The Rav's famous letter to Rabbi Leonard Rosenfeld at HILI

In 2005, Rabbi Nati Helfgot published a book entitled Community, Covenant, and Commitment: Selected Letters and Communication, which contained much of the correspondence of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik.

There was a letter in the book that caused quite a stir when it was published: it was written in 1953 to Rabbi Leonard Rosenfeld, a student of the Rav, zt”l and a member of the Education Committee of the Hebrew Institute of Long Island (HILI), in response to a question about whether female students could learn the Gemara.

The letter seemed to clearly indicate that the Rav was strongly in favor of it. He said it would be a “regrettable oversight” if we were to establish separate Hebrew classes for girls. He also stated in the letter that “teaching girls Torah she b'al peh is not only permissible, but an absolute must these days.”

For those in the Orthodox world who had always believed the Rav held this view—based on the curriculum at the Maimonides School in Boston and his endorsement of Talmud courses for women at Stern College—the letter was conclusive evidence of his stance on the matter.

There is, however, someone who was not surprised when he saw the letter in the book. Joseph Kaplan of Teaneck knew about this letter before Rabbi Helfgot's book was published. In fact, he has a copy of the original letter the Rav wrote to Rabbi Rosenfeld.

Here is the backstory of the famous letter, as Kaplan recounted it…and how he came to obtain a copy of the letter.

Kaplan grew up in Far Rockaway, New York, in the 1950s, and he and his family were close friends of Rabbi Rosenfeld, a prominent figure in the Far Rockaway community.

According to Kaplan, four separate letters were actually sent back and forth between Rabbi Rosenfeld and the Rav. Rabbi Rosenfeld first sent the Rav a letter with a series of questions about teaching Talmud to girls. The Rav responded that he would not answer the questions unless he was assured in advance that the school administration would follow his recommendation.

Rabbi Rosenfeld immediately responded with a letter written in Hebrew, stating that the school would follow his recommendation. In a letter to Rabbi Rosenfeld dated May 27, 1953, the Rav made his recommendation and stated unequivocally that it was not only permissible but mandatory for girls to study Talmud.

A few interesting notes on the Rav's letter. Although the question was not specifically about coeducation (HILI was already coeducational up to fifth grade, and did not separate boys and girls for Limudei Kodesh until sixth grade), it seems likely that the Rav was in favor of male and female students learning Limudei Kodesh together, even in the higher grades. He says that “it would be a very regrettable oversight on our part to establish separate Hebrew classes for girls.” However, later in the letter he also speaks of not discriminating “as to subject matter and method,” which may mean that he felt boys and girls could be taught separately if the curriculum was completely the same.

What was also fascinating was that the letter was sent “through” Rabbi Leo Jung, the spiritual leader of the Jewish Center in Manhattan. Rabbi Rosenfeld was married to Rabbi Jung's daughter… Why the Rav decided to send the letter through Rabbi Jung rather than sending it directly to Rabbi Rosenfeld remains a mystery.

So how did Kaplan get a copy of the letter before it was first published? According to Kaplan, he had read about the existence of such a letter in a magazine article – and decided to investigate further. He contacted Ezra Rosenfeld, Rabbi Rosenfeld's son, who confirmed that such correspondence did exist and who had a copy of the original letter to his father, signed by the Rav. Rosenfeld sent Kaplan a copy of the letter, which he now keeps in Rabbi Helfgot's book.

What was the real reason for the letter to the Rav? Was there a demand from parents for Talmud classes for girls? Did the school administration want this? Kaplan is not 100 percent sure. “I suspect that the question was not raised by the parents, but by Rabbi Rosenfeld and some of the rabbis on the school board, which was a heterogeneous group. Since HILI had a mix of coed and segregated classes, and some of the same Limudei Kodesh subjects were taught to girls and others were not, this was different from the Rav's Maimonides school model. So I suspect that some members of the board wanted clarification on whether they should follow the Maimonides model or continue as before.”

And therein lies the irony of this fascinating story. Despite the Rav's very clear response to give girls the same Limudei Kodesh education as boys, and Rabbi Rosenfeld's assurance that the school would follow his recommendation, nothing changed. Kaplan explained, “The system at HILI remained exactly as it had been, boys and girls continued to receive the same Limudei Kodesh education in mixed classes until fifth grade, and from sixth grade onwards in separate classes for girls and boys. Girls did not receive any Gemara education, despite the Rav's insistence that they absolutely must receive it. Bottom line: the letter was ignored in practice. I am not sure why the school completely ignored the Rav. It was most likely because the school administration and/or teachers were reluctant to make the change, but unfortunately that is a story that remains untold.”

Despite the Rav's clear statement that girls should learn Talmud, there are still those today who believe that this was an departure from the faith and that he only recommended this to keep day schools afloat and that he felt girls should not learn Talmud. Kaplan strongly disputes this theory: “Whatever the Rav's ideas were when he founded Maimonides, the school would have done what he wanted. He and his wife were directly in charge. So if he really had wanted separate boys' and girls' classes, or even separate Limudei Kodesh classes, or just separate Gemara classes, all he had to do was say so. But he didn't. The strong words in his final response in the letter certainly don't sound like he considered it an departure from the faith.”

Was the Rav's letter meant to be psak or just friendly advice? Kaplan said, “I think the difference between 'psak' and 'opinion' is a red herring. It certainly sounded like Rabbi Rosenfeld was asking for psak. And the Rav's first letter, in which he said he would not answer the questions until he was sure the advice was being followed, certainly sounds like he was giving psak. On the other hand, the Rav often did not give psak to his musmachim; rather, he gave them advice and told them he hoped he could teach them to think for themselves. My conclusion is that if you read all of the correspondence in context, it was more psak than advice.”

Michael Feldstein lives in Stamford, Connecticut, and is the author of Meet Me in the Middle (meet-me-in-the-middle-book.com), a collection of essays on contemporary Jewish life. He can be reached at [email protected].