Talk:Shira Hadasha

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Shira Hadasha article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

User:69.37.9.104's edit[edit]

I believe that the 23:11, 12 March 2006 69.37.9.104 edit, which changed "It was the first Jewish congregation to implement an opinion by Modern Orthodox Rabbi Mendel Shapiro that halakhah, Jewish religious law, permits women to be called to and read from the Torah on Shabbat in mechitza services with men under certain conditions" to "It was the first Jewish congregation to implement the halakhah, Jewish religious law, which permits women to be called to and read from the Torah," renders the entry inaccurate and should be undone on both factual accuracy and NPOV grounds.

1. The Shapiro/Sperber opinions represent what is currently a minority view within the Orthodox world, one which most Orthodox rabbis, organizations and synagogues do not currently endorse.

2. They address women reading Torah in a mixed service with men, not in e.g. a women's prayer group.

3. They apply only to Shabbat.

4. Sperber and Shapiro are Orthodox Rabbis and their opinions concern Orthodox services.

5. The issue is novel/controversial only within Orthodoxy. Conservative Rabbis opined that "the halakha" permits women to be called to and read from the Torah decades ago.

6. The opinions contain other conditions and limitations (e.g. congregation must be willing to waive its dignity.)

Stating "The halakhah permits women to be called to and read from the Torah" without these qualifications (and without indicating whose view of "the halakhah" is involved) does not accurately represent either Shira Hadasha's sources or NPOV. Reporting tha Shira Hadasha was "the first" requires special qualification for neutrality and accuracy. A claim that Shira Hadasha was the first congregation to follow "the halakhah" (unqualified) suggests that prior (e.g. Conservative) opinions do not follow "the halakhah", i.e. that Conservative Judaism is invalid. This violates NPOV. --Shirahadasha 13:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reb Mendel didn't just pull this halakha out of 20th centurary. IIRC there have always been female minyans. In some cases woman are obligated to make a minyan as for Birkat Hamazon. To throw anything in: M. M. Schneerson promoted once in one of his letters of making female minyans, I might be able to find it. This is defently not only conservative's opinion. ems (not to be confused with the nonexistant pre-dating account by the same name) 07:13, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid the issue isn't whether I agree with you or not. WP doesn't allow me to offer my personal opinions here, no matter how right I may think they are. I'm trying to be a good WP doobie and implement what I understand to be WP's sourcing and NPOV policies, which mean that I have to identify whose view I'm presenting, say whether it's a majority or a minority view, and present major dissenting views whether I agree with them or not. So an article can't say that "the halakha says X" when there's a controversy no matter how strongly or for what reasons I might believe X myself. It can only say things like "Rabbis A and B say the halakha is X, while Rabbis C and D say the halakha is Y." And If C and D represent the majority, I have to say so, even if I personally agree with A and B. --Shirahadasha 15:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree. ems (not to be confused with the nonexistant pre-dating account by the same name) 11:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Website change[edit]

As of this comment Shira Hadasha's new web site appears to be still under construction. For the time being the new website doesn't contain all the material the article sources (e.g. a description of their Mechitza), so links to both sites need to be maintained at least for a transition period. --71.235.96.96 02:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No halakhic support for egalitarian innovations in Orthodoxy[edit]

Centralized discussion at Talk:Partnership minyan#No halakhic support for egalitarian innovations in Orthodoxy. Thank you, IZAK 10:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 men / 10 women?[edit]

The statement "Parts of the service requiring a minyan do not begin until both 10 men and 10 women are present" refers to which services? Are women to be found at the 7:00am imyan and 10:30pm minyan too? Or is it just selective? Chesdovi (talk) 17:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]