devarim

My understanding was that the Mishna Berura allows women to read megilla for men (I'll have to check this, I guess). There are also differences between friday night kiddush (Torah obligation) and shabbat day kiddush (Rabbinical obligation) - in Urbana-Champaign's ortho minyan, a woman would often publicly say kiddush on Shabbat day.

Beyond the legalities, however, one can still ask:
why should women say kiddush? Can't you women
leave us men *something* that we can call our
own ... some thing that we can do that you won't
feel an envious requirement to take over?

AT - I can't speak for anyone else, but my desire to say Kiddush is not rooted in envy. It's rooted in...a desire to say Kiddush. My desire to have other women feel empowered to say Kiddush for their husbands (or, more importantly, their sons) is rooted in seeing far too many situations where the husband/son either was struggling with the Hebrew (and actually mispronouncing words in a problematic way) or clearly did not have the proper kavanah, and I knew that the wife/mother's Kiddush would have been more appropriate.

On the topic of mothers hearing Kiddush from their just-past-bar-mitzva-aged sons (if, for example, the mother is divorced or widowed, or the father is out of town), I'm going to take the liberty of posting the following, from an email I received from one of my readers. S/He is welcome to claim credit for it, if s/he so desires.

I looked up the Minshna Brurah on this and though it did not say explicitly this issue it could be infered from it and the Be'er Halacha (See OC 271:2) that a woman cannot be yotze kiddush by hearing a 13 male make it for her unless it was definatly known that he had Shtei Saarot, since the rabinnical presumption that a 13 y.o. male is a gadol is not suffcient to rely on for mitzvot d'oraitah and that if she however did daven she can relay on the 13 y.o. male since the chazakah of a 13 y.o is then sufficent to use on the Rabbanan that left.

AT - I leave you all the cooking to call your own. I promise to feel no envious requirement to take it over.

AT,
Although it makes it easier to understand things for guys to have gender division on activities, sometimes it's too arbitrary. What to you may seem the encroachment of women taking on things formerly associated with only men's involvement, may have seemed unfair beforehand to women, limiting their involvement, limiting their experiences. With allowing them to do things they haven't been doing (yes, within parameters of halakhah), it isn't that they are taking over men's activities.

I looked up the relevant mishna brura over shabbat for megilla reading. In my understanding, the Shulhan Arukh states unequivocally that all are
obligated to read the megillah, and then claims
a minority opinion ("yesh omrim") that women may
not read megilla for men. The mishna brura then tries to give an explanation for this minority opinion.

You know, I'm so confused about this. I've now heard that it's easier to permit women to say kiddush for men on friday night than on shabbos day, AND the exact opposite. Which is it??

I was taught when I was younger that there's some kind of g'zeira shava between kiddush and havdala. For havdala there's a bewildering preference for a woman to hear it from a man - not just that she shouldn't be motzi a man, but if there's a man available she shouldn't be motzi another woman, or even herself. I thought this was just superstition, since most of the sources say it's because she shouldn't drink the havdala wine -- but finally I found a source that says there's some question whether women are chayav to say havdala, or only to hear it. If that's so, it would seem to explain why there's hesitation to allow women to make kiddush for men, no?

I'd love to learn this properly, instead of trying to figure out retroactively how much of my teenage education was just the traditional party line.

persephone - from what I recall, havdalah and kiddush are two separate issues, because the latter is done only on Shabbat - during a time-frame which also has a whole bunch of negative mitzvot, giving women an equal obligation with men in the positive time-bound mitzvot - whereas the former is not tied to any particular time with negative mitzvot. So, no, the question of whether women are actually obligated to say havdalah has no bearing on why there should be any reason not to allow them to say kiddush for men. Er...I don't think I explained that very well, but I have a pretty good grasp of it in my head...

As for evening vs. daytime kiddush, the latter is d'rabbanan, and (as you pointed out) that argument can be used in both directions. One side: women can say daytime kiddush for men because it's "only" d'rabannan (so apparently even if it's not ok, it's not that big of a deal), but they can't say evening kiddush for men because it's d'oraita and therefore a much bigger deal for the man to make sure he is hearing kiddush the "right" way. Or, flipside: because evening is d'oraita, women have the same obligation as men, and therefore can say kiddush for them, but since daytime is d'rabannan it is unclear whether women are obligated in daytime kiddush at all. (avtherav, if he is reading, may be able to explain that perspective better...)

I dunno - in my house, everyone BUT me usually makes kiddush. The kids usually each make their own, even my daughter, and my husband encourages guests (male especially, but if, for example, a female guest at the same meal makes a comment, even joking, he will seriously offer her the same chance).

We often surprise guests, because most other people hold that it is better for the single mitzvah to be done by/for the group than each one separately (sorry, I forget the aramaic(?) term for this). I think part of it stems from my husband having wanted his own opportunity as a not-so-young single man, but who am I to conjecture . . .

I'm so happy that my thoughts have sparked this discussion and contributed to the spreading of Torah. Thank you Shanna for continuing the conversation.

I agree with Drew that men shouldn't feel spiritually crowded by women who make kiddush. Kiddush is a beautiful prayer. The kiddush weaves together basic credoes of our religion; a harmonious melody; the ambience of the shabbos table; and of course, a cup of wine. I personally love saying kiddush (especially to my grandfather A"H's niggun), and I would expect that others, of all ages and genders, would as well.

Shanna described the havdalah situation well. It is downright bizarre, but that's the way it is.

I would think that the daytime kiddush would be easier to have women recite for men than the nighttime. In addition to the reasons already mentioned, the daytime kiddush contains no testimony. Thus, the objection based on the Mogen Avraham and the Rosh (see my original post), which is the strongest of the (all weak) objections, falls away. The daytime kiddush simply contains a bracha, which, it would appear, anybody can recite for anybody else.

Lab Rab,
Props on the "men shouldn't feel spiritually crowded by women" phrasing - I wish I came up with it.

Shanna,
I wouldn't be so quick to say that the daytime is the easier one to say. Perhaps, it is possible, the positions offered by various sages give problematic reasons for women to not have a greater obligation regarding the evening kiddush by LabRab in his comments on the posting. However, if they do fall away, it would seem that women, in fact, have a higher degree of obligation than men (but only if they didn't daven ma'ariv), and since there is a principle that those with a lesser obligation cannot fulfill those who have an higher obligation, it would seem insufficient for men to make kiddush for women.

Shanna,
I wouldn't be so quick to say that the daytime is the easier one to say.

I didn't say that; LabRab did. I offered arguments in both directions. In fact, the situation you present (woman not davening ma'ariv and therefore potentially having a higher obligation than her husband) is the most common position I use when discussing this with other people.

Hmmm. Shanna, I think I've come across some basis for what I was taught - it sounds from this (PDF) source like it's based on the position of the Rambam. This doesn't surprise me because I know my teacher was a strict Rambam-nik. Not necessarily the majority opinion, but it's better than wondering (as I was starting to) if he made the whole thing up...

I have the z'chut to be learning at Nishmat, and we covered this issue in my class on Women & Mitzvot last week. We learned that there is more basis for women being able to fulfill the mitzva of kiddush for men on Friday night than on shabbat morning for precisely the reason Shanna gave: "because evening is d'oraita, women have the same obligation as men, and therefore can say kiddush for them, but since daytime is d'rabannan it is unclear whether women are obligated in daytime kiddush at all."

As for women possibly having more of an obligation on Friday night than a man who has gone to shul, davened and heard kiddush there...it's inconclusive. First, the exact d'oraita requirement is uncertain. It could be, as LabRab's original post mentions, that one fulfills the Torah requirement of kiddush through any verbal acknowledgment that the day is Shabbos." If that's the case, a woman would have been yotzeit simply by saying the bracha over the candles and then saying "shabbat shalom." It could be that what's required is both such a verbal acknowledgement and a rememberance of yetziat mitzrayim, in which case if the woman has davened she has fulfilled that. It could be that wine must be involved, in which case if the man has only davened but not heard kiddush over wine he still has just as much of a chiyuv as she who may not even have davened. It may require the person to actually taste the wine, in which case even if he heard kiddush in shul he still has the same chiyuv, as he would similarly if it is necessary that the kiddush occur in the same setting as se'udat shabbat, the festive meal. Finally, it's possible that in order for the man to have been yotzei in shul he had to have kavana for that to be so.

So the bottom line is that depending on the exact situation, a woman might have more of a chiyuv to make kiddush on Friday night than a man. Then again, she might not. Which of course only means that it might be better for her to make kiddush, or it might be just as good for him to do so. Quite a reversal from the conventional way of looking at the matter...