Ode to My Local Orthodox Mikvah
Certain recent posts have reminded my how much there is to appreciate about my LOM. It's a well-maintained building, with a comfortable waiting room, luxurious preparation rooms, and mikvaot that are very clean and pleasantly heated. In the prep rooms, guidelines for performing breast self-exams hang on the walls, and piles of discrete business cards for the Shalom Task Force sit on the counters, belying the notion that Orthodox Jews don't care about the well being of women.
The attendants have good and bad days, like anyone else, but on the whole they are very considerate. I often come in slacks, with my hair uncovered, and I am treated as congenially as anyone else. On my first visit, I didn't clip my nails, because I wanted to get a manicure for my wedding. The attendant (aware of the fact that this was a matter of custom, not law) checked my hands, saw that they were clean, and let me right in. I dunked only once (the standard custom for Ashkenazi women being at least two dunks, usually more), and still she said nothing, simply smiling pleasantly and handing me my robe as I emerged from the water. Technically, I was tehorah. Why should she make me uncomfortable and possibly discourage me from coming back?
In spite of all this, I have often been uncomfortable at the mikvah, especially during my first year of marriage. A few times, I wore a long skirt and a hat in an effort to fit in (even though, logically, a mikvah is hardly the place to worry about modest dress). Once, I came home crying. I couldn't shake the feeling that I was a phony, a modern girl masquerading as a frummie, and that if the mikvah attendants knew what I was really like they wouldn't approve of me at all.
It's hard, being the type of person who has always wanted everyone's approval, to acknowledge that my concerns were probably legitimate: these women wouldn't "approve" of many aspects of my lifestyle, just as I would not "approve" of many aspects of theirs. That is precisely why it is so commendable that they treat me like a mensch. And that is why I have to keep reminding myself how indebted I am to the attendants, to the rabbi who oversees the mikvah, and to everyone else involved, for making it possible for me to observe this mitzvah with dignity and comfort.
One day, I may live in a neighborhood with a Mayyim Hayyim type mikvah, where I can go and "be myself," so to speak, halachic incongruities and all. For now, I have a perfectly adequate mikvah -- much better than adequate, in fact. Yes, indeed. It could be much worse.
TrackBacks
Comments
If it helps (both of you)... here's one "frummie's" perpective... I think it's wonderful that you use the mikvah when you obviously haven't taken on all the other mitzvos, like covering hair, etc.
And I'd much rather you come in jeans and loose curls than not come at all.
another "frummie" here ...youse guys are probably worrying about nothing. I also think that it's wonderful that not only the frummies use the mikva. I think most of the people you worry don't "approve" of you probably are just thrilled to realize that women they might pass on the street and not realize are observant are keeping such a difficult mitzva. The women you think are disapproving are probably busy admiring you.
I first just want to thank everyone on this website. All of the comments are so respectful and thoughtful and have really made me think a lot about how and why I keep the mitzvot I do in my life. I'm a traditional Conservative Jew (very comfortable with Conservative Judaism)who takes keeping shabbat and Kashrut (as well as other things) seriously. I never new anything more about t"h than "it's something that orthodox women do", I had made the assumption that the Conservative movement had somehow rationalized that t"h was not applicable to modern society and figured out some way around it. Anyway, point being I was (and currently am) extremely upset, confused, and frustrated, that t"h is apparently something along the lines of kashrut etc. in importance (i.e. chok, not something given with a reason that can be rationalized with) and I have never been taught, or even heard, about it once. I'm upset that something this important has been glossed over completely. So, thanks to this website I am now on a quest to figure out a) why the Conservative movement has effectively treated t"h this way b) what the official Conservative halackic ruling on this actually is (from Ruchama's writings it seems like they must exist, but I can't find them, my grandfather is a rabbi but at this stage of things I can't bring myself to ask him about it(Conservative jews including myself can get quite touchy about the "validity" of their practices)) c)to try to figure out if t"h is something that I can and want to bring into my life (and here's the connection to Ruchama's post) without feeling like I'm dressing up as a "frummie" all of the time. Contemplating all of these questions has also helped me in questioning all of my Jewish practices at a time in my life when I felt like it was all starting to lose a little meaning for me. I currently live in Jerusalem, and it's hard being a Conservative Jew here. So, again I thank you all. I'd appreciate any suggestions, comments, and any help being pointed in the right direction. I'd also like to thank all of the women who have opened up on this website, the open discussion has not only allowed me to understand my orthodox friends (and the hundreds of women I see on the street everyday)better, but also to help break down my defenses against my fear of criticism from orthodox Jews by giving me a reason to finally step outside of my comfortable halachic box on my own terms(if that makes any sense). Sorry this is long, it's been brewing in my head for a while.
I know the differences in dress that you're referring to are not the real issue, but rather the deeper religious differences they may reflect. But I think it's worth mentioning, for those reading this who may not know, that pants & uncovered hair are not hard-and-fast signs of religious orientation or halachic commitment.
Pants, when designed especially for women, do not violate the law of beged ish (women wearing men's clothing) and are not worn by much of the Orthodox community more as a matter of custom / spirit of the law than technical requirement. There's a continuum of things which "feel" modest: past the knee skirts > loose pants > miniskirts, according to one famous teshuva. Even for Orthodox women who normally wear only long skirts there might be instances where she would feel pants are the more modest option.
Covering hair is more difficult to dismiss based on textual sources but in practice there have been prominent Orthodox married women who did not cover their hair, and many women of my parents' generation followed their example. Meanwhile these same women overcame challenges we can't dream of, such as keeping shabbat in the days before it was acceptable to say blithely "I'm leaving early!" on a Friday afternoon.
This is just to say that I think it's a mistake to presume anything about someone's level of commitment from her manner of dress. I admit I've done a double take when I ran into a woman my age with uncovered hair at the mikvah, but when I realized what I was doing I gave myself a little shake.
Count me as one of the admirers.
Shoshana- I'm not sure exactly what the CJLS has given as an official ruling on taharat hamishpakha- I don't think that it has (this coming from another observant Conservative Jew). What I do know is that Rabbi Joel Roth has chosen not to give a formal tshuvah on the matter, but has taught his private ruling to his students, including one of my teachers, who has gotten his permission to teach his view, and checks back in with him about once a year to make sure that she still has it right. My suggestion would be to contact him, since I know that he has an already formed opinion, is still part of the CJLS, and is a brilliant halakhicist. He's at JTS so his contact information must be available on their site.
Otherwise, if you want to check, CJLS teshuvot from the last chunk of years are available online at the Rabbinical Assembly's website.
Another frummie piping up to say, I could care less what you wear to the mikveh. What matters to me is that you are there, observing what can be a difficult mitzvah. As long as your motivation is honest, I'm just proud that there is another woman continuing a mitzvah practiced by our ancestors, and who is hopefully going to pass that practice on to her children.
I wouldn't question a woman in pants and no headcovering coming into a kosher store and buying kosher meat, why would I question that same woman in a mikveh? ;)
Shoshana, I think it's wonderful that you want to learn and consider observing t'h. I found Nishmat's website extremely helpful when I was starting out. Actually, I still find it extremely helpful! I spent a lot of time looking terms up in the glossary, but after awhile, you get the hang of them. Rivka Slonim's book, Total Immersion doesn't teach much, but it does give you insight into different womens' practices and feelings regarding t'h. I didn't feel any of the essays spoke to me personally, but it was beneficial to read them.
If you contact the rabbi that debka_notion mentions, I'd be interested in the Conservative movement's ruling on t'h; perhaps you could do a guest post about it? Good luck with your learning!
Thank you all for your comments!
First, Desde, Stama, and Eden: I think you're probably right. It's just that, for my own part, I'd prefer to "fit in" than to be regarded as someone who was "on the right track, but not quite there yet." Another sticky issue is that, rather than moving along the "right track," I'm becoming increasingly comfortable with with my current (very lenient) practices. I'm fairly certain that if the mikvah attendants knew that, they would not "approve." On the other hand, they don't know, and can't know, and probably wouldn't much care; they have plenty to think about besides the personal lives of women who visit the mikvah.
TL: I try to keep reminding myself of what I just wrote: the attendants probably aren't thinking about me much at all. Still, it helps to know that other women are having similar feelings.
Shoshana: I can relate to your frustration! The Conservative movement has gotten a lot more
"open" about T"H recently, but the current approach still leaves a great deal to be desired. There is, in fact, no "official" Conservative ruling on the subject, which means that "officially" Conservative halacha makes the same demands as Orthodox halacha. Unofficially, Conservative rabbis tend to take more lenient positions. I have seen the following positions attributed to Conservative rabbis (from most to least stringent):
1. Rabbi Isaac Klein lays out the laws of T"H is his Guide to Jewish Religious Practice (1979:510-522). The laws are essentially "Orthodox" (based on the Shulchan Aruch), but I noticed a few omissions and leniencies:
a. No mention is made of refraining from physical contact during niddah; only intercourse is explicitly prohibited.
b. The intricate system used by Orthodox women to calculate their periods is not mentioned. Rather, a woman with regular periods is instructed to refrain from from intercourse "as soon as she feels the approach of menstruation." What exactly this means appears to be left to the individual woman to determine, based on her personal experiences with premenstrual symptoms.
c. No direct mention is made of internal checks ("bedikot") or of consulting a rabbi when bedikot are ambiguous. (This latter is unsurprising, since Conservative rabbis are not trained in the "science" of menstrual blood.)
d. There is no mention of "ha'arachot," although Klein states that it is "proper" for husband and wife to sleep in separate beds.
e. Women are permitted to immerse with nail polish or hair dye.
2. As Debka_notion has mentioned, Rabbi Joel Roth, along with other American Conservative Rabbis, regards the seven "clean" days as an optional stringency. Women are permitted to immerse seven days after the onset of menstruation or one day after the cessation of flow (whichever comes later). I'm not sure about Joel Roth, but I know that some rabbis in this school permit non-sexual physical contact and sharing a bed.
3. Rabbi Susan Grossman maintains that the prohibition against sex during menstruation is independent of the purity laws; thus, the seven-day wait and immersion are unnecessary in post-Temple times. However, she advocates visiting the mikvah after menstruation as a form of hiddur mitsvah ("glorifying" or "beautifying" the commandment). Grossman believes that bedikot are a relic of an ancient blood taboo and need not be performed. Women may make their own judgements as to when their periods have begun and ended. She also permits sharing a bed during menstruation, and allows any form of physical contact that would be socially acceptable between an adult brother and sister.
Joel Roth and Susan Grossman both encourage husbands to visit the mikvah the morning after their wives' visits, as a way to participate in the creation of "family sanctity."
In case you're looking for more information, An earlier post of mine includes a reading list, which you may want to look at. I also recommend browsing the Nishmat Yoatsot website for an overview of "Orthodox" halachah.
If you're looking for a mikvah in Jerusalem that you'd be comfortable using, you may want to check with the Conservative Yeshiva. If they don't have one of their own that you can use, they may at least be able to make some recommendations.
For the record, my personal practice is to refrain from sex beginning a set number of days after I go off the pill. This interval has proven quite reliable, so I don't feel the need to do bedikot. I count seven days from the onset of menstruation and use the mikvah the following night. I do not do a hefsek taharah, since (thanks again to the pill) my period is always well over by that point. My husband and I share a bed and don't refrain from expressing affection physically (though we try to maintain some boundaries).
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this.
I agree with fb. I'm very impressed at anyone who would chose to keep t"h.. my kallah teacher stressed the beauty of t"h -- it's something that you keep and only you know that you are keeping it. I don't think I'd bat an eye if I saw a woman coming into a local mikveh not dressed "like a frummie"... that she came at all would impress me. it's a very difficult mitzvah...
yet, I must say, while I do not judge based on appearance, I'm very careful as to how I appear. A frustrating paradox I struggle with.
Lastly, I am also curious in other viewpoints of t"h... and I want to echo that both Nishmat and Rivka Slonim's book are great. Rabbi Kaplan's book "Waters of Eden" is also a pleasure to read...
Ruchama: you are actually doing a proper veset. My kallah teacher said that is what you do, you can have a cycle based upon an event (veset hamasha* "activity cycle"). Going to placebo pills is an event and if you know you always bleed on day 3 of placebo, there you go. That's your cycle.
Also, if you open a new pill pack and don't take any of the placebos and go straight into the new pack, you therefore extend your cycle and you therefore "ignore" your onah days.
Please ask your LOR/t'h teacher about this. I'm not 100% sure this is common. It's at the end of my notes and I was sleepy. I'll try to confirm with mine soon...
* I wrote heh-mem-ayin-shin-heh. My hebrew isn't very good and my husband is too busy right now to help me decipher my notes.
clarification you could ignore your onah days for that cycle only, as you are skipping the event that causes you to become niddah, there is no need to check.
i.e. if you bleed on day 25, which is 3 days after you start taking blue/placebo pills, but you open a new pack, you don't have to seperate or do a bedekah on day 25... you only have to seperate when you come to day 3 of the next time you take placebo
I hope that clarifies!
Wow. Thank you all SO much for this post and the comments. Count me as another mostly-observant Conservative woman here! I also go (sporadically) to my local (Chabad) mikveh, dressed in long skirts and a hat, figuring that if I look like I belong there, they won't quiz me about how strictly I count white days and bedikahs--and I do feel like something of a fraud. And I keep wondering what reaction I'd get if I went to the mikveh in my usual pants and without the hat (I never wear my hair loose unless I have a hat on, but I don't usually wear the hat).
It's so wonderful to have company.
And Ruchama, thank you SO much for the annotated bibliographies, on this post and on your earlier posts. It's so good to know that I'm not just making up Conservative practice as I go along.
I didn't grow up observing Kashrut, Shabbos, etc., and if I had been presented with the more Orthodox interpretations of them as the 'only valid way' to observe these mitzvot, I would have been scared away. Taharat Mishpaha is no different. You all are inspiring me to be a more consistent visitor to my mikveh.
Hmmm. Interesting. Lots of food for thought. Thanks for all of the sources. Is there any way I can get my hands on Sussman's article in Conservative Judaism. I can't seem to find them archived online anywhere? Ironically I bet my grandfather has the issue somewhere in his study. I also have Klein's book sitting around somewhere from high school. Anyway, thanks for a synopsis of the conservative practices, it will help to have some context to work from. I think I might even email my old Rabbi from the US. Ok, thanks everyone for the info and support. Keep the comments coming.
sorry, sorry. I meant the article by Susan Grossman, not Sussman. oops.
Talia, I just re-read your post. And I'm pretty sure your notes said "veset ha'ma'ase". Which literally means, as you said, activity cycle or cycle of an act. ma'ase is an act (la'asot, the verb to do something). Sorry I'm posting piecewise, there were a lot of posts to process, and things keep poppng into my head.
re: Susan Grossman article. If someone gets me the proper citation (year would be close enough)? I can poke around the NYPL and see what I find. The research library is closed Mondays. They do have onservative Judaism from '45 - present.
I just finished reading this long string of posts, and I can definitely relate. When I first got married, I debated whether I should wear a skirt to the mikvah. I quickly decided that I should just be myself, and wear whatever I happened to be wearing that day. including shorts. I haven't thought about this in years, but it's certainly nice to hear that other people have the same issues.
Regarding the CJLS and such...I've had several conversations with my brother, a (very)Conservative rabbi on the role of T"H in the current configuration of the Conservative movement. Also, in my shul we have something like 12 congregants (half of whom are women) who are also Conservative rabbis. Guess that comes from being near a large, urban university. I've had discussions with many of them about how we could "promote" this mitzvah and bring awareness to the fact that gee, this isn't optional. But then again, many congregants don't keep any sort of kosher (Conservative or otherwise and I'm viewed as the Kashrus magazine-reading kosher police so go figure.) But I digress.
Anyway, to my point. We are soon to have a new head rabbi. A woman. During the Q&A interview session with the congregation I asked about promoting "underobserved" mitzvot and how would she go about drawing attention and encouraging people to do x, y, and z. I specifically mentioned mikvah. Some women in the congregation complained loudly saying "we don't do that here!" And, the rabbi's response was that she'd be more interested in trying to get people to observe Shabbat before mikvah. I can't say I agree with her or that it has to be one and not the other. If something is not option, I am firmly of the opinion that Conservative rabbis need to stop being afraid to remind people that halacha is neither optional nor pick and choose. Halacha may be evolving and may be viewed through a different lens than by those used in other movements or congregations. But, "nah, I don't feel like it" isn't one of the choices. Maybe I'm a voice whistling in the dark but I say spell it out. Tell people what it is we're supposed to do and how we're supposed to conduct our lives and interpersonal relationships. The rabbi isn't our paid observant Jew or shaliach. If we're to be an Am ha Kodesh, maybe it's time we start acting the part. To further this loft aspiration, I am soon to join the board of our local mikvah society to serve as a bridge between the frummies and the community that built the new mikvah and our egalitarian shul and community. Down from soapbox.
Oh, and one more thing. I have had an email correspondence with Rabbi Pamela Gottfried (an educator at Ahavath Achim Synagogue in Atlanta) and Rabbi Esther Reed (Rutgers Hillel). Both are Conservative rabbis and pubished mikvah advocates. R' Reed wrote her master's thesis on “The Intention in One’s Heart”: The Rituals of Mikveh. With their permission of course, I'd be happy to pass on this document.
Now, I can understand Conservative Jews not wanting to be told what to do (it's for good or bad how the communities have developed), but without even approaching the topic of whether a halacha is mandatory or not what about even telling us that the halacha exists???? I agree with you, tall latte, that " 'nah, I don't feel like it' isn't one of the choices", officially, but practically is another issue. And I think that this is part of what bothers me. Through the course of my life I have viewed my experience with Conservative Judaism to be that they have an official ruling on a halacha, and halacha being technically mandatory, but that for good or for bad everyone makes their own decisions and practices with whatever stringency they take upon themselves. So, while I theoretically feel comfortable not always following the Conservative halacha to the letter if for some reason disagree with it, I do rely on the Conservative movement to still make a halachic ruling based on the assumption that halacha is halacha. Which is why I'm so upset that it seems the movement has never made an official ruling, or publicized the halacha. It seems like the Conservative movement is scared of putting people off or making people uncomfortable. I see more and more of a trend (especially after looking at the UCJS website, which to me seemed like it was starting to dumb down Judaism a bit to make it more appealing) of people wanting to maintain congregant numbers than be true to what they religiously believe. As Ruchama wrote "There is, in fact, no "official" Conservative ruling on the subject, which means that "officially" Conservative halacha makes the same demands as Orthodox halacha." Now, I have never even considered the possibility that in order to be a fully practicing Conservative Jew I would have to go and consult with the Orthodox rabbis to see if there was anything I was leaving out. Of course, according to the Orthodox movement there's something I'm leaving out. I fully believe in the principal of Conservative Judaism and as a result I trust my Conservative rabbi and powers that be to make halachic decisions based on these principals and to teach me about these decisions, have these decisions be available to me as part of my life. In this respect I feel Conservative Judaism has sorely lacked in respect to t"h. It may not be something that seems to fit in with modern life (but to be honest neither do shabbat and kashrut), but to just ignore it and not really deal with it? I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, this is obviously my emotions coming out and how I view the situation, not necessarily fact. I don't mean to offend any rabbis, I know there is a lot to deal with when running a congregation. I just think this is a good example of how things can start going down the wrong track in Conservative Judaism if we're not careful. And besides that t"h seems like, for all of it's difficulties, be a beautiful addition to our lives. And I'm a little worried that shul politics is maybe robbing us of this part of our religious lives. Ok, thanks for listening everyone, I know it's long. I appreciate this discussion and the opportunity it's giving me to crystalize a lot of feelings about things that I've been having.
here is the citation for the Grossman article:
Grossman, Susan. “Feminism, Midrash, and Mikveh.” In Conservative Judaism, Winter 1992, pp. 7-17.
(I just copied and pasted it from ruchama's post)
One more comment on attire when visiting the mikvah - I know plenty of "modern orthodox" women who wear pants and only cover their heads in shul who (likewise) arrive at the mikvah bareheaded in pants. And I can't imagine that our mikvah ladies quiz them or anyone else - except the standard "shall I check your hands and feet?"
As far as other people's opinions, count me in for the list of "frummies" who is thrilled that you acknowledge the mitzvah and show up in the first place; my non-observant SIL asked some questions prior to their marriage, but I'm not sure she ever quite went (not sure if it would have helped if I was local).
I found the article and will attempt to write a review of it soon. If you would like a copy of it, please email me and let me know and I'll figure some way to get it to you.
How lucky to find you women! I am not Orthodox and have observed (sort of leniently) laws of niddah for the past nine years of my marriage (I've been married longer)--I sometimes wonder about the jeans or shorts I wear, but then figure it is a little educational for other women who see me there to see me as myself. On the other hand, like Ruchama, I often wish I would fit in.
Oh thank you. It was so validating to read someone else who has had that same feeling of being a phony. I wish I could just fit in one world or the other and actually be satisfied or feel no guilt. My tsuris. But there have been many times when I've thrown on a long skirt and shul hat to go to the mikvah when earlier in the day I had on pants or jeans. Who am I kidding? The last time I finally just ran in wearing my sweats. It was a new mikvah and a new attendant. I have to admit, I felt very weird. I mean, the usual attendants know I'm Conservative-ish and probably wouldn't be surprised to see me in pants, with my head uncovered. What an impression I must have made this time. See, even now I'm conflicted about it. Hmm. Another topic to bring up in therapy. It's always something.