Pages

Saturday, March 07, 2009

R' Feitman on Yoatzot Halacha: Second Letter

In this past week's Five Towns Jewish Times, there was a piece published by R' Yaakov Feitman (formerly the Rav of my parents' shul in Cleveland, currently the Rav of "The Red Shul" in the Five Towns) about the issue of Yoatzot Halachah - female halachic advisors. Upon reading the article, I will readily state that I was less than impressed by the arguments cited. Certainly, the examples of a shtender or the tzuras haDaf as examples of not altering our mesorah came off poorly; as commenters on the piece noted, it is difficult to imagine that Moshe Rabbeinu learned at a shtender or that a form created by a non-Jew to allow for easier printing is somehow such an important part of our tradition. Furthermore, only after a later closer reading was it clearer just how R' Feitman intended the role of the rebbetzin and how that was quite dissimilar to that of the proposed yoetzet. Prior to that, my reaction had been to wonder how what he described was different than what was expected of a yoetzet.

Between my own confusion as to his article and after reading other (disrespectful) criticisms elsewhere, I decided to contact R' Feitman asking for a clarification: [e-mail was sent to Rebbetzin Feitman; only relevant parts included]
I'm writing because I feel like your husband is going to get harshly criticized for the Yoetzet piece in the 5TJT. [...] the substance of the piece comes off rather weakly, I have to say. A careful reading suggests that a few points come off a little differently than he may have intended, so perhaps a clarification would help, though certain points simply don't work well.

Not sure why I'm writing this, just felt somewhat frustrated reading it originally. Perhaps R' Feitman could rewrite it in a way that comes off more clearly? I don't know. But it felt important enough to comment to you/him about.
R' Feitman wrote a letter in response to me, beginning with a simple statement noting that he has no further intention in responding in any way, feeling that he has said what he needs to say and is moving on to other things. He then shared a few thoughts for my own sake, but allowed me to quote him if I felt it would be productive. As I had a much greater understanding of his position after reading the points he made, I have decided that the same may be true for others and have decided to do so. [again, only relevant portions included]
Dear Ezzie:

Sholom Aleichem.

[...]

Regarding your e-mail and my article, [...] I actually have no intention of further responding in any way. I said what I needed to say and am moving on to other things.

However, for your sake only, I will share a few thoughts. Feel free to quote me if you feel it will be productive:

1. I purposely did not cite sources.

Much of Torah decision-making and Hashkafah positions are more related to the essence of the Torah and elemental issues than to a particular footnote. It is famous that Poskim treated the "Yirah Li" ("I believe") of the Rosh as a stronger statement than when he sourced his P'sak. There is a famous story to this effect as well with Rav Chaim Soloveitchik and Rav Chaim Ozer Grodjenski. As a matter of fact, Rav Soloveitchik ZTL used this method in responding to Ben Gurion's famous "Who is a Jew?" query. He chose to answer succinctly and with almost no sources jointly with Rav Chaim Heller. The point he was making was
  • a. There is no need for us both to respond since this is basic and there is only one Torah;
  • b. This does not require lengthy analysis or pilpul. It is self-evident-poshut.
2. The points about women being more comfortable with a woman than with a man are of course all valid. My only contention was that this has certainly not gotten worse in recent times. If anything, I believe the opposite is true and there IS a time-honored approach to this matter. I am well aware that Nishmat advocates that the Yoatzot turn to a Posek for complicated or novel issues. However, this is not enough. The sense from the Nishmat web site and literature is that they believe their training is sufficient for the overwhelming majority of Shaalos. This is simply not true. They provide a great deal of INFORMATION. However, even basic P'sak often involves methodology and training far beyond the purvey of those with a thousand or even two thousand hours of study. It is, of course, true that not every Rov is a Posek or the expert we all ought to be. But that does not justify ejecting millenia of tradition.

3. I never, obviously, would claim that a shtender, Tzuras Hadaf or particular type of shiur was the sine qua non of Torah study but the point I was making was that Tzurah or form is part of the tradition of Torah. Clearly, there are numerous legitimate forms -- Chassidim, Sepahardim, Hungarians, Litvaks each maintain authentic but different Tzuros. However, each of those groups would be guilty of a lapse in their own Mesorah if one of their leaders unilaterally cancelled his own tradition even in favor of one of the others. Rav Hershel Schechter, who speaks often in my Shul, has written eloquently in his Nefesh Harav (in the name of the Rov) and especially in his lengthy essay "Tz'ei Lach B'ikvei Hatzon" of the requirement in Torah of emulating earlier generations in both format and substance. This applies most urgently to this subject because we are speaking about the Mesoras Hatorah. We have nothing more sacred than this.

4. Another source which I did not quote (but of course could have) is the famous Yam Shel Shlomo No.9 on the Gemara in Bava Kamma 38a which seems to indicate Jewish bias toward gentiles concerning monetary matters. The Maharshal in this sefer asks, why couldn’t the rabbis have simply withheld the one Mishnah in all of Shas which caused difficulty? The answer, he writes, is that when it comes to presenting the Torah accurately even a sin of omission is as bad as a sin of commission, and may not be utilized even if it means putting all of k'lal yisroel into danger. Analogies are always imperfect and dangerous but it is clear from this Gemara and Maharshal that one must be extraordinarily careful when tampering with any Mesorah.

Those who make the point about changes brought about by individuals such as Sarah Schnierer etc. are correct. However, she did go to the Chofetz Chaim, Gerrer Rebbe and others, the Gedolei and Ziknei HaDor, who with the the most profound of gravity, decided that these innovations were acceptable and necessary for the survival of K’lal Yisroel. This process has certainly not happened with the Yoatzot.

There is much more but it is Erev Shabbos [...]

B'ahava,

Rabbi Yaakov Feitman
At this point it is important to remember what R' Feitman's original intent was in publishing the article in the 5TJT:
...Since this was reported without critical comment or dissent, I feel that an alternative view must be presented to your readers. So please consider this article a macha’ah—one man’s protest and disagreement with the “rave reviews” this project has reportedly received.
His intent was not and does not seem to be to pasken or say with finality that the idea of a yoetzet is anathema to and must be rejected as an attack on Jewish tradition. Rather, he seems to be simply noting an alternative way of looking at the issue by making a few succint points about how it seems to have come about and what the purpose of it is, by questioning why it is necessary and what it really adds. This does not mean that there is no merit to the other side of the discussion, but merely questions whether those merits outweigh or countermand the tradition that is already in place and properly address the other points that have been raised. Certainly, it is worthwhile to think about these issues from both sides before rushing to judgment either way.

31 comments:

  1. bottom line is that there are more people who utilize the yoatzot who might otherwise be less zahir or laxed in their practice of tahars hamishpacha.

    it is doubtful that even this rabbi would rather a scenario where the yoatzot didnt exist and people couldnt comfortably practice th.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anon - I think the comment was cut off, mind reposting?

    bottom line is that there are more people who utilize the yoatzot who might otherwise be less zahir or laxed in their practice of tahars hamishpacha.

    While I think that's AN argument the other way, his point seems to be that it is that it's hard to say that that's necessarily true. Certainly it is difficult to say that it is the "bottom line". Moreover, even if true, present it as an issue for discussion among the gedolei hador: Many women are increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of going to their Rabbonim; Rebbetzins are [too busy/unqualified/etc.] to fulfill a role as a listener who can then present things to Rabbonim; what about creating this position of a yoetzet to serve as this advisor in between, who would still seek out a psak when the need arises from a qualified posek?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why do you and the commenters call him Rav Feitman and the article says Rav Feldman?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Rabbis can't be mikva ladies.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon2 - His name is certainly R' Feitman. The Feldman is a typo.

    Anon3 - I don't see the relevance.

    ReplyDelete
  6. R' Feitman assumes that there hasn't been any discussion by the Gedolei Hador re: Yoatzot. Just b/c he may not have been included in the conversation doesn't mean there haven't been conversation about it. Go ask R' Aharon Lichetenstein or R' Willig about the women serving as yoatzot. You might be surprised.
    I'm not naive that everyone believes that this concept is wonderful, but rabbonim who are just discussing it 5 yrs. after the first yoetzet arrived in the US shouldn't assume that the gedolei torah haven't discussed this issue already. They have and some are pro and some are against it. But this mesorah argument is red herring at best.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sorry to butt in here, but I have to say, Ezzie was refering to gedolei hador, not just prominent rabbanim. Meaning gedolei eretz yisrael and maybe america. Big difference.

    regarding the point, that more ppl would be more machmir if they go to yoatzot, that is just not a strong point. More ppl would keep pesach if their house didn't have to be cleaned of chametz, or more people would daven better on yom kippur if they got to eat. my point is that we are am yisrael and this is just what we do, whether or not its par to our comfort zone. this is just the way we do it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I didn't read R' Feitman's piece. My husband did and was considering writing a response. I know he didn't post it yet, and may not. [It is one of those type of things that make s blogs bad for shidduchim. Actually, we are not yet worried about that (though some would say we should be).] Anyway, the argument of things have always been this way and so we should not change can be used to block innovations in medicine, fertility treatments, social advances, and educational progress. Hey,if slavery was legal for hundreds of years, no one ha a right to question its validity, would be one example of this type of argument. So you do need a bit more than that as a basis.

    For my own part,I once heard one of the Yoatzot speak, and she said that chareidi women do call the Yotatzot because they are very uncomfortable discussing intimate details with a man. Also the Yotatzot have put out a very good book on Taharas Hamispacha,which is more informative than anything else I have seen written in the English language. (There happens to be far more available in far more detail in seforim written in Hebrew than in English) They also do try to make these halachos accessible to women who are not educated as FFBs or committed enough to take on the idealized approach usually taught to kallahs.
    As to what they offer,they call it advice rather than psak. Other than judging maros and the like, a lot of situations have already been addressed by halachic authorities. So there is a precedent and halachic guideline about what to do in these situations. The simple fact is that many are ignorant of the details of the halcha. They don't need a new psak but englightenment, which is why they can turn to the Yoatzot for information and guidance.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anon - What Raizel said, essentially.

    Ariella - Have your husband read this follow up before penning any response...

    Bad for Shidduchim? Oy. I hope that's not a reason...! :)

    I don't think the argument is "it's always been this way", but "it's always been this way and there seems to be no real reason to change it".

    Other than judging maros and the like, a lot of situations have already been addressed by halachic authorities. So there is a precedent and halachic guideline about what to do in these situations. The simple fact is that many are ignorant of the details of the halcha. They don't need a new psak but englightenment, which is why they can turn to the Yoatzot for information and guidance.

    I think that that is simultaneously the best argument *for* the Yoatzot - and also against. If the problem is a lack of access to or just lack of knowledge in general, the need is not for Yoatzot but for a greater way of attaining the answers being sought. I would tend to agree that the problem is less that of psak and more that of knowledge; that just means that there needs to be a better way of finding the answers people seek, not necessarily a need for a Yoetzet.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ezzie you wrote 2 points I'd like to comment on:
    "it's always been this way and there seems to be no real reason to change it"

    if an ostrich keeps its head in the sand, then it will never see all the changes going on around, will it? As one of the individuals pointed out there is a need for increased knowledge, but what if iI also told you that these yoatzot helped numerous women who until now couldn't get pregnant? are you really going to tell them "sorry, but tradition trumps your desire for kids (not to mention"? We may be an Am kshe oref, but that doesn't mean we're supposed to be ignore the needs of the weak.

    You also mentioned the following:
    "that just means that there needs to be a better way of finding the answers people seek, not necessarily a need for a Yoetzet"
    What is the problem with using Yoatzot to increase knowledge? Is the fear based on the slippery slope theory? If you knew these women, you'd know that's not the concern. Bottom line is that there's a problem out there that isn't being addressed - the rabbonim in Riverdale didn't receive fewer calls when the first yoetzet started there, yet she received numerous calls (about 5-7 per week). Who was calling her if the rabbis were still getting the same number of calls? ALl the solutions that the anti-YH are proposing aren't meeting this population's needs. Average Rebbitzens don't understand the first thing about technical fertility matters nor are they fluent enough in the laws of TH to fully grasp all the nuances that can impact the psak. Increased sensitivity programs for rabbis are nice, but it's not persuading more women to call them.
    Additionally, there's a flaw in your argument - you seem to say that there's no need for change yet acknowledge that there are flaws in the system. Well what is it - if there are no reasons to change, then there aren't any flaws? But if there are flaws, then oyu need to come up with a solution. YH is a solution. What's yours?

    ReplyDelete
  11. As for Raizel who said "Ezzie was refering to gedolei hador, not just prominent rabbanim. Meaning gedolei eretz yisrael and maybe america. Big difference." If you're refering to the Moetzet Agudas Yisroel, then you're missing the point. Charedi/Yeshivish rabbonim obviously reject this position, but they also reject going to university, going to the army, and other positions that are generally accepted in the MO communities in the US & Israel. R' Feitman is a shul rabbi of a MO community - yeshivishe MO, but MO nonetheless. This article would never have been prionted in Yated, b/c they don't even acknowledge these ideas. Rabbonim like R' WIllig, R' Lichtenstein, R' Warhaftig (head of Machon Harry FIschel) and many other Gedolei Hador have already taken positive stands on this issue. So again,let's not use the whole mesorah argument - it's a red herring and a lazy man's argument at best. ANd please, let's not use the term da'as torah here.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ezzie, my point was that the Yoatzot serve to help educate women. There are many who truly wish to keep taharas hamispacha but are lacking in understanding of what's involved. Mikvah ladies have told me that some women come with bedikos they want reviewed when they come for tvila. There are several problems with this that I won't go into here. But what this signifies is that these women who know they may have a question do not feel comfortable enough to ask a rabbi themselves at the right time and want the intermediary of the mikvah lady -- which is really not what the mikvah lady is supposed to have to do. If women knew more, there would be far fewer questions coming in from the mikvah on their layl tevila because they would know before either because they asked when the question first arose or already learned whether or not their issue prevents tevila.

    BTW my bad for shidduchim reference really refers to a relative who took his blog privates at the insistence of his children of marriageable age who insisted it was bad for their shidduch prospects.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anyone who can't believe that there are any jewish women today who are uncomfortable consulting men for taharat hamishpacha questions probably has not spoken to women about this for 35 years or more. Get your heads out of the sand. And if you want verification, go and speak to women across the observant spectrum and listen to what they say.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon - if an ostrich keeps its head in the sand, then it will never see all the changes going on around, will it?

    Not the same thing. R' Feitman is not saying anyone should stick their head in the sand, but that the Yoatzot seem to be an unnecessary innovation. This is an arguable point, for certain, but he brings reasons why he believes they are not adding anything that a Rebbetzin already fulfills. Meanwhile, the developments it could or would theoretically lead to are obvious and ones with which most people would or should not be comfortable with, in his opinion.

    Is the fear based on the slippery slope theory? If you knew these women, you'd know that's not the concern.

    I would assume that that plays a role, and whether the specific women currently are fine or not does not matter so much as the concept of how such a position could be used.

    Average Rebbitzens don't understand the first thing about technical fertility matters nor are they fluent enough in the laws of TH to fully grasp all the nuances that can impact the psak.

    And on the flip side R' Feitman seems to be arguing that they Yoatzot don't know enough about psak. Again - there are certainly arguments to both sides, and I am not claiming there are not. R' Feitman's main purpose was to demonstrate that there *is* a second side to this.

    Finally, flaws do not necessarily mean large change is necessary. R' Feitman seems to feel that people need to better utilize what's there, and that if people still feel there's a strong need for Yoatzot, then it should be discussed (or perhaps it should be discussed already) among poskim. But to simply implement them instead of psak seems to be a rush to drastic action without determining what the unintended consequences might be for a problem that may be overstated or to which the solution being offered's impact is overstated.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anon - Certainly there's a short list on the MO side taking a stand for Yoatzot, but if people are looking for widespread acceptance than it will have to pass through the Charedi world as well. I don't know the makeup of the Red Shul, but R' Feitman certainly places himself in the RW camp more than the MO (though certainly he is respectful toward the MO).

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ariella - And again, the argument will be that Yoatzot are not necessary as a position for the community to have such an education. If the need for such an education is there, then we should create a better way for them to learn what they need to without creating a controversial position.

    Perhaps we need to expand the role of the mikvah ladies in this generation.

    Anon - I think R' Feitman addresses that well: Why is this a greater problem now than in the past hundreds of years? To whatever extent the discomfort exists, what has gotten worse in the last 35 that didn't exist prior to that?

    ReplyDelete
  17. In reply to your question, the reason this problem has exacerbated over the last 35-40 years is that women have become more educated in all areas (including Torah), and know they have more choices in almost anything they do, think, or say. I personally know of many women who would NEVER consult a rabbi on any of these matters. Rather they would most likely become more machmir (some may be more maykhel). Remember, for instance, one of the first yoatzot is a trained MD, who has given gemara shiurim herself. She has studied long and hard to get to this point. And many, many women have availed themselves of either the yoatzot or their web site. Just begin asking.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anon - But that doesn't follow logically, which I think is R' Feitman's point. Why would more education make them less likely to ask, and certainly why would it make them more machmir?

    The line is typically "Anyone can be machmir, it takes someone who knows what they're talking about to be meikel."

    If people know *more*, wouldn't they a) have less Q's to begin with and b) be more willing to ask the Rav since they have a better background on the Q?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Whether it is logical or not, the facts speak for themselves. Look at the trends; when women today look for doctors whether for breast cancer or obstetrics, they often look for women physicians. This is happening in increasing numbers. (I work in that industry.) Few women I know want to send underpants in any shape or form to a man; especially when there are cases it isn't needed. As I keep telling you, just go out and do your own survey, but remember, you must include every facet of the community from modern orthodox to the right. You might be surprised at some of the answers given not to you, but to a woman asking. I have friends in the chareidi world who have privately voiced their opinions in regards to rabbis and the control they want to exert over women.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anon - That's fine, and I personally agree with that. But because of the illogic it's understandable and logical for Rabbonim like R' Feitman to disagree, particularly if they're not getting any direct knowledge of this, as is obviously the case. Nobody is approaching the Charedi Rabbonim, informing them of what's going on, and suggesting this to them (which is what he touched on). Without direct knowledge and with the illogic involved, it's understandable that they would not wish to suddenly change course on a potentially large issue.

    On other blogs and certainly in other discussions the implication is that rabbonim like R' Feitman are against Yoatzot because they are trying to control women or other such nonsense. I think that it's important to understand why people disagree with the idea, and that it has nothing to do with control of women in almost all cases. Are there exceptions? Probably. But R' Feitman and others like him who are arguing against it are giving reasons why they think it's a dangerous switch and they don't see a reason to make such a dangerous switch. I think that those who don't see the danger are lying to themselves, and that the reasons are worth a real discussion on both sides.

    In the end, I think that a real discussion would lead to some version of Yoatzot, but the issue needs to be clarified better, certainly in the Charedi world.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I personally do not care if the chareidi world accepts it or not. Their rabbis are not my rabbis. If this is the way they want to live, fine with me; but do not try to dictate to me when my rabbinic authority is not threatened or intimidated by the yoatzot.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Understood, and you may not, but a large chunk of the MO world (especially the RW MO world) still follows or is beholden to Charedi psak and Rabbonim. You can't pretend it doesn't matter. This may speak to a greater weakness in the MO world in terms of its lack of respected Rabbonim on a more global level or certainly within its own circles.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I beg to differ. We do not all have to adhere to the opinions of the same group of rabbis. We do have choices.

    ReplyDelete
  24. On a personal level, yes. On a communal level, you can't ignore the impact the Charedi world has on the MO one when it comes to psak.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I can almost guarantee you that the yoatzot will not go away. The rabbinic authorities that teach them, that test them, and those that have already approved of them will not go back on their support. Just like the toanot,these women are here to stay.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Not what I'm saying. I think that's true. But the positive impact will remain minimized.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Then that's too bad for jewish women.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ez -

    To reiterate what others have written, increased education and knowledge has led women to ask more questions and challenge the status quo. This isn’t the Rambam’s era where women left the house (supposedly) only twice a month. They have more opportunities which include more avenues to explore their questions. What compelling reason is there for women to ask rabbonim shailos that they’re uncomfortable with? Mesorah – that’s what they’re bubbes did so there’s no reason to change? Such an attitude only encourages people to believe that rabbis are against YH purely for political reasons – they like the power and want to keep for no other reason but power. If you’re going to say that it’s a problem, and so far I’ve yet to hear or see a reason why the YH is a problem outside of the slippery slope theory, then what is it? You can’t nix an idea because of some specters that it might possibly maybe cause sometime in the undetermined future.

    Bottomline your entire argument is women should suck it up and deal with it. Stop being immature and just show your underwear to these men. Bubbe did it, so can you.

    Do you think your wife would buy that argument?

    I do believe that a valid argument could be that in some communities there is no need due to circumstance that a specific community enjoys (rebbtizen with detailed knowledge of hilchos niddah). But these are specific arguments relevant to specific communities and at elast these arguments take into account the sensitivity issue which you and others haven’t addresses, besides saying it should have no impact on matters even though sensitivity is a basic staple in all halachic psaks.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I don't think you can fully appreciate the positive impact that these women are making. Besides the hundreds of children that they've helped bring into the world, not to mention limiting the economic costs invloved by helping women to forego expensive IVF treatments, they also serve as tremendous role models for women. Last generation, how many women did school girls have that they could look at and say these are true leaders in their field, a field that includes both men and women. Now, besides YH, you have female talmud & halacha teachers that are truly inspiring these girls. Neve before in histroy have we had so many women learning. YHs are just a natural outcome of this phenomenon and will help to perpetuate these feelings.

    ReplyDelete
  30. When was the last time you read in Yated about women learning gemara or men going to college? And when was the last time you heard about these issues in shiurim given by YU roshei yeshivos? Both of these matters are dead issues in their respective communities b/c there is now pretty much only one opinion. So the chareidim's position on this matter isn't all that relevant here. Shul rabbis will do what they believe is right or what the community wants.

    Yoatzot were a hot topic about 5,6 years ago, but only now that they've gotten some press are some people talking about it. Trust me - the MO rabbonim have already decided on their positions. Some are for and some are against, but even though who have concerns wouldn't suggest that these women are doing anything wrong. These rabbis are senstive to this issue, but don't feel that it's necessary or feel the same way the R' Feitman does. But R' Feitman isn't breaking any ground here.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Ez - do you know what kind of training these women undergo? If you knew, you'd know that they are properly trained - they get more training than your standard smicha student plus their shimush is with some of the most reputable rabbis around.
    I'd trust them a lot more than most rabbis

    ReplyDelete