Unanimous vote: Landmark verdict rules women can take Rabbinate exams

The women spent years studying the necessary halachot for the exam, as well as solidifying and investing in their Jewish and Torah knowledge as a whole.

In a landmark verdict, the High Court of Justice unanimously ruled on Monday that women cannot be barred from taking Chief Rabbinate of Israel exams. The ruling put to bed a years-long fight for equal opportunity and financial benefits, and established another foundation in the efforts to broaden and legitimize religious female leadership.
The verdict was authored by Justices Dafna Barak-Erez, Ofer Grosskopf, and Supreme Court Deputy President Noam Sohlberg.

On March 15, 2018, six women, religious leaders and scholars in their own right – Avital Engelberg, Shlomit Flint, Sarah Segal-Katz, Rachel Keren, Michelle Cohen Farber, and Shlomit Piamenta – registered for a Chief Rabbinate exam. They submitted the required documents but were told just several hours later that their candidacy had been canceled.

The rabbinate’s Examination Unit administers several different exams that test for both general and specific halachic knowledge. It grants certifications, with the stated goal of providing the Jewish Israeli public with qualified religious authorities.

Of these, three certifications require six exams, three of which are mandatory – a “neighborhood rabbi,” a “local rabbi,” and what is known as Yoreh Yoreh, i.e., someone who can issue halachic rulings. Yoreh Yoreh is considered the first tier of the certificates.

To become a “regional rabbi,” one must take nine exams and an interview, while a “city rabbi” must take 11 exams and an interview.

Of these different options, the city rabbi title is the only one that carries with it the official authority capacity enshrined in the 1980 Rabbinate Law. The other certifications reflect a strong base of halachic knowledge and carry communal weight, but they do not grant official standing in terms of public leadership.

Passing the exams and holding such a certificate often grants communal legitimacy, as they indicate widespread halachic knowledge.

These certificates are not only symbolic and carry soft power; they have real financial implications. Any regional job openings consider the first-tier certification – along with at least six years of yeshiva study after the age of 18 – to be equivalent to an academic degree. This is applicable to nearly all public clergy positions, said the ruling, authored by Sohlberg.

It also includes financial benefits. For example, public-school teachers who teach “religious studies” are eligible for higher salaries because of the equivalency to academic degrees in their training.

The women spent years studying the necessary halachot for the exam, as well as solidifying and investing in their Jewish and Torah knowledge as a whole. When they queried as to their candidacy cancellation, they were told, in a letter dated April 12, 2018, that “because the Chief Rabbinate does not certify women, it cannot allow women to [take] the exam.”

“The Rabbinate is a government body that certifies religious leaders for public service; it is not a testing ground for those who want to show how much they know,” the letter said.

The women persisted and were told by a Rabbinate representative, in a letter dated March 3, 2019, that even considering the financial implications of taking the exam, “there are alternative ways for women to reach that status – such as academia, for example – which can at times be easier to master than the Yoreh Yoreh exam. There is no reasonable way to argue that there is an intrinsic benefit for men in their ability to [take] the exam that women can’t achieve in other ways.”

Petition to allow women to sit the exam

This led to a 2019 petition by NGO ITIM – The Jewish Life Advocacy Center, representing the women, along with The Rackman Center, and Kolech: Religious Women’s Forum, against the Chief Rabbinate, the Examination Unit, and the Religious Services Ministry – not to have the ability to be certified as rabbis, but simply to have the option take the exam.

The petitioners said the Rabbinate’s position that it cannot ordain women is not valid, because the whole purpose of the exams is to certify qualified individuals; this ability is limited, they argued, because it does not ordain them and does not guarantee employment or communal legitimacy, so there is no reason to exclude women from it.

Furthermore, they said, this argument opposes the Rabbinate’s goal as a whole: to strengthen the values of Torah and biblical commandments among the public. As well, especially in recent years, the certifications have financial consequences for “completely secular” jobs that are very far away from the Rabbinate’s ideological and philosophical goals, since they have the equivalent weight of an academic degree, they argued.

THIS POLICY discriminates against women and infringes on their legitimate legal rights in an unreasonable manner, the petition said, adding that the policy is not enshrined in Halacha, and it actually harms public interest by removing women – who make up 50% of the population – from assuming important positions in religious circles, particularly in education and religious lifestyle.

The Rabbinate at the time suggested a different testing method be created for women, completely separated from the Rabbinate. It would be operated by a different authority and would solve at least the financial aspect by serving as a conduit for the financial benefits, identical to the ones the Rabbinate exam provides.

This idea was probed, but it never progressed.

The first case hearing took place on July 16, 2020, and the judges issued a conditional order for the Rabbinate to explain its policy of automatically blocking women from taking the exam, given its discriminatory nature and its violation of basic rights. The Rabbinate responded that it was looking into the alternative testing operation. Nothing came of these efforts, Sohlberg wrote.

Another hearing took place on May 12, 2022, and another conditional order asked that the Rabbinate again explain its policy to the court.

The conditional order was for 90 days from the hearing. During that time, then-religious services minister Matan Kahana decided that his office would be the authority that would operate the alternative testing services. Seventeen women took its first exam on November 23, 2022. However, not all of the proper equivalencies were made between those exams and the ones by the Rabbinate.

Then, elections kicked in, bringing in a new government and a new religious services minister: Shas MK Michael Malkieli.

On April 24, 2023, he said he had “examined the issue thoroughly and came to the conclusion that the alternative tests would be more appropriate in a different ministry that deals more with the Rabbinate exams themselves and rabbi certifications – that would be the right platform.”

The responsibility was transferred to the Labor Ministry, but nothing really advanced, despite dozens of requests and update announcements, as well as the ire of the courts, Sohlberg wrote.

A hearing took place on June 24, 2024, before Sohlberg, Barak-Erez, and Grosskopf. The justices granted the Rabbinate the option to submit an update before the court issued its verdict.

A system had been created, the Rabbinate said, adding that the exams would be different, and that the candidates would have to declare that they “know that this process is not intended as a certification for becoming a rabbi or holding a rabbinical position.” All of the financial benefits would be identical, it said.

The Rabbinate said the claim of discrimination was not accurate, as its exams are intended for rabbinical positions, and being that women cannot serve as rabbis, it is not really discrimination.

This was not a stated purpose of the petitioners, Sohlberg wrote.

The petitioners rejected this response, arguing that rabbinical certification is marginal when compared with the Rabbinate’s broader activities. In the years 2015-2017, only 1%-2% of those who took the exam received “city rabbi” certification, i.e., an official leadership capacity, they said.

The measly amount was the basis for a widespread discriminatory policy, as those who take the lower-tier exams cannot serve in official capacities, the petitioners said.

Furthermore, they said, if such a small number of people receive the leadership capacity certification, that effectively means everyone else who takes the exam benefits from the financial benefits that come from the lower-tier certifications. The logical flow in this is faulty, they added.

Their arguments were less about the alternative testing services and more on the illogical apparatus of the Rabbinate’s testing program, especially given the other benefits – not financial – the candidates receive, the petitioners said.

Furthermore, they said, because there would be no benefit for men to take the alternate exams – i.e., why would they if they can get more benefits with the traditional one? – it would become a “separate but equal” testing method only for women, “creating a clear gender-based hierarchy,” they argued.
The court ruled in favor of the petitioners.

Certification viewed as necessary to carry out Rabbinate’s goals.

THE WOMEN did not challenge the fundamental basis for the Rabbinate’s position of not ordaining women, Sohlberg wrote. The Rabbinate’s goal is to “act to bring the public closer to the values of Torah and biblical commandments,” while one of its authorities is to certify rabbis. Clearly, he wrote, the lawmakers viewed the certification ability as necessary to carry out the Rabbinate’s goals.

As a publicly funded body, the Rabbinate is bound by the distinction the law makes between authorities that are halachicly driven and those that are not. Given legal precedent that notes the sensitivity of the often-ingrained discrimination against women in halachicly based authorities, the legal tradition is to approach such issues with extra sensitivity.

The Rabbinate’s position that its authority to ordain rabbis necessarily extends to dictating who can take the exam “is not an acceptable one,” Sohlberg wrote. Its authority does not extend that far, he said.

Furthermore, the Rabbinate’s reasoning for this extended authority does coincide with its own interpretation of it as it is carried out in practice, Sohlberg wrote.

On its website, the Rabbinate says the goal of the exams is to “expand Torah and Halacha among the Jewish people.”

The argument that the lower-tier exams are meant as temporary and to push the candidates to the higher levels is not grounded in reality, Sohlberg wrote. From 2015-2018, 342 “city rabbi” certifications were awarded, compared with 1,178 Yoreh Yoreh certifications, he wrote. Fewer than 30% of the candidates become official leaders, indicating that the lower-tier exams do not really lead to that result, he added.

“If the stated goal of these exams is to certify rabbis in an official capacity – to have more religious leaders – what can be the legitimacy for most of the certifications that do not meet this goal?” Sohlberg asked. The facts show that the certifications carry other practical benefits that can really only come from Rabbinate exams, he wrote.

“The Rabbinate is trying to have its cake and eat it too: Block women from taking the exam because they cannot, at the end of the testing process, be ordained, while allowing any man who wishes to do so to take any exam, not reach the level of official leadership – fulfilling the stated goals of the Rabbinate – all while reaping the benefits that accompany the exam,” Sohlberg wrote.

The alternative testing method would lead to a “separate but equal” scenario, which is unacceptable, he wrote.
Sohlberg criticized the Rabbinate’s handling of the petition, particularly how it shuffled the responsibility around between different ministries, all of which refused to take the matter seriously – apart from Kahana’s efforts – in a way that is “difficult and even degrading” to the women.

“These citizens only asked that government authorities fulfill their duties to them in a wholesome manner,” Sohlberg wrote. “I can only express sorrow at how this was handled and hope it will be better in the future.”
A plethora of Jewish sources, ancient and modern, encourage female religious leadership, further exemplifying how far off the management of this case was, he wrote.

ITIM founder Rabbi Seth Farber said the decision was “a historic moment not just for religious women but for religious Zionism as a whole. Women’s Torah learning is one of the most impressive and important processes that have taken place in the last decades, and now it finally has the institutional recognition it deserves, he said.

Ohr Torah Stone president Rabbi Dr. Kenneth Brander said: “Today’s ruling by the High Court affirms what has been true for many years. Women have been studying at a high level and been taking unrecognized exams. Access to Torah is not reserved for some of the Jewish people. These women have the right to have their achievements in learning recognized.”

The Ohr Torah Stone network contains the Women’s Institute of Halakhic Leadership.

“Halacha delineates different opportunities for male scholars and their female counterparts,” Brander said. “The very women qualified to be taking these exams are the ones who will uphold that separation of responsibilities. Today’s victory is a step forward in the tradition of Sarah Schenirer, the pioneer of female Jewish education.”