don't think I would do so now, though the last time this happened, I went to daven ma'ariv after the shir that Chaim and I both attended. I was in the women's section, and some teen boy came in and hissed at me to leave. I was taken aback and left. But I realize he was wrong, and I should have stood my ground. I had more right to be there than he had, and I was davening, not just hanging around.
Ah, your cousin. Related to Richard?
DeleteThat story about the hissing teenager really disturbs me. Although it's very likely that rational discourse and rebuke would have been wasted, there are other ways to make sure that he regretted that for the rest of his life. Speaking of Richard Wagner, for example,
https://youtu.be/svMHBPed9Bs?t=5m25s
I'm related on his mother's side not the Wagner side. The teen was one of those latecomers who feel that the women's section is reserved for them. True, not many women show up on a weekday there, but that doesn't mean they have no right to be there the way this kid assumed.
Delete