![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
At lunch today we actually sang through all of Tzama Nafshi (a 12ish stanza song with chorus, the only tune for which I know is very slow)- and in the songbook I was using (the Brandeis Shiron), there was a mysterious extra verse before the last verse that didn't fit with the acrostic set up (the first letter of each stanza, put together forms an acrostic of the name of the author). It was about sacrificial goats- it seemed like a reference to the Yom Kippur (add quotation marks around that if you're a biblical scholar and/or feel like being one right now) ritual involving the scapegoat. But where it came from or why the other texts didn't include it is a mystery. Any insight?
At lunch today we actually sang through all of Tzama Nafshi (a 12ish stanza song with chorus, the only tune for which I know is very slow)- and in the songbook I was using (the Brandeis Shiron), there was a mysterious extra verse before the last verse that didn't fit with the acrostic set up (the first letter of each stanza, put together forms an acrostic of the name of the author). It was about sacrificial goats- it seemed like a reference to the Yom Kippur (add quotation marks around that if you're a biblical scholar and/or feel like being one right now) ritual involving the scapegoat. But where it came from or why the other texts didn't include it is a mystery. Any insight?
So in the last big-Jewish-post (on counting non-egal women in an egal minyan, where egal is gender-egalitarian, for my pickier readers), I remembered that Egal here also has an interesting attitude (which has been changing and vacillating: it's definitely an in-process thing) on people who don't use certain ritualwear. A lot of it is based on long-term social norms from the larger (read: Orthodox) community, certainly. But it certainly isn't gender-egalitarian in its assumptions there.
The particular issue I'm thinking of is divided into 2 areas, and I freely admit that I'm often as guilty of both as the next person. But I'm working on it.
Part 1: If a man shows up to the minyan, especially say, on a weekday morning, when people tend to assume that it's only people who are strongly committed to observance in an egalitarian setting who show up (little else will get a college student up to be somewhere at 7:45 when it isn't absolutely required), someone will dig up a spare kippah and offer it to him- and get offended if he declines (this has all happened). So for a man to be there with his head uncovered comes across as offensive or unacceptable at the very least. But there are generally several women there, often women who do wear a tallit or even tfillin at the appropriate times who don't cover their head in any way, and no one objects at all. No one offers them a kippah or other headcovering (and Egal is the only egalitarian minyan I've seen without a supply of the lace-doily-things. Kippot can pretty easily be seen as beged ish, even though I don't see them that way, especially the sorts that hand around in public-kippah-bins. Maybe minyanim (pl. of minyan) ought to keep a supply of cocktail hats*?). I know head covering is only minhag- but then why make such a fuss if a man chooses not to wear one?
Part 2: Both men and women are given assorted honors in the community, and with the exceptions of hagbah (lifting the torah) and candle lighting, these are given quite gender-neutrally. (I see another piece of writing coming up- but that is Off Topic For Now.) But when a man is given an honor and he is not wearing a tallit, he is often offered someone's for the period that he is specifically in public sight, and he will rarely refuse. There are men who don't wear a tallit customarily because they don't have one or think it is not necessary, and there are men who don't wear one because they wear a tallit-katan (a 4--cournered undergarment with the knotted fringes on each corner that fulfill the mitzvah-requirement that the tallit fulfills in a more decorative and prayer-time specific way), and don't believe that unmarried men should wear a tallit except when actively participating in a service. Either way, the offer is made, and usually accepted. Women (who yes, are less likely to wear a tallit: some folks feel like it's men's clothing, and therefore forbidden, or they jsut aren't interested in wearing one.) are less likely to be offered a tallit. I've noticed this even at mincha (the afternoon prayer) where no one besides the people actively participating wear a tallit. So a woman who normally wears a tallit in the morning will have an honor and not be offered a tallit when a man who doesn't wear one except when asked to will be offered one and accept. Here the folks at the minyan are getting better about offering- but it's an interesting statement that they/we have to think consciously to do so, when with men it's an assumption.
*Preferably the ones without veiling over the eyes: religious head coverings ought not to send sexual signals. I've swapped into footnotes here because I was stacking entirely too many parentheses.
The particular issue I'm thinking of is divided into 2 areas, and I freely admit that I'm often as guilty of both as the next person. But I'm working on it.
Part 1: If a man shows up to the minyan, especially say, on a weekday morning, when people tend to assume that it's only people who are strongly committed to observance in an egalitarian setting who show up (little else will get a college student up to be somewhere at 7:45 when it isn't absolutely required), someone will dig up a spare kippah and offer it to him- and get offended if he declines (this has all happened). So for a man to be there with his head uncovered comes across as offensive or unacceptable at the very least. But there are generally several women there, often women who do wear a tallit or even tfillin at the appropriate times who don't cover their head in any way, and no one objects at all. No one offers them a kippah or other headcovering (and Egal is the only egalitarian minyan I've seen without a supply of the lace-doily-things. Kippot can pretty easily be seen as beged ish, even though I don't see them that way, especially the sorts that hand around in public-kippah-bins. Maybe minyanim (pl. of minyan) ought to keep a supply of cocktail hats*?). I know head covering is only minhag- but then why make such a fuss if a man chooses not to wear one?
Part 2: Both men and women are given assorted honors in the community, and with the exceptions of hagbah (lifting the torah) and candle lighting, these are given quite gender-neutrally. (I see another piece of writing coming up- but that is Off Topic For Now.) But when a man is given an honor and he is not wearing a tallit, he is often offered someone's for the period that he is specifically in public sight, and he will rarely refuse. There are men who don't wear a tallit customarily because they don't have one or think it is not necessary, and there are men who don't wear one because they wear a tallit-katan (a 4--cournered undergarment with the knotted fringes on each corner that fulfill the mitzvah-requirement that the tallit fulfills in a more decorative and prayer-time specific way), and don't believe that unmarried men should wear a tallit except when actively participating in a service. Either way, the offer is made, and usually accepted. Women (who yes, are less likely to wear a tallit: some folks feel like it's men's clothing, and therefore forbidden, or they jsut aren't interested in wearing one.) are less likely to be offered a tallit. I've noticed this even at mincha (the afternoon prayer) where no one besides the people actively participating wear a tallit. So a woman who normally wears a tallit in the morning will have an honor and not be offered a tallit when a man who doesn't wear one except when asked to will be offered one and accept. Here the folks at the minyan are getting better about offering- but it's an interesting statement that they/we have to think consciously to do so, when with men it's an assumption.
*Preferably the ones without veiling over the eyes: religious head coverings ought not to send sexual signals. I've swapped into footnotes here because I was stacking entirely too many parentheses.
So in the last big-Jewish-post (on counting non-egal women in an egal minyan, where egal is gender-egalitarian, for my pickier readers), I remembered that Egal here also has an interesting attitude (which has been changing and vacillating: it's definitely an in-process thing) on people who don't use certain ritualwear. A lot of it is based on long-term social norms from the larger (read: Orthodox) community, certainly. But it certainly isn't gender-egalitarian in its assumptions there.
The particular issue I'm thinking of is divided into 2 areas, and I freely admit that I'm often as guilty of both as the next person. But I'm working on it.
Part 1: If a man shows up to the minyan, especially say, on a weekday morning, when people tend to assume that it's only people who are strongly committed to observance in an egalitarian setting who show up (little else will get a college student up to be somewhere at 7:45 when it isn't absolutely required), someone will dig up a spare kippah and offer it to him- and get offended if he declines (this has all happened). So for a man to be there with his head uncovered comes across as offensive or unacceptable at the very least. But there are generally several women there, often women who do wear a tallit or even tfillin at the appropriate times who don't cover their head in any way, and no one objects at all. No one offers them a kippah or other headcovering (and Egal is the only egalitarian minyan I've seen without a supply of the lace-doily-things. Kippot can pretty easily be seen as beged ish, even though I don't see them that way, especially the sorts that hand around in public-kippah-bins. Maybe minyanim (pl. of minyan) ought to keep a supply of cocktail hats*?). I know head covering is only minhag- but then why make such a fuss if a man chooses not to wear one?
Part 2: Both men and women are given assorted honors in the community, and with the exceptions of hagbah (lifting the torah) and candle lighting, these are given quite gender-neutrally. (I see another piece of writing coming up- but that is Off Topic For Now.) But when a man is given an honor and he is not wearing a tallit, he is often offered someone's for the period that he is specifically in public sight, and he will rarely refuse. There are men who don't wear a tallit customarily because they don't have one or think it is not necessary, and there are men who don't wear one because they wear a tallit-katan (a 4--cournered undergarment with the knotted fringes on each corner that fulfill the mitzvah-requirement that the tallit fulfills in a more decorative and prayer-time specific way), and don't believe that unmarried men should wear a tallit except when actively participating in a service. Either way, the offer is made, and usually accepted. Women (who yes, are less likely to wear a tallit: some folks feel like it's men's clothing, and therefore forbidden, or they jsut aren't interested in wearing one.) are less likely to be offered a tallit. I've noticed this even at mincha (the afternoon prayer) where no one besides the people actively participating wear a tallit. So a woman who normally wears a tallit in the morning will have an honor and not be offered a tallit when a man who doesn't wear one except when asked to will be offered one and accept. Here the folks at the minyan are getting better about offering- but it's an interesting statement that they/we have to think consciously to do so, when with men it's an assumption.
*Preferably the ones without veiling over the eyes: religious head coverings ought not to send sexual signals. I've swapped into footnotes here because I was stacking entirely too many parentheses.
The particular issue I'm thinking of is divided into 2 areas, and I freely admit that I'm often as guilty of both as the next person. But I'm working on it.
Part 1: If a man shows up to the minyan, especially say, on a weekday morning, when people tend to assume that it's only people who are strongly committed to observance in an egalitarian setting who show up (little else will get a college student up to be somewhere at 7:45 when it isn't absolutely required), someone will dig up a spare kippah and offer it to him- and get offended if he declines (this has all happened). So for a man to be there with his head uncovered comes across as offensive or unacceptable at the very least. But there are generally several women there, often women who do wear a tallit or even tfillin at the appropriate times who don't cover their head in any way, and no one objects at all. No one offers them a kippah or other headcovering (and Egal is the only egalitarian minyan I've seen without a supply of the lace-doily-things. Kippot can pretty easily be seen as beged ish, even though I don't see them that way, especially the sorts that hand around in public-kippah-bins. Maybe minyanim (pl. of minyan) ought to keep a supply of cocktail hats*?). I know head covering is only minhag- but then why make such a fuss if a man chooses not to wear one?
Part 2: Both men and women are given assorted honors in the community, and with the exceptions of hagbah (lifting the torah) and candle lighting, these are given quite gender-neutrally. (I see another piece of writing coming up- but that is Off Topic For Now.) But when a man is given an honor and he is not wearing a tallit, he is often offered someone's for the period that he is specifically in public sight, and he will rarely refuse. There are men who don't wear a tallit customarily because they don't have one or think it is not necessary, and there are men who don't wear one because they wear a tallit-katan (a 4--cournered undergarment with the knotted fringes on each corner that fulfill the mitzvah-requirement that the tallit fulfills in a more decorative and prayer-time specific way), and don't believe that unmarried men should wear a tallit except when actively participating in a service. Either way, the offer is made, and usually accepted. Women (who yes, are less likely to wear a tallit: some folks feel like it's men's clothing, and therefore forbidden, or they jsut aren't interested in wearing one.) are less likely to be offered a tallit. I've noticed this even at mincha (the afternoon prayer) where no one besides the people actively participating wear a tallit. So a woman who normally wears a tallit in the morning will have an honor and not be offered a tallit when a man who doesn't wear one except when asked to will be offered one and accept. Here the folks at the minyan are getting better about offering- but it's an interesting statement that they/we have to think consciously to do so, when with men it's an assumption.
*Preferably the ones without veiling over the eyes: religious head coverings ought not to send sexual signals. I've swapped into footnotes here because I was stacking entirely too many parentheses.
.