kol isha, agency, and women reading torah

[cellio]

Ok, I realize that Friday isn't the best time to post about a partly-baked halachic issue, but hey, I post things when I think of them. C'est la vie. (Hmm, is there a corresponding Hebrew idiom to "c'est la vie", perhaps one that would be easier to spell?)

There is an issue in halacha called kol isha, which literally means "a woman's voice". The idea is that a woman's voice -- specifically a singing voice, according to B'rachot 24a -- will arouse men in the same way that seeing her hair (or certain body parts, and I don't just mean the naughty bits) will. So just as women are to cover their hair and wear modest garments to keep men from sinning, so too are they to refrain from singing around men. (Well, at least solo; being in a group can mitigate.)

I'd long assumed that kol isha is the reason women can't read torah (except in women's groups) in traditional communities. But I've thought of an argument against that position, which probably means that either the argument is wrong or this isn't a kol-isha issue to begin with. (I tend to assume that no halachic argument that turns out to be correct would be original to me, because I don't have the vast knowledge base yet.)

Ok, here goes. There is a state that people and objects can be in called tamei, which is a sort of ritual impurity. (This is sometimes translated as "unclean", but it has nothing to do with physical cleanliness.) If, for example, you come into contact with a corpse, you are tamei for a period of time. You can transmit that status to objects that you touch, and they too are tamei for a period of time. The only time this really matters is in worship -- it really only mattered when the temple stood (nothing tamei inside the courtyard), but I wouldn't be surprised if the concept applies to worship more generally in some ways. (Like, can a coroner ever lead services? I have no idea. But this is a tangent.)

I have learned (can't cite a source but believe it to be valid) that a sefer torah (a torah scroll) can never become tamei, no matter what it comes into contact with. (It can become non-kosher (pasul), but that's completely different.) So, why can't a sefer torah be tamei? Because it contains words of torah, which are inherently holy and can't be made impure. If so for the written form of torah, so too for the oral form? Isn't chanting torah, conveying the words from the sefer torah, inherently holy (and thus not lewd or suggestive)? Can such a reading (if done correctly) be made inappropriate in any way?

There are arguments (having to do with agency) for why women can't lead services, but torah-reading is different. Men are obligated to pray and can't be led by a woman who isn't obligated, but no one is obligated to read torah. People are obligated to hear torah being read. So I don't think the agency argument applies.

I can think of two issues that would arise from this. First, if the prohibition really is about kol isha, wouldn't that imply that a woman could read torah but not chant it? Kol isha is about singing. (And I've been to traditional congregations where the reader read without chanting, so this seems to be permitted.) And second, if agency is really about doing versus hearing as I've speculated, does that mean that women can do other things which we must hear but not necessarily do, like blowing the shofar on Rosh Hashana and reading the megillah on Purim?

I plan to ask my rabbi about this when we meet next week, since it was studying kol isha with him that set this speculation in motion to begin with.

Comments

[gnomi.livejournal.com]

(Hmm, is there a corresponding Hebrew idiom to "c'est la vie", perhaps one that would be easier to spell?)

I tend to use "zeh mah yesh," or in English, "that's what there is."

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

Jonathan would do better at this than I, but I'm going to try.

The mitzva is neither to read the Torah nor to hear it, but to learn it. By reading the Torah, the baal kriah is learning it in behalf of the congregation, as well as enabling it to learn. He's acting as their agent.

Here's the kicker. An agent for a mitzvah must have the same level of obligation for that mitzvah as the person who appointed then. I can, and do, make motzi or kiddush for a crowd because men and women are under the same level of obligation then. I cannot lead a service for men, even if I had the Hebrew skills and singing ability to do so, because men have a higher level of obligation and I cannot be their agent. I can lead a modifed (nothing "public", such as kaddish) one for women because, as women, the obligation is the same.

This is what makes megillah reading interesting - there are several opinions out there that, as the obligation to hear (and reading = hearing in this case) is the same for men and women, a woman can read the megillah for men.

(Kol isha is less of a factor than you might assume, since the issur may only in regards to shema. That is, a man may not recite the shema if he can hear a woman singing or can see a married woman's hair. This last includes his own wife. Kol isha has no halachic bearing during other times, although it has become custom in some places for men to avoid the singing of women not their relatives, and there are arguments about extending it further.)

[mbarr.livejournal.com]

Oh dear... You had to go and ask a Q I can answer. That means i have to type it all up. Ugh.

OK- this is actually covered directly in the Talmud. The response to the Q of women having aliyot was No, because of Kavod Ha Tzibbur. (Honor of the Congregation.) It also includes Kol Issha in there, but I don't think it was the same area. However, many Modern Ortho rabbis (or at least the left wing ones) at this point consider Kol Issha impossible if it's torah, like you said.

There is *no* obligation to read torah. It's only custom, not actual obligation, like davening for males. So now the only reason you can't have a women (or a child) get an aliyah is kavod ha tzibbur.

That is to say... it would embarrass the men in the room if a woman got an aliyah, since it would imply that none of them could do so. This was written in a time when the person getting the aliyah read from the torah as well.
There was no Baal Koreh at the time, thus the implication.

So, let's go with the assumption that your rabbi goes w/ the no kol issha for torah, or one of a few other ways of making kol issha not an issue. (I don't know them in depth. Sorry.) How do you deal w/the whole Honor thing?


1) You don't. Meh.
2) You make it a non-tzibbur.
3) You make a new tzibbur, set up under the idea that you will have such a thing, and that anyone joining will have to be aware of, so as to not embarrass themselves.

#1... Standard answer.
#2... A tzibbur is a group that comes together to pray, with a schedule, etc, and has some permanency. A pickup minyan at someone's home after a BBQ... not a tzibbur. (or at least it can be very well argued.) Mechitza issues can be interesting in these situations, btw. I've actually been to the Kotel and had a pickup minyan with no physical mechitza.. just a separation between folks. Really should ask the roommate/rabbi about it.
Alternatively, a torah reading outside the main shul would do it, since it isn't usual.

This is actually the principal under which my shul operates, under a p'sak by R. Halivni. It's actually all about *mixed* reading, instead of women only.. since you need to have the 10 men for minyan in it, and the reader & aliyah holder have to be on the same side of the mechitza, and it has to be outside the main minyan, and the first few have to be men, due to Kohen & Levi. (Bat Kohen & Levi just aren't the same...)
Oh, we also only have them at special events.. Bat mitzvah, aufruf, serious Gommel, naming a girl, (or child birth, in case of a boy where they had a bris) Has to be requested, has to be a member of the shui. etc...
FYI- our shul is not officially Ortho. Halachic, but not affiliated. I believe we use Post-Denominational :-) It is NYC :-)


#3. The principal under which & Shirra Chadasha in Jerusalem & Darkei Noam in NYC + others operate.
look at: http://www.jofa.org/social.php/ritual/synagogue/partnershipm/ It has a bunch of the others, as well as the source article that sparked most of the mixed reading minyans - the one by Mendel Shapiro. The JOFA site has more stuff, check under Ritual, then Synogogue. Mixed Torah has some more stuff, including the Sperber article.

These minyans consider themselves Orthodox. They meet every week, or try to (DN has rent issues, with space being a fortune here in NYC.)

By making a new tzibbur, it's hard to argue that anyone walking in wouldn't know the deal, etc... thus, no embarrassment to the men when a woman reads, or gets an aliyah.

BTW- they don't mix & match gender.. that would be tough. The reader, aliyah, & gabbi/gabbiit are the same gender, and on the same side of the mechitza.


For more info, read the articles.. they'll do this much more justice than I can.. I learned this with my shul when we went with option #2...

[ichur72.livejournal.com]

AFAIK, kol ishah isn't cited as a reason for women not reading (i.e., leining) Torah; as mbarr mentioned, the reason given is kavod hatzibbur. It's discussed in terms of whether women can be awarded aliyos, but I believe the assumption would have been at the time that the person receiving the aliyah was supposed to do the reading, not just stand at the bimah and have the baal korei act as a shaliach, so the discussion is about whether women can do the reading. I believe but am not 100% certain that the issue is discussed in masechta Megillah.

Also, I believe that the trope is considered part and parcel of the obligation to read during a service. It's considered part of the oral tradition and conveys some extra sense of meeting.

There are disagreements as to whether women can blow shofar on R"H or read the megillah on Purim. In the circles I travel in, the general consensus is that it's permitted for women to do this for other women but is not the best option.

[jarethsgirl.livejournal.com]

I'm really not the right person to comment about this subject, but I just wanted to let you know I'd added you :)