I find it hard to understand why there are some mitzvos shezman grama that women are obligated in when the mishna in Kiddushin 29 explicitly uses the word "KOL" meaning there are no exceptions. On the other hand there are many where ambiguity reigns and rishonim differ as to whether they are time-bound or not. Yet the mishna seems to assume that all the time bound mitzvas are already known. But if there are exceptions why doesn't the mishna simply add the word "some"?
David Goldman, USA
David, it seems that your question is asked by the Gemara in Kidushin 34a on this Mishnah. The Gemara asks that Matzah, Simchah on Yom Tov, and the public reading of the Torah once every seven years are Mitzvos that are bound by time, but nevertheless women are obligated. Conversely, there are some Mitzvos which are not bound by time, but women are exempt. Rebbi Yochanan answers that "we do not learn from rules" (where the Mishnah uses the word "Kol") even where the Mishnah also states "with the exception of...."
As they say in English, there is an exception to every rule.
B'Hatzlachah Rabah,
Dovid Bloom
But in this case there is more than a single exception, there are many.....and yet we are told that the statement using the word "all" cannot be taken at face value at all??
Some of the rules that we have in Shas are very general rules, and they may be waived if we have good reason to do so. For instance, we have a rule that the Halachah follows Rebbi Yehudah when he argues with Rebbi Meir. However, in the Gemara in Arachin (5b) Rava said that the Halachah in a particular case follows Rebbi Meir because his reasoning is logical. The Kesef Mishneh (Hilchos Arachin 1:6) writes that the Rambam maintains that the idea of the reasoning being more logical is a stronger rule than the one that says that the Halachah always follows Rebbi Yehudah.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Thank you, so then could we argue that the argument of zman grama for women does lack logic as we discussed? After all, how long would it take a woman once in a while to wear tefillin for five minutes just to say Shma? But yet one would exempt them entirely their whole lives on a mitzva that has no specific duration and can be done anytime....
Your suggestion would render the Mitzvah of Tefilin one which does have a specific duration and one which cannot be done anytime. It would be a Mitzvah incumbant on the woman to do whenever she has a chance, and she would be exempt when she is focused on her other responsibilities. Such a level of obligation would possibly undermine the deeper essence of the Mitzvah (i.e., perhaps the Mitzvah must be one which indeed can be (and ideally should be) fulfilled at all times, which a woman would not be able to do), and, also, it would still cause a disparity between the man's Mitzvah and the woman's. It is more likely that the exemption from Mitzvos Aseh sheha'Zman Grama is based on logic, and we are just not getting to the bottom of that logic. (-Y. Shaw)
Moreover, there may be other reasons for a woman's exemption from the particular Mitzvah of Tefilin. (See Tosfos to Eruvin 96a, DH Michal.) (-D. Bloom)
I just wanted to clarify: Since zman grama has roots in the inyan of Talmud Torah, are the gemara sources unanimous (either explicitly or by silence) that women are exempt from Talmud Torah? And since Talmud Torah has no shiur for duration or frequency, how would they be exempt from any learning their entire lives, especially since women are said to have to learn the halachas that are relevant?
Thanks,
David Goldman