Featured Post
Free The Hostages! Bring Them Home!
(this is a featured post and will stay at the top for the foreseeable future.. scroll down for new posts) -------------------------------...
Sep 4, 2012
Supreme Court Asks Religious Council For response On Unmarried Women Immersing in Milvah
Last year the Religious Action Center began proceedings to try to force the Religious Council to open up mikvahs to all women regardless of marital status.
The women running the mikvahs are currently instructed by the religious council to not allow single women to immerse - I assume they are instructed to ask a woman as to her marital status in a situation in which they are suspicious that the woman might not be married. I don't know how else the balanit is expected to know who is single or married, and I know they don't ask every woman who walks in.
While they initially petitioned the Religious Council to change their policy, eventually this organization brought their petition to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has now ordered the Religious Council, the Chief Rabbis and Minister Yaakov Margi who heads the Religious Council, to respond as to why they oppose opening the mikvahs up to the public, including single unmarried women without discrimination.
There is a rabbinic prohibition against unmarried women immersing, as it is is deemed inappropriate to allow such a thing. Allowing such immersion would be akin to allowing premarital sex. The Religious Council operates on that assumption, following the rabbinic ban. Obviously it is only rabbinic, as all adult women used to immerse for the purpose of impurity, as it was important for keeping food and utensils pure and they had to immerse monthly to do so.
The Religious Council is in a bit of a bind, as from a liberal democracy's perspective, services are meant to be supplied in a non-discriminatory fashion. It is discriminatory to ask women if they are married or single and provide services based on the answer. On the other hand, the Religious Council is meant to operate along religious guidelines, based on rulings from the rabbis, especially the Chief Rabbis, and to follow halacha.
This is the type of problem that arises when there is no separation of Shul and State, and there are no guidelines for how to integrate the two. Instea dof a formal policy, the governments religious body works by politicking just like any other governmental body - and sometimes those running it get what they want, and sometimes they don't.
What they probably should do is not agree to open it to unmarried women, but agree to take a step back and be less intrusive. It is not really their job to make sure everyone else keeps halacha. it is their job to provide the religious services to those who wish to use them. So, it is not really their business if the person requesting to immerse is single or married - they should just be providing the ability to immerse to those who want it. it is up to the women to keep their side of the halacha, in all that entails. So the Religious Council should respond and say that they oppose unmarried women immersing (with the exception of immersion for the purpose of ascending Har HaBayit), but it is not their job to enforce and prevent unmarried women from immersing. And they should instruct the balaniot to stop asking.
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
The women running the mikvahs are currently instructed by the religious council to not allow single women to immerse - I assume they are instructed to ask a woman as to her marital status in a situation in which they are suspicious that the woman might not be married. I don't know how else the balanit is expected to know who is single or married, and I know they don't ask every woman who walks in.
While they initially petitioned the Religious Council to change their policy, eventually this organization brought their petition to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has now ordered the Religious Council, the Chief Rabbis and Minister Yaakov Margi who heads the Religious Council, to respond as to why they oppose opening the mikvahs up to the public, including single unmarried women without discrimination.
There is a rabbinic prohibition against unmarried women immersing, as it is is deemed inappropriate to allow such a thing. Allowing such immersion would be akin to allowing premarital sex. The Religious Council operates on that assumption, following the rabbinic ban. Obviously it is only rabbinic, as all adult women used to immerse for the purpose of impurity, as it was important for keeping food and utensils pure and they had to immerse monthly to do so.
The Religious Council is in a bit of a bind, as from a liberal democracy's perspective, services are meant to be supplied in a non-discriminatory fashion. It is discriminatory to ask women if they are married or single and provide services based on the answer. On the other hand, the Religious Council is meant to operate along religious guidelines, based on rulings from the rabbis, especially the Chief Rabbis, and to follow halacha.
This is the type of problem that arises when there is no separation of Shul and State, and there are no guidelines for how to integrate the two. Instea dof a formal policy, the governments religious body works by politicking just like any other governmental body - and sometimes those running it get what they want, and sometimes they don't.
What they probably should do is not agree to open it to unmarried women, but agree to take a step back and be less intrusive. It is not really their job to make sure everyone else keeps halacha. it is their job to provide the religious services to those who wish to use them. So, it is not really their business if the person requesting to immerse is single or married - they should just be providing the ability to immerse to those who want it. it is up to the women to keep their side of the halacha, in all that entails. So the Religious Council should respond and say that they oppose unmarried women immersing (with the exception of immersion for the purpose of ascending Har HaBayit), but it is not their job to enforce and prevent unmarried women from immersing. And they should instruct the balaniot to stop asking.
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
Labels:
Chief Rabbinate,
mikva,
religion
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Agreed - "don't ask/don't tell" is the way to go here.
ReplyDeleteI predict a compromise - Mikvaot will be required to have a sign that immersion in a mikva my non-married women is against halacha/minhag/massoret/what-have-you. At the same time, the balaniot will be proscribed from making any inquiries of women using the mikvaot, or stopping those they know to be unmarried.
ReplyDeleteI guess "don't ask/don't tell" - but I am not a rabbi and respect their opinions on this issue. I know that some would say that keeping the ban would not prevent premarital waste of seed, but then again, it is not a good idea to seem 'compromising' on religious matters because it reduces respect in general.
ReplyDeleteFrom what internet says, Rav Metzger issued a prohibition to the rabbinate mikvahs in 2008 for unmarried to dunk.
Josh
that prohibition can continue to stand, but the religious council should not see themselves as obligated to enforce that ruling. just like there is a prohibition regarding turning on lights on shabbos, but the rabbanut does not stop any particular person from doing so. it is on the person to follow, or not follow, the rules.
ReplyDeleteIf you tried turning on the light on Shabbat in your shul (private or paid for with government funds), i am sure that the rav and many other folks would try to stop you.
DeleteThis is actually a bigger problem.
ReplyDeleteWomen want to visit har Habayit. They don't have to be married to do so. They do have to use a Mikveh.
The Rabbanut really needs to change it's stance on single women using a Mikveh.
Huh??? The rabbinate is dead-set against any Jew visiting Har Habayit. Why would the need to something they consider to be 100% assur be a reason for them to permit something else that they consider assur?
DeleteThat's the problem, and they need to change their stance.
DeleteHopefully the Supreme court will rule they have to allow non-married women in, and then they can justify the ruling by saying they need to enter the mikveh for times when they might visit har habayit.
Women who are in relation under the Heter of Rav Yaacov Emden ( Pileguesh )(Shehelot Yavetz Vol 2 num 15 )have also the duty to go to the mikva
ReplyDeleteits a real stretch to suggest that pilegesh is common enough today to even be an issue worth taking into consideration...
ReplyDeleteIt's unenforceable... the balanit will ask a woman she suspects if she's married or not? So the woman in question will lie...
ReplyDelete