When Jewish Women in Time and Torah was first published over thirty years ago, I was at the beginning of my journey as a young woman struggling to find my place within the world of Torah and halakhah. At that point, women had been learning Talmud and other basic Jewish texts at a high level for a good number of years and were now yearning to turn that knowledge into personal practice of mitzvot, some of which were denied to women. We wanted to be active participants in the ritual that formed the fabric of our personal lives and that of our communities. At times we felt alienated and neglected by traditional Judaism and its leaders.
I was in college, seriously thinking about these issues, when Jewish Women in Time and Torah was released. I was pleased, fascinated, and touched that my very own grandfather had written on an issue so close to my heart – the status of women in halakhic Judaism. What perplexed me at the time was his motivation. What motivated him to dedicate a whole book to this topic? Clearly he himself was not a woman trying to reconcile what she knew about herself and what the texts of tradition said about her gender. My grandfather, father to three sons, did not even have any daughters, and thus could not witness their struggles firsthand. And although my grandmother was an incredibly strong and individualistic character, her activism did not lie within the halakhic context.1I very clearly remember eating Shabbat lunch at my grandmother’s with my brother after my grandfather had passed away. At the end of the meal when I suggested that we have a mixed zimmun (as my grandfather discusses in this book on pages 98–102), my grandmother said very forcefully, “Not in my house we don’t!”
Nor was my grandfather a young rabbi at the start of his career, hoping to make a name for himself, and so chose to write on the pressing hot topic of the day. I was baffled – what motivates an eighty-year old traditional European rabbi to write an innovative and progressive treatise on the status of women in halakhic Judaism at a time when most other Orthodox rabbis are not even willing to admit there is a problem? However, as I came to understand my grandfather’s commitment to Torat Hayyim – a living eternal Torah – I realized that this work on women’s status was a fitting culmination to his vast teaching and writing career.
This book is an outgrowth of Rabbi Professor Eliezer Berkovits’ theology and belief system. His philosophical understanding of the nature and function of the halakhic system shaped his view on the status of women in Judaism, and his role as a posek compelled him to address their religious needs in the modern day. This progression and development can be seen in his published works. Besides the entire volume he wrote on marriage and divorce law,2תנאי בנשואין ובגט (Conditionality in Marriage and Divorce), Jerusalem: Mosad Harav Kook, 1966 and 2008. the topic of women appeared throughout his books and articles,3" מעמד האשה ביהדות – הבט הלכתי-חברתי" (“The Status of Women in Judaism: A Socio-Halakhic Overview”) Hagot 5, Misrad Hahinuch, 1983, pp. 27–34. "התחייבות עצמית של נשים במצות עשה שהזמן גרמא" (“The Self-Obligation of Women in Positive Time Caused Commandments”), Sinai 100, 1987, pp. 187–94. and so it was only natural that he decided to dedicate this entire book to the topic. In Crisis and Faith,4Crisis and Faith, Chapter 7, “The Status of Women within Judaism,” New York: Sanhedrin, 1976. published in 1976, Berkovits entitled the seventh chapter “The Status of Women within Judaism,” and seven years later he devoted the first chapter of his magnum opus Not in Heaven: The Nature and Function of Halakha to “The Halakhic Conscience and the Status of the Woman.”5Not in Heaven: The Nature and Function of Halakha, Chapter 1, “The Halakhic Conscience and the Status of the Woman,” Chapter 4, “Marriage and Divorce Laws.” New York: Ktav, 1983. Finally, here in Jewish Women in Time and Torah,6First published by Ktav Publishing, Hoboken, NJ: 1990. the last of his nineteen books, Berkovits addressed the issue head-on. He presented his theological explanation for a woman’s status in past generations, and the changes that are possible in the present day.
Berkovits’ views on women are the product of his philosophy of halakhah in general and his understanding of the nature of Torat Hayyim in particular. A number of the examples of halakhic ingenuity which appear in the Mishnah and Talmud involve women and divorce. These cases helped Berkovits form his general views of the nature and function of halakhah and in turn caused him to grapple seriously and practically with the issue in modern times – for Berkovits believed that a living Torah must speak to the unique needs of each specific generation. As he explains: “The Torah is eternal because it has a Word for each generation… One can find the Word that has been waiting for this hour to be revealed only if one faces the challenges of each new situation in the history of the generations of Israel and attempts to deal with it in intellectual and ethical honesty.”7Not in Heaven, pp. 117–8.
Berkovits’ deep commitment to and faith in the eternity and truth of the Divine Torah left him no other choice in his role as a posek but to take responsibility to act and thus fulfill what he thought was his part in the covenant with God. For Berkovits, the study of halakhah was not confined to the walls of the beit midrash. He writes: “There is no halakhah of the ivory tower. The attitude to human needs is decisive. Without understanding, without sympathy and compassion, one cannot be an authentic halakhist.”8Crisis and Faith, p. 98.
This great sensitivity to, and deep understanding of, human reality and need, compelled Berkovits to speak out regarding women’s issues. He courageously voiced what he believed to be halakhic truth without concern for normative communal labels or how his views would be received by the establishment. For example, in a letter to the editor of the Jerusalem Post newspaper, he staunchly defended women’s prayer groups after the leadership of Yeshiva University had condemned them, and he voiced public support for the women who participated in them:
Sir – I read with interest your article of September 11, “Orthodox women fume at rabbis.” One may no longer remain silent. I have read carefully the responsum of the five Talmudists at Yeshiva University, forbidding prayer services by women. I wish to state unequivocally that their so called “T’shuva” has nothing to do with Halacha.
People will have to realize that knowledge and understanding are not identical. One may know a lot and understand very little.
There may be a great deal of Orthodoxy around. Unfortunately, there is only very little halakhic Judaism.
May God grant to the women of the Women’s Tefilla Network strength and courage to continue their efforts to the best of their abilities.9Letter to the editor, Jerusalem Post, April 1, 1985.
Berkovits’ views on women and his motivation to speak out and create change also stemmed from his most basic core belief about the Divine. In one of his Hebrew articles he uses a Tanaitic midrash about the daughters of Zelophehad to explain his own behavior:
I think that the time has come to admit the truth and to confess that in the legal-halakhic area as well as in the communal-sociological area there is severe inequality to the detriment of women.
Interestingly, Hazal themselves were aware of this situation. In order to substantiate my remarks, I will quote from the Sifrei on the verse: “The daughters of Zelophehad came forward… They stood before Moses” (Numbers 27:1–2).10Sifrei Bamidbar #133. The Sifrei says: “Since the daughters of Zelophehad heard that the land would be divided [amongst] the tribes, [and given] to the males and not to the females, they all gathered to take advice one from the other. They said: The compassion of God is not like the compassion of human beings [literally, flesh and blood]. Human beings have more compassion on males than on females. But the One who spoke and the world came into existence is not so. Rather God has compassion on males and on females. God has compassion on everything.” We hear a kind of criticism, which Hazal themselves have leveled, about the laws of the division of the land. Seemingly the issue is very simple. Because I believe in the Holy One Blessed be He and because I believe that the Holy One Blessed be He has compassion on all his creations – for this reason all discrimination is forbidden to me. I am obligated to cleave to his deeds.11Maamad HaIsha Beyahadut – Mabat Hilkhati- Hevrati, p. 27–8. The translation is my own. The original reads:
אני חושב שהגיע הזמן להודות על האמת ולהתוודות, שבשטח המשפטי-הילכתי וגם בשטח החברתי-סוציולוגי שורר אי-שוויון חמור לרעת האשה. מעניין הוא, שחז"ל בעצמם היו מודעים למצב זה. בכדי לבסס את דברי, אצטט מה'ספרי' על הפסוק: "ותקרבנה בנות צלפחד …ותעמדנה לפני משה "(במדבר כ"ז א('. אומר ה'ספרי': "ותקרבנה בנות צלפחד "(במדבר פרק כז:א( כיון ששמעו בנות צלפחד שהארץ מתחלקת לשבטים, לזכרים ולא לנקבות, נתקבצו כולן זו על זו ליטול עצה. אמרו: "לא כרחמי בשר ודם, רחמי המקום. בשר ודם רחמיו על הזכרים יותר מן הנקבות אבל מי שאמר והיה העולם, אינו כן אלא רחמיו על הזכרים ועל הנקבות רחמיו על הכל." שומעים אנו מעין ביקורת, שחז"ל בעצמם מתחו, על דיני חלוקת הארץ. לכאורה הדבר פשוט מאוד. מכיוון שאני מאמין בקב"ה ומכיוון שאני מאמין שהקדוש ברוך הוא רחמיו על כל מעשיו – מטעם זה כל הפליה אסורה עלי. אני מחויב לבדוק במעשיו.
Berkovits’ fundamental belief that God, as the creator of the world and humanity, does not discriminate between the genders, and his belief that his role as a Jew and posek was to emulate the Divine must be a central aspect of what drove him to write this book. In it he provides a profound theological explanation for why one should always be working towards elevating women to their “Torah true” place of equality despite very clear and disparaging statements, which relegate them to a second-class legal status within the Torah and rabbinic literature. His treatise reconciles those discriminatory Torah texts with the compassionate Giver of Torah who, as seen from the story of the daughters of Zelophehad, could never have ideally wanted to favor men over women.
Belief not only in God but in the Divine’s Torah and eternal system of halakhah, was another aspect of Berkovits’ worldview that led him to address women’s issues. In a private correspondence to his Rebbe, R. Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg, the Sridei Esh, regarding the problem of agunot, women chained in marriage, he writes: “I believe with complete faith that there is a solution because I believe. Because I believe in the God of Israel and his Torah, I also believe in the strength and eternal power of the Halakhah to solve the problems that transpire in the lives of the Am Yisrael.”12The letter is undated and was most probably written around the early 1960s. The translation is mine. The original reads:
אני מאמין באמונה שלמה שיש פתרון מפני שאני מאמין. מפני שאני מאמין בא-להי ישראל ובתורתו אני מאמין ג"כ בכחו האיתן והנצחי של ההלכה לפתור את הבעיות העוברות את חיי עם ישראל.
This belief that halakhah must find a solution for the intolerable situation of women who are agunot spurred Berkovits to write a halakhic treatise on the issue in 1966, well before other leading rabbinic figure were willing to address the issue. He describes his experiences and motivation for that book in the same Hebrew article cited above.
Interestingly, before the publication of the book, one of the senior rabbis in the United States13I believe this is a reference to R. Leo Jung. gave the manuscript to one of the great rabbinic authorities [poskim] in the United States and the entire world so that he could offer his opinion.14I believe this is a reference to R. Moshe Feinstein. And this was his response: “From the side of halakha I have no reason to oppose, but if one should do [la'asot] this – that is already a different issue.”
What we need to understand today is that it is “a time to act” [et la'asot] and it is “a time to act” not just for the woman but rather “a time to act for HaShem,”15Psalms 119:126. for the things that are happening today are in the category of a desecration of God’s name [hillul HaShem]. The role of halakha is to solve problems.16Maamad HaIsha Beyahadut – Mabat Hilkhati- Hevrati, p. 34. The translation is my own. The original reads:
מעניין, שלפני הדפסת הספר, מסר אחד מזקני הרבנים בארצות הברית את כתב-היד לאחד מגדולי הפוסקים בארצות הברית ובעולם כולו כדי שיחווה את דעתו. זו הייתה תשובתו: "מצד ההלכה אין לי מה להתנגד, אבל אם לעשות את זה – זה כבר עניין אחר".
מה שאנחנו צריכים להבין היום הוא ש"עת לעשות", ו"עת לעשות" לא רק בשביל האשה אלא "עת לעשות לה'", מפני שהדברים שמתרחשים היום הם בבחינת חילול-השם. תפקידה של ההלכה הוא לעשות לפתרונן של בעיות.
Berkovits felt that to remain silent in the face of true human tragedy and not to actively search for a halakhic way to address the needs of women was a desecration of God’s Holy Name. Directly opposing those who believe that to preserve the true and Godly nature of Torah there can be no change, Berkovits’ whole life was dedicated to acting in the name of, and becoming a model of, Hakadosh Barukh Hu, in this human world so as to bring about a transformation in the attitudes toward and status of women in halakhic Judaism.
One could look back on these past thirty years since the original publication of this book and say that the innovations and advances that have ensued for women within the halakhic world are a celebration and tribute to the real life change Berkovits helped bring about with the writing of this important work. On the other hand, there is also a measure of sadness that this book remains so relevant today. There is so much work to be done to bring attention to the pain of agunot, to ensure that women can actively participate in both personal and communal ritual when they wish to, and to move beyond the negative and disparaging views that are still “Torah tolerated” in our communities to values that mirror the Divine and are authentically “Torah taught.”
What is most important about this book, what makes it as relevant and new as the day it was first published, is not the specific halakhic cases and rituals that Berkovits so eruditely writes about, but rather the theology and philosophy of halakhah that he presents. This book offers a coherent argument for both how to uphold the eternal Divine nature of Torah and yet to also recognize that the ever-changing status of women, reflected in our sacred texts, is linked to historical and social movements of humanity in the greater world at large. The explanation Berkovits posits enables him to make halakhic suggestions for innovations within ritual despite past precedent of women’s non-participation. The presentation of this world-view, which reflects looking at the issues with ethical and moral honesty, lends support and basis for present and future halakhists and poskim to initiate change in women’s status and practice. Hopefully, this will not be seen as deviating from tradition but rather will be understood as a direct outgrowth of the true nature of Torah.
For my grandfather being an active part of women’s historical and social change within the Jewish community was a reflection of who he was – a simple God-fearing Jew, committed with his whole being to the way of life of Torah, halakhah, and mitzvot. This book is a fitting crown and testament to his legacy.
May God grant us strength and courage to continue his efforts to the best of our abilities in pursuit of the “gradual halakhic renewal that will ultimately reestablish Judaism as Torat Hayyim – a Torah of Life.”17See end of page 140.
Jerusalem, Israel
Purim 5781/2021