The first tshuvah in the Shu"t R' Akiva Eiger addresses the question of whether a woman who forgets ya'aleh v'yavo in bentching on Yom Tov must repeat her birchas hamazon. Omitting ya'aleh v'yavo on days where there is no obligation to eat bread, e.g. Rosh Chodesh, does not necessitate repeating bentching. R' Akiva Eiger writes that the obligation to eat a seudah on Yom Tov stems from the time dependent zman gerama mitzvah of kavod v'oneg, honoring Shabbos and Y"T, from which women are exempt. Since they do not have to eat a seudah of bread, women would not have to repeat bentching in this case.
Many achronim disagree with this entire approach of R' Akiva Eiger (a discussion for another time). R' Shlomo haKohen, the dayan of Vilna (Shu"T Binyan Shlomo vol II, O.C. 48), however writes that even if one accepts R' Akiva Eiger's premis, not all Yamim Tovim are alike. Chazal tell us (Pesachim 68) that even those Tanaim who otherwise allow fasting on Y"T agree that a seudah on Shavuos is obligatory as that is the "yom she'nitna bo Torah", the day the Torah was given, a day which requires celebration. Just like women are obligated in tefilah because the obligation stems from sevara, a logical argument (do women not need to beseech G-d for their needs?), here too, women are obligated in seudas Yom Tov on Shavuos because the source of the obligation is a logical argument (see Tosfor d"h haKol). Therefore, all would agree that a woman who forgets ya'aleh v'yavo on Shavuos must repeat her birchas hamazon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
GEVALDIK! Fits right in to my thesis, that the mitzvas hayom of Pesach is Matza, of Sukkos is Lulav, and of Shavuos is Blintzes. Or, for the Litvaks, Shaltenoses. Believe it or not, this is one of the themes of my Ne'ilas Hachag drasha, expanding on the Magen Avraham in 494 that it is the food of newborns, and the Kitzur in 103:7 about the roshei teivos of mincha chadasha lashem beshavuoseichem being meichalav.
ReplyDeleteGood Yomtov.
And when is this derasha going to be posted for us to read?
ReplyDeleteBy combining the fact that women on not chayav in talmud torah with R' Shlomo Zalman's vort on the concept of simchas Shavuot, one can readily defend R' Akiva Eiger from the ha'orah of the Vilner Dayan.
ReplyDeleteAnd no, I haven't forgotten your question as to whether or not I equate reform (kefirah) with the avodah zarah of ba'al. I have been too massively occupied to give you a reply worthy of your ahavas ha'emes. BE"H, any day now.
However, in twenty-five words or less: Yes as to avodah zarah, No as to the specific avodah zarah of ba'al.
My son had the same he'ora: women have no chiyuv T"T. My answer: but they are still included in kabbalas haTorah. Rashi says l'haros shenoach u'mekubal... yom shenitna Torah bo. In fact, the Zohar makes the point on the pasuk "koh somar l'beis ya'akov..." that women were directly given the Torah, as opposed to hearing it from their husbands as Chavah received it from Adam.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWe waited that extra day because of polettes, so that women would be on a madreiga of be'eima be'reses ube'zeiya, so it seems that women were not just hanging around to improve the scenery.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, the Chasam Sofer is the one that says that if a woman sends her husband to learn, and he fools around, then in the Yeshiva shel maala she's going to know how to learn, while her husband is going to be tinkering with the plumbing. If he's lucky. Evidently, there is no machlokes Reb Eliezer and Rabanan on machshirei Torah; the din machshir by women is not merely a necessary hachana; it's like akira tzorech hanacha by kim lei bederaba minei in Kesuvos.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete