-3

THis is a follow-up question to the long-forgotten "why-are-women-exempt..." (2011).

What is the meaning of the word Patur (exempt) here - does it mean like דחויה or הותרה?

  • Were they obligated on Mt Sinai and then G-d/Moses/Rabanan eased on them? Or...

  • Were they never commanded in the first place as those Mitzvot have no relevance to them? As we don't say "the Gentiles are exempt from the 613 Mitzvot" - they are not commanded in the first place. Or, am I Potur from the Miztvot of Kohanim or a King?

Al Berko
  • 25,936
  • 2
  • 22
  • 57
  • This seems to be a dup of https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/10540/why-are-women-exempt-from-many-time-bound-mitzvot - You commented on the other question "I was gonna ask the same question, but you phrased it weirdly. Can I ask it differently without duplicating or edit your question?". IMHO you can't "ask it differently without duplicating" but in principle all questions can be edited. BTW, it seems that your question is answered in the accepted answer there. Women are patur from those mitzvos because they do not apply to them (equivalent to הותרה). Doesn't הותרה apply to laavim? – Avrohom Yitzchok Aug 31 '18 at 11:09
  • @You didn't understand the question. I asked not about the fact of the Ptur but about the way to exempt - nobody touches that in the cited question. – Al Berko Aug 31 '18 at 14:03
  • @AvrohomYitzchok הותרה means it does not apply in the first place, דחויה means it is "postponed" – Al Berko Sep 01 '18 at 19:51
  • 2
    @AvrohomYitzchok It does not seem to be a duplicate. The other question was asking for the "ta'amei hamitzva"; this one is asking for the "lomdus" by which it works. – Alex Sep 02 '18 at 01:43
  • As you can see, I didn't vote to close and that's good in the light of the comments from Alex and Al Berko. – Avrohom Yitzchok Sep 02 '18 at 09:10

2 Answers2

1

The rule that women are exempt from time-bound positive mitzvot is derived by the Talmud in Kiddushin 34a:

ומצות עשה שהזמן גרמא נשים פטורות: מנלן גמר מתפילין מה תפילין נשים פטורות אף כל מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא נשים פטורות ותפילין גמר לה מתלמוד תורה מה תלמוד תורה נשים פטורות אף תפילין נשים פטורות

AND AFFIRMATIVE PRECEPTS LIMITED TO TIME, WOMEN ARE EXEMPT. Whence do we know it? — It is learned from phylacteries: just as women are exempt from phylacteries, so are they exempt from all affirmative precepts limited to time. Phylacteries [themselves] are derived from the study of the Torah: just as women are exempt from the study of the Torah, so are they exempt from phylacteries. (Soncino translation)

The rule that women are exempt from Torah study is in turn derived in Kiddushin 29b:

איהי מנלן דלא מיחייבא דכתיב ולימדתם ולמדתם כל שמצווה ללמוד מצווה ללמד וכל שאינו מצווה ללמוד אינו מצווה ללמד ואיהי מנלן דלא מיחייבה למילף נפשה דכתיב ולימדתם ולמדתם כל שאחרים מצווין ללמדו מצווה ללמד את עצמו וכל שאין אחרים מצווין ללמדו אין מצווה ללמד את עצמו ומנין שאין אחרים מצווין ללמדה דאמר קרא ולמדתם אותם את בניכם ולא בנותיכם

How do we know that she [the mother] has no duty [to teach her children]? — Because it is written, we-limaddetem [and ye shall teach], [which also reads] u-lemadetem [and ye shall study]: [hence] whoever is commanded to study, is commanded to teach; whoever is not commanded to study, is not commanded to teach. And how do we know that she is not bound to teach herself? — Because it is written, we-limaddetem [and ye shall teach] — u-lema — detem [and ye shall learn]: the one whom others are commanded to teach is commanded to teach oneself; and the one whom others are not commanded to teach, is not commanded to teach oneself. How then do we know that others are not commanded to teach her? — Because it is written: ‘And ye shall teach them your sons’ — but not your daughters. (Soncino translation)

Thus, the exemption for time-bound positive mitzvot ultimately leads back to the fact that the commandment of Torah study was never given to women in the first place – the Torah says to teach your sons, but not your daughters.

It stands to reason, then, that the exemption for time-bound positive commandments is the same. That is to say, that just like the commandment of Torah study was never given to them in the first place, the commandments of tefillin, tzitzit, etc. were never given to them in the first place.

Al Berko
  • 25,936
  • 2
  • 22
  • 57
Alex
  • 49,242
  • 3
  • 120
  • 228
  • I bolded the conclusion. 2. I know the Gemorah well but I fail to see the necessity of your conclusion. It definitely looks that the conclusion IS yours. Moreover, the Gm says it IS a Rabbinic LIMUD, it is not explicit in the text, and the Limud is extremely distant - one is derived from another with no explanation or connection at all.
    • – Al Berko Sep 01 '18 at 19:44
  • To continue my last point - why the word Patur is used where ther was no commandmend in the first place. Am I Potur from Kohanim's Mitzvos cause I'm not commanded at all? I have true difficulty understanding the use of the term Patur then.
    • – Al Berko Sep 01 '18 at 19:46
  • @AlBerko I don't claim my conclusion is a necessity. I merely point out that if the exemption is derived from comparing to other mitzvot then it stands to reason that the have the same status. If the original source mitzva is one that was never commanded, then we are in effect saying that just like women were not commanded for that they are also not commanded for this. – Alex Sep 02 '18 at 01:47
  • You can delete the [unneeded] citations and leave the last 2 paragraphs and see if it answers the question. Wow, it turned out to be much harder than I thought! – Al Berko Sep 02 '18 at 11:57
  • @AlBerko How are the citations unneeded? My entire answer is based off of them. – Alex Sep 02 '18 at 12:54
  • Those citations do not explain the word Patur at all. They suit the original question of why women are Pturot, but not mine. Don't take it personally, but your answer does not explain anything, but states that they were not given in the first place. – Al Berko Sep 02 '18 at 14:43
  • Don't take it personally, but your answer does not explain anything Please reread the second option in your question: Were they never commanded in the first place Then please reread my answer: the commandments of tefillin, tzitzit, etc. were never given to them in the first place. As you can see my answer addresses the question. You have a follow-up question on my answer about why the word פטור is used if this is indeed how it works. That doesn't mean that my answer didn't address your question, and my answer certainly would not be improved by deleting the citations. – Alex Sep 02 '18 at 15:55
  • Yes you said it, but you didn't show any connection to "Patur" - do we call anybody who's not commanded Patur? Please 1. source your conclusion (who said women were not commanded at all. 2. Show how is that connected with the term Patur in other references. Does it sound fair? – Al Berko Sep 02 '18 at 19:26
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. – Alex Sep 02 '18 at 19:27
  • I have a proof that you're [seemingly] wrong. What's the difference between a woman sitting in a Succah on Succos and on Pesach? THere's no prohibition of Succah on Pesach, why don't we call it אינו מצווה ועושה? If I say Birkat Kohanim, am I אינו מצוויה ועושה? Does Goy that puts Tfillin earn a reward as learning Torah (B"K 38a)? All those examples of someone not being commanded in the first place. Why don't they get rewarded as women on Succos? – Al Berko Sep 03 '18 at 18:17
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. – Alex Sep 03 '18 at 18:21