public fasts, liturgy, and obligations

[cellio]

Someone called a meeting for next Thursday morning. Initially I thought "hmm, I could get here in time for that if I skip the minyan's breakfast after services". Then I looked more closely at the calendar and realized that, it being the day before Purim, it's a public fast day -- so no breakfast after services. Ok, one problem solved.

Another problem created: I need to make sure I'm familiar enough with the insertions into the liturgy for public fast days to be able to lead them next week. Either that or get David to lead that part. (I know we insert Avinu Malkeinu after the Amidah; I can't remember if there are other changes. Fortunately, I own a copy of the siddur we use, so there shouldn't be any surprises.)

I happened to glance at next month on the calendar and noticed that the fast of the first-born (before Pesach) also falls on a Thursday, my day to lead services. This one poses more uncertainty -- it's a public fast day but only for some people. Breakfast will be held, taking advantage of a rather dubious rules hack, but I don't know what liturgical changes are implied for a day on which some people must fast and others not. Fortunately, I have a month to find out. :-)

There are five minor fasts in the calendar. Three have to do with the destruction of the temple and one falls before Purim (commemorating Esther's call for a fast before she tried to save her people). These apply to everyone, but they don't resonate for me at all. I can't say exactly why, at least in the case of Purim. Maybe it's this nagging question of why this attempt to wipe out the Jewish people in a particular area warrants special treatment when it's not a singleton -- just the first that the rabbis noted. I don't know; I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it.

But the fifth of these minor fasts is the fast of the first-born on the day before Pesach (or earlier if that would cause it to interfere with Shabbat, like this year). This fast exists because of the tenth plague, the one that killed the first-born malees. Jewish first-born were spared but this is later given as a reason that first-born men belong to the temple for service to God. (There is a redmption mechanism, called pidyan ha-ben -- which is good because otherwise those people would be stuck today.) And of all the minor fasts, this one resonates for me. Isn't that odd? I'm a first-born woman whose ancestors were never endangered by this plague, though obviously had I been there I would have been.

I'm a woman, so traditional Judaism would say I'm not obligated. But a consequence of being egalitarian is that I don't get out of it that easily; if I believe men are obligated, then I am obligated too.

I don't know if we are obligated, but I should give this one more thought. I've tended to non-observance in the past, or going along with that rules hack I mentioned, but I'm beginning to think that the correct thing for me is to (1) keep the fast and (2) not use the rules hack. I've got a month to figure that out, too.

Comments

[arib.livejournal.com]

*shrug*

The seudat mitzva never really struck me as too dubious.

I wouldn't use it for something like the 10th of Tevet or anything, but the fast for the first born? *shrug*

[sanpaku.livejournal.com]

Remember that you only do the liturgy for a fast day (including Torah reading) if at least 6 people will be fasting in the minyan. Depending on where you are, at most Conservative shuls, there's an excellent chance that there won't be. I asked for our "joint minyans" and not even the rabbi or the cantor of the other congregation will be fasting. So it is really just a normal service. You neeed to ask the rabbi what their practice is.

If you have to make these kinds of decisions for a Conservative congregation, you really must get ahold of the Luach, which is very detailed about this kind of issue.

I usually don't fast either -- it has been years since I tried. I don't know all the ins and outs of it, but there are folks who feel that since the establishment of the State of Israel, these minor fasts have lost whatever meaning they once had. Of course in the orthodox world they take place in a whole panoply of voluntary minor fasts (like for Behab) and need to be understood in that context. But I suspect very few people in any Conservative congregation will be fasting.

As far as the "rules hack," to my mind it's not that different from living in an eruv or any other type of pious fiction that the tradition has created. It gives a reason for attending a siyyum, to boot. So it's no more dubious than anything else. I think the fast of the first-born is easier for people to relate to because it's personally addressed, unlike these other minor fasts, which are kind of abstract to the point of meaninglessness. (Gedaliah is the one that I've never understood at all.)

Also, it might be a mistake to say that being egalitarian means that obligations are as equivalent for women as for men. To my mind, it should mean is that women who want to take on the obligation may do so, not that it's compulsory. Otherwise there'd be real problems with women wearing tfillin and so forth. But then if you're coming at this from a Reform perspective, none of it is "binding" unless you find it personally meaningful, so I'm not sure why you would mention obligation for the fast.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

I'd have thought the distinctive thing about Purim is that it commemorates an attempt at extermination which was headed off at the last minute.

[goljerp]

There are five minor fasts in the calendar. Three have to do with the destruction of the temple and one falls before Purim (commemorating Esther's call for a fast before she tried to save her people). These apply to everyone, but they don't resonate for me at all. I can't say exactly why, at least in the case of Purim. Maybe it's this nagging question of why this attempt to wipe out the Jewish people in a particular area warrants special treatment when it's not a singleton -- just the first that the rabbis noted.

Ooh, goody: a chance for me to get in a (slightly relevant) reference to Yom Nicanor!

I think one (among many) reasons for the Rabbis to set the fast of Esther on 13 Adar was to (effectively) knock Yom Nicanor off the calendar. Never heard of Yom Nicanor? It worked! Yom Nicanor was a celebration of the Hasmonean victory over the Greek[1] general Nicanor, and was a day of feasting. The Rabbis, for very understandable reasons, weren't too keen about celebrating military victories over outsiders in general, or the Hasmoneans in particular...

And calling a fast on the 13th of Adar "the fast of Esther" was really kind of disingenous, since according to the book of Esther, she was actually fasting on the 19th-22nd days of Sivan.

[1] OK, Selucid, whatever.