Adapted from deracheha.org by Deracheha: Women and Mitzvot
tl;dr
What is Kevod Ha-tzibbur?
It seems to mean different things in different cases. It can mean an unnecessary burden or inconvenience to the congregation, or something that reflects poorly on the congregation by entrenching laxity in communal practice or representation.
How would a woman reading from the Torah pose an issue of Kevod Ha-tzibbur?
It could imply that men, who have an obligation in Torah study and in maintaining a minyan for keri’at ha-Torah, aren’t prepared to read it, or it might foster laxity on their part with regard to reading. It might also violate tzeniut norms (especially gender separation) for services, or foster laxity with them.
What is Kevod Ha-tzibbur?
The Talmud states that a woman may not read from the Torah because of kevod ha-tzibbur, but does not explain what it means by kevod ha-tzibbur in this context.
מגילה כג.
תנו רבנן: הכל עולין למנין שבעה, ואפילו קטן ואפילו אשה. אבל אמרו חכמים: אשה לא תקרא בתורה, מפני כבוד צבור.
Megilla 23a
Our rabbis taught [in a baraita]: Everyone counts toward the number seven, even a minor and even a woman. But the sages said: A woman may not read from the Torah, because of kevod tzibbur [the honor of the congregation].
One might suggest that, on the simplest level, kevod ha-tzibbur is rooted in questions of social status, which are subject to change. While this explanation is plausible, the early and later halachic authorities who comment on kevod ha-tzibbur don’t suggest it. Since other explanations do appear in traditional sources, they take precedence in halachic discussion.
Four other cases of kevod ha-tzibbur appear in the Talmud, each likewise connected to keri’at ha-Torah. Two of those cases—uncovering the Torah ark or rolling the sefer Torah—involve burdening the congregation. In both scenarios, the community would be inconvenienced, and thus dishonored, by sitting through physical preparations for keri’at ha-Torah that could and should have been performed in advance.
The other two cases seem to have more potential relevance to ours.
- Chumashim The Talmud teaches that we are not to read the Torah from partial scrolls (chumashim) because of kevod ha-tzibbur:
גיטין ס.
רבה ורב יוסף דאמרי תרוייהו: אין קוראין בחומשין בבית הכנסת משום כבוד צבור.
Gittin 60a
Rabba and Rav Yosef, who both said: We do not read from chumashim in synagogue because of kevod tzibbur.
Why should this be a kevod ha-tzibbur issue? Ran (on the Rif Gittin 27b) writes that it would make this particular tzibbur appear to be impoverished. The Yerushalmi hints at another potential issue:
תלמוד ירושלמי מגילה ג: א
הדא ארסקינס אוקיר אוריתא דצנבראי אתון שאלון לר’ יונה ולר’ יוסה מהו לקרות בספר ברבים אמר לון אסור לא דאסור אלא מן גו דנפשהון עגימה אינון זבנין להון אחורי.
Yerushalmi Megilla 3:1
This Arskinas [a name] burned the Torah of Tzanberai. They came and asked Rav Yosse what is the [Halacha] of reading from a book [not a proper Torah scroll] communally. He said to them: It is prohibited. Not that it is [truly] prohibited, but rather out of their distress they will purchase themselves another [sefer Torah].
If reading from a partial scroll, or a book, is permitted, a community might become lax about acquiring a complete sefer Torah. Along these lines, Ra’avyah explains kevod tzibbur here as a matter of preventing laxity with the mitzva:
ראבי”ה חלק ב – מסכת מגילה סימן תקנד
ותו מפני כבוד הציבור שייך בהו בחומשין שלנו, דאין פתרון כבוד הציבור מפני שאינו שלם, אלא גנאי הוא לציבור שאין להם ספר תורה העשויה כמצותה…ואף על גב דלא אפשר השתא לא שרינן להו, שמא יתרשלו מלקנות ספר…
Ra’avyah, Part II, Megilla 554
Kevod ha-tzibbur is also relevant with our chumashin, for the meaning of kevod ha-tzibbur is not because it [a chumash] is incomplete, but rather, [that] it is a dishonor to the tzibbur that they do not have a sefer Torah made according to its mitzva…And even though it is not possible now [to have a full one], we do not permit them [to read from chumashin], lest they neglect to purchase a sefer Torah…
Not having a sefer Torah from which to read conflicts with kevod ha-tzibbur because it reflects poorly on the congregation. On Ra’avyah’s reading, kevod ha-tzibbur is also meant to prevent entrenching dishonorable deviation from a normative standard.
- Poche’ach A second case emerges from the Talmud’s explanation of a mishna. The mishna in question teaches us that a minor could read from the Torah, but that an adult dressed in tattered clothing that reveals either the upper (Rambam on the Mishna Megilla 4:6) or lower body (Rashi Megilla 24a) may not:
משנה מגילה ד:ו
קטן קורא בתורה…פוחח פורס את שמע אינו קורא בתורה ואינו עובר לפני התיבה ואינו נושא את כפיו
Mishna Megilla 4:6
A minor reads from the Torah…a person with tattered clothing [poche’ach] is “pores al Shema,” does not read from the Torah and does not lead prayers and does not raise his hands [as a kohen to bless the congregation]
The Talmud follows up, asking whether a minor could read from the Torah if he is in tatters:
מגילה כד:
בעא מיניה עולא בר רב מאביי: קטן פוחח מהו שיקרא בתורה? אמר ליה: ותיבעי לך ערום. ערום מאי טעמא לא – משום כבוד צבור, הכא נמי – משום כבוד צבור.
Megilla 24b
Ulla bar Rav asked Abbaye: A minor poche’ach, what is [the halacha] of him reading from the Torah? He [Abbaye] said to him [Ulla]: You should ask about a naked one. A naked one, what is the reason that he cannot [read from the Torah]? Because of kevod tzibbur. Here, too, [the minor poche’ach may not read] because of kevod tzibbur.
The answer is that just as a naked minor may not read, because his nudity would impinge on the community’s honor, so, too, a minor in tatters may not read.
Rashi explains the two possibilities that the Talmud considers in its question as follows: Perhaps only an adult poche’ach is precluded from reading, because an adult is clearly subject to the halacha of not exposing erva. The adult poche’ach, even if not technically violating the halacha of concealing erva, does not meet normative standards of tzeniut for covering his body and presenting himself with dignity. Alternatively, perhaps even a minor, not usually subject to the same standards, would need to meet them when reading, since kevod ha-tzibbur is involved.
רש”י כד: ד”ה קטן פוחח
קטן פוחח מהו שיקרא בתורה. גדול פוחח הוא דאסור משום ולא יראה בך ערות דבר (דברים כג:טו) אבל קטן אינו מוזהר או דלמא לא פליג מתני[תין] בין קטן לגדול:
Rashi 24b s.v. katan poche’ach
A minor poche’ach, what is [the halacha] of him reading from the Torah. Is an adult poche’ach prohibited because of “that He not see in you any matter of nakedness” (Devarim 23:15), but a minor is not cautioned? Or perhaps our mishna did not differentiate between a minor and an adult.
On this reading, the Talmud concludes that it is dishonorable for a poche’ach to read Torah publicly because there are normative standards for proper appearance for any communal representative, even when the technical halachic strictures of erva are not breached.
How would a woman reading from the Torah pose an issue of Kevod Ha-tzibbur?
Two main approaches appear in halachic discourse, somewhat parallel to the cases that we’ve seen.
- Negative Reflection or Effect on the Tzibbur A couple of early authorities juxtapose kevod ha-tzibbur with the case of me’eira (literally, curse). Me’eira refers to a Talmudic passage that discourages a man from having his son or his wife recite birkat ha-mazon for him.
ברכות כ:
…ת”ש [=תא שמע] באמת אמרו בן מברך לאביו ואשה מברכת לבעלה, אבל אמרו חכמים: תבא מארה לאדם שאשתו ובניו מברכין לו.
Berachot 20b
Come and learn: Truly they [our sages] said: A son recites [birkat ha-mazon] for his father and a wife recites [birkat ha-mazon] for her husband. But the sages said: Let a curse [me’eira] come upon a person whose wife and sons bless for him.
The Talmud describes a situation in which the man needs the help because he is unlearned. Ritva takes the view that the son in the passage is post bar mitzva and that women are obligated on a Torah level in birkat ha-mazon, so that both could fully discharge the man’s obligation. Ritva thus views this case as another example of the ruling that when two men eat together (where there is no zimmun), one may recite birkat ha-mazon for the other specifically if he is unlearned:
חידושי הריטב”א סוכה לח.
…למאי דקיימא לן דאשה מדאורייתא מחייבא מתניתא כפשטא בבן גדול ובדאכל איהו שיעורא דאורייתא ואתו הני ומפקי ליה… ומפני שהוא בור יוצא בברכתם כדרך שאמרו היה אחד מהם בור ואחד חכם מברך חכם ובור יוצא, ומפני זה אמרו שתבא לו מארה כשלא למד והוא בור שיוצא בברכת אחרים שלא בזימון..
Ritva Sukka 38a
…According to what we rule, that a woman is obligated on a Torah level [in birkat ha-mazon], the plain meaning of the baraita concerns an adult [i.e., post bar mitzva age] son, when [the father] ate an amount of food to obligate him [in birkat ha-mazon] on a Torah level, and these [wife or son] come and discharge his obligation…and because he is ignorant, he discharges his obligation through their beracha, as they said ‘if one of them [two men eating together] is ignorant and one is learned, the learned one recites a beracha and the ignorant one discharges his obligation [through the learned one’s beracha].’ Because of this they said a curse should come upon him, when he did not learn and he is ignorant so that he discharges his obligation with the beracha of others [even] when there is no zimmun…
An unlearned man with a learned wife or son at home deserves a me’eira because he continues to rely on his family members rather than learn himself. In his discussion of women discharging others’ obligations in megilla, Ritva links me’eira with kevod ha-tzibbur:
חידושי הריטב”א מגילה ד.
וכיון דקי”ל [=דקיימא לן] כר’ יהושע בן לוי דחייבות [במקרא מגילה], אף מוציאות, אלא שאין זה כבוד לציבור והן בכלל מארה…מפי מורי נר”ו.
Chiddushei Ha-Ritva, Megilla 4a
Since it is accepted for us according to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi that [women] are obligated [in megilla], and even discharge obligations, but this is not kavod for the tzibbur and they are in the category of me’eira…from my teacher
The concept of me’eira is invoked in a private context, while kevod ha-tzibbur is communal. Nevertheless, in both, men’s ritual competence is assumed and expected, so that a woman’s taking a leading role in ritual implies something dishonorable about the men present.
With keri’at ha-Torah, the implication may be that men have not mastered the skills required for public Torah reading. Rav Uzziel makes this point:
שו”ת משפטי עוזיאל כרך ד – חושן משפט סימן ו
ופירוש כבוד הצבור הוא שלא יאמרו: שאין בין האנשים מי שיודע לקרא בתורה…
Responsa Mishpetei Uziel IV: CM 6
The meaning of kevod ha-tzibbur is that they [people] should not say: that there is no one among the men who knows how to read from the Torah.
This is particularly ignominious because men have a formal obligation to study Torah, and thus should make the effort to learn it well enough for ritual purposes entailing public Torah study.
As we have learned, women present for keri’at ha-Torah are considered to be part of the tzibbur fulfilling the mitzva. Still, this view of kevod ha-tzibbur focuses on the men of the tzibbur. This is presumably because men are considered the default Torah readers, and a tzibbur for keri’at ha-Torah must by definition include ten men.
This set of concerns may be specific to cases in which men are counted in a requisite minyan or obligated in a ritual, and women are not. In a recorded lecture, Rav Ovadya Yosef formulates the concern about women Torah readers in this way, based on men’s obligations.
רב פנחס פרץ, משיעורי מר”ן הראש”ל רב עובדיה יוסף, שנה ראשונה, שיעור י”ט
אמרו אשה לא תעלה משום כבוד ציבור, והטעם הוא רק משום שאין זה כבוד הציבור, והיינו מפני שהיא פטורה מקריאת התורה, וכל הרואה אשה קוראת בתורה, מבין שלא היה שם איש שיקרא, וממילא זה בזיון לציבור, שלא מצאו איש המחויב שיקרא, ומצאו אשה שאינה מחוייבת.
Rav Pinchas Peretz, From the Lectures of Rav Ovadya Yosef, First year, 19
They said a woman should not count [toward the Torah readers] because of kevod ha-tzibbur, and the reason is only because this is not kevod ha-tzibbur, and that is because she is exempt from keri’at ha-Torah, and whoever sees a woman read from the Torah infers that there was no man there to read, and this is a disgrace to the tzibbur, that they did not find an obligated man to read, and they found a woman who is not obligated.
When a man has an obligation and lets someone who is not obligated take the lead, that could imply that he is not careful about his ritual obligations. Rav Yehuda Henkin adds that the concept of kevod ha-tzibbur is also meant to prevent men from developing laxity with regard to ritual.
שו”ת בני בנים ד:ג
שכבוד צבור לענין קריאת נשים אינו רק כדי שלא ייראה כאילו אין שם גברים היודעים לקרוא, אלא כדי שהגברים לא יסמכו מראש על קריאת הנשים ויתעצלו מללמוד לקרוא ולנגן בטעמים בעצמם.
Responsa Benei Banim IV:3
For kevod tzibbur in the matter of women reading is not only that it should not seem as if there are no men there who know how to read, but in order that the men not rely from the start on the women’s reading and neglect to learn how to read and to sing with the cantillation themselves.
These understandings of kevod tzibbur echo the discussion of reading from chumashim. In both cases, kevod tzibbur maintains norms for communal ritual performance. It dictates that Torah reading not be performed in a way that reflects poorly on members of the congregation or in a fashion that will foster dishonorable carelessness with communal obligations.
- Tzeni’ut Some later authorities have suggested that the kevod ha-tzibbur concern with women reading from the Torah relates to tzeniut. This may be reminiscent of the case of the poche’ach according to Rashi, which he considers in light of erva in a way that touches on tzeniut. A woman’s reading might detract from the level of modesty appropriate to the synagogue, even if no technical transgression is involved, and even if, as distinct from the case of poche’ach, the tzeniut concern is not specific to the reader’s presentation per se.
For example, Rav Ya’akov Emden suggests that kevod tzibbur here refers to it being improper for a woman to enter the men’s section to read, although a technical halachic case could be made for it.
מור וקציעה סימן רפב
ונראה דעדיף [עבד] מאשה בהא, דאית בה משום כבוד צבור לכתחלה מיהת היכא דאפשר בלתה, משום דאשה בעזרת ישראל מניין, משא”כ [=מה שאין כן] בעבד.
Mor U-ketzia 282
It seems that [a bondsman] is preferable to a woman for this, in any case where it is possible [to conduct the reading] without her, for with her there is [a concern] le-chatchila [ab initio] of kevod tzibbur, because of “why would a woman be in the Temple courtyard,” which is not the case with a bondsman.
Just as women could enter the Temple courtyard only when necessary, Rav Emden would allow a woman to read, and thus to enter the men’s section of the synagogue, only if the reading cannot go on without her. Generally speaking, then, the need for gender separation in synagogue services would militate against a woman reading. In practical terms, physical proximity of ba’al korei and olim in a regular mixed-gender keri’at ha-Torah would be difficult to navigate while preserving separation between men and women in the synagogue.
More recent halachic authorities have considered the possibility that kol isha is at issue here. Others, including Rav Zalman Nechemya Goldberg, have simply stated that the issue is one of tzeniut per se:
הגרז”ן, “נשים בברכת שבע ברכות” שו”ת מראה הבזק ה, עמ’ 185
…שנראה שכבוד הציבור הוא עניין של צניעות.
Rav Zalman Nechemya Goldberg, ‘Women in the Blessing of Sheva Berachot,’ Mar’eh Ha-bazak V, p. 185
…For it seems that kevod ha-tzibbur is a matter of tzeniut.
If the main concern of women reading from the Torah is one of tzeniut, however, then it is not clear why the phrase “kevod ha-tzibbur” should stand in for other terms more frequently used to refer to tzeniut. Perhaps for this reason, some authorities reject the tzeniut explanation out of hand.25 Still, the poche’ach provides some precedent for connecting kevod ha-tzibbur to concerns related to tzeniut in a general sense, even when the concern falls short of erva.
A broader conceptual approach to tzeniut may point the way to a position that combines it with the reading skills approach to kevod ha-tzibbur. Rav Herschel Schachter presents one such approach:
רב צבי שכטר, “ע”ד ‘המנינים המשותפים’”
שמספיק מה שגברים צריכים לפעמים להתפשר על מדת הצניעות שלהם, ואין לנו לתבוע מהנשים שיתפשרו אף הן על הצניעות שלהן…ובודאי אם אין שמה במנין גבר שיודע לקרות בתורה, יש לנו לבקש מאשה שתקרא היא, אבל אין זה מן הנכון מטעם כבוד הציבור, שבזה שמכריחים לאשה לעבור על מדת הצניעות שלה, ולקרוא בתורה ברבים, מראים על הציבור שאין שמה גברים שיודעים לקרות.
Rav Hershel Schachter, ‘On the Matter of Partnership Minyanim’
For it is enough that men sometimes need to compromise on their attribute of tzeniut, and we shouldn’t demand of women that they also compromise on their tzeniut…And certainly if there is no man there who knows how to read the Torah, we should ask a woman to read, but this is not correct on account of kevod ha-tzibbur, for by forcing a woman to forgo her attribute of tzeniut, and to read the Torah in public, we demonstrate regarding the community that there are no men there who know how to read.
Rav Schachter seems to assume that reading from the Torah, or taking on any public leadership role, entails a measure of compromise on tzeniut. Regardless of whether one accepts that premise, the gist of his view is that the regular norms of tzeniut during prayer times in the synagogue are important to maintain. Therefore, having a woman read keri’at ha-Torah implies that the community was forced to compromise those norms, because the men have been lax with learning to read the Torah.
Click here to learn more about how the concept of kevod ha-tzibbur plays into current discussions of women and keri’at ha-Torah. Can kevod ha-tzibbur be waived, how does kevod ha-beriyot factor in, and do these rulings change in a bedi’avad or she’at ha-dechak situation? Read the full article to see the sources and further analysis at www.deracheha.org/keriat-ha-torah-3-kevod-ha-tzibbur/
