I try not to express controversial opinions here often — and I am going to in this thread. But first, a story.

Two elderly men are on an airplane. One is Jewish, one is not. The Jewish man is accompanied by his grandson, who responds to everything he says with deference and
does his best to make sure he’s comfortable throughout the flight. The non-Jewish elder asks in astonishment, “what is your secret? Your grandson is so attentive, and I can’t get mine to show me any respect! They say I’m old and out of touch, less evolved.”
The Jewish elder replies, “in our tradition, the ultimate source of wisdom is the Torah. So the older you are, the closer you are to the giving of the Torah — and the more respect you deserve.”

It’s apocryphal, but highlights the traditional Jewish attitude towards
spiritual knowledge — it ultimately, and chronologically, flows from the giving of the Torah. (Scientific knowledge, in contrast is a whole different ballgame and beyond the scope of this thread).

There's a proposal making the rounds— dubbed 'The Kranjec Test' —
While I unequivocally support and advocate for elevating women to more leadership roles across the Jewish world, including within the Orthodox one I call home, I'm afraid this proposal will do more harm than good. Here's why:
The basis of Torah study, for thousands of years, has centered on the Torah, the Talmud, and early commentaries. Since the 1700s, Hasidic texts, too. But the underlying premise of Jewish text study is that the Torah is the ultimate source of truth, the Talmud is the roadmap
to understanding and living the Torah — and, importantly, the closer commentators were to the giving of the Torah, the more insight and authority they have, because they’re inherently more connected.

The Talmud was compiled by and prominently features the voices of men.
All of the early commentators — and later commentators — were men. Is that a problem? Perhaps. But it's reality. Early sources that are written by women *don't exist*. Prominent female Torah scholars didn’t exist until the 1900s.

Is there value in including later commentaries?
Yes. Are most of them written by women? No.

There is a big difference between the source of inspiration for this idea — the Bechdel test (a movie passes if two named women have a convo not about a man) — and this. The Bechdal test asks modern creators to do better at
portraying reality. This test asks modern creators to prioritize less authentic commentaries.

I believe that women can and should study Torah and Talmud today (this is controversial in parts of the Orthodox world). I do not believe there are many — I can think of a handful,
including my female Gemara teachers — who have had the access, training, and environments necessary to rival the insights and textual fluency of male commentators.

I hope my daughters, should I merit to have them, will be taught the Torah and Talmud on a level of
their male peers. I don’t know that it’s likely, and I know it is not our current reality. Creating source sheets will not fix this problem.

There is no woman or man alive today whose knowledge and insights on Torah will rival that of the early commentators. It’s antithetical
to traditional Jewish belief.

In the places where feminism is not only routinely mocked, but used as a slur — the places in which Jewish women are fighting for more access to halachic knowledge, resources, and equitable divorce proceedings, I'm afraid
this is going to be leveraged against those advocating for change.
You can follow @Laura_E_Adkins.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:

By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.