User:Ynadiv/sandbox

Feminist Ethical Approaches to Traditional Jewish Texts

Feminist Jewish scholars approach Jewish texts with several ethical considerations. They struggle with the ethically problematic portrayal of women in Torah and rabbinic texts and offer their own readings of these texts. They often use Jewish Feminist values to reflect upon ethical practices in Judaism and in the modern world.

Ethical Readings of Torah

Feminist Jewish scholars point out the mistreatment of women in the Torah. They argue that it is an ethical imperative to engage in the interpretation of Torah using a feminist lens. A Jewish Feminist critique of Torah is attentive to phenomena in the text such as the absence, silence, distortion, or subjugation of women in the text. Because the text exhibits a “normative character of maleness,” a feminist critique is one in which “the stage of criticism is never left behind…”

A common feminist critique of the Torah is noting the degree to which women are absent or silenced. Judith Plaskow writes, “Half of Jews have been women, but men have been defined as normative Jews, while women’s voices and experiences are largely invisible in the record of Jewish belief and experience that has come down to us.”

Rachel Adler invokes the rabbinic concept of Geneivat da’at (“theft of the mind”) to describe the process by which tradition “steals the memory of the true face of the other” by misremembering and misrepresenting women in the text.

Feminists also point out that the targeted audience of the Torah is male. Rachel Adler cites Exodus 19:15, “And he [Moses] said to the people, ‘Be ready for the third day: do not go near a woman.’” as an example of the male audience of the text. Moreover, Adler argues, when this text is read each year during the holiday of Shavuot, women “are left standing apart as your mothers stood under the mountain, eavesdropping on the conversation between God and man, wondering if there is anything God wants you to do and, if so – why doesn’t He tell you so Himself? ”

Having identified the patriarchy of the text and the way it has translated into unethical treatment of women, the project of many feminist writers is to reclaim the voices of women in the text. Plaskow writes:

"[H]ints concerning women’s experiences must be carefully ferreted out from narratives, prophecies, and legal texts focused on other matters. Biblical scholars, for example, have argued that the scant sources concerning Miriam suggest that she was probably an important cultic leader in early Israel. What exactly was the nature of her contribution and role?"

Jewish feminist scholars frequently reflect that the Torah portrays woman subordinately. Tamar Ross writes, “[T]here is no denying that women’s subordinate status did receive concrete expression even in biblical times.” Similarly, Plaskow comments:

"In Torah, Jewish Teaching, women are not absent, but they are cast in stories told by men. As characters in narrative, women may be vividly characterized, as objects of legislation, singled out for attention. But women's presence in Torah does not negate their silence, for women do not decide the questions with which Jewish sources deal."

These critiques are challenging from a Jewish perspective because of the centrality of the Torah in the Jewish tradition. Many feminists describe the tension of criticizing that which they hold precious. Tova Hartman, who identifies as Modern Orthodox, describes this tension:

"To know that one is feminist and to know that one loves the Bible is, in the thinking of many, at best an oxymoron, perhaps clever as a rhetorical statement but surely not a possibility for existential living. After all, no woman can serve two authorities, a master called Scripture and a mistress called Feminism."

Jewish feminists differ in their treatment of source criticism as a tool for feminist biblical criticism. Some Jewish feminists maintain that source critical methods help the reader to identify the historical context and explain the androcentric nature of the text. Orthodox feminist writers take issue with this lens because it rejects the traditional understanding of the origins of the Torah.

Ethical Issues of Rabbinic Texts

Rabbinic texts serve as foundational materials for much of Jewish life and practice including both legal and narrative areas of Jewish life. Feminists identify similar issues of patriarchy within rabbinic literature as they do in their critiques of Torah. Just as with Torah, they assert that rabbinic texts silence, subjugate, misremember, and oppress women.

Laurie Zoloth writes that when women read rabbinic text, “We witness the discussion of our existence as the considered object, largely unnamed, and called only by the name of their relationship to men (‘Rabbi Hiyya’s wife,’ ‘the widow,’ ‘his handmaiden’) and often seen only in terms of the most external of features.” Rachel Adler utilizes object-relations theory, that understands this phenomenon and “explain that it is because women are not perceived as autonomous subjects in these narratives.” Zoloth describes that the result of this process is that:

"The woman as reader must project herself right out of her body, the body of the discourse, imagine herself into the male-self of her teacher, who is imagining rabbis imagining the fictive body of women. It is elaborate textual cross-dressing."

Many Jewish feminist scholars also criticize the imagery rabbinic texts use to describe women and the consequences of those images. Plaskow notes that rabbinic texts frequently portray women as temptresses and connects this imagery to halakhic legislation aimed at controlling women’s sexuality. Susan Shapiro identifies the use of the “married harlot” image in Maimonides and points to his writings permitting the beating of one’s wife. She writes:

"I am not suggesting that Maimonides required the metaphor of the ‘married harlot’ to hold this position on wife beating. … The metaphor didn’t make him do it. Rather, … [the metaphor] further reinforces, rationalizes, and justifies such violence against wives and women. Metaphors matter. They have consequences." The rabbinic literary genre of midrash is often suggested by feminist thinkers are being particularly well suited to feminist endeavors. Suzanne Stone writes:

"The great attraction of midrash for feminist legal scholars, however, is that it may be read as a metaphoric discussion of legal and moral concepts, one that transcends the traditional dichotomies of law and literature or reason and emotion."

Similarly, Plaskow writes:

"Yet historiography is not the only nor the best source for the feminist expansion of Torah. Jews have traditionally used midrash to broaden or alter the meanings of texts. The midrashic process of bringing contemporary questions to traditional sources and elaborating on the sources in response to questions easily lends itself to feminist use."

Some scholars reject the midrashic approach. Heidi Ravven argues that the claim that texts have “multiple levels of meaning” is a “pre-modern fiction” that, “With the advent of scientific historical scholarship of texts we can no longer claim [to be true].” Ravven suggests that instead of rereading old texts with new ethical understandings, feminists need to confront the Jewish philosophical tradition “head on” and create change through this “philosophic response.”

Ethical Readings of Torah and Rabbinic Text

Many tools characterize a feminist reading of Torah and rabbinic text. Some feminist readings focus on giving voice to otherwise silent women in texts. Plaskow reflects on the characters of Miriam and Dinah, and references to the worship of goddesses as areas of silence and misremembering which are deserving of a voice.

Zoloth describes a gendered reading as one that recognizes that the text naturally “pulls” in the direction of a male reader. She suggests a type of reading which she calls “reading like a girl.” Zoloth explains:

"Reading like a girl then deconstructs the narrative logic of the passage because the reader resists the forward going movement of the narrative with a motion of her own, turning away from the conversation to another possible conversation, not yet quite spoken, but whose possibilities suggest … an alternative plane of moral discourse. It will be the counter-text, the background and not the foreground, an alternative patterning, that will arise with a gendered reading."

While these feminist thinkers, and others like them, suggest readings that in some manner reinterpret or redeem the text, others suggest reading the texts as they are to point out the ethical quandaries present within them. Plaskow refers to this as “preaching against the text” and remarks that, “Remaining silent about the negative aspects of tradition not only leaves them to do their work in the world, it also deprives us of an important spiritual resources.” [Judith Plaskow, “Preaching against the text” in The Coming of Lilith: Essays on Feminism, Judaism, and Sexual Ethics. Boston: Beacon Press, 2005. P.155] Plaskow identifies these spiritual resources as responses to the pain that exists in Jewish communities and that can be alleviated if people use these texts as opportunities to discuss the issues that could be the source of this pain.

Health Care

Laurie Zoloth poses the question, “How are religious scholars shaping the moral sense of ethical choices in American life?” She argues that the voice of Jewish tradition can bring back a voice of community in the face of a culture that values autonomy. Zoloth uses biblical and rabbinic texts to foster an ethic of health care in the United States. She discusses a story in the Talmud to reflect on the issue of micro-allocation of medical resources. The story relates:

"Two people were walking along the way, and in the hand of one of them was a flask of water. If both of them drink, they die, but if one of them drinks, he reaches civilization. Ben Petura expounded: it is better that both of them should drink and die and let not one of them see the death of his fellow. Until Rabbi Akiba came and taught: “That your brother may live with you” – your life takes precedence over the life of your fellow. (Bava Metzia 62a)"

Zoloth analyzes this, and many other sources, to arrive at ethical language through which society can frame the debate on medical ethics. She write, “The impoverishment of the community is a real factor, and it must be considered even when a life is at stake. The project of a community as a whole must be affected by the plight of the one, according to Rashi, but there are limits on obligation.”

In framing a new discourse on health care, Zoloth offers a feminist ethical reading of the Book of Ruth. She points to passages and themes in Ruth that detail friendship, family, and community depicted as an obligation and a right. She also highlights the themes of loving the community, the value of face-to-face encounters, and the responsibility of the social order to provide for a “basic minimum.” She concludes, “What Ruth teaches is that citizenship is solidarity, that meaningful discourse starts with the recognition of the other, and that justice is prior to any human freedom.” This feminist ethical analysis derives its values from the action of a female biblical heroine.

Abortion

David Kraemer notes that when Jewish commentators speak about values or ethics, “virtually without exception, even when they have claimed to be speaking of values or ethics, their discourse shows that they have really meant Jewish law (Halacha).” Kraemer constructs an ethical discourse on the topic of abortion that engages traditional rabbinic texts but that does not reflect a standard halachic approach to abortion. Kraemer claims that the “halachic approach to abortion leads to a dead end.” but that this approach can evaluate questions such as “how Jewish traditions view the life or potential life of a fetus, the relationship of the fetus to the mother (and father), and the prerogatives of a mother (and father) with respect to the fetus.” Kraemer notes that, “From the ethicist’s perspective, the Talmud’s inconclusiveness in this matter is its most notable feature.” Therefore, he concludes that this lack of clarity “Is the most important characteristic of these various rabbinic discussion. This indecision offers us proper advice; we should hear it as a caution.”

Globalization

Donna Berman posits a form of feminist ethics, what she calls nashiut ethics, in which the goal is “not to redeem oppressive texts, but to redeem Jewish women – and men – from oppressive texts.” Berman identifies the Jewish value of tikkun olam as an “essential ingredient” of faith because it serves to counteract the abuse of mistreatment of women. Berman suggests the topic of globalization as an area on which nashiut ethics can comment because “it represents well the complex web of race, gender and class issues which are … the defining ingredients of early twenty-first century moral dilemmas.” Berman then suggests that nashiut ethics would rebel against the forces of greed and exploitation and support the minority and oppressed workers in their struggle for recognition.

Jewish Wedding Ceremony

Rachel Adler points out that the Jewish rituals surrounding marriage stem from biblical and talmudic conceptions of women as property and therefore reflect talmudic rites of property transfer. Adler writes, “The legal definition, derived from talmudic property law, anachronistically categorizes women as a special kind of chattel over which the husband has acquired rights.” Because of the patriarchal and unethical roots of this ceremony, Adler proposes a solution that will “treat both parties consistently as persons rather than as property.” [Rachel Adler. 1998. Engendering Judaism: An Inclusive Theology and Ethics. Beacon Press: Boston, MA p.169] Adler outlines a new wedding ceremony based on the sheva brachot (the celebratory blessings bestowed upon a newly married couple) that is compatible with an egalitarian society. Adler refers to this new ceremony as B’rit Ahuvim (a covenant of lovers).