Introduction

The responsa literature—compilations of legal opinions written by rabbis in response to specific queries or cases—is one of the largest branches, if not the largest branch of Jewish literature. Menachem Elon estimated in the 1970s that at that time there were approximately 300,000 individual responsa in existence (Hamishpat ha‘ivri, second edition, Jerusalem, 1978, p. 1221), and a new bibliography of the responsa literature by Shmuel Glick (Kuntres hateshuvot heḥadash, I–IV, Jerusalem, 2006–2010) lists over 4,400 books or series containing responsa.

Indeed, responsa are a fount of information about Jewish women on a host of topics, such as marriage, divorce, agunot (women who remain “chained” to missing husbands in the absence of a religious divorce), widows, child-rearing and women in business, starting from about 500 CE and continuing right up to the present day. This vast literature was utilized for research on women’s lives in studies by Israel Abrahams (Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, London, 1896) and, more recently, by Avraham Grossman (Rebellious and Pious: Jewish Women in Medieval Europe, Lebanon, NH, 2004) and Ruth Lamdan (A Separate People: Jewish Women in Palestine, Syria and Egypt in the Sixteenth Century, Leiden, 2000), but the study of women in the responsa literature is still in its infancy (see Glick, IV, pp. 347–348).

This is why, for this issue of Nashim, we invited submissions about women in the responsa literature, focusing on a broad topic, a specific geographical area or a specific set of responsa. How are women portrayed? What can we learn about their lives? How were they viewed by rabbis and by their societies? Can we hear their own voices in the testimony they gave before religious courts (batei din)? How did and do these rulings affect their lives? And how can we interpret all of this data using the tools of women’s and gender studies?

The articles that appear in this issue of Nashim can be conveniently divided into four categories. The first two articles deal with women in the responsa of two meshivim (responders). Debby Koren translates and analyzes a responsum of the Radbaz (Spain, Israel and Egypt, 1479–1573), one of the most prolific responders of all time, about a woman who had lost her get (writ of divorce) as a result of the expulsion from Spain. Julie Lieber analyzes two very unusual teshuvot by Rabbi Eleazar Horowitz (Vienna, 1803–1868) regarding women who had sex with men other than their husbands but claimed it was innocent (sic!).

The next three articles deal with the participation of Jewish women in public rituals and Torah study in the modern era. My own article is a timeline of 41 events related to this topic from 1845 to 2010, offering seven general conclusions that can be derived from it. Norma Joseph translates and analyzes a well-known 1976 responsum by Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Lithuania–New York, 1895–1986), responding to a query sent to him in the context of the “Women’s Liberation” movement, regarding the permissibility of women wearing prayer shawls in the synagogue. Jessica Rosenberg analyzes and compares three more recent teshuvot by Rabbis Mendel Shapiro, Gidon Rothstein and Shlomo Riskin regarding aliyot for women.

The next section features two debates relating to the subject of Jewish women and Jewish medical ethics. In the first, Alan Jotkowitz responds to a Hebrew article by Ronit Ir-Shai about abortion and maternal need in the responsa literature, with a brief response from Ir-Shai. In the second, Tova Ganzel and Dina Zimmerman relate to the ethics of using hormones to delay ovulation in order to overcome halakhic infertility caused by the observance of the laws of nidah, with a response by Haviva Ner-David.

Finally, Michael Pitkowsky offers a preliminary study of an important topic. He compares the number and type of questions which women asked of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, of the Sefardic responder Rabbi Hayyim David Halevi (Israel, 1924–1998) and of the Hebrew website www.kipa.co.il. This comparison has important implications not only for women in the responsa literature, but for the effect of the internet on...