![the Open Siddur Project [logo]](https://opensiddur.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Open-Siddur-Project-Logo-2016.svg){kind=logo}
| Source (Hebrew) | Translation (English) |
|---|---|
זה השער לה׳ צדיקים יבואו בו (תהלים קיח:כ) |
‘This is the gateway of Hashem, the righteous shall enter through it’ (Psalms 118:20) |
הנה אנכי הרואה רעה ראיתי בתוך עמי. והיה מדי חודש בחדשו כשמברכין החודש נתקן תחנות שלא על פי תקון מתרי ותלת טעמא: חדא שנתקן בל לומר בשבת חטאתי, עויתי, פשעתי – המפורסמים אינם צריכים ראיה. הנה כולי עלמא לאו דינא גמירא בר בי רב דחד יומא הוה פשיעותא הוא כי ביום טוב היה בטוב. ועולם נתקן בה כמה שאלה מעובדא דחול אשר חכמינו ז״ל הגידו ולא כחדו. |
[A.] Behold, I the seer have seen a bad thing among my people. Month in and month out when they bless the new month, the teḥinot they say are non-canonical on several counts. For instance, one should not say on Shabbat, ‘I have sinned, I have transgressed, I have committed iniquity’.[1] As Weissler noted, Leah was apparently referring to the prayer for blessing the new moon that appears in the Yiddish tkhine collection Seder tkhines oyf ale tug, printed in Amsterdam in 1752 (Weissler, Voices of the Matriarchs,98, 232; ead., ‘Tkhines for the Sabbath before the New Moon’, 408). It states there: ‘Forgive me the sins, transgressions, and iniquities that I sinned, committed, and perpetrated’ and ‘O Lord, I have sinned; may I never be ashamed’ (Seder tkhines oyf ale tug (Amsterdam, 1752), 10b, 11a; cf. Pss. 31: 2; 71: 1). Weissler observed that this tkhine also appears in the standard Seder tkhines uvakoshes (Fürth, 1769), no. 67. It should be added that this tkhine was a Yiddish paraphrastic translation of the Hebrew prayer for blessing the new moon, ‘Yehi ratson’, which was becoming the standard prayer for the occasion in the eighteenth century and is still recited today. While the Hebrew did not contain the confession of sins it did consist of petitions for material welfare in the month ahead. This is well known and needs no prooftext. Surely everyone, even a beginning student, knows that this is not acceptable. On a holy day one should be of good cheer.[2] See Eccles. 7:14. (Of course, our sages did ordain a number of prayers relating to mundane matters [to be said on sabbath and holidays] and they did not try to deny that they did so.)[3] Cf. Job 15:18. |
על כן אמרת: הגם ראתתא בסברא לא שכיחא, כתר של תורה מונח וכו׳. ולדעתי אני מזכה את הרבים כי בלאו הכי נשים דברניות לדבר בבית הכנסת בשבת. |
[B.] [Given the need for a different kind of teḥinah], even though it is not often that a woman engages in Torah discourse, ‘the crown of Torah is set out [for all the inhabitants of the world]’,[4] Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘Korah’, 756, and many other places in rabbinic literature. [and that includes women]. [Moreover, by composing this teḥinah[5] For the Aramaic, go here. For the Yiddish translation, go here. ] I believe I am benefiting the public. Since in any event women are talkative, gossiping in the synagogue on Shabbat.[6] Cf. BT Ber. 48b; Yalkut shimoni, ‘1 Samuel’, 108. See also: ‘May God thereby forgive me for my youthful chattering in synagogue during the reading of the beloved, holy Torah’ and ‘I, the woman Sarah, beseech the young women not to converse in the beloved, holy synagogue, for it is a great sin’ (T.G. Klirs et al. (eds.), The Merit of Our Mothers: A Bilingual Anthology of Women’s Prayers (Cincinnati, 1992), 12, 28; translations slightly emended). |
ידוע דאמיה דרבי שמעון בר יוחאי משתעי בשבת. ואמר לה: ”אמי, שבת היום“; בכן מוטב שיהיה אלמים בדברי עולם הזה ובצדק ידברון. |
It is well known that Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai’s mother would speak [about mundane matters] on Shabbat. He said to her, ‘Mother, today is Shabbat!’[7] Cf. JT Shab. 15:3; Vayikra rabah, 34; Yalkut shimoni, ‘Isaiah’, 496. Thus it is better that women be mute concerning the matters of Olam haZeh (this world) and speak words of righteousness [in prayer].[8] See also the famous letter of the Vilna Gaon (Leah Horowitz’s contemporary) to his wife, which touches on some of the same subjects as Leah’s introduction (Hebrew Ethical Wills, ed. I. Abrahams, 2 vols. in 1 (Philadelphia, 1926; facsimile edn., 1976), 313–325). |
והצעתי דברים האלו שברצון ה׳ בדעתי שיבואו לדפוס, כיון בפני גאונים ורבנים וקלסוהו. |
I have offered these words, Hashem willing, intending to print them, since [I showed them] to foremost scholars and rabbis and they praised them.[9] Leah did not name the ‘scholars and rabbis’ who approved of her work. Perhaps they were members of her own family or perhaps no rabbi was willing to go on record as endorsing a work written by a woman. |
ואגב דאתא לידן, להוכיח שיש צלייה לשם שמים תבא עליהם ברכה, כמבואר במדרש והובא (ב)בעברי טייטש שלכן צווה הקב״ה לעשות הכיור ממראות הצובאות פתח אוהל מועד, שאלו הנשים להיות יושב בבית המדרש והתפללו כל היום. |
[C.] Apropos of the subject [of women’s prayer], there is proof that [women’s] prayer is for the sake of heaven and brings blessing upon them. As explained in the Midrash[10] Exod. 38:8 reads: ‘He made the laver of copper and its stand of copper from the mirrors of the women who assembled at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.’ Targum Onkelos translated ‘the women who assembled at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting’ into Aramaic as ‘the women who came to pray at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting’. Similarly Abraham ibn Ezra, in his comment on this verse, noted that this referred to ‘women who would come regularly to pray at the place of the Tent of Meeting, who had renounced all worldly desire and therefore donated their mirrors’. This explanation, emphasizing that the mirrors came from women who gathered at the Tent of Meeting to pray, differs from the better-known conventional one, apparently originating in Midrash tanḥuma (‘Pekudei’, 9), which insists that the Israelite women gathered at the Tent of Meeting for the express purpose of donating their mirrors. These mirrors bore an aura of holiness because they had served the Israelite women in Egypt to beautify themselves so that they might attract their tired husbands after a day of hard labour, and conceive children to strengthen the Israelites. There is no reference to the women praying there. This explanation was adopted by Rashi and other standard commentaries on this verse. and the Ba’al haturim al hatorah:[11] See Jacob ben Asher, Ba’al haturim al hatorah, on Exod. 38:8 (my thanks to Ya’akov Elbaum for this reference); cf. Chovav, Alamot ahevukha, 105 n. 234. the blessed Holy One commanded the fashioning of the basin [of the Tabernacle/Tent of Meeting] from the mirrors of those assembled at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. Those assembled were the women who [gave up their mirrors. They] would sit in the beit midrash all day, praying.[12] Unlike the Ba’al haturim al hatorah, which specified that the women who prayed at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting were ones whose evil inclination (libido) had left them, and Ibn Ezra, who asserted that the mirror donors had renounced earthly desire, Leah implies that the praying women might be of all ages and still sexually active. |
עוד יש לי חבילות ראיות, אך משום הוצאת הדפוס… בר מן דא, בודאי לא נעלם מעין הבדלח דבר זה; ובאזני כסיל לא אדבר. |
I have bundles of proofs [that women’s prayer is legitimate], but due to the costs of printing, [I must be brief]. Besides, surely [the legitimacy of women’s prayer] does not escape any clear-eyed person and I ‘will not speak to dullards’.[13] Cf. Prov. 23:9. |
וצריך להיות שזה פירש הפסוק שדרשו בו: ”שמענה פרות הבשן“ (עמוס ד:א) הני נשי דמחוזי דאכלו ולא עבדין (בבלי שבת לב ב׳). יש לדקדק, הא עיקר תרעומות הנביא עליו השלום] מה דלא עבדין. ומה לו להזכיר דאכלין? ואם תאמר שהוכיח להם מה דמנפקא; דמאכל דהא סתמא כי הוא לחם והיה לו להזכיר ד”אכלו משמנים, שתו ממתקים“ (נחמיה ח:י) וכו׳ כדפירושו. |
[D.] We must also note that this is the meaning of the verse ‘Hear this . . . you cows of Bashan’ (Amos 4:1), which [the sages] interpreted as referring to ‘the women of [the Babylonian city] Meḥoza who eat and do not serve’ (BT Shabbat 32b) [i.e. do not engage in divine service]. That is, the prophet was angry over their not praying. (Why then did he mention their eating? You might say that he was criticizing the women for pampering themselves; however, the simple words [‘who eat’] imply eating plain bread. [If he meant to criticize their gourmet eating] he would have said that they ‘eat choice foods and drink sweet drinks’ (Nehemiah 8:10) [and] as is explained [in the Talmud].[14] Those who ‘eat choice foods and drink sweet drinks’ forsake eternal life for temporal pleasures (BT Bets. 15b). ) |
דידוע מאמר רב אחא הובא בילקוט רות שהדורות אינן נגאלין אלא בזכות נשים. ולכאורה הוא תמוה דיציבא בארעא וגיורא בשמי שמיא. אנשים מצוים יותר, למה נגרעו וכוחן להביא הגאולה. |
Consider also Rav Aḥa’s famous comment in Yalkut, ‘Ruth’: ‘The generations are redeemed only owing to the merit of women.’[15] Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘Ruth’, 406. It actually says: ‘The generations are redeemed only as a reward to the righteous women of the generation.’ See also Rut zuta 4:11. On its face this is surprising [for it reverses the hierarchy], placing the permanent residents [men] down on the ground and the strangers [women] in the highest heaven.[16] Cf. BT Eruv. 9a. Men have more commandments. Why is their power to bring about the redemption diminished?[17] Leah is playing devil’s advocate here, representing the view that the supposed fact that men have more opportunities to fulfil God’s will than women do should gain them more merit and make them the catalysts of redemption. In the continuation of the text she subtly undermines this view by showing that women are obliged to observe almost as many mitsvot as men (see Hebrew Introduction, Section F, and n. 63 below). |
ואמר ליה: בקרא כתיב ”בבכי יבואו“ (ירמיה לא:ח) ואצל הנשים הדמעות מצויות. אך אין תפלתו של אדם נשמעת אלא בבית הכנסת. ואם כן ראוי לנשויי דידן, ”כי קרוב יום ה׳“ (ישעיה יג:ו), להיות משכימין ומערבין לבית הכנסת להתפלל בדמעות שליש (תהלים פ:ו), לא על מנת לקבל פרס. (כדאיתא בזוהר: צווחין ככלבים הב לן חיים כו׳ לית מאן דתב בתשובה בגיניה דשכינתיה, כל טוב דעבדין לגרמא עבדי. ואז אולי בזכותם ”ובא לציון גואל“ (ישעיה נט:כ) אמן. |
Note the verse that states [when God gathers Yisrael from the ends of the earth] ‘they shall come with weeping’ (Jeremiah 31:8). Women cry. [That is their contribution to bringing about the redemption.] However, ‘a person’s prayer is only heard in the synagogue’.[18] Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘1 Kings’, 190; BT Ber. 6a. Therefore, since ‘the day of Hashem is near’ (Isaiah 13:6), it is proper that our women come to the synagogue morning and evening to pray ‘with copious tears’ (Psalms 80:6), not in order to receive a reward. (As it says in the Zohar, ‘They bark like dogs “Give us[19] The Aramaic for ‘give us’, hav lan, is reminiscent of the Hebrew for the sound of a dog barking: hav hav. life”; no one repents under the influence of the Shekhinah; any good they perform, they do for their own sake.’[20] Cf. Tikunei zohar, 22a. The text in parentheses is to emphasize that women’s prayer (and crying) should, in contrast to typical male prayer, be selfless and heartfelt; otherwise, it will have no effect. People (men) who commonly pray for instrumental reasons are just like barking dogs. ) Then perhaps by the women’s merit ‘the redeemer will come to Ẓíōn’ (Isaiah 59:20) (Amen). |
ידוע דעבודה זו תפילה. וזה שאמרו בגמרא ”דאכלין ולא עבדין“ (בבלי שבת לב א׳) כלומר אין מתפללין ורחמנא ליצלן ובעונותינו הרבים לא כך צוה. בדורותינו מחליפים עולם עומד בעולם עובר, ועוברין על ראשית חכמה יראת ה׳ (תהלים קיא:י) סי׳ א בשולחן ערוך: ישכים בבוקר לעבודת בוראו. ואם יתרחש לו ויהא שלא במתכוין לילך לבה״וכ הלואי תהא יציאה כביאה וקרא צווח: ו”מי ביקש זאת מידכם, רמס חצרי?“ (ישעיה א:יב). |
[E.] It is known that ‘[divine] service’ is prayer.[21] See BT Ta’an. 2a; Sifrei on Deut. 41; Yalkut shimoni, ‘Ekev’, 863. The criticism in the Talmud of ‘those who eat and do not serve’ (BT Shabbat 32b) meant those who—as a result of our [collective] copious sins—don’t pray (may the Compassionate One save us). This is not what God commanded.[22] Refraining from prayer is a violation of God’s commandments. In our generations people exchange the permanent world for the transitory world, transgressing ‘the essence of wisdom, the fear of Hashem’ (Psalms 111:10). The very first paragraph of the Shulḥan arukh says: ‘One should rise in the morning to the service of the Creator.’[23] Cf. Shulḥan arukh, ‘Oraḥ ḥayim’ 1:1: ‘One should be as strong as a lion to rise up in the morning for the service of the Creator.’ [But prayer must be with intention, purpose, and concentration.] If a person just happens to wander into a synagogue, then he should leave the same way he came. As the verse cries out: ‘Who asked you to trample my courts?’ (Isaiah 1:12). |
ונראה לי דכך פירושו: מיין דנוקבא ביקש זאת דא שכינתא ליקדם; מידכם בזרוע, אם אין נשיאת כפים שתהא תפלתו זכה ולא כן בעונותינו הרבים, רק רמוס. וידוע דז׳ בסמך מתחלף וכאלו נכתב רומז כלומר דידוע דבית הכנסת מקרי נחל שמטהר הטמאים, אבל אם במקום קדוש ישתבחו שיהא לנגדי והעיזו פנים ברבים וגם לכבוש המלכות בבית המלך כידוע בזוהר דמאן דאשתעי בבית כנישתא עבד קלנא בקב״ה ושכינתיה רחמנא ליצלן. |
This is what I think that verse means: the Shekhinah seeks spiritual awakening[24] Literally: ‘arousal of the female waters first’; that is, the female mystical waters emit a seed which induces the male waters to emit their seed. The union of the seeds causes the unification of the divine presence, the Shekhinah. This is a kabbalistic idea (see L. Leet, The Secret Doctrine of the Kabbalah (Rochester, 1999), 274); cf. Jewish Theological Seminary of America, MS 350; National Library of Israel F 24355: Ya’acov ben Hayim Tsemah, Sefer kohelet ya’akov, passim. I am grateful to Zvi Mark for this reference and for helping me to understand this passage in Leah’s text. from you, but (as a result of our [collective] copious sins), rather than lift up your hand in pure prayer you forcefully trample [my holy place]. Now it is known that samekh [ס, the last letter of ‘trample’, רמוס] interchanges with zayin [ז], [so the verse would read:] ‘Who asked you to make small talk in my courts?’[25] With a switch of the unvoiced Hebrew letter samekh (ס) to the voiced zayin (ז) the original Hebrew רמוס (remos), to trample, might be read רמוז (remoz), to hint at, to signal—that is, to communicate with the other worshippers in various ways rather than concentrate on the service. The synagogue is famously called a brook which cleanses the defiled;[26] See Yalkut shimoni, ‘Balak’, 771. however, if in a holy place people just talk about themselves in my presence, being publicly brazen,[27] See Rashi on Eccles. 8:10. they violate the majesty of the King in his own house.[28] Cf. Esther 7:8. As the Zohar says: a person who talks in the synagogue disgraces God and his Shekhinah (may the Compassionate One save us).[29] Cf. Zohar, i. 256a. |
ועוד שע״י שיחת בבית הכנסת קנאתה אשה רעותא גם מחדרי אימה, בבואה לביתה היא מריבה עם הבעל בשביל תכשיטין. כי אומרת, ”בבית הכנסת אף אני כמות אשה המלובשת בבגדים נאים“. על כן יש לרמות תוכחות מגולה לנשים שיקיימו דין, המובא בילקוט שופטים סי׳ ט״ו: ”אשה כשרה בנשים עושים רצון בעלה“. |
Moreover, women talking [rather than praying] in the synagogue arouse jealousy, even in such an awesome place. When she gets home a woman argues with her husband over finery. She says, ‘In the synagogue I should be outfitted as beautifully as so-and-so.’ Therefore one should cast ‘open rebuke’[30] See Prov. 27:5; see also Chovav, Alamot ahevukha, 361. at such women to obey the rule cited in Yalkut, ‘Shoftim’, 15: ‘A proper woman obeys her husband.’[31] Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘Shoftim’, 42 (rather than 15), which reads: ‘There is no proper woman among women except she who obeys her husband.’ |
דאיתא בגמרא: ”אמר רבא: ‘הני נשי במאי זכין? בדמייתא בנייהו לבי כנישתא ודמנטרין לגברייהו עד דאתא מבי מדרשא’“ (בבלי ברכות יז א׳), הוא תמוה. דהא שס״ה לא תעשה הנשים מצוות וקיימא לן: דישב ולא עבר עבירה נותנין לו שכר. ועוד דהא כתב הרמב״ם בספר המצוות: דכל המצות הנוהגות בזמן הזה לכל איש, מהן ששה וארבעים שהנשים גם כן מצוות. |
[F.] In the Talmud, Rava said: ‘How do women gain merit? By bringing their sons to the synagogue [to study] and waiting for their husbands until they return from the beit midrash’ (BT Berakhot 17a)[32] the standard edition reads: ‘Rav [not Rava] said to Rabbi Hiyya…’) This is strange. Women are commanded to observe the 365 prohibitory mitsvot and there is a principle: if one sits back and refrains from sinning he merits a reward.[33] See Mishnah Mak. 3:15. In addition, Maimonides wrote in his Sefer hamitsvot[34] Maimonides, Sefer hamitsvot, ‘Conclusion to Positive Commandments’. that of the [sixty] obligatory mitsvot that still apply to individuals in these [post-Temple] times, women are commanded to observe forty-six. [With 411 (365+46) commandments to observe, not many fewer than the 425 (365+60) for men], it is difficult to understand why Rava did not find merits for women other than those he mentioned.[35] What Leah is claiming here is that it cannot be that the only way women gain religious merit is by facilitating the religious activities of men. It is plain that women have almost as many religious obligations as men do. Like men, their path to religious fulfilment is through performance of the mitsvot in their own right, not by facilitating the performance of others. Compare this to Rabbi Ephraim Solomon of Luntshits’s inaccurate observation that women ‘were exempted from most of the commandments’ (Ir giborim ‘Tazria’, no. 286; cf. Fram, My Dear Daughter, 37). |
ואם כן קשה לן אמאי לא מוצא לנשים שום זכיות רק זכיות הנזכרות לעיל. ונראה לי דהברטנורא כתב פרק א׳ דברכות: ”’זכיתי’ היינו ‘נצחתן’“ |
[G.] I believe R. [Obadiah] Bartenura [Bertinoro] commented on the first chapter of tractate Berakhot, ‘I merited’ means ‘I prevailed’.[36] Cf. Bartenura on Mishnah Ber. 1:5: ‘“[I am nearly 70 years old,] but I merited not” [means] I did not prevail over the sages’. Bartenura was explaining that when R. Elazar ben Azariah in the Mishnah said he did not gain merit he meant that his arguments did not convince his colleagues. Leah parsed this explanation and interpreted it to imply that it is through successful argument that one may indeed gain merit. Hence there are times when a wife should argue with her husband and thus gain merit. See Chovav, Alamot ahevukha, 106, whose interpretation I have adapted here. The Hebrew word for ‘I merited’: זכיתי (as it appears in the Mishnah) was printed in a corrupt form (זביחא) in Leah’s text. |
וידוע דאיתא בגמרא דאשת ר׳ חנינא בר חכינאי נענשה שלא מיחתה לבעלה. |
The talmudic story is known about the wife of R. [Ḥananiah] bar Ḥakhinai who was punished because she failed to protest to her husband.[37] Cf. BT Ket. 62b: When R. Ḥananiah returned home unexpectedly after twelve years away studying Torah, his wife was so agitated that she collapsed (she either fainted or died). Her husband said that she did not deserve such a punishment. However, there is no claim in the story that she ‘failed to protest’ to her husband and hence was punished. A different story in the same cycle recalls how, in similar circumstances, Rabbi Akiva’s wife did protest that her husband should complete his studies by going away for another twelve years. Leah’s text here is one of the clearest indicators that she was citing by heart without consulting the books. In this case her memory was not accurate. |
אם כן זהו פירושו: הני נשי במאי זכתן כלומר ‘נצחתן לבעל’ דבכל מילי דעלמא דא ראוי להיות גבר, הוא להוי גבר. אפילו גרדני בביתיה להוי פרדשכי. משאין כן במילי דעלמא דאתי. ונצחו לבעליהון, שאם הבעל רוצה לבטל מדברי תורה או לבטל בניו אזי תבוא עליה ברכה אם מנצחת אותו ומייתי בנייהו לבי כנישתא ומנטרת לבעלים כו׳ וקיימא לן. |
If so, this is what Rava meant: How does a woman gain merit? By prevailing over her husband [when appropriate]. In all matters of Olam haZeh (this world) a man should act manly and be a man. ‘Even a lowly weaver is a satrap in his own home’ [and a proper woman obeys her husband].[38] Cf. BT Meg, 12b. Interestingly, for ‘weaver’ Leah uses the word gardini, derived from the synonym Rashi used for the word karkha, which appears in the Talmud text there. This confirms Dov Ber of Bolechów’s claim that ‘She would recite the gemara or Rashi by heart.’ In her recitation sans text, Leah mixed the talmudic text with Rashi’s interpretation of it. This is not the case in matters of Olam haBah (the world-to-come). In these, women should prevail over their husbands. If a husband wants to neglect Torah study or have his sons neglect it, then blessed is the wife who prevails over him and brings her sons to the synagogue [to study] and waits for her husband [to return from the beit midrash]. This is our maxim. |
This is Leah Horowitz’s introduction to her Teḥinah Imahot, an argument for the legitimacy of Jewish women’s prayer. While the accompanying prayer is written in Aramaic with an accompanying Yiddish translation, the introduction is written in Hebrew.
The earliest printed edition containing the essay (and accompanying prayer) is in a prayer pamphlet in the collection of the National Library of Israel (NLI), R41A460, vol. 6, no. 2. Moshe Rosman writes, “From the printer’s mark appearing at its end, [Ḥaim] Liberman determined that the booklet was printed in Lemberg (Lviv), by Judith Rosanes, who ran a print shop there from about 1788 until her death in 1805.”
The digital transcription here relies on the printed transcription of the Lemberg edition of the prayer that Dr. Moshe Rosman published in his chapter, “Etgar terom feministi lamanhigut harabanit bepolin-lita bame’ah hashemoneh esrei: hakdamat tkhine imohos lesarah rivkah rah. el le’ah horovitz,” in Y. Hacker and Y. Harel (eds.), Lo yasur shevet miyehudah: hanhagah, rabanut ukehilah betoledot yisra’el, meh. karim mugashim leprofesor shimon schwarzfuchs (Jerusalem, 2011), 304–311. I have amended the Hebrew transcription by presenting the complete words of roshei tevot (abbreviations) in the Lemberg edition, while removing accompanying brackets. I have also removed section titles and footnote numbers. For the complete annotation in Hebrew, please consult the published chapter.
The English translation, also by Dr. Rosman, can be found in his article, “Leah Horowitz’s Tkhine Imohos A Proto-Feminist Demand to Increase Jewish Women’s Religious Capital,” in Polin 33 (2020). For consistency between the text and annotation, I have retained the section lettering in the translation and omitted the lettering found in Dr. Rosman’s chapter in Hebrew. As the Hebrew and its translation are here set side-by-side, the section lettering from the translation should suffice. I have slightly amended the translation to re-Hebraize names and circumlocutions of the divine name, and made tiny adjustments here and there, for instance, not translating raḥmana litslan as “God forbid” or “Heaven forfend” but rather as may the Compassionate One save us.
For Dr. Rosman’s full scholarly analysis in Hebrew and English, please find his chapter and article referenced above.
In transcribing this text, I dedicate my work to the ongoing struggle of Women of the Wall to pray on Rosh Ḥodesh at the kotel, uninterrupted with all the dignity and decorum offered to man davvening at the Kotel. –Aharon Varady
Source(s)
Tehinah Imahot (NLI R41A460, v.6, n.2), p. 1 Tehinah Imahot (NLI R41A460, v.6, n.2), p. 2 Tehinah Imahot (NLI R41A460, v.6, n.2), p. 3
Notes
| 1 | As Weissler noted, Leah was apparently referring to the prayer for blessing the new moon that appears in the Yiddish tkhine collection Seder tkhines oyf ale tug, printed in Amsterdam in 1752 (Weissler, Voices of the Matriarchs,98, 232; ead., ‘Tkhines for the Sabbath before the New Moon’, 408). It states there: ‘Forgive me the sins, transgressions, and iniquities that I sinned, committed, and perpetrated’ and ‘O Lord, I have sinned; may I never be ashamed’ (Seder tkhines oyf ale tug (Amsterdam, 1752), 10b, 11a; cf. Pss. 31: 2; 71: 1). Weissler observed that this tkhine also appears in the standard Seder tkhines uvakoshes (Fürth, 1769), no. 67. It should be added that this tkhine was a Yiddish paraphrastic translation of the Hebrew prayer for blessing the new moon, ‘Yehi ratson’, which was becoming the standard prayer for the occasion in the eighteenth century and is still recited today. While the Hebrew did not contain the confession of sins it did consist of petitions for material welfare in the month ahead. |
|---|---|
| 2 | See Eccles. 7:14. |
| 3 | Cf. Job 15:18. |
| 4 | Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘Korah’, 756, and many other places in rabbinic literature. |
| 5 | For the Aramaic, go here. For the Yiddish translation, go here. |
| 6 | Cf. BT Ber. 48b; Yalkut shimoni, ‘1 Samuel’, 108. See also: ‘May God thereby forgive me for my youthful chattering in synagogue during the reading of the beloved, holy Torah’ and ‘I, the woman Sarah, beseech the young women not to converse in the beloved, holy synagogue, for it is a great sin’ (T.G. Klirs et al. (eds.), The Merit of Our Mothers: A Bilingual Anthology of Women’s Prayers (Cincinnati, 1992), 12, 28; translations slightly emended). |
| 7 | Cf. JT Shab. 15:3; Vayikra rabah, 34; Yalkut shimoni, ‘Isaiah’, 496. |
| 8 | See also the famous letter of the Vilna Gaon (Leah Horowitz’s contemporary) to his wife, which touches on some of the same subjects as Leah’s introduction (Hebrew Ethical Wills, ed. I. Abrahams, 2 vols. in 1 (Philadelphia, 1926; facsimile edn., 1976), 313–325). |
| 9 | Leah did not name the ‘scholars and rabbis’ who approved of her work. Perhaps they were members of her own family or perhaps no rabbi was willing to go on record as endorsing a work written by a woman. |
| 10 | Exod. 38:8 reads: ‘He made the laver of copper and its stand of copper from the mirrors of the women who assembled at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.’ Targum Onkelos translated ‘the women who assembled at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting’ into Aramaic as ‘the women who came to pray at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting’. Similarly Abraham ibn Ezra, in his comment on this verse, noted that this referred to ‘women who would come regularly to pray at the place of the Tent of Meeting, who had renounced all worldly desire and therefore donated their mirrors’. This explanation, emphasizing that the mirrors came from women who gathered at the Tent of Meeting to pray, differs from the better-known conventional one, apparently originating in Midrash tanḥuma (‘Pekudei’, 9), which insists that the Israelite women gathered at the Tent of Meeting for the express purpose of donating their mirrors. These mirrors bore an aura of holiness because they had served the Israelite women in Egypt to beautify themselves so that they might attract their tired husbands after a day of hard labour, and conceive children to strengthen the Israelites. There is no reference to the women praying there. This explanation was adopted by Rashi and other standard commentaries on this verse. |
| 11 | See Jacob ben Asher, Ba’al haturim al hatorah, on Exod. 38:8 (my thanks to Ya’akov Elbaum for this reference); cf. Chovav, Alamot ahevukha, 105 n. 234. |
| 12 | Unlike the Ba’al haturim al hatorah, which specified that the women who prayed at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting were ones whose evil inclination (libido) had left them, and Ibn Ezra, who asserted that the mirror donors had renounced earthly desire, Leah implies that the praying women might be of all ages and still sexually active. |
| 13 | Cf. Prov. 23:9. |
| 14 | Those who ‘eat choice foods and drink sweet drinks’ forsake eternal life for temporal pleasures (BT Bets. 15b). |
| 15 | Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘Ruth’, 406. It actually says: ‘The generations are redeemed only as a reward to the righteous women of the generation.’ See also Rut zuta 4:11. |
| 16 | Cf. BT Eruv. 9a. |
| 17 | Leah is playing devil’s advocate here, representing the view that the supposed fact that men have more opportunities to fulfil God’s will than women do should gain them more merit and make them the catalysts of redemption. In the continuation of the text she subtly undermines this view by showing that women are obliged to observe almost as many mitsvot as men (see Hebrew Introduction, Section F, and n. 63 below). |
| 18 | Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘1 Kings’, 190; BT Ber. 6a. |
| 19 | The Aramaic for ‘give us’, hav lan, is reminiscent of the Hebrew for the sound of a dog barking: hav hav. |
| 20 | Cf. Tikunei zohar, 22a. The text in parentheses is to emphasize that women’s prayer (and crying) should, in contrast to typical male prayer, be selfless and heartfelt; otherwise, it will have no effect. People (men) who commonly pray for instrumental reasons are just like barking dogs. |
| 21 | See BT Ta’an. 2a; Sifrei on Deut. 41; Yalkut shimoni, ‘Ekev’, 863. |
| 22 | Refraining from prayer is a violation of God’s commandments. |
| 23 | Cf. Shulḥan arukh, ‘Oraḥ ḥayim’ 1:1: ‘One should be as strong as a lion to rise up in the morning for the service of the Creator.’ |
| 24 | Literally: ‘arousal of the female waters first’; that is, the female mystical waters emit a seed which induces the male waters to emit their seed. The union of the seeds causes the unification of the divine presence, the Shekhinah. This is a kabbalistic idea (see L. Leet, The Secret Doctrine of the Kabbalah (Rochester, 1999), 274); cf. Jewish Theological Seminary of America, MS 350; National Library of Israel F 24355: Ya’acov ben Hayim Tsemah, Sefer kohelet ya’akov, passim. I am grateful to Zvi Mark for this reference and for helping me to understand this passage in Leah’s text. |
| 25 | With a switch of the unvoiced Hebrew letter samekh (ס) to the voiced zayin (ז) the original Hebrew רמוס (remos), to trample, might be read רמוז (remoz), to hint at, to signal—that is, to communicate with the other worshippers in various ways rather than concentrate on the service. |
| 26 | See Yalkut shimoni, ‘Balak’, 771. |
| 27 | See Rashi on Eccles. 8:10. |
| 28 | Cf. Esther 7:8. |
| 29 | Cf. Zohar, i. 256a. |
| 30 | See Prov. 27:5; see also Chovav, Alamot ahevukha, 361. |
| 31 | Cf. Yalkut shimoni, ‘Shoftim’, 42 (rather than 15), which reads: ‘There is no proper woman among women except she who obeys her husband.’ |
| 32 | the standard edition reads: ‘Rav [not Rava] said to Rabbi Hiyya…’) |
| 33 | See Mishnah Mak. 3:15. |
| 34 | Maimonides, Sefer hamitsvot, ‘Conclusion to Positive Commandments’. |
| 35 | What Leah is claiming here is that it cannot be that the only way women gain religious merit is by facilitating the religious activities of men. It is plain that women have almost as many religious obligations as men do. Like men, their path to religious fulfilment is through performance of the mitsvot in their own right, not by facilitating the performance of others. Compare this to Rabbi Ephraim Solomon of Luntshits’s inaccurate observation that women ‘were exempted from most of the commandments’ (Ir giborim ‘Tazria’, no. 286; cf. Fram, My Dear Daughter, 37). |
| 36 | Cf. Bartenura on Mishnah Ber. 1:5: ‘“[I am nearly 70 years old,] but I merited not” [means] I did not prevail over the sages’. Bartenura was explaining that when R. Elazar ben Azariah in the Mishnah said he did not gain merit he meant that his arguments did not convince his colleagues. Leah parsed this explanation and interpreted it to imply that it is through successful argument that one may indeed gain merit. Hence there are times when a wife should argue with her husband and thus gain merit. See Chovav, Alamot ahevukha, 106, whose interpretation I have adapted here. The Hebrew word for ‘I merited’: זכיתי (as it appears in the Mishnah) was printed in a corrupt form (זביחא) in Leah’s text. |
| 37 | Cf. BT Ket. 62b: When R. Ḥananiah returned home unexpectedly after twelve years away studying Torah, his wife was so agitated that she collapsed (she either fainted or died). Her husband said that she did not deserve such a punishment. However, there is no claim in the story that she ‘failed to protest’ to her husband and hence was punished. A different story in the same cycle recalls how, in similar circumstances, Rabbi Akiva’s wife did protest that her husband should complete his studies by going away for another twelve years. Leah’s text here is one of the clearest indicators that she was citing by heart without consulting the books. In this case her memory was not accurate. |
| 38 | Cf. BT Meg, 12b. Interestingly, for ‘weaver’ Leah uses the word gardini, derived from the synonym Rashi used for the word karkha, which appears in the Talmud text there. This confirms Dov Ber of Bolechów’s claim that ‘She would recite the gemara or Rashi by heart.’ In her recitation sans text, Leah mixed the talmudic text with Rashi’s interpretation of it. |
“On the Legitimacy of Jewish Women’s Prayer, by Leah Horowitz (ca. 1790)” is shared through the Open Siddur Project under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA) 4.0 International copyleft license.
Leave a Reply