- This topic has 103 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Maharal on Who Was Created Last
The Maharal says that, though created simultaneously, the asynchronous formation of the first man and woman does have bearing on their relative spiritual makeup. However, the male was formed last.
“There is to conclude that, just the opposite, the woman was created first. Even though concerning the matter that [Hashem] took the bone from bones [to create Chava], and this occurred after the creation of Adam, in the final analysis [we can conclude] [He] [He] [the formation of Chava], the female was created as a pair [with the male]. And then the female [as a distinct entity] was formed [before the male was]
Maharal, Gur Aryeh, Vayikra 12:2, beginning of parshas Tazriah.
Woodchucks can chuck wood.
A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
That’s the spirit! Now Let’s have a little talk about tweetle beetles….
When tweetle beetles fight,
it’s called a tweetle beetle battle.
When a fox is in the bottle where the tweetle beetles battle
with their paddles in a puddle on a noodle-eating poodle,
THIS is what they call…
…a tweetle beetle noodle poodle bottled paddled
muddled duddled fuddled wuddled fox in socks, sir!
I’m confused. Doesn’t the pasuk clearly say that Chava was created after Adam?
It probably means that both were created together as one being. Then, first was ???? ?? ???? and after that was ????? ??? ?????? which, according to the Shita of ??? ???????, means that Hashem closed up the male.
Joseph, is this title of ???? ???? your source of pride? The Maharal actually stresses in other places that this is not a matter of who is better then whom. It is about a position and status.
In a normal, healthy marriage, the husband brings in a certain pride and status. This is what the Gemara is referring to when it says in Kesubos 75:
???? ?”? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ???????? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ?? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??????
In short, even if the husband is a midget, a cheap laborer, or from an uncertain background he is still a source of pride and status for his wife.
Nevertheless, these days this a charged topic, and people can’t understand nuance and detail when they are busy fighting the other end of the same cause. But since you brought it up it should be put in perspective. I’m still not sure, though, what you try to accomplish with these color-war style male cheers.
Were male animals created before female animals or females before males?
????
joe,
+1
i actually had this arguement with my wife, that women aren’t special, they just have a different role than men, i gave an example of a fast food worker making minimum wage, since they have minimal responsibilty they don’t make as much, whereas the manager (men) have more responsibility and therefore get paid more
which explains why women only got not working on rosh chodesh, because they didn’t do the cheit ha’egel whereas shevet levi got working in the mishkan (more of a reward)
Do you have any examples?
Really? Do you have any evidence?
Are you saying that men are not good at valuing family, love, and community? If so, that is very insulting to all men. I see no reason why men and woman would be different in this regard.
First of all, being a professor is not easy. I have several family members who are, and they have worked very hard to get to where they are, and continue to put in maximum effort into their careers.
Second, there are plenty of women who excel in both being a mother, and having a career. Speak to any kollel wife.
And a husband should always look up to his wife.
This contradicts your point that woman are lower than men.
No one is denying that men and women have different jobs. Rav Soloveichik is just saying that they have different jobs, not different levels of holiness.
And it is quite disingenuous of you to quote Rav Soloveichik, when in numerous threads you have disparaged and insulted him.
I thought there was a rule against females are inferior threads.
I remember a rabbi saying they got it backwards on the titanic- the men should have been saved before the women- because men have more kedusha since they are chiuv in talmud torah.
Men are saved before women are (all other variables being equal) because men have more kedusha since they learn Torah. Its a gem in horayos.
I have yet to find one Rabbi tell me l’maaisa we save a man before a woman in an emergency, or that we follow any of that hierarchy when it comes to saving a life l’maaisa.
But I thought we were not allowed to say these things, and are only allowed to say that women have more kedusha than men, and the only reason they are pattur from talmud torah is because they have so much kedusha to begin with, they dont need to learn.
newbee: The Gemara doesn’t say it’s because of Talmud Torah. It says it’s about Chiyuv in Mitzvos.
Joseph: It is not at all clear that that’s actually referring to physically saving lives. It’s a big Machlokes Achronim.
The “women who don’t recognize their inferiority” thread also made no claims that women are inferior.
Joseph: See Tzitz Eliezer 18:3 (maybe 18:2, somewhere around there) and who he quotes. Not everyone holds “L’hachayos” means saving lives.
Sam2:The beis yoseph says its reffering to saving life mamish. The main mitzvah being talmud torah but mitzvos in general.
For women i think it was ???? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? Go ask a rov lemaisa if you should save a man before a woman all else being equal and you will get the same answer. If you dont, I would like to know who.
Joseph, thats why we have a rov of a community to pasken for us. Did you ask your rov the question yet?
I guess most contemporary poskim hold by the tzitz that its not referring to a case of life.
“Talk to the women of the 60s and 70s, how career turned out to be a bust.”
Hahaha. I know you didn’t speak to any of them, because then you would suddenly be surprised to see how wrong your are.
“Many that gave up child bearing years for career and they hate their careers and wish they had more children.”
Maybe, maybe not. I know women who had few children because of their career and today are perfectly happy with their decision. I know women who juggle large families and a career and are happy with that decision. And I know MANY women who devoted their lives solely to raising children and today regret not having a career.
“Our grandmothers had enormous respect for their fathers and husbands. Not so the women of this generation or even the last generation.”
Koheles: 7:10: (I’ll skip the hebrew-I’m sure you know this pasuk) “Don’t say the days before us were better than today, because not from wisdom are you asking this…”
We know that women were forced to tolerate many abuses from men in the past and were not always able to do anything about it-that’s a historical fact… so does that for you translate into respect?? Besides, respect is something to be earned, not something you get automatically because you are male. If you or the men in your life are feeling disrespected, then earn that respect instead of trying to keep putting women “in their place”.
“Our grandmothers had enormous respect for their fathers and husbands. Not so the women of this generation or even the last generation. If someone doesn’t think that feeds into divorce and confusion among the youth, then they aren’t thinking.”
So you think people are getting divorced because women don’t respect men?
“It does not value family, love, community – all the stuff women are good at.”
Family? Ok, you want women to raise the children. Love? I can tell you aren’t married. That’s 50/50 the man and woman. Community? What?? You want women to remain at home raising children. Not being community leaders. Not going to shul all the time. Not being part of any communal organization or chas v’shalom speaking in front of men. Nor having careers where they are leaders because it will “erode their natural sensitivities and softness”.
“It glamorizes career, when most people hate their jobs.”
Really? I don’t know what kind of people you hang around. But most of my friends like their job/career.
Jospeh, you need a serious reality check.
I am not going to argue with you on the halachic/hashkafic plane because we have different frames of reference and it’s a waste of time.
But for heaven’s sake, stop saying all these things as if you know. You are just parroting things you are reading without ever stopping to see if they reflect reality.
Sit down with some women and speak to them. Hear them and listen to what they have to say. If you do this with an open mind, you will find that much of what you are saying in not true. Your image of “the happy housewife” is often a woman on anti-depressants who would do well with a job to lift her out of the repitition housekeeping often entails. You will find that in the 21st century, a women doesn’t necessarily have to choose between a career and family. You will find that the children of homes where the mother did not work are not necessarily better off. You will find women with high-powered careers who have large families and nurse their babies (it’s not thaaaat limiting). Maybe you don’t speak to women and that’s fine. But then stop speaking about them as if you know anything on the matter.
The comtemporary women is a train wreck? Care to explain what that means? Do you know any “comtemporary women”?
I’m not sure why I am wasting my time on this, after all, you ARE Jospeh. But I encourage you to critically analyze the things you read (not sure if your hashkafa allows for that but whatever) and see if they match with reality.
Are you a frum woman?
Yes I am a frum woman.
And Jospeh, you can thank Betty Freidan and Gloria Steinem for allowing something like Lakewood to ever exist. (I never read Gloria Stienem and only ever read some snipptes from Betty Freidan, so you cannot say I got this “tainted hashkafa” from them.)
Joseph, please dont miss the point. It’s not about you being the “frum” hashkafa and me being the “feminist apikorus”. It’s about making you aware that you have no idea what you talking about with your grand assupmtions about what makes women happy and how they think. And yes, I speak for the Lakewood wife too. When it comes to this, I’m pretty sure I know better than you.
As you are a frum woman, it follows logically that your perspective is a frum woman’s perspective.
Now is Joseph a frum woman?
bais yakov maidel – While I agree with everything you have said to Joseph in this last post, I have to disagree strongly that you are speaking for women in general. There may be many, many others who agree with you, but there are so many, many of us who couldn’t disagree more. I for one, have never met anyone who thinks like you do tho I do not doubt your word. I would only ask, respectfully, that you, also, not generalize or make assumptions about women and what makes them happy. And please don’t give the impression that you are a majority because I don’t think either one of us could possibly know if that is true. Represent your side, as will I, and the others can speak for themselves.
Joseph – you have always had the habit of imposing your ideals on others as truth, and assuming you can speak for any women, when you have made it so clear that you are not of the type who would have conversations with them, is ludicrous.
My only question for you (if I wanted an answer, which I don’t) would be if you are making it up for the sake of getting a rise out of people, or if you actually have convinced yourself this stuff makes sense.
Syag,
My apologies. When I said I “speak for the Lakewood woman” I meant that among Lakewood women, there is a significant number who would agree with me. I did not mean that all Lakewood women would agree with me. And that’s ok. I just don’t like Joseph’s sweeping assumptions that ignore reality.
I just don’t like Joseph’s sweeping assumptions that ignore reality.
im right with you. and even more odd is that there are others out there agreeing with him….
Joseph, that is a made-up, unsupported statement.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.