A woman’s testimony
Why is a woman disqualified from testifying from the Torah? What is the logic? It doesn’t seem clear that a woman is less trustworthy than a man.
Honorable Mention
There are indiscretions in halakha that are not related to the level of credibility of the witness. For example, the disqualification of relatives, which is explained in the Gemara and cited in the Rambam and Shulchan Arba, is not because they are suspected of lying or are less trustworthy. This is what is usually called “the disqualification of the body.”
Beyond that, it is possible that the Sages did think that women in their time were less trustworthy for various reasons. In our time, this has probably changed.
And which option do you think is correct?
Second, the sermon from which we learn that women are impermissible is quite dubious, and it is quite clear that there was an underlying reason or purpose behind it.
In all human societies, there was a complete division of labor between men (outside) and women (inside) as a result of the phenomenon of scarcity. The modern society of abundance has destroyed this division and driven women out of the home.
Thanks for the answer
Option A: Why is there a body defect
Option B: Why were they thought to be less reliable
On the 4th of Elul 5775
To Chaim, Shalom Rav,
There is no one, as far as I know, who claims that a woman's testimony is unreliable, since a woman is a witness in the most severe prohibitions, such as the prohibitions of Nidda (which is a binding obligation) and Terum, and Challah (which are subject to a death obligation). Most of the early scholars said that women's disqualification from testifying is the "decree of Scripture."
The author of the book gave the reason that women are not punctual because of their troubles, and based on this, the Chief Rabbi Uziel believed that today, when women are engaged in matters of negotiation, their testimony should be trusted because today, women are also punctual. And yet, even in the days of the Sages and the Rishonim, there were regulations to rely on the testimony of women in situations where they had unique information.
See my responses to the article by Eli Hadad, "Going Out into the Wider Spaces," on the website "Mossaf Shabbat" (from 7-8 Elul 5773), and to the article by D.A. Avi Weinrot, "Women in the Judicial Process," on the website "Da'at."
With greetings, Sh”z
It is worth noting that the mere appearance in court was considered a disgrace in the days of the sages, and therefore the woman is usually exempt from the oath when collecting the ketubah, because no one wants his widow (or even his ex-wife) to be disgraced in court. All the more so because the ’interrogation of every witness by the court was a very unpleasant experience, which the sages preferred to spare the woman, unless it was unique information.
Besides the fact that women are characterized by compassion and mercy, a wonderful quality in life but problematic in a judicial process where ‘justice will pierce the mountain’ and ’there is no mercy in justice’. And there is an opinion that the Torah wanted to spare the woman the unpleasant experience of having a man punished for her, unless, in the court's opinion, the woman's testimony is necessary.
Paragraph 1, line 1
… For a woman is faithful to the prohibitions…
Paragraph 4, line 3
… Every witness is required of her by the court…
Supplement to paragraph 4
And they exempted ‘precious women’ from appearing before the court themselves as plaintiff or defendant, and allowed them to be represented by an ‘antler’ (= authorized, lawyer), in contrast to other litigants who are required to plead their claims and be present at the receipt of the testimonies and the delivery of the verdict without the possibility of appointing a representative.
The fact that giving testimony and being questioned about it is considered a "disgrace" is the reason that minors are exempt from testifying before a court of minors so that their honor is not tarnished.
And I have heard people tell me that today, the Abrechs are like housewives in years gone by, and women who earn a living are like men in years gone by, and therefore, according to the law, women are eligible to testify and the Abrechs are disqualified.
A. I don't know. Just like I don't know why relatives are disqualified.
2. Because they were less familiar with what was happening and didn't always understand the nuances. Someone who is locked up at home and uneducated doesn't always understand what she sees in front of her eyes, like a person from a different culture.
Mana, I've heard that argument too, and there's something to it. Of course it's a bit exaggerated, but there's definitely some truth to it. You can see here some ultra-Orthodox scholars whose arguments suggest they don't really understand the nuances of what's going on around them.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
