Re: Fw: Kol Isha

[TROMBAEDU <TROMBAEDU...>]

In a message dated 2/17/01 11:43:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
nusach (at) hotmail(dot)com writes:


> ....it were really part of oral law dating back to 
> the Talmud,,,,and....if oral law was part of Torah mi Sinai...then why 
> would 
> there be a wide variety of opinion on the subject?  IMHO kol isha issue is 
> 

There is a wide variety of opinion on just about every Halacha discussed in 
the Talmud. I don't see why Kol Isha is any different. Halachic discussion is 
precisely about the fact that Talmudic and Midrashic texts are sometimes 
enigmatic, or there are multiple versions of the same text, with slightly 
different emphasies of meaning. Some Halachic thinkers apply Kol Isha in very 
limited circumstances, and some in an appallingly wide range of 
circumstances. All are within the realm of Halachic discussion. I do not want 
to discuss the particulars on the list, because I would feel compelled to 
discuss my personal take on it, which Ifeel is best done in private.
My whole objection to the way this thread is handled is that many on this 
list display a great deal of presumption when discussing Halachic issues, 
with which they have no more than a vague familiarity. Which would not be so 
bad, ifthey were not so casually dismissive of Halacha. For someone to say 
that the whole reason for Kol Isha is to keep women in their place is a 
disgusting display of ignorance of the process of halacha, and a lack of 
repect for the many people who spend their entire lives studying Torah with a 
great deal of integrity and intellectual honesty. That does not mean that 
there are no Rabbis who are misogynistic. Rabbi's are going to be 
misogynistic about as often as a lot of other people. But that does not give 
anyone the right to assume that the Halacha is a reflection of that narrow 
and specific point of view either. 
I would be happy to discuss these issues with anyone, but not on the list!

Jordan