YESHIVAT HAR ETZION

ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)

*********************************************************

WOMEN AND HALAKHA

Rav Chaim Navon

For easy printing, go to:

www.vbm-torah.org/archive/womenandmitzvot/04womenandmitzvot.htm

SHIUR #04: WOMEN AND PRAYER

Please pray for a refua shleima for Breindel Shoshana bat Reva Devorah,
betokh she'ar cholei Yisrael.

I. THE FOUNDATIONS OF A WOMAN'S OBLIGATION TO PRAY

The Mishna in Berakhot establishes that a woman is fundamentally

obligated in prayer: “Women, slaves and minors are exempt from reciting the
Shema and from donning tefillin, but they are subject to the obligations of
prayer, mezuza and Grace after Meals” (20a-b). The Gemara notes there that
women are obligated in prayer because “it is [a supplication for] mercy.” The
Gemara adds that one might have thought that women should be exempt
from prayer, as there is an obligation to pray three times a day at fixed hours,
and therefore it might have been possible to relate to prayer as a time-bound
positive commandment, from which women are exempt. For this reason, the
Mishna clarifies that women are indeed obligated in prayer.

It is not entirely clear from the Gemara why a woman’s exemption from
time-bound positive commandments does not apply to prayer. Rashi explains
that prayer is a rabbinic obligation, and the exemption is limited to Torah
obligations. The Tosafot agree that prayer is a rabbinic commandment, but
they disagree with Rashi's second assumption. According to the Tosafot,
women are exempt not only from time-bound positive commandments from
the Torah, but even from those that are rabbinic in origin. We can dispute
Rashi's first assumption as well, for according to the Rambam, prayer is a
Torah obligation. In any event, the Tosafot argue that a woman's obligation in
prayer is not connected to its status as a rabbinic obligation, but rather to the
fact that “it is [a supplication for] mercy.”

There are two ways to formulate the Gemara's conclusion: 1) Prayer is

actually not a time-bound positive commandment; 2) Prayer is indeed a time-
bound positive commandment, but nevertheless women are obligated in it.
According to Rashi, the Gemara maintains that prayer is, in fact, a time-bound
positive commandment. However, it is only mandated by rabbinic law, and
therefore women are obligated in it. In contrast, the Rif writes that prayer is a
positive commandment that is not time-bound (Berakhot 11b in Alfasi). He
may have had a different version of our Gemara, which left out the rationale
that prayer “is [a supplication for] mercy” altogether, as this rationale is not
needed if we are dealing with a mitzva that is not time-bound.

How is it possible to define prayer as positive commandment that is not

time-bound? Rabbeinu Yona explains the matter as follows:

Even though prayer has a fixed time, nevertheless, since the Sages
said: “Would that a man should pray the entire day,” it is treated like a
mitzva that is not time-bound, and therefore women are obligated in it.
Alternatively, because it is [a supplication for] mercy. (Rabbeinu Yona,
Berakhot 11b in Alfasi)

Rabbeinu Yona offers two explanations: 1) The mitzva of prayer is, in its
essence, not bound by time. While it is true that the Sages established times
for prayer, these are only minimal times, similar to the mitzva of Torah study,
which has a minimal measure – one halakha in the morning and one at night.
Neither Torah study nor prayer is limited to these prescribed times, but rather,
both mitzvot essentially apply at all times. If a person is unable to pray
throughout the day, it suffices to recite a minimum of three prayers. However,
this minimum certainly does not define the obligation as time-bound. 2) The
mitzva of prayer is, in fact, time-bound, but it is treated as if it were not
because it is characterized by supplication for God's mercy. Rabbeinu Yona
seems to be saying that the fact that prayer is defined as supplication for
mercy negates its definition as a time-bound positive commandment. Mercy is
needed at all times; even if for technical reasons the Sages limited prayer to
three times a day, the mitzva in its essence is not bound by time.

It is also possible to interpret the Gemara differently and say that even
though prayer is a time-bound positive commandment, women are
nevertheless obligated in it, since it involves supplication for mercy. That is to
say, it is difficult for the Gemara to accept that women should not seek God's
mercy. This is what is implied by the Yerushalmi: “And they are subject to the
obligation of prayer – so that each and every individual should seek mercy for
himself” (Berakhot 3:3). The Yerushalmi suggests that according to the
normative principles of halakha, women should indeed be exempt from
prayer, as it is a time-bound positive commandment. Here, however, there is a
special interest (of the Torah, or of the Sages) that every person seek mercy
for his or her self. As stated, however, this is not the understanding of the Rif
(nor does it seem to be the understanding of the Tosafot).

Let us summarize the various possible formulations of a woman's

obligation to pray:

1) Prayer is essentially a positive commandment that is not time-

bound (Rif, Rabbeinu Yona in his first explanation).
2) Prayer is a positive commandment that is not time-bound
because it is a supplication for God's mercy (Rabbeinu Yona in
his second explanation).
3) Prayer is a rabbinically-ordained positive commandment, in
which women are obligated, even if it is time-bound (Rashi).
 4) Prayer is a positive commandment that is time-bound, but
nevertheless women are obligated in it because it is a
supplication for God's mercy (implied by the Yerushalmi).
The Rambam's ruling follows the position of the Rif. Let us examine that
ruling in full, as it is of great importance with respect to the issues that we will
discuss later in this shiur:

It is a positive commandment to pray every day… as it is stated:

“Serving Him with all your heart and soul” (Devarim 11:13), about which
the Sages said: “What is the service of the heart? Prayer.” The number
of prayers is not fixed in the Torah, nor is their format, and neither does
the Torah prescribe a fixed time for prayer.
Women and slaves are therefore obligated to pray, since it is a positive
commandment without a fixed time.
Rather, this commandment obligates each person to pray, supplicate
and praise the Holy One, blessed be He, to the best of his ability every
day; to then request and plead for what he needs; and after that praise
and thank God for all that He showered on him. (Hilkhot Tefilla 1:1-2)

The Rambam explicitly writes that prayer is a positive commandment

that is not time-bound, and therefore women are obligated in it. 1 The
Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chayyim 106:1) rules accordingly. The Magen
Avraham (no. 2) writes that is it is possible to infer from the Rambam that a
woman is only obligated in the prayer that is mandated by Torah law. That is,
she must pray once a day, using her own format. The rabbinic element of the
obligation, however, which includes a fixed format that must be recited three
times a day, is defined as a time-bound positive commandment, and therefore
women are exempt from it. This is a critical point with respect to actual
halakhic practice, for if we adopt the position of the Magen Avraham, it follows
that women are not obligated to recite three prayers every day. They need
only recite one prayer a day, without necessarily using a fixed format.

The Mishna Berura (Orach Chayyim 106, no. 4) notes that this
distinction is relevant only according to the view of the Rambam that there is a
level of prayer that is mandated by Torah law. According to the Rambam, it
can be argued that the mishna that obligates women in prayer relates to that
basic level of prayer. But according to those who maintain that the entire
mitzva of prayer is only mandated by rabbinic decree, we are forced to say
that the mishna obligates women to pray in the manner established by the
Sages, using their fixed format, and that the halakha does not distinguish
between different levels of the mitzva. The Mishna Berura notes that this is
the position of most halakhic authorities, and therefore in practice women are
obligated to recite the full Amida, and may not suffice with a personal prayer
of their own design. The Mishna Berura adds that this applies to shacharit and
mincha, the prayers for the morning and afternoon. As for arvit, the evening
prayer, the Gemara states: “The evening prayer is optional” (Berakhot 27b).
Even though men have since accepted arvit upon themselves as obligatory,
1
It should be noted that the Rambam himself writes in his commentary to the Mishna
(Kiddushin 1:7) that prayer is a time-bound positive commandment. Apparently he later
retracted this position.
women have not. There are other authorities who rule that women are
obligated in arvit as well (Arukh Ha-shulchan, Orach Chayyim 106:7).

II. WOMEN'S PRAYER – IN PRACTICE

The Shulchan Arukh rules that women are exempt from reciting the
Shema, which is, according to all opinions, a time-bound positive
commandment. He adds, however: “But it is proper to teach them to accept
upon themselves the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven” (Orach Chayyim 70:1).
The Rema adds: “And they should read at least the first verse [of the
Shema].”

The Magen Avraham (Orach Chayyim 70, no. 1) writes that women are
obligated to recite the Emet Ve-yatziv blessing in order to fulfill the obligation
to remember the Exodus from Egypt, implying that women are included in the
obligation of semikhat ge'ula le-tefilla, i.e., of joining the Emet Ve-yatziv
blessing to the Amida prayer. The Mishna Berura (Orach Chayyim 70, no. 2)
expresses doubt as to whether women are actually obligated in the mitzva to
remember the Exodus, as that might be considered a time-bound positive
commandment. This consideration depends on whether there is an obligation
to remember the Exodus at night in addition to during the day. If we are
commanded to remember the Exodus both day and night, it would be difficult
to define the mitzva as time-bound, as the obligation is constant. But even if
the mitzva applies at night as well, we might argue that remembering during
the day and remembering at night are two separate mitzvot, distinct from one
another, so each mitzva might very well be considered time-bound. The
Mishna Berura (106) writes that women are in fact exempt from reciting the
Shema, but it is proper for them to recite at least the first verse and the Emet
Ve-yatziv blessing.

What about the earlier portions of the prayer service? The Shulchan
Arukh (Orach Chayyim 47:14) rules that women must recite birkot ha-Torah.
The Mishna Berura (70) raises the question of whether women are obligated
to recite birkot ha-shachar. He writes that the wording of the Shulchan Arukh
(46) implies that they are obligated. The Mishna Berura writes further that,
according to some authorities, pesukei de-zimra serve as a kind of
introduction to the Amida, and therefore women who are obligated in prayer
are obligated in pesukei de-zimra as well. The Mishna Berura does not reveal
his own position in the matter.

To summarize: According to the Mishna Berura, the core of women's

prayer is as follows: Birkot ha-Torah and birkot ha-shachar, the first verse of
the Shema, the Emet Ve-yatziv blessing, and the Amida. Ideally, they should
also recite pesukei de-zimra and the Shema and their blessings in their full
form (or at least from the first verse until the end of the Amida).

In actual practice, however, as the Magen Avraham noted, most women

do not pray at all during the week. The Magen Avraham writes that they rely
on the position of the Rambam – that it suffices if they recite a personal
prayer. However, we must be precise: Even according to the Rambam,
reciting the Modeh Ani prayer would not suffice, for even the most basic
prayer must have a fixed structure in order to fulfill the Torah obligation to
pray. One must open with words of praise, continue with words of
supplication, and then conclude with words of praise and thanksgiving. We
find this structure in birkot ha-Torah and in the final blessing of birkot ha-
shachar. It may be that women who do not recite the full Amida can still fulfill
their obligation by reciting these blessings, according to the Magen Avraham's
understanding of the Rambam.

Rav Ovadya Yosef (Yabi'a Omer VI, Orach Chayyim, no. 17) accepts the
Magen Avraham's understanding of the Rambam, and asserts that by strict
law it suffices for a woman to recite one personal prayer a day, provided that it
follows the structure presented by the Rambam. In practice, however, he
recommends that women should pray as follows: birkot ha-Torah, birkot ha-
shachar, the first verse of the Shema and the Amida. He adds that there is no
reason for them to refrain from praying three times a day. He adds that
women who follow the rulings of the Shulchan Arukh should not recite the
blessings of Barukh She-amar and Yishtabach, for according to Sephardic
custom women do not recite blessings over time-bound positive
commandments. What is more, according to Rav Ovadya, they may not recite
the blessings of the Shema (Yabi'a Omer II, Orach Chayyim, no. 6).

Despite Rav Ovadya’s ruling, there are Sephardic halakhic authorities

who disagree. The Kaf Ha-chayyim writes:

If they wish to recite the blessings of Shema and also the pesukei de-
zimra with their blessings, they may do so. Therefore, women who know
how to learn [the ritual] should recite the entire order of the prayer, as
men do – nothing less – from the story of the Akeida to Aleinu Le-
shabei'ach. (70, 1)

We see that the Kaf Ha-chayyim permits Sephardic women to recite

the entire liturgy. We have already seen that there is a firmly grounded custom
among Sephardic women to recite blessings over time-bound positive
commandments. Regarding the blessings found in the Amida, the matter is
even less problematic from a halakhic perspective, for according to some, the
only reason a woman might refrain from reciting a blessing over a time-bound
positive commandment is the problematic phrase “who has commanded us,”
which does not appear anywhere in the Amida.

(Translated by David Strauss)