From: david@bourbon.ee.tulane.edu (David Kaufmann)
Subject: Re: On the SUPERIOR Role of Women
Organization: E.E. Dept., Tulane University, New Orleans, LA
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:39:50 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-3309]: bourbon

In article <199208301444.AA08904@das.wang.com> MASH@WEIZMANN.WEIZMANN.AC.IL (Michael Shimshoni) writes:
>>
>>G-d's will was to create the world, and the woman, having a child
>>in her womb for the 9 months, is the closest act that a person can
>>do to 'copy' what G-d has done.
>
>That is interesting.  Thus *every* woman, *any* woman who is "having a
>child in her womb" does the closest act ... to copy what God has done.
>
>In  their pathetic  cover  up of  the male  orientated  nature of  the
>present  day practice  of Orthodox  Judaism, they  are ready  to twist
>logic to the  extreme.  Any woman, also every  child bearing *gentile*
>woman, is closer to God's acts than not just Moses, the Ba'al Shem Tov
>but even  lehavdil the  present Lubavicher Rebbe  and the  Mashiah (in
>case this is  not a repetition of a previously  mentioned person), all
>just males and thus further from God.
>
Ignoring Michael's uncharacteristic rancor: one does not say
"lehavdil" about Jews. Whatever one's level of observance, the
commonality of being Jewish transcends differences.

>This insisting  that *everything*  has been handed  down, thus  has to
>remain unchanged,  really makes  the present day  Orthodox apologetics
>perform some  odd mental  gymnastics.  If one  cannot accept  the fact
>that at  the time when, say,  some of the rules  and rituals governing
>the relative  position of  Jewish males  and females  were formulated,
>they may  have been fitting, or  even progressive for their  time, but
>no, one has  to try and rape  the simple words of  prayers and deprive
>them of their obvious meaning as in the following:
>
Before judging the intent (or effect) of rules and rituals, one should
also make an effort to understand the purpose and basis of them.
Sociological prejudices too often substitute, especially when
considering matters of Judaism, for contextual understanding, whether
one agrees with the principles or not. As one should not accuse
Michael of disrespect because of his sarcasm and sardonic style,
unless one chooses to deliberately misread, so, too, in the case of
Jewish "rules and rituals."

>>With this in mind, we can understand why the morning blessings are
>>slightly different for men and women. Men will say that the thank
>>G-d for not making them a woman, yet women say thank G-d for
>>making "like His will".
>>
>>At first glance, it seems to look inferior,
>
>and also at second and third glance!
>
>>                                            however, if we look at
>>G-d's will, we find He wanted and therefore created the world and
>>humanity. The woman is the one that can emulate this, and
>>therefore, she says the blessing which thanks G-d for making her
>>"like his will", meaning, capable to fulfill His will.
>
>Now "like his will" is supposed to "mean" capable to fulfill his will;
>even in the original Hebrew this does not sound right.  And the Jewish
>male blesses God that he was so kind  and did not to make him a woman,
>and thus  denying him the ability  to fulfill God's will!  How twisted
>can some minds get?!
>
The translation is not the best. I'd suggest, as some have written,
"according to His will."

This controversy is, imho, passe, arousing the ire of many except the
thousands of well-educated, secularly involved observant women.

One does not have to agree with a prayer's formulation; one should,
however, give at least the leaders credit for understanding the
problems, if there are any, and having an answer.

I would agree, though, that scj is not always the best place to find
either questions or answers.

>Michael Shimshoni


David Kaufmann
INTERNET:	david@bourbon.ee.tulane.edu