Q&A: Women Reclining
Women Reclining
Question
I didn’t understand the Rema’s words. On the one hand he writes that all our women are considered important, but on the other hand they relied on the view of the Ravyah that nowadays one need not recline. What is different, according to his view, between women and men? After all, women are equal to men in this respect.
I do understand, historically, how the women’s custom of not reclining developed. The question is whether there is a halakhic mechanism that justifies the custom.
2 – Has the Rabbi written in the past about the Ritva, who speaks about an asmachta as “semi” Torah-level? If so, I would be glad for a reference, please (including to the Rabbi’s books as well).
Thank you very much!
Answer
Once I saw a nice explanation for this (if I remember correctly, in Rabbi Mann’s book Meor Yisrael). His claim is that according to the Ravyah, since nowadays people do not recline, the obligation of reclining in our time has lapsed, and this does not violate the idea of seeing oneself as if one had left Egypt (as is well known, even at the time of the Exodus they did not recline; this is a Roman custom). But the commandment to present oneself as if one had left Egypt still remains, and that of course does not depend on the custom of the present time (for you are showing what happened then), but rather on the form of the Sages’ original enactment from the outset (they apparently thought that reclining existed in Egypt too). This obligation is imposed only on the one conducting the Seder (presumably that is the man), who is the one telling the story and showing the participants what happened in the Exodus from Egypt. Therefore, even though nowadays women are considered important and are obligated in reclining just like men, the obligation of reclining has lapsed both for them and for men because of the Ravyah’s reasoning. But the obligation to present oneself as part of the story of the Exodus from Egypt remains, and that is imposed on the man. And there are two practical implications: 1. This obligation is not imposed on men at the table who are not conducting the Seder. 2. If a woman conducts the Seder, then she is indeed obligated to recline.
Discussion on Answer
Thank you very much
What is the Rabbi’s halakhic view, and how does the Rabbi conduct himself at home regarding reclining?
In our home, they all recline, except for those who cut corners now and then, like the Rema.
Why not say more simply that in essence the Rema understood the law to be like the Ravyah, and therefore women can rely on that. But men should be stringent and continue their custom. Seems to me a simpler explanation.
That’s how he is usually learned, but it isn’t plausible. It isn’t presented as a matter of the laws of uncertainty.
Over the holiday I heard from a friend another answer in the name of Rabbi Eliyahu Diskin. He wanted to say that for men there was an enactment to recline because that was the manner of freedom, but the enactment applies to the act itself, and therefore even if the reason has lapsed, the enactment has not lapsed (according to the medieval authorities who disagree with the Ravyah).
But for women, from the outset the enactment was "a woman whose way is to recline all year," and therefore nowadays, when it is not their way to recline, even though the enactment remains in place, they are nevertheless exempt from reclining.
And that is the distinction between women and men. And the reason the Rema wrote that they relied on the Ravyah regarding women is in combination with the above.
I haven’t written about the Ritva in detail and directly, but I discussed it in my book Ruach HaMishpat. There I showed that the relation/connection between a halakha and the verse from which it emerges lies along a continuum of levels of connection. There is a halakha that is really there in the verse (plain-meaning interpretation), and that is genuine Torah-level law. There is a halakha that branches out from there, and those are interpretive laws, which according to Maimonides are rabbinic. There are laws that are not connected to verses at all (laws given to Moses at Sinai, decrees, and enactments). The Ritva’s asmachta is a third level according to the last category (there is an affinity to the verse, but it is not really found in it. It is the spirit of the verse).