Succah 51b: What was the “great improvement”? … Originally, during the Simchas Beis Hashoevah, the women sat inside the Ezras Nashim and the men sat outside. But the men and women began socializing (“kalus rosh”), so they reversed it: women on the outside and men on the inside. But still there was kalus rosh. Finally they built a balcony and made a rule that the women had to sit above and the men below.
סוכה נא ע”ב: מאי תיקון גדול? ־ אמר רבי אלעזר: כאותה ששנינו, חלקה היתה בראשונה והקיפוה גזוזטרא, והתקינו שיהו נשים יושבות מלמעלה ואנשים מלמטה. תנו רבנן: בראשונה היו נשים מבפנים ואנשים מבחוץ, והיו באים לידי קלות ראש, התקינו שיהו נשים יושבות מבחוץ ואנשים מבפנים. ועדיין היו באין לידי קלות ראש. התקינו שיהו נשים יושבות מלמעלה ואנשים מלמטה.
It is well-known that the Baal Shem Tov said, “You are wherever your thoughts are.” Less known is that the Ramban says it too, and uses it to explain how an eiruv works.
In his commentary on Eiruvin 17b, the Ramban wonders: according to Rabbi Akiva who says that walking out of the 2000-amos techum is a Torah prohibition, how does an eiruv techumin work to circumvent it? If it were a Rabbinic prohibition, we would understand: Chazal created the prohibition so they have the right to make the exception. But if it’s D’oraisa, why should putting some food out on the road make that spot your starting point to measure the techum, while you sit at home, not even able to see that spot?
The Ramban proposes that either eiruv techumin is a Halacha L’moshe Misinai, or else it is a svara. The logic would be that since his mind is on that spot, he has made it his home. The Gemara says (Eiruvin 73a), “We are witnesses that if he were living there, he would be happier.” His thoughts make it his place of eating and sleeping, and therefore we measure his techum from there.
Fascinatingly, this concept came into play in the famous dispute between Rabbi Moshe Feinstein and the Satmar Rebbe over the required height of a mechitzah in shul. The source for a having a mechitzah is the Gemara in Succah about the women’s balcony constructed in the Beis Hamikdash during the Simchas Beis Hashoevah, and their dispute hinged on whether that balcony’s purpose was to prevent mingling, or to block the men’s view of the women.
Central to the debate was an apparent contradiction in the Rambam between his Commentary on the Mishnah and his Yad Hachazaka. In the Commentary on the Mishnah, the Rambam says:
תיקון גדול ר”ל גדול התועלת והוא כי העם היו מתקנים מקום לאנשים ומקום לנשים ומקום הנשים למעלה ממקום האנשים כדי שלא יסתכלו האנשים בנשים.
“The place for the women was above the place of the men, in order that the men would not gaze at the women.”
But in Hilchos Lulav 8:12 he writes:
ערב יום טוב הראשון היו מתקנין במקדש מקום לנשים מלמעלה ולאנשים מלמטה כדי שלא יתערבו אלו עם אלו.
“On Erev Yom Tov, they would prepare in the Temple a place for the women above and the men below, in order that they should not mingle with each other.”
The Rambam says this again in Hilchos Beis Habechirah 5:9, and it is actually an explicit Mishnah in Midos 2:5 that the balcony was there so that the men and women should not mingle.
Based on this, Reb Moshe argues that the mechitzah is to prevent mingling, socializing and touching, not seeing, and therefore in our shuls, an upstairs gallery need not be blocked off from vision by a wall, and an ezras nashim on the same level with the men need not have a mechitzah higher than shoulder height.
In a second teshuva written to support the first one, he stresses that gazing deliberately at women, whether in shul or anywhere, is forbidden; however, the mechitzah in shul is not there to prevent people from doing aveiros. Everyone is responsible to guard his own eyes. The mechitzah is there because it’s a Torah obligation for a shul or any place of public gathering to have one. Indeed, were it not a Torah obligation, it would not have been allowed to add it to the Beis Hamikdash, every aspect of which was dictated by nevuah.
How then does Reb Moshe explain the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah where he says the balcony was built to prevent gazing? He proves that the Rambam cannot mean to prevent people from doing the aveirah of gazing, because: 1) Even after the balcony was built, the women were visible, and 2) Before they built the balcony too, Chazal had the women sit on the inside and men on the outside without any partition between them, so they were clearly not concerened about blocking visibility. They changed this setup only after they saw that it led to kalus rosh – socializing and touching. Therefore, the Rambam must mean that looking at the women was leading to mingling, and that is why a balcony was built – to prevent mingling.
The Satmar Rebbe, on the other hand, says that a mechitzah must block the women from view, and he bases himself on the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah. How does the Satmar Rebbe explain the Rambam in Yad Hachazakah and the Mishnah in Midos, which say that the problem is mingling? He answers that when men gaze at women and think about them, it is considered as if they were physically there among the women. This is based on two sources: the Ramban in Eiruvin quoted above, and also the concept of בני ערבוביא – literally, “children born from a mixture” (Nedarim 20b). According to the Tur, this refers to a man who lives with his wife while his mind is on another woman. We see that they are called a mixture, even though physically they may be far apart, since his mind is on her.
Thus, the “kalus rosh” and “taaruves” mentioned in the Gemara as the impetus for building the women’s balcony really means that the men were gazing at the women. They solved this problem by making a balcony with a solid fence around it so that the women would not be visible. In our shuls too, the mechitzah must be high enough to block vision.
Sources: Igros Moshe OC 1:39-40, Teshuvos Divrei Yoel 1:10
[Rabbi Aharon Rubenstein brought a proof to Reb Moshe from the Ramban on Parshas Ki Savo, on the words ארור אשר לא יקים את דברי התורה הזאת, who quotes a Yerushalmi that explains this to refer to lifting up the Sefer Torah in shul. The Ramban adds that the writing in the Torah should be shown to every man and woman in the shul. If the mechitzah were higher than the women’s heads, how would they see the Sefer Torah?
However, even the Satmar Rebbe surely agreed that the women at the Simchas Beis Hashoeva were able to see the dancing, although the men could not see them. It must be that the fence around the balcony in the Beis Hamikdash was built with curtains or holes through which the women could look. Here too, in shul, the mechitzah could be the same way so that the women could see the Sefer Torah.
The Satmar Rebbe also quotes an opinion (the Teshuras Shai, Rabbi Shlomo Yehuda Tabak, dayan of Sighet) who said that the women should not be able to see the men. The Satmar Rebbe disagrees with this, citing the Simchas Beis Hashoeva and also the fact that there is no historical precedent for this. So the Satmar Rebbe clearly agrees that the women could see through the mechitzah, and thus see the Sefer Torah as well. (The question from the Ramban would be a problem for the Teshuras Shai. So would the poskim quoted by the Mishnah Berurah at the end of Siman 88 who say that a niddah should not look at the Sefer Torah – implying that other women do look.]
Read and Remember 