Tag Info

New answers tagged


No. It is an artifact of language rather than a matter of "patriarchal dominance". Many languages have no "gender neutral" pronoun that can be applied to a human being or an animal with a sexual identity. That is, "it" refers to something inanimate and cannot be used for a being. Thus it does not have a term that can refer to Hashem. English does not have a ...


Kaf Hachaim Orach Chaim 38:9 says that Michal bas Shaul had a male Neshama.


The Ashel Avraham (Pri Migadim 23:2 ) writes that one should not wear tzitzs out next to a kever of a child because maybe his neshama is that of a gadol. He also mentions that in a case of a woman it seems that there is no concept of loeg lerash since a woman is not obligated in tzitzs in their life time. He adds by saying that we are not worried that a ...


The Zohar writes that the Patriarch Yitzchok had the soul of a female (Pikudei 257a). The Seder HaDoros (Elef HaRishon) says that it was the soul of Chava.


This does not imply men are better than woman, this implies that men are better off than women. This is apparently the intent of the first explanation of Rashi in Menachos 43b when the gemara says a slave is the same as a woman, Rashi says 'for she too is a servant to her husband like a save to his master'. Rashi's other explenation is the one cited in ...


The reason is that women are obligated in fewer mitzvos than men. So Jewish men thank Hashem for not making them women, because we should be happy to have more opportunities for serving Hashem, rather than seeing it as a burden. This is not a newfangled feminist interpretation. This is the original reasoning for why we say this bracha. This explanation ...

Top 50 recent answers are included