Sunday, January 17, 2016

Chiddush about Women and Tefillin

See here - the original post about Women and Tefillin - a list of links to articles and blog posts on the subject.. 

My shiur Shabbos afternoon was about women and tefillin. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this article as part of my preparation. But one thought came to me afterwards based on the position of Rabbi Eliezer Melamed (see his footnote there). 

One of the suggested reasons why women should not wear tefillin is based on the rules surrounding how the body must be maintained while the tefillin are worn, what is called in halakha "guf naki." In simple terms - guf naki means no discharge can come from one's privates while wearing the tefillin. Since women can't control the menstrual discharge, then certainly until menopause or at least during those days of the month, the woman would be forbidden from wearing the tefillin out of respect for the honor owed to the tefillin.

One of the primary examples of a woman wearing tefillin appears in the Talmud in the form of the personality of Michal Bat Shaul. She is assumed to have been super righteous, so much so that her motivation was pure and the rabbis did not reprove her for her "untraditional" practice. Even though she was the only woman doing this.

But, in light of Rabbi Melamed, might I suggest another possibility as to why Michal was the only example the rabbis could come up with: The verse tells us in Shmuel II 6:23 that Michal never had children. Could it be she never menstruated, and then, unlike other women, the reasons why the rabbis didn't bother her was because her "guf naki" issue was a non-issue?

Just a thought?

2 comments:

  1. Does the lack of practical application mean that the halacha can change on a whim? After all, there could be many instances where under a certain condition the application isn't immediately obvious. Does that mean that we don't need to apply to halachot? What about maaris ayin? Do individuals have the authority to change the rules when they don't believe the application exists? Can't I say, for example, that in an Eruv, we could blow a shofar on shabbat rosh hashana?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think individuals have such authority. Of course what one does for oneself fits into the category of personal autonomy that is between oneself and God. But the "change" for all falls under the category of "ככל אשר יורוך." That power was given to the scholars, the real Talmidei Chakhamim and poskim.

    ReplyDelete