- This topic has 142 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
writer soul, shekermoochlat
“My point was only that it is a double standard…”
Of course it is a double standard. Is this really your first encounter with this?
The notion that all people are equal is not a Jewish one.
There are differences between men and women
There are differences between old and young
There are differences between learned and unlearned
There are differecnes between Kohanim and Others
Need I go on?
Is this really news to you?
Using some of the “logic” posited here, we should call “married” two people of the same gender who profess their commitment to each other. After all, it is merely a formal title.
Yidden throughout the years have had the fortunate ability to recognize their great leaders no matter what they called themselves. There is a famous story about a court officer from Seattle, who interviewed Rav Moshe Z’l and asked him how he came to be the “greatest Rabbi in North America”. He is reported to have answered that someone asked him a question and was satisfied that he gave a proper answer and told his friend, who in turn told his friend and before you knew it, everyone started sending him their questions.
Titles and degrees are meaningless.
Shekerm ” whats the big deal calling chashuva women “rabbi”.??”
Why are you upset that they are called Rebbetzin? like Rebbetzin Zahava Braunstein, or (lehavdil) Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis. Do you want women to be called Mr. instead of Mrs. also?
No reason to be ashamed of the title Rebbetzin, there are some very Choshuva women with the title.
APY
I’m not sure about the Seattle or court part.
I appeared in the New York Times 5/5/75. In an Article entitled “Responsa: The Law as Seen By Rabbis for 1,000 Years”
The relevant quote attributed to R” Moshe is:
“You can’t wake up in the morning and decide you’re an expert on answers. If people see that one answer is good, and another answer is good, gradually you will be accepted.”
(Though he didnt speak English so its obviously not verbatim)
The entire article is interesting. With Google’s help it is easy to find
Ubiquitin, all are equal before the law. A cohen gadol and a mamzer receive the same punishments for aveirot.
Is this what you’re referring to? It doesn’t talk about s’micha for women.
Avi, why do you define equality by punishments?
Avi: A Kohen did the Avodah in the Mikdash, a Levi got to make the music. No matter how wonderful a musician you are, unless you are the son of a Levi, you couldn’t join. Yiddishkeit isn’t America with equal rights. It’s about equal responsibility to do G-d’s will.
Titles and degrees are meaningless.
You’re kidding, right?
We have so many titles that we seemingly have to keep adding new ones. When I was a kid, I don’t remember a single “Adoneinu Moreinu V’Rabbeinu Harav HaGaon….”
The Wolf
What did it say? Do you have a link?
Anyhow, it seems that they shifted the focus away from that point, although the RCA continues to address it.
The moetzes, in their psak halacha that a woman cannot be called Rabbi because there is no smicha for a woman AFFIRM that the term IS a technical, smicha related word.
The Moetzes doesn’t have the final say on the English language (of which “Rabbi” is a word). They may say that a woman can not be the leader of a community or Kehilah. But to be called “Rabbi”? “Rabbi” Sally Priesand is a “Rabbi”.
We have so many titles that we seemingly have to keep adding new ones. When I was a kid, I don’t remember a single “Adoneinu Moreinu V’Rabbeinu Harav HaGaon….”
Because the prior ones are meaningless. Each additional term has a short shelf life, and then they need to add a new one.
Unmarried men are called Rabbi if they are in the category of people who are called that, but unmarried women are never called Rebbetzin.
It is illegal in several states (I believe New York, as well) to impersonate a clergyman. A while back, some non jewish criminal was actually arrested in New York for faking being a Rabbi. Try telling the DA that you never went to school to get a degree but you felt it was appropriate to call yourself a Rabbi. Dena d’malchusa dena.
I believe studying Torah changes a person. Serious study and focus on Torah topics (yes, even hilchos melicha), particularly with a talmid chochom, changes a person. That person who spent hours on hilchos melicha will be a better rebby with a better hashkafa than others.
Further, if Dirshu has taught the velt anything it is that studying for a test adds focus and competence. A fellow who is learning loosely will simply retain less and be impacted less than someone studying for a semicha exam.
oyveygevalt: You’re incorrect. It isn’t illegal to pretend to be a clergyman. In the case you refer to they were arrested for other actual crimes they did.
You’re also incorrect about a necessity for smicha for rebbeim.
But you can become a clergyman through the ULC.
BTW, guys, anyone with smicha can give anyone else smicha. A 22 year old guy newly minted with smicha can go around giving smicha to a bunch of other people. That is part of the rights of anyone with smicha.
Try telling the DA that you never went to school to get a degree but you felt it was appropriate to call yourself a Rabbi. Dena d’malchusa dena.
Are you actually trying to claim that rebbeim and menahelim who use the title Rabbi are doing something illegal and assur? You’re not serious, are you?
I believe studying Torah changes a person. Serious study and focus on Torah topics (yes, even hilchos melicha), particularly with a talmid chochom, changes a person.
That’s all true, but doesn’t answer the question: why davka melichah?
Why should the government decide who is a rabbi any more than they decide who is a Jedi?
they also decide who is Jedi…
Wold. That’s my point. You didn’t know a single one. Now everyone is one
Ubiq: Not the same at all.
The halachic differences between men and women, for example, are laid out.
Running on the assumption that in fact modern-day semicha candidates (even if technically semicha was discontinued), as the Rema said, need to be eligible for Sanhedrin and must therefore be male (there are other reasons but that’s probably the most overarching one), the same applies here. So far so similar.
But here we’re not talking about someone who earns the title of rabbi. We’re specifically someone who did not get (the modern equivalent of) semicha. The rules are open at this point. Should any man be considered to earn this qualification? How is that right, if women can do the same things- none of which are part of the traditional way by which rabbanus is achieved- and not get the same title? When we are specifically speaking of ADDING privileges onto things which historically did not contain them, we can talk about fairness.
So your solution to the “unfairness” is…
…not to give non-rabbis a title which they have not earned….
So you think male limudei kodesh teachers, menahelim, and magidei shiur should be called Mister?
Joseph, if someone received a benefit by falsely claiming to be a member of the clergy he can be prosecuted for fraud. If he received a tax break (and there are) he is guilty of tax evasion. The big question is who is clergy. An on-lie dictionary defines it as people (such as priests) who are the leaders of a religion and who perform religious services. It would be interesting to make a claim for a yoetzet halacha or a woman who leads of women’s Tehillim group.
As for male teachers, at one time many were misters. When this began not to sit well with parents they were given the title “rav u’manhig”. Even someone who has “Yoreh Yoreh” may not serve as a dayan unless he also has “Yadin Yadin” (see Sanhedrin 5a that there was also a semicha for allowing bechorot).
So you think male limudei kodesh teachers, menahelim, and magidei shiur should be called Mister?
Most aren’t chashuv enough to be called “Mister”, so they should be called “rabbi”.
From Agudas Yisroel of America:
5.
Can women receive a parsonage allowance?
There is no clear precedent whether an Orthodox Jewish female teacher who has a bona fide certification (i.e., a certificate from a seminary or other Jewish program as described below) to teach Limudei Kodesh, and who is employed by a Jewish school for that purpose, is eligible to receive a parsonage allowance. We therefore cannot state with certainty that such payments would not be challenged by the IRS, which could affect the
seminary or other qualified Jewish program designed to prepare Limudei Kodesh teachers (and not from a board of education
or other secular organization or school) and should certify that the recipient is authorized to perform those religious functions.
So call them what you want, but the Agudah has decided that there can (and should) be female “clergy”.
Shekermoochlat, I agree that amateurs shouldn’t be marbitz Torah, and if you wanted to be makpid that all rebbeim know gantz Shas and poskim, I’d be maskim in theory, but we would have no rebbeim. So the question remains, why davka should a rebbe need to know the parts of Shulchan Aruch needed for s’michah more than anything else, and the answer is that he doesn’t; that’s completely arbitrary.
Avi says it didn’t sit well when rebbeim were called mister (something that if true, was before my time). Of course it didn’t. Torah teachers deserve a title of respect.
Most aren’t chashuv enough to be called “Mister”, so they should be called “rabbi”.
If that is your experience, I strongly suggest you find your kids a new yeshiva.
And if that’s your attitude, I would strongly advise the yeshiva not to accept them.
Avi, if someone received a benefit by falsely claiming to be a painter, he also can be prosecuted for fraud. If he claimed a tax break that only painters are eligible for, he is guilty of tax evasion. But a non-painter calling himself a painter isn’t a criminal offense nor is calling oneself a clergyman.
writersoul
You are ,aking the same mistake again
“…How is that right…”
Its not! I never claimed otherwise.
How is it right that I cant bring the ketores even if I am a bigger baki than the kohen?
How is it right that I cant sit in the azara even if Im really really tired?
TRhe premise of your question “…How is that right..” is flawed.
You were one hundred percent correct in your assesment “My point was only that it is a double standard…” it absolutly is I agree whole heartedly.
I merely pointed out that we have many such “double standards”
AVi K pointed out that these double standards are not allways applicable for example before the law all are equal. However generally there are many differences based on gender, age, lineage etc.
Is this really news to you?
Daas Yochid – Is that a Daas Yochid or Daas Rabbim?
Seriously though, I find this whole discussion somewhat amusing (especially when they blamed me! “Gavra”).
The point of the OP was that the title makes the person. While true in government or union positions (where the actual work is not valued), in Klal Yisroel and the working world, it isn’t your title, but what you know (as many here have pointed out). The US Government agrees that the title is unimportant, and it is the function that matters.
If you are really concerned about the title, then ask yourself hypothetically: If Rebbetzen Kanievsky ZTL (when she was alive) had decided (which she never would) to lead a Kehillah and act as the spiritual leader and advisor (with no male in a similar or higher position), but not be a “Rabbi”, would that be acceptable?
Of course not.
Obviously, titles are important to some people, otherwise there wouldn’t be titles.
Obviously, titles are important to some people, otherwise there wouldn’t be titles.
In my (limited) experience in the Yeshiva, Orthodox and business worlds, the only people who care about their titles are those who need the self-esteem boost that others should know they are “qualified”. in many instances, it is because they are only qualified because of their title, not because of their knowledge or experience.
Those who know they are an expert don’t care if they are referred by or have a title. Of course there are exceptions (such as a CPA needs the title to sign an opinion), but those are the exceptions.
ubiquitin: You missed my point.
My point is that there are at least previously-determined reasons why those other things differentiate. (If you’d like to get into a discussion of whether those are valid…) But this would be creating something new. To CREATE a double standard of whole cloth and excuse it by saying “well the Torah has loads of double standards!” is really not okay.
Gavra, so physicians and dentists shouldn’t be called Dr.?
Writersoul, who is creating anything?
DaasYochid – Not sure where you are going. My point was they don’t need to be called a Dr. to be an expert, and calling them a Dr. doesn’t mean they actually know anything (look at first year residents). To actually practice medicine legally they may need the accreditation (like the CPA example). One does not need to be accredited to do the job of a “Rabbi”.
writersoul
what on earh are you talking about.
“But this would be creating something new. To CREATE a double standard “
Calling only males Rabbis isnt new. you know that right?
YOU want to create somehting new.
Now, I am not one of those who says all changes and innovations are wrong (in fact some are proably surprised on which side of this discussion I fall). However given the importance of mesora, you need a good reason to create somehting new (namely calling women Rabbis). Of course the more drastic the change the better the reason needs to be.
Now there may in fact be good resaons to call Women Rabbis, say you felt they needed it for self esteem or female role modetls or something (I may not agree with those reasons but at lest you can make the case for it.
So far the “reasons” you have given for this innovation are to avoid “doubl;e standards” and that it should be “right”
As Ive pointed out with several examples, neither of those are reasons, our religion is not opposed to “double standrds” at all. Zilp zero nada. MEn and women do in fact have different standaards and are not equal.
No it isnt fair (by society’s standard that men and women be equal)
Again, im so sorry if this is news to you.
And again, you can come up with valid arguments why the innovation of women Rabbis should be considred “fairness” is nsimply not a reason.
Gavra, don’t judge a person by their title, fine, but we don’t need to stop using them.
Gavra, don’t judge a person by their title, fine, but we don’t need to stop using them.
Not saying you should. But as the title means nothing anyway, why not call a person by the honorific that they prefer. If a doctorate in Talmudic law or a first grade Rebbe wants to be called Doctor, Rabbi, Esquire or “Late for Dinner”, let them. As long as they don’t use their title for gain inappropriately, what difference does it make?
“…not to give non-rabbis a title which they have not earned….”
As Wolf so eloquently pointed out, the title “Rabbi” is meaningless. It does not mean what it did, say 200 years ago (or even 30 years ago) in its general usage. Sure, the technical meaning has not changed, but people are not using the term for its technical meaning.
It’s like the term “Askan”. Now, anyone who can photobomb a picture with a politician or some other knocker calls himself an Askan. The term as it is used today does not have the same meaning as the term when it was used 40 or 50 years ago.
Sorry, if my kid’s first grade rebbe wants to be called Dr., I’m not doing it.
Sorry, if my kid’s first grade rebbe wants to be called Dr., I’m not doing it.
Your call for yourself. As for me, if it makes someone (especially a fellow Yid) happy and doesn’t hurt anyone, why wouldn’t I?
P.S. If the Rebbe was a Doctor of History, or Talmudic law, would your answer change?
What is interesting is that who truly deserve the title and honorifics, dont use it.
As Wolf so eloquently pointed out, the title “Rabbi” is meaningless.
Just for the record, that’s *not* what I was saying.
I believe the title does have meaning. That’s why I object when someone uses it for me. That’s why I believe it should be reserved for those who have earned the title.
The fact that people, often out of good intentions of honoring and/or not hurting someone, use the term for everyone doesn’t really change my opinion on the matter.
The Wolf
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.