Front Matter Source: AJS Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Nov., 2004) Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131520 . Accessed: 20/07/2011 02:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
VOLUME28, NUMBER 2
NOVEMBER,2004
REV
IE
W
AJS THE
JOURNAL
OF
THE
ASSOCIATION
FOR
JEWISH
STUDIES
AJS Review ASSOCIATION
FOR JEWISH
STUDIES
NEW YORK, NEW YORK EDITORS Hillel J. Kieval, WashingtonUniversityin St. Louis MartinS. Jaffee, Universityof Washington,Seattle EDITORIAL BOARD
Michael Alexander,Universityof Oklahoma YaakovElman,YeshivaUniversity TalyaFishman,Universityof Pennsylvania Susan Niditch, AmherstCollege Derek Penslar,Universityof Toronto ChavaWeissler,Lehigh University EDITOR BOOKREVIEW JeffreyRubenstein,New YorkUniversity MANAGING EDITOR
SarahMassey The AJS Review (ISSN 0364-0094) is publishedtwice annually by the Association for Jewish Studies Manuscriptsfor considerationshould be sent to AJS Review c/o Prof. Hillel J. Kieval, WashingtonUniversityin St. Louis, Busch Hall 15, Box 1121, One BrookingsDrive, St. Louis, MO. 63130. Books for review shouldbe sent to Prof. JeffreyRubenstein,New YorkUniversity,53 WashingtonSquareSouth, Room 100, New York,NY 10012. ? 2004 by the Association for Jewish Studies Publishing, Subscription, andAdvertising Offices: CambridgeUniversityPress, 40 West 20th Street,New York,NY 10011, U.S.A.; or CambridgeUniversityPress, The Edinburgh Building, ShaftesburyRoad,CambridgeCB2 2RU, England. Annual subscriptionrates for Volume 29, 2005: Institutionsprint and online ?75/$119; institutions online only ?63/$99; institutions print only ?68/$105; single part ?36/$56, payablein advanceor on receipt of invoice; institutionalcheck or creditcard only. Special ratesexist for membersof the Association for Jewish Studies;membershipinformationcan be found at http://www.brandeis.edu/ajs. AJSReviewand all otherCambridgeJournalscan be found at http://journals.cambridge.org/ Photocopying Information (for users in the U.S.A.): The Item-Fee Code for this publication (0364-0094/04 $12.00) indicates that copying for internal or personal use beyond thatpermittedby Sec. 107 or 108 of the U.S. CopyrightLaw is authorizedfor users duly registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) TransactionalReporting Service, providedthat the appropriateremittanceof $12.00 per article is paid directlyto: CCC, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers,MA 01923. U.S.A. Specific writtenpermissionmust be obtained for all other copying; contact the nearest CambridgeUniversity Press office. Postmaster:Send address changes in the U.S.A., Canada, and Mexico to: AJSReview, JournalsDept., CambridgeUniversityPress, 100 BrookHill Drive,WestNyack, NY 109942113, U.S.A. Sendaddresschangeselsewhereto:AJSReview,JournalsDept.,CambridgeUniversityPress,The EdinburghBuilding,ShaftesburyRoad,CambridgeCB2 2RU,England.
AJS
Review
THE JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES
NOVEMBER2004
VOLUME28, NUMBER2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Hillel J. Kieval and Martin S. Jaffee A Word from the Editors....................
...........................................
............................215
ARTICLES
Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern The Masterof an Evil Name: Hillel BaCalShem and His Sefer ha-heshek .................217 Rachel Feldhay Brenner The Artist as a Motherand the Birth of TerribleBeauty in the Post-HolocaustWorld: RuthAlmog's TheInnerLake........................................249 William Kolbrener "Chiseledfrom all Sides":Hermeneuticsand Dispute in the RabbinicTradition..........273 Natan Margalit PriestlyMen and InvisibleWomen:Male Appropriationof the Feminineand the Exemptionof Womenfrom PositiveTime-BoundCommandments.............................297 Sharon Faye Koren KabbalisticPhysiology: Isaac the Blind, Nahmanides,and Moses de Leon on .................317 Menstruation ........................................ ......................................... REVIEW ESSAY
James T. Robinson Three Recent Books on IsaacAbarbanel/Abravanel (1437-1508/9) ...........................341 BOOKREVIEWS BIBLICAL STUDIES
Robert T. Anderson and Terry Giles. TheKeepers:An Introductionto the History and Cultureof the Samaritans REINHARD PLUMMER ...................................................
......................
351
RABBINIC PERIOD
Judith R. Baskin. MidrashicWomen:Formationsof the Femininein RabbinicLiterature GARYG. PORTON ..............................................................352 Michael L. Satlow. Jewish Marriage in Antiquity TALILAN....................................................... Alexander Samely. TheRabbinicInterpretationof Scripturein Mishnah MICHAEL CHERNICK .............................................356
....354
MEDIEVAL
Josef W. Meri. The Cult of SaintsAmongMuslimsand Jews in MedievalSyria HARVEYE. GOLDBERG......................................
.................360
..............
James Arthur Diamond. Maimonidesand the Hermeneuticsof Concealment: Deciphering Scriptureand Midrashin The Guide of the Perplexed Menachem Lorberbaum. Politics and the Limitsof Law: Secularizingthe Political in MedievalJewish Thought ALFREDIVRY........................ ..... .................................. ................ ....... 361 Jose Luis Lacave. MedievalKetubotfrom Sefarad YOSEF RIVLIN ...................................
..... .............................364
Lawrence Fine. Physician of the Soul, Healer of the Cosmos:Isaac Luria and His KabbalisticFellowship SH AUL MAGID
367
............................................................................................................
Susan L. Einbinder. BeautifulDeath: Jewish Poetryand Martyrdomin Medieval France SHMUEL SHEPKARU..............................
.................
................
371
MODERN
David Rechter. TheJews of Viennaand the First WorldWar Marsha L. Rozenblit. ReconstructingNational Identity:TheJews of HabsburgAustria During WorldWarI HARRIETPASSFRIEDENREICH .. ..................... 373 .......................................
Yosef Salmon. Religion and Zionism:First Encounters JODYMYERS .................................................................................376
Ruth Gay. SafeAmong The Germans:LiberatedJews After WorldWarTwo Zeev Mankowitz. Life Between Memoryand Hope: TheSurvivorsof the Holocaust in Occupied Germany G. DANIELCOHEN.................................................................
....................378
Alexander B. Rossino. Hitler StrikesPoland: Blitzkrieg,Ideology, andAtrocity DAVIDENGEL ..................................
...........
.....
...............
.....................381
Haim Hazan. SimulatedDreams: Israeli Youthand VirtualZionism 383
TAMAR RAPOPORT.....................................................
Esther Schely-Newman. Our Lives are but Stories: Narrativesof Tunisian-Israeli Women SUSAN SERED ............................................................
.................
Lois C. Dubin. ThePort Jews of HabsburgTrieste: AbsolutistPolitics and EnlightenmentCulture JAYR. BERKOVITZ .................... ..................................................................................
386
387
Michael L. Morgan. BeyondAuschwitz:Post-HolocaustJewish Thoughtin America MARTINKAVKA ................................................................
.....................391
Aaron L. Mackler. Introductionto Jewish and CatholicBioethics: A Comparative Analysis Louis E. NEWMAN.....................................
..............
....................394
Burke O. Long. Imaginingthe Holy Land:Maps, Models, and Fantasy Travels Rehav Rubin ...................................................395 Ruth Katz. "TheLachmannProblem":An Unsung Chapterin Comparative Musicology David M. Schiller. Bloch, Schoenberg& Bernstein:AssimilatingJewish Music Marsha Bryan Edelman. DiscoveringJewish Music M. COHEN................................................. JUDAH ................
398
Itzik N. Gottesman. Defining the YiddishNation: TheJewish Folkloristsof Poland KENFRIEDEN .......................................................................403 Leslie Stein. TheHope Fulfilled: TheRise of ModernIsrael ERANKAPLAN .........................405 ......................... ..... Shimon Redlich. TogetherandApart in Brzezany:Poles, Jews, and Ukrainians, 1919-1945. Rosa Lehman. SymbiosisandAmbivalence:Poles and Jews in a Small Galician Town RACHEL MANEKIN..................................... ................... ................ Zafrira Lidovsky Cohen. Loosen the Fettersof thy Tongue,Woman:ThePoetry and Poetics ofYona Wallach ALICIA OSTRIKER ........................................... ...................410 HEBREW ARTICLE
mInn-
;pnD
:bnf
nm
1- 3
t-woona
i
:-latvev
alpix
jvr-nnn
;5,ftr2
ninn-a
406
A Word from the Editors Author(s): Hillel J. Kieval and Martin S. Jaffee Source: AJS Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Nov., 2004), p. 215 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131521 . Accessed: 20/07/2011 02:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 28:2 (2004), 215-216
A WORD FROM THE EDITORS Withthis issue, we launchourjoint editorshipof the AJS Review.It is therefore an appropriatemomentto sharewith our readersour hopes and expectations for the intellectualdirectionof thejournal.Some of what follows has alreadybeen articulatedin a statement published in the AJS Perspectives (Spring/Summer, 2003) shortly after we assumed our tasks. We feel it bears repeatinghere for the sake of those who may not have seen the originalarticle. Webelieve thatwe have inheriteda healthyand importantjournalin the field of Jewish Studies, which, like the AJS itself, has made every effort to reflect the diversity of scholarshippracticedamong its members.We hope that the journal will continue to attractcontributionsfrom the various disciplinaryperspectives broughtto bearin the Academyon the materialsof Jewishhistory and culture.We look forward,moreover,to receiving submissions from colleagues with interests in Jewish Studies thatmight not have been representedbefore, as well as from individuals beyond the field of Jewish Studies who might now find in ourjournal food for thoughtwith regardto their own areasof study. Given the above-mentionedgoals, we recognize that we have staked out a specifically interdisciplinaryframeworkas the guiding principleof thejournal. In has long been this, of course, there is nothing revolutionary."Interdisciplinarity" a buzzwordof the Academy. So let us try here to clarify what interdisciplinarity might mean in the pages of the AJS Review. First, we encourage submissions in traditionalfields of Jewish inquirythat employ and contributeto a varietyof disciplinaryparadigmswithin the humanitiesand social sciences. Thus, for example, sociologists should feel free to be sociologists ratherthan anthropologists;but we will look for sociological work that is framed in such a way as to invite inquiry from other disciplinaryperspectives.We will also, however,value explicit efforts to integratea varietyof disciplines into a single project.Second,we are interested in researchthatexpandsthe frameworkof Jewish Studiesinto new areas,or broadens the awarenessof datarelevantto the study of the Jewish experiencein its various contexts and social settings. In view of our interdisciplinaryconcerns, we also hope to be attentiveto emerging debates and discussions that are currentlyknown to specialists, but which deserve broaderattentionbecause of their implications for other areas of Jewish Studies scholarship.Accordingly,we hope from time to time to devote entire issues of the journal to introducingkey argumentsand lines of researchthat are changingthe shape of their fields and have the potentialto reshapediscourses in other fields as well. In conclusion, we look forwardto this opportunityto stimulate and help shape one of the truly distinguishedacademictraditionsof the modernUniversity-the study of Jewish civilization in all of its historical,geographical,and culturalbreadth. HJK and MSJ 215
The Master of an Evil Name: Hillel Ba'al Shem and His "Sefer ḥa-heshek" Author(s): Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern Source: AJS Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Nov., 2004), pp. 217-248 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131522 . Accessed: 20/07/2011 02:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 28:2 (2004), 217-248
THE MASTER OFAN EVIL NAME: HILLEL BACALSHEMAND HIS SEFER HA-IHESHEK
by Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern
I. INTRODUCTION:THE MANUSCRIPT
Back in 1993, as senior librarianat the VernadskyLibraryin Kiev, Ukraine, in chargeof cataloguinga newly uncoveredJudaicacollection, I came acrossan enigmatic manuscriptentitledSefer ha-heshek.It did not matchthe bulk of the Judaica holdings.' Nor did it fit in Abraham Harkavy'scollection of medieval manuscripts.2It was too Ashkenazic for AbrahamFirkovich'sKaraitepapers,3and too
I am gratefulto ArthurGreen and JonathanSarna,who have readpreviousdraftsof this paper and generouslysharedwith me theircriticism.I am especially gratefulto Ze'ev Gries and Moshe Rosman, whose invaluablecommentshelped me to improvethe final draft. 1. On the fascinatingfate and composition of this collection, see ZacharyBaker,"Historyof the Jewish Collections at the VernadskyLibraryin Kiev,"Shofar 10 no. 4 (1992): 31-48; Binyamin Lukin, "Archiveof the Historicaland EthnographicSociety. History and PresentCondition,"Jews in Eastern Europe, 1 no. 20 (Jerusalem, 1993): 45-61; YohananPetrovsky,"Zapisnyeknigi evreiskikh obshchestv na Ukraine. Iz arkhivaA. Ia. Garkavi,"Novyi Krug 2 (Kiev, 1992): 274-288; Nikolai Senchenko and Irina Sergeeva, "Jewish Scholarly Institutionsand LibraryCollections in Kiev after 1917: A Brief HistoricalSketch,"SovietJewishAffairs2 (1991): 45-50; Mykola Senchenkoand Iryna Serheeva,"Zistorii formuvanniakolektsiievreiskoiiliteraturyTsentral'noiNaukovoiBibliotekyim. Vernads'kohoAkademiiNaukURSR,"Svit. ChasopysNarodnohoRukhuUkrainy2-3 (1991): 64-67. The only in-depthdescriptionof the collection, togetherwith a preliminarylist of some two hundred manuscripts,is given in Dov Walfish, "'Osef ha-sefarimve-kitvei ha-yad be-sifriyat vernadskybekiev,"Mada'ei ha-yahadut34 (1994): 68-86. 2. AbrahamHarkavy(Abram lakovlevich Garkavi, 1835-1919), the founder of Russian Judaica and Hebraica,was in chargeof the Departmentof OrientalManuscriptsat the St. PetersburgImperialLibrary,responsiblefor cataloguingandacquisitions.A followerof Wissenschaftdes Judentums, Harkavyoverlookedkabbalisticworks,concentratingchiefly on Spanish-Jewishliteratureof the Golden Age. On Harkavy'smanuscriptcollection, see YohananPetrovsky,"The Lost Chapterof Russian Judaica:AbrahamHarkavy'sMSS in The VernadskyLibrarycollection,"Jews and Slavs 5 (Jerusalem: HebrewUniversity,1996), 157-168. 3. AbrahamFirkovich(1786-1874), a Karaitecommunalleader,traveler,sui generis historian of Karaismand authorof the most well-knownninteenth-centurymanuscriptforgeries,amasseda significant collection of Genizah fragmentsand Karaitemanuscripts,which he sold shortly before his deathto the St. PetersburgImperialLibrary.See V L. Vikhnovich,KaraimAvraamFirkovich:evreiskie rukopisi,istoriia,puteshestviia (St. Petersburg:"Peterburgskoevostokovedenie,"1997).
217
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern early for most of S. Ansky's nineteenth-centuryfolkloric materials.4The manuscripthad a wooden cover, separatefrom the text, with a copper monogramSefer ha-heshekin Hebrew (hereafter-SH). SH's title appearsrandomlyas a running head; the authoroccasionally refers to the title of the manuscript.5Primarilybecause of its size-411 folios, 23 of them blank, some 760 filled pages altogether-and due to its magical contents, I discarded any attempts to identify the manuscriptas a version of the well-known Sefer ha-heshek,a twenty-or-so-page kabbalistic treatise on the names of the archangel Metatronattributedto Isaac Luria.6Also, since the manuscriptis not a commentaryon the book of Isaiah or Proverbs,it could neitherbe Solomon Duran'snor Solomon ha-Levi'sHeshekshelomoh.7 The manuscriptis stronglyreminiscentof a lost Yiddish book on practical Kabbalahand folk medicine entitled Sefer heshek, apparentlywritten at the beginning of the eighteenth centuryby the doctor Wolf Binyamin ben Zevi Hirsch from Posen, who studiedmedicineat the Universityof Frankfurtam Oderandpurportedlypublishedhis composition in 1727 in Hanau.8Like the Hanaubook, the newly discoveredSH drewheavily frompopularKabbalahand folk medicine.Yet, unlike the Hanauone, it was Hebrew,notYiddish;it claimed a differentauthorship (not Wolf Binyamin);it was composed in East Europeand not in Germany;and it seemed much more complex than its Hanau prototype.In addition,nobody has seen the Hanaubook since the early eighteenthcentury,9if indeed it ever existed as a book. Shatzky,who himself never saw the HanauSH, which is not listed eitherin the Friedberg,Benjacob,orVinogradcatalogues,reconstructedits contents throughobliquereferencesto its sourcesmentionedin Steinschneider,who did not see the book either.Thoughit is possible thatthe newly discoveredSH in terms of its title and genre is somehow relatedto the lost Yiddishmedical tractate,the com4. SemionAnsky (ShloymeZanvlRapoport,1863-1920), a Russian-JewishandYiddishwriter, populist,Kulturtreger,and ethnographer,amassed severalhundredJudaicamanuscriptsduringhis expeditionto the Pale of Jewish Settlementin Russia between 1911 and 1914. OnAnsky'sexpeditionand the materialshe collected, see V Lukin,"Otnarodnichestvak narodu(S. A. Ansky-etnografvostochnoevropeiskogo evreistva),"in Trudypo iudaike: istoriia i etnografiia 3, ed. Dmitrii Eliashevich (St. Petersburg:Peterburgskiievreiskii universitet, 1993), 125-161; Aleksandr Kantsedikas and Irina Sergeeva,Albomkhudozhestvennoistariny SemionaAn-skogo(Moscow and Jerusalem:Mosty kul'tury-Gesharim,2001); Rivka Gonen, ed., Ba-hazarahla-'ayarah.Ansky ve-ha-mishlahatha-etnografit ha-yehudit 1912-1914 (Jerusalem: Museon Israel, 1994); Avram Rekhtman, Yidisheetnografie un folklor: zikhroynesvegn der etnografisherekspeditsie,angefirtfun Sh. Ansky(Buenos-Aires:Yidishe wisnshaftlekherinstitut, 1958). See also the forthcomingcollection of articles Between TwoWorlds: Anskyand Russian-JewishCulture,ed. GabriellaSafranand Steven Zipperstein(Stanford:Stanford UniversityPress, 2005). 5. VernadskyNational Libraryof Ukraine,OrientaliaDepartment,JudaicaManuscriptcollection, Sefer ha-heshek,[OR. 178], f. 14b, 18b-19a, 28b-29a. 6. 1 used the Lemberg reprint(1865) of the first Yizhak Meir Epshtein edition (Jerusalem, 1865). Because of the size of the manuscriptI also ruledout the possibilityof identifyingSH as Yohanan Aliman'sSefer sha'ar ha-heshek(Livorno, 1690). 7. Firstpublicationcorrespondingly-Venice, 1588, and Saloniki, 1600. 8. Jacob Shatzky,"Seferheshek:a farfalnrefu'oh-bukhin yiddish fun 18tnyorhundertun zayn mekhaber,"YIVOBleter 4 (1932): 223-235. 9. Ibid., 223.
218
The Masterof an Evil Name parisonbetween an unknownmanuscriptand an unseen book will hardlybe helpful. This SH is an in quarto manuscriptwrittenon a plain paperwithout watermarks.It has a leatherspine and no back cover.The worn, greasy edges of the paper signify thatthe manuscripthad been not only in use, but in intensive use. The author'sconsistentyet awkwardearly-eighteenth-century Ashkenazicsemicursive different from the rabbinic script, script,' along with his occasioncontemporary al Hebrewmisspellings, is telling. " Apparently,he was not a learnedrabbiandnot a rabbinicalscholar (talmid hakham), although he had access to an amazingly broadgamutof books both knownand unknownto us. The name of the authorHillel Ba'al Shem-appears throughoutthe manuscript.12The dates scatteredin the text did not go beyond 1739 or 1740. Accordingto the qualityof the paper,the ink, and the script,SH was writtenmost likely ca. 1740-1741, since at thattime a regularconsumerpurchasedpaperin orderto use it, not stock it, and the last date mentioned in SH is 1739/1740. The manuscriptis complete. It opens with the words "Andthese are 32 rules against 32 paths of wisdom""3and ends with the words "these are the words of Hillel."14Hillel wrote mostly in Hebrew,rarelyin Yiddish, inserting clumsy Slavic (Polish and Ukrainian)incantations,which he transliteratedin Hebrewcharacters.In addition,Hillel illuminatedhis manuscript with some ninety drawingsof kabbalisticamulets and anthropomorphicand traditionalJewishsymbols, as well as diagrams,tables,and series of magical signs.'5 Some of them were copies from contemporarybooks on practicalKabbalahalreadypublished,whereasotherswere unique.16 10. Forthe mid-eighteenth-centurycalligraphy,see the facsimile reproductionfrom the manuscriptwrittenby one of the colleagues of the Besht: Dov Baermi-Mezrich,Magid devaravle-yaakov, ed. AvrahamYizhak Kahn (Jerusalem:Yeshivattoldot aharon, 1971), 6 (unpaginated).See also later eighteenth-centurycalligraphyin the YehoshuaMondshinefaximile edition of the Habadcopy of "In Praise of the Besht"by Dov Baer ben Samuelof Linits:Shivheiha-besht:faksimil mi-ktavha-yad hayehidi ha-noda' lanu ve-shinuyeinushavleumat nusah ha-defus: be-zerufve-nispahim(Jerusalem:Y. Mondshine,1982). Cf. handwrittenlate-eighteenth-centurydocumentsandlettersby LevyYizhakfrom Berdichev in Kedushatlevy ha-shalem (Jerusalem:Zeev Derbarimdiker,1978), 576, 578, 580 (unpaginated);the handwrittencommentaryon the Zohar (parashatShelah) by Vilna Gaon, in Yeshayahu Vinograd,'Ozarsifrei hagr "a (Jerusalem:KerenEliyahu,2003), 357. 11. AlthoughSH was writtenby one and the same person, it containeda numberof pages by a differenthand.Apparently,the authorcommissioned them to a professionalTorahscroll scribe; see f. 239b-251a. 12. SH, f. lb, 162b, 206a, 216b, 329a, 355b, 389a. 13. SH, f. lb. Hillel is using a popularkabbalisticmetaphorof 32 paths of wisdom that dates back to Sefer Yezirah1:1, Zohar, "Terumah,"106; Pardes rimonim,sha'ar 12: 2. It was also known to the kabbalistsof hug ha- iyun, see MarkVerman,TheBooks of Contemplation:MedievalJewish Mystical Sources (Albany: State Universityof New YorkPress, 1992), 45 n. 43, 52, 71 n. 103, 75 n. 122, 152. 14. Apparentlya concluding talmudiccliche [ad kan divrei Hillel]. SH, f. 389a. 15. See, for example,SH, f. 17b, 18a,34b, 35a, 37b-38a, 47b, 85b, 89a, 96a, 112a- 113b, 156b, 204b-205b. The most amazingare the anthropomorphicamuletsthat establishthe links between kabbalistic abbreviationsand members of the humanbody; see f. 215b and 217b. The amulets and diagrams that appearin SH as well as the linguistic strategiesof Hillel will be discussed elsewhere. 16. Forthe comprehensivelist of the Judaicamuletsthat includes the list of specific kabbalis-
219
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern Moshe Rosman, who saw SH (and encouragedme to write this essay) has dubbedit "themost extensiveexpositionof ba'al shem techniquesand experiences that I know of."17It is common knowledge that ba'al shem stands for "masterof the Names of God," or, as Gershon Hundert suggested, "Manipulatorsof the Name,"18 and signifies a Jewish magicianor healer,engaged in practicalKabbalah and able to use his mystical knowledge and theurgicalpowers to produceprotecting amulets that neutralize evil and restore psychological and social order among the healer'sclientele.19The term became particularlypopularafter Israel ben Eliezer (ca. 1700-1760) adoptedthe name of Ba'al Shem Tov (the Besht), the Master of a Good Name, and eventuallycame to be seen as the founderof modem Hasidism.A numberof books illustratingpracticesof ba'alei shem were published before and afterSH was written,yet SH exceeds all of them in terms of the 20 historical,social, cultural,andtheologicaldatait contains. Moreastonishingwas tic abbreviations,see Eli Davis and David Frenkel, Ha-kameya' ha-'ivri (Jerusalem: Makhon lemada'ei ha-yahadut,1995). 17. Moshe Rosman, Founderof Hasidism:A Questfor Historical Bacal Shem Tov(Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1996), 217-218 n. 19. 18. GershonDavid Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuaniain the EighteenthCentury:A Genealogy of Modernity(Berkeley and Los Angeles: Universityof CaliforniaPress, 2004), 142. 19. Forthe analysisof intellectualandtheological aspectsof ba'alei shem, see ImmanuelEtkes, "Magiyahu-vaCaleishem be-yamav shel ha-besht,"in Bacal ha-shem: ha-besht-magiyah, mistikah, hanhagah (Jerusalem:MerkazZalman Shazar,2000), 15-53; idem, "Mekomamshel ha-magiyahuva alei ha-shem ba-hevrahha-ashkenazitbe-mifneh ha-me'ot ha-yud-zayin-ha-yud-het," Zion 60 (1995): 69-104. Forthe analysis of the genre of the books ascribedto variousba'alei shem, see Hagit Matras,"Sifrei segulot u-refu'ot be-civrit:tekhanimu-mekorotal pi ha-sefarimha-rishonimasher yazu la-'orbe-'eropahbe-reshitha-me'ahha-18" (Ph.D. diss., HebrewUniversityof Jerusalem,1997); GedalyahNigal focused on the folkloric aspect of the writings by ba'alei shem in his Magic, Mysticism, and Hasidism (Northvale,NJ and London:J. Aronson, 1994); Michal Oron analyzedthe sabbatean context of one of the most prominent ba'alei shem in her "Dr. Samuel Falk and the Eibeschuetz-EmdenControversy,"in Mysticism,Magic and Kabbalahin AshkenaziJudaism:International Symposiumheld in FrankfurtA.M. 1991, ed. Karl Grrzingerand Joseph Dan (Berlin and New York:Walterde Gruyter,1995), 242-256. Oronalso publishedimportantdocumentson and of the BaSalShem fromLondon.These include letters,descriptionof theirbooks, ethical wills, and diaries. See Michal Oron,Mi- "bacalshed" le- "ba'alshem: "shmuelfalk, "ha-ba'alshem mi-london"(Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 2002). Ze'ev Gries contextualizedpopularKabbalahbooks writtenby East European ba'alei shem integratingthem into the genre of regimenvitae (conduct)literaturethatregulateseveryday behavioralpatterns,prescribesattitudesand remedies, and establishes links betweenthe tradition and popularcustoms. Gries also connectedthe popularizationof practicalKabbalahwith the rise of interest in hermeneuticstudies and medicine triggeredby the Florentinerenaissanceneoplatonicacademy. See Ze'ev Gries, Sifrutha-hanhagot:toldotehau-mekomahbe-hayei hasidei r.yisra el ba'al shem tov (Jerusalem:Mosad Bialik, 1990). For the most convincing socioculturaltypology of the ba'alei shem in the context of social anthropology,see Rosman,FounderofHasidism, 13-19. Forthe recent standardsummaryof the ba'alei shem and the books they produced,see Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuania, 142-153. Cf.: EncyclopediaJudaica (Jerusalem: Encyclopedia Judaica, 1972), s.v. "Bacalei shem"; JoshuaTrachtenberg,Jewish Magic and Superstition:A Study in Folk Religion (ClevelandPhiladelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety, 1939). 20. Cf.: Razi'el ha-mal 'akh (Amsterdam,1701), Shem tov katan (Sulzbach, 1706), Sefer kar1709), MifWalot'elokim (Z6tkiew, 1710, 1724 and 1725), Toldot'adam (Z6lkiew, nayim (SZ6kiew, 1720), Keren'or (Z6lkiew, 1721), Zevahpesah (Z6tkiew,1722), Divrei hakhamim(Z6tkiew,1725). For the pioneering analysis of the genre of practical Kabbalahbooks, see Hagit Matras,"Sifrei segulot
220
The Master of an Evil Name thatHillel Ba'al Shem, unlike otherba'alei shem knownto date, coincided in time and space with the Besht: they traveledthroughcontiguousareas(Hillel in Volhynia and the Besht in Podol), and sometimes almostthe same areas(Rovno district in Podol), and did so almost at the same time. Thus, the portrayalof Hillel Ba'al Shem against the backdropof early-eighteenth-centuryEast Europeanitinerant healers, the comparisonand the differentiationbetween the kabbalisticpractices of Hillel Ba'al Shem and those of the Ba'al Shem Tov,and a discussion of the relationsbetweenHillel andhis own clientele arein order.Methodologically,this paper representsa slow readingof this eighteenth-centuryKabbalahmanuscriptfrom the vantagepoint of the history of culturewith special emphasison the behavioral patternsof a ba'al shem vis-a-vis a Jewish community.This paper echoes the recent appeals to "reconsiderthe meaning of the ba'al shem traditionin the developmentof early Hasidism"21and to reassess such pivotal facets of the premodern East Europeanculturalhistory as its popularkabbalisticsubculture.22 II. HILLEL'S CURRICULUM VITAE SH, our only source on Hillel, is a complex document.In it, first and foremost, Hillel is tryingto demonstratehis expertisein practicalKabbalah.He spends hundredsof pages discussing how to use holy names (shemot ha-kedushah)and impurenames (shemot ha-tum'ah)in orderto stop epidemics (14a, 20a); treat a sick child (23b); preventepilepsy, dizziness, craziness, headache, and night fear (24a-b, 159b, 279b); treat fever, wounds, pollution, diarrhea,insomnia and bad smell from the mouth (117a, 145b, 254a, 255b, 260a-b, 295a,); expel evil forces from the house (31b, 296b-297b); protecta feeding (32a-b, 267a); cure a barren woman(166a, 178a-b), regulatemenstruation(168b- 169a,262b-264b) andheartbeating (274b-275a, 278a); preventevil forces from harminga newly born child (270a);keep healthydietarylaws (107b); stop girls' hairfromgrowing(145b); protect an individual and his habitatfrom an evil eye (156b, 293b, 385b), thieves (174a-b), fire (188b), bandits(293b), Lilith (329b); identify a thief throughtalking to a homunculusin a bottle (163a-164a); and other things indispensablein u-refuotbe-civrit"(Ph.D.diss.,HebrewUniversity,Jerusalem,1997) andHavivaPedaya,"Le-hitpathuto shel ha-degemha-hevrati-dati-kalkali ba-hasidut:ha-pidyon,ha-havurah,veha-caliyahle-regel,"in Dat ve-kalkalah:yahasei gomlin, ed. MenahemBen-Sasson (Jerusalem:ZalmanShazar,1995), 311- 373. Most recentdiscoveriescorroboratethe fact thatSH occupies a unique place among seventeenth-and eighteenth-centuryEast Europeanwritings on practicalKabbalah.Thus, for instance, in 1996, Moshe Rosenfeld from Jerusalem(the authorof a numberof book catalogueson early Hebrewprint)briefly introduced me to an untitled manuscript apparentlywritten by the ba'al shem from Tomashpol (Ukraine).The size of the manuscriptdid not exceed 80 pages. Its content to some extent resembled the content of SH. However,unlike the often used SH, the clean white paperand the overall physical conditionof that manuscript(especially edges and cornersof the pages), testified to its rareuse by the owner or its readers.In addition,the amountof practicalKabbalahinformationincludedin the manuscriptof the ba'al shem fromTomashpolfalls short in comparisonwith SH. 21. KarlGrrzinger,"TsadikandBa'al Shem in EastEuropeanHasidism,"Polin 15 (2002): 162. 22. Moshe Rosman, "A Prolegomenonto the Study of Jewish CulturalHistory,"JSIJ (Jewish Studies, an InternetJournal) [Bar-IlanUniversity] 1 (2002): 126. See http://www.biu.ac.il/JS/JSIJ/ 1-2002/Rosman.pdf (accessed 11/7/04).
221
Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern practicallife. Also, Hillel shows his profoundknowledgeof chiromancyandmetoposcopy (70b-73a, 200b-201a); exorcism (192b, 197a-198b); witchcraft(194a197b);originsof evil (302b-3 10a);levitation(312a); andhoroscopy(247b-251 a). Provinghe is a pious and observantJew,Hillel demonstrateshis knowledgeof major kabbalisticconcepts, which he consistentlytries to connect to variousJewish practices such as daily prayer(168b), confessional prayer(169b), healing prayer (347b-348a), bed-time prayer(369b-370a), philanthropy(150a), family purity (174a-b), observing Shabbatlaws (305a), celebratingsecondaryholidays such as Hanukah(247b-250a), giving oaths (314b) and Torahstudy (181a, 184b, 186a187b). Particularlysignificant is that in SH Hillel provides-though not abundantly and not consistently-the details of his life, his career and its ups and downs, his modusoperandi,his connectionsto the worldof rabbisand doctors,his attitudesto colleagues, his feedback to the popularizationof Kabbalahand kabbalistic bookprint,his personalmodus vivendi, and the attitudeof his contemporariestowardhim. What follows is a tentativereconstructionof Hillel's life based on data scatteredthroughoutthe manuscript. Slavic wordsin his lexicon23as well as Yiddishpermeatedwith Slavicisms24 would suggest thatperhapsthe authorof SH was bornin Easternor CentralPoland. Since he startedto be active as a practicalkabbalistand a healeraroundthe 1730s, I assume he was either five to ten years older or youngerthan the Besht, born ca. 1700, or was of his age and was bornmost likely between 1690 and 1705. SH contains no referenceto his birthplaceor to the name of his father.Given Hillel's attemptto tell his own life story and demonstratehis masteryof kabbalisticarts,his reticencein regardto his origins is noteworthy.PerhapsHillel was tryingto, as Oscar Wilde put it, "revealthe artand conceal the artist."Apparently,Hillel had good reasons to do this. Perhapsat the end of the 1720s and in the early 1730s, when he began his careeras a professionalhealer,magician, and Kabbalist,Hillel called himself the Ba'al Shem,the Masterof Name (I doubthe neededthe name,indicativeof his profession, before that time). Apparentlyhe came from a lower-middle-classPolishJewish family unable to provide him with full-time rabbinic education. Unlike the famous Jewish doctor and kabbalistTobiasha-Cohen(ca. 1652-1729)25 and the scions of prominentPolish Jewish families,26Hillel did not study medicine at 23. He refersto Slavic, mostly to Ukrainianand Polish, to describeherbs(polnytablan,7a; majevy borsch, 9a; krapiva, 147a; gorchitsa, 182a), birds or reptiles (voroni, 22b; piavke, 147b; zozuli, 204a). He also uses lengthy Polish-Ukrainianincantationstranscribedin Hebrew letters, see 362a364b. See, for instance,the following incantationin Polish (I retainHebrew spelling): Zive boze, pomozni,pomohi ten ohon ohniski i otruski,od silaiu, od glovi, ochi i od beloho kosti, od chervonikrev (Living God, [my Helper],help [to take out] that poisoning fire of fires, out of [his/her] strength,out of [his/her] head, out of [his/her] eyes and white bones, 368a-369a). 24. See his Yiddishamuletsand "dialogues"with the dybbuks,166a-168b, 139b-241a, 349a-b. 25. See AbrahamLevinson, Tuvyahha-rofe've-sifro 'macasehtuvyah'(Berlin: Rimon, 1924). 26. See "LekarzeZydowscy w dawnej Rzeczypospolitej,"in Zydzi w Polsce odrodzonej:dziatalnoki spoleczna,gospodarscza,odwiatowai kulturalna,ed. IgnaciusSchiperet al., 2 vols. (Warsaw: "Zydziw Polsce odrodzonej,"1932-33), 2:289-303.
222
The Masterof an Evil Name the University of Padua or in one of the German universities.Yet, avid for the knowledge of medicine, he apprenticed with various professional doctors in Poland.Among his teachersHillel refersonce to Dr. Simhah,27twice to the great sage and doctorRabbiYadakovZilon [Zahalon],28and more than a dozen times to Isaac Fortis,"the great Rabbiand a great sage in all the countriesof Poland."29 AbrahamIsaac Fortis (dubbed also Hazak), a professional doctor from an Italianand Polish family of doctorsand rabbis,probablystudiedat the University of Mantua.30He also spent some time learningKabbalahunderthe famousMoshe Zakut(1620-1697).31 He returnedto Polandin the last decade of the seventeenth century,settled first in Lw6w and later in Rzesz6w, and establishedhimself as a court doctor to two of the five wealthiest Polish noble families, Lubomirskiand Potocki. Between 1726 and 1730 he held a position of the highest prestige when electedparnas at the Councilof the FourLands.32Hillel claimed he had learntunder Fortis,consulted his books and manuscripts,and copied Fortis'samulets and remedies.33He learnedfromFortisrules of hygiene, bothpersonalandpublic,particularlyimportantin the context of the late 1730s epidemic of cholera in Podo27. SimhahMenahemben YohananBarukhde Yona(knownas Emanuelde Jona, d. 1702)-a court doctor of the king Jan III Sobieski. Between 1664 and 1668, he studiedmedicine at the University of Padua,lived in Z61kiewand Lw6w, and helped to solve communaldisputes.He was accused of allegedly poisoning Jan III, but was found not guilty. His name, as well as remedies and amulets ascribed to him, are mentioned in a numberof practicalKabbalahbooks, including Ma'aseh tuvyah, Toldot'adam,Mif'alot 'elokimand Zevahpesah. See, for example, Mif alot 'elokim, simanim 9, 51, 52, 169, 297, 337, 346, 410, and 416. On Dr. Simhah,see Salomon Buber,Kiryahnisgavah (Cracow, 1903), 76; Schiper, Zydzi w Polsce Odrodzonej,298-299; Natan Mikhael Gelber, "Toldotyehudei Natan MikhaelGelberand IsraelBen-Shem (Jeruzolkiv,"in Seferzolkiv [Z•lkiew]: kiryahnisgavah, salem; enziklopediyahshel galuyot, 1969), 43-45. 28. Most probablyDr. Ya'akovZahalon, a Jewish physician and rabbi from Rome, graduate from the University of Rome, and the authorof an importantseventeenth-centurypopular Hebrew "handbookfor medical treatment"'Ozarha-hayim(Venice, 1683). On Zahalon,see David Ruderman, Science, Medicine,and Jewish Culturein EarlyModernEurope.Spiegel Lecturesin EuropeanJewish History (TelAviv:Tel Aviv University,1987), 9, 15, and the bibliographyhe assembledon p. 28 n. 20; idem, "Medicineand Scientific Thought:The Worldof Tobias Cohen,"in TheJews of Early Modern Venice,ed. Robert C. Davis and Benjamin Ravid (Baltimoreand London:Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001), 194-98; idem, Jewish Thoughtand Scientific Discovery in Early ModernEurope(New Haven and London:Yale UniversityPress, 1995), 232-235 and bibliographyon p. 232 n. 10. Significantly,"Dr.YaCakov Zahalon],is also mentionedin Zevahpesah [3b]. Forthe referencesto Zevahpesah I used the only extantcopy of this book at the rarebook Judaicadivision of New YorkPublicLibrary. I am gratefulto Dr. LeonardGold for his assistance. 29. SH, f. 12b, 13b, 25a, 46a, 183b.Hillel says, for example:segulah mi-rofemumhehha-nikra ha-ravr.yizhakfortis, 46a; od kibaltimin rofe hazak, 183b. 30. Moshe Rosman, TheLord'Jews:Magnate-Jewishrelationsin the Polish-LithuanianCommonwealthduring the Eighteenth Century(Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity Press for Harvard UkrainianResearch Institute, 1990), 148 and bibliographyhe assembled in n. 20; Schiper, Zydzi w Polsce Odrodzonej,299-300. 31. See EncyclopediaJudaica, s.v. "I[srael]Ha[lpern]." 32. Ibid. 33. Hillel was not uniquein the reverentattitudeto Fortis.Forotherreferencesto Fortis'sremedies and amulets, see Mif ~alot'elokim,siman 379; Toldot'adam,siman 101.
223
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern lia.34Medicalreferencesin SH, which exceed medicalreferencesin books by other ba'alei shem, substantiateHillel's claim that he was an expert healer.35 Hillel seems to be familiarnot only with kabbalistictexts and manuscripts but also with the pietistic rites of the kabbalists,perhapseven with Italiankabbalists.36While describingtikkunleyl shabbat,a midnightpietistic liturgycanonized by Lurianickabbalists,he mentions it as part of "the customs of my friends in Venice and Prague"and urgesothersto follow it.37However,unlikethe case of his medical contacts,he mentionsno names of his friends-in-Kabbalah. This is yet anothermysteriouspatternof Hillel's writings. It appearsas if he wantedto conceal theirnames.The 1720s were the years of a fierce battleagainstcrypto-sabbateans from Altona to Pragueand Z61kiew.38As a numberof scholarshave demonstrated, sometimesit was not feasibleto drawthe line separatingregularkabbalistsfrom Was Hillel hinting at his proximityto the sublime mystical crypto-sabbateans.39 34. Recommendationson public hygiene appearin SH on f. 13a-15b, 20a-22b. See the story aboutthe 1654 (in fact, 1656-see Ruderman,Jewish Thoughtand ScientificDiscovery,232) epidemic in Rome which Hillel ascribedto Fortis,SH, f. 12b. Some primaryknowledgeof medical Latin,which Hillel demonstrates,may also have come from Fortis. 35. Forexample, when Hillel discusses differentways of preparingamuletsor herbalremedies to treatmelancholy(marahshehorah)he says thathe learnedthis is from "professionaldoctors in the countryof Poland,"6a-b; when he explains what should be done to a sick person,he recommendsenema with milk and sugarand makes a double referenceto Doctor Simhahand DoctorZilon [Zahalon], 23b; he claims he learnedfrom Doctor Fortishow to protecthumanbody fromevil spirits,25a; he says that Doctor Zalnik (?) taught him what measuresto take in orderto completely recover after having drunka poison (sam mavet), 108a. 36. In the second half of the seventeenthcentury,Italybecame a paramountEuropeancenterof Kabbalahlearning.It suffices to mention Moshe Zakutand his circle. For an analysis of ItalianKabbalah, see Moshe Idel, "MajorCurrentsin Italian Kabbalahbetween 1560-1660," Italia Judaica II (1986): 243-262; RobertBonfil, Rabbisand Jewish Communitiesin Renaissance Italy (Oxford University Press for the LittmanLibrary,1990), 280-298; idem., "Changein the CulturalPatternsof a Jewish Society in Crisis;ItalianJewryat the close of the sixteenthcentury,"JewishHistory2-3 (1988): 11-30; Moshe Halamish,"cOdle-toldot ha-pulmusal ha-kabalahbe-Italiyahbe-reshitha-me'ahha17,"Peterburgskiievreiskii universitet,9 vol. 3 (1986): 101-106. 37. SH, f. 187a.The questionof whetherHillel was in directcontactwith Italian(Venician)kabbalists must be left open due to the thin evidence. 38. ElishevaCarlebach,ThePursuitofHeresy: RabbiMoshe Hagiz and the SabbatianControversies (New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress, 1990), 172-185; Gelber,"Toldotyehudei zolkiv,"96104; Geshom Scholem.SabbataiSevi: TheMysticalMessiah,1626-1676 (Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press, 1973), 78-85; Moshe Arie Perlmuter,Ha-ravyehonatan eybeschuezve-yahasole-shabta'ut (Jerusalem:Schocken PublishingHouse, 1947), 26-29, 42-49; YehudaLiebes, "Ketavimhadashim be-kabalahshabta'itmi-hugo shel r. yehonataneybeschuez,"in JerusalemStudies in Jewish Thought, ed. Yosef Dan (Jerusalem:HebrewUniversityof Jerusalem,1986), 141-349. Fora broadercontext of the crypto-Sabbateanism,see MortimerJ. Cohen, Jacob Emden:a man of controversy(Philadelphia: Dropsie College, 1937) and JacobSchacter,"Historyand Memoryof Self: the Autobiographyof Rabbi Jacob Emden,"in Jewish Historyand Jewish Memory:Essays in Honor ofYosefHayimYerushalmi, ed. ElishevaCarlebachet al. (Waltham,MA: BrandeisUniversityPress, 1998),428-452. A useful summary is to be found in Michal Galas, "Sabbateanismin the Seventeenth-CenturyPolish-Lithuanian Commonwealth:A Review of Sources,"in TheSabbatianMovementand Its Aftermath:Messianism, Sabbatianismand Frankism,ed. RachelElior(Jerusalem:The Instituteof Jewish Studies,HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem,2001), 2:51-63. 39. Carlebach,Pursuitof Heresy, 11, 171-172.
224
The Masterof an Evil Name knowledgewhile simultaneouslyhiding his personalrelationswith those who balanced on the brinkof heresy? Be this as it may, before Hillel became a practicing ba'al shem, he traveledthroughBohemia, Romania,and Bukovina.He claims to have visited Tiraspol,40Vissa,41and Rozhnu.42He recollects his sporadicmeetings with an anonymouskabbalistfrom Rozhnu and claims he studiedthe manuscriptsof a certainEfraim,a renownedpreacher(maggidmesharim)andprominent kabbalistfromVissa (Bessarabia).43 Hirshfrom MezeHillel was lucky to landunderthe wings of his tutor, the head of the rabrich (MiqdzyrzecPodliaski).44RabbiZevi Hirsch (d. 1724), Z.evi binicalcourtin Mezerich,could boastan impressivepedigreeandlearning.He was the son of R. Alexanderand the grandsonof Zevi Hirsch,the head of the rabbinic court in the same locality, who is mentionedin seventeenth-centuryresponseand who himself is the authorof the volume of responsaTorathayim(Lublin,1708 and 1724); R. Zevi Hirsch was also the son-in-law of Rabbi Mordekhay,the head of the rabbiniccourt in Brisk (Brest of Lithuania)and the fatherof Mordekhayand Avishal,who eventuallybecame rabbisof Lissa andFrankfurt,respectively.45Hillel assertsthathe spenta certainperiodof time underZevi Hirschcopyinghis manuscripts, talking to him, and learning from him the secrets of amulets and holy names.46Hillel's assertionis revealingfrom two perspectives.First,even if he did not mention how long he stayed in Mezerich,the mere fact that he studiedunder such an authorityas Zevi Hirsch-in additionto Fortis-testifies to his thorough 40. Southeastfrom Jassy (Bessarabia),nowadaysin Moldova, 188b. 41. Jassy District (Bessarabia),now in Moldova, 189a. 42. Bukovina,now in Ukraine, 189a. 43. Perhapsthe travelsof Hillel BacalShem were partof a largerphenomenonof Jewish wandererssalientamong East EuropeanJews in the late-seventeenth-century and first half of the eighteenth of Jews in Lithuaniathat the council Gries to the records of references Ze'ev century. brings important specified types of beggars and vagabondswho were a burdenfor the Jewish communities in eastern Poland(Pinkas medinatlita, p. 33 sect. 130, p. 38 sect. 164, p. 53 sect. 250; p. 76 sect. 378; p. 133 sect. 559; p. 144 sect. 596). Depicting itinerantJews, Gries includes in his list regularbeggarsas well as sabbateanand hasidic preachersand "prophets,"regularvagabondteachers,fundraisersfor EretsYisrael, preachersof penitence (rebukers,mokhihim),and exorcists. See his review essay of Marc Saperstein, Jewish Preaching 1200-1800, An Anthology(New Haven:Yale UniversityPress, 1989), in TheJournal ofJewish Thoughtand Philosophy4 no. 1 (1994): 113-122, esp. 117-119. 44. Hillel identifies him as ha-rav ha-gadol he-hasid ha-mefursamu-mekubalkavod moreynu ve-rabeinuzevi hirsh ben ha-rayvha-gadol moreynuha-rayvavram hu avrahamav bet din be kehillah kedoshah mezirich be-medinatpodlasye ha-samukhbrisk de-lita ve-kehillah kedoshah tiktin ve-hu hatanmi-ravha-gadol de-briskkavod moreynuha-rayvmordekhay.Hillel claims thatRabbiZevi Hirsch was the highest authorityin both revealedand esoteric law in the whole Podlasiearea.In addition,Hillel refersto him as often as to Fortis.See, for example, SH, f 63b, 107a, 174a, 358a-b. Hillel is accurate even in the way he refers to R. Zevi Hirsch'sfather,R. Abraham,the authorof Torathayim:the latter signed his endorsementof 'Olat yizhak (Frankfurta/Main, 1692) with the following formula: avram hu avraham.See Meir Edelboym, Di yidn-shtot Mezrich (Buenos-Aires: Mezricher-lanslaytfaraynin Argentina,1957), 295. 45. For the discussion of R. Zevi Hirsch(Junior,Hillel's mentor)pedigree, see Edelboym,Di yidn-shtotArgentina,294-297. 46. Hillel repeatedlycites his learningunderRabbiZevi Hirsh:"AndI stayedwith him and in my thirstI drankthe wordsof the greatRabbiuntil I understoodlittle by little the smallerface [of God] (mi-z'eyr"anpin)of his sacredwritings and copied them."SH, f. 118a.
225
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern preparationfor his career.Second, Hillel's claim that he had copied amulets and remedies from Zevi Hirsch implies that practicalKabbalahhad alreadybecome part and parcel of general Jewish culture-even prominentrabbiswere engaged in it, to say nothing of itineranthealers, well-established doctors, and ba'alei shem.47 Thus, with medicaland kabbalisticexperiencesgained underFortisandZevi Hirsch, in the 1730s Hillel took to the road. FromMezerich he moved to Podolia andVolynia,and,at the end of the 1730s, to Lithuania.48It was in Galicia andVolhynia thathe startedhis careerof a ba'al shem. In 1731 he performedan exorcism in the town of Shinove(Pol.: Sieniawa,nearPrzemys'l).49Between 1731 and 1733 he was active as ba'al shem in Olik (Olyka), and in 1733 he came to Ostrah(Ostr6g) and laterto Tutchin.50 During his trip to the north,Hillel came to Shklov.51 In 1739 he reachedKeidan.52Apparently,at that time he was marriedand had at least two daughters.53Between 1739 and 1741 he moved westward,headingprobably to Posen (Poznani),where he startedwriting his manuscript,which, he believed, would change his life for the better.54 BAcALSHEMANDTHEJEWISHCOMMUNITY III. HILLEL The beginning of Hillel's careerwas promising. He visited importantJewish communitiesin Volyniaand Podoliaandwas commissionedas bacalshem. His success in Ostrah,the third place he visited in his itinerary,was pivotal. In the 1730s, Ostrahwas an importantprivatePolishtown. It boasteda huge Polishpalace and fortress,one of the busiest annual fairs in Poland,a beautiful,big sixteenthcentury,fortress-shapedsynagogue, more than 20 smallersynagogues and prayer houses, and illustriousrabbis, some of them descendantsof the disciples of Maharal(RabbiYehudahL6we ben Bezalel of Prague, 1525-1609).55 Hillel came to 47. Thus SH provides additionalsupportto the argumentthatby the 1720s Kabbalahcaptured minds of East EuropeanJews, see Etkes, Bacal ha-shem, chap. 1; Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuania, chap. 6; Rosman, Founderof Hasidism, chap. 1. On the spreadof practicalKabbalahin East Europe see Ze'ev Gries's"He-catakatve-hadpasatsifrei kabbalahke-makorle-limudah,"Mahanayim6 (1994): 204-211. 48. SH, f. 35b, 125a-127a. 49. Galicia/Red Ruthenia,now in EasternPoland. 50. All three localities were in the same Rovno districtof Podolia and some of them were repeatedlymentionedin the stories about Bacal Shem Tov collected in Shivheiha-besht. See, for example, stories nos. 26, 59 and 67 for Ostrah(Ostrog)and 204 for Olyka. 51. SH, f. 209b. 52. SH, f. 35b; Pol.: Kiejdany,near Kovno, Lithuania. 53. See Hillel's complaintsof his bad luck in the family context, SH, f. 74b. 54. This assumptionis based on Hillel's attemptsto please GermanJews (yehudei Ashkenaz) at the expense of Polish Jews (yehudeiPolin). Hillel refersto the formeras to his potentialreadersand, he hopes, his futureemployers:"AsI have observedin differentcommunitiesin Poland,Podol, andVolhyn, they [the Jews] prayin theirhouses of learning(batei midrash)in such a loose way,thatonly some of them will go to Paradise.It is because of that [loose prayer]thatthe Redemptionis not coming. However, I praise the [Jews in the] countriesof Ashkenaz, let them see the Redemption!"SH, f 80a. 55. YitzhakAlperowitz and Hayyim Finkel, eds., Sefer ostrah, volin: mazevetzikaronle-kehilah kedoshah(TelAviv: 'Irgunyozei ostrahbe-yisra'el, 1987), 37-38, 58-59.
226
The Masterof an Evil Name the town of Ostrahand stayed at the home of the rabbiof the kloyz,who was the son of the chief rabbiof the town. EitherHillel could not prove his pedigree and learningand was not allowed into the kloyz, an elitist prayerhouse of East European kabbalists,or the kloyzdid not fit Hillel's immediateinterests.56At any rate, Hillel spent two or three days in a special room of the local bet midrash.Indeed, he learnedthattherewas an incidentin the community-a womanhad an evil spirit (dybbuk)who refused to leave her body-and he waited until the elders of the city commissionedhim to performthe exorcism.Apparently,therewas some consternationamong the elders, who were eitherreluctantto rely on the powers of an itinerantba'al shem or mistrustedHillel personally,or both.This is how Hillel describes the episode: Oneeveningtheevil spirit[ruah]sentforthehonorable man,theformerbeadle [shamash]of the Rabbi,a greathasidandthe KabbalistNaftaliKohen himthathe shouldimmediThespiritinstructed Zedek,of blessedmemory.57 "He Shem,whohadjustcometo theircommunity. atelyfindRebHillelBaCal [RebHillelBaCal Shem]willputanendto mydayswiththehelpof holynames in thesynagogue.Hemightbe ableto finda kindof remedyforme."Andthat man[thebeadle]didnotwantto listento thespiritandstartedto talkin public. Later,thedemontoldthebeadlefromthebodyof thewoman:"Ifyoudo notgo to theBaCal Shem,youwillbe sorry,forit will definitelybe toolate."58 From this episode one may learn, first, that Hillel was not a famous bacal shem. Second,he did his best to provehe was well known-if not among local Jews, than at least among the otherworldlyinhabitants.Hillel used the dybbuk,a representative of the evil powers,to establishhis reputation.Third,local dwellerstreatedHillel harshly despite his desire to help them.59They mistrustedHillel and in all likelihood mocked him in public-hence the reluctanceof the beadle to resortto Hillel's help. The case Hillel encounteredin Ostrahwas not an easy one.60The confes56. In connectionto the individualmystics activebefore the Ba'al ShemTov,Hundertmentions that "[i]n some towns, there were groups of Hasidim who prayed separatelyin their own kloyzen ("prayerrooms"),or study halls, and were thoughtto benefit the communitythat supportedthem by their special ties to Heaven."See Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuania,120 and referenceshe brings in n. 5. The importanceof the kloyz (and not bet midrash)as the center of study of East Europeankabbalists before the Besht has been in the focus of JosephWeiss's fundamentalessay, "A Circle of Pneumatics in Pre-Hasidism,"in Studies in East EuropeanJewish Mysticismand Hasidism (London and Portland:The LittmanLibraryof Jewish Civilization, 1997), 27-42. 57. To some extent the details providedin the text corroboratethe veracity of the whole story. The late Naftali Cohen Zedek, mentioned by Hillel Ba al Shem, was most likely Rabbi Naftali ben Yizhak Kaz, the head of the rabbinicalcourt and the chief rabbiof the province.After Ostrahhe held the position of a chief rabbiin Posen and Frankfurtam Main. He passed away in Turkeywhile traveling to the Landof Israel. See Sefer ostrah, 38. 58. SH, 126a. 59. Hillel thus describesthe treatmenthe receivedin Ostrah:"Theybroughtme [by force] from the ritualbath before the morningprayer,""they opened their mouths againstme.. ." SH, f. 126a-b. 60. My analysis of the socio-psychological reality of exorcism is based on the methodology
227
Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern sion obtained from the woman/dybbukunderthe threatof excommunicationrevealed that a certainJew took a non-Jewishconcubine and had childrenwith her. For unknownreasons he was later involved in a murdercase. Jews tried to arrest and prosecutehim but he convertedto Greek Orthodoxy(be-'emunatyavan) and circumventedpunishment.Finally,he died a terribledeath. Since he was possibly not buriedproperly(a posthumouspunishmentfor a criminaland an apostate),after severalyears he apparentlybecame an evil spirit(ruah). He settled in a tree in Ostrah,not far from the town's big synagogue, waiting for a victim.61Once on Shabbat,when a pregnantwoman was sitting underthe tree inhabitedby the spirit, the latterenteredher body throughherrighteye, thusbecoming a dybbuk.62She lost sight in thateye. The same night the dybbuktorturedthe woman'shusbanduntil he died. Soon the womangave birthto a babygirl. Althoughthe girl was healthy, the dybbukspentsome seven yearswithinthe woman'sbody,growing strongerand causing her bitter sufferingsuntil she became completely blind. At this point the communitydecided to search for a remedy. Furtherdetails of the story make us think that Hillel uses "evil spirit"(he avoids the word "dybbuk")as a substitutefor the issues of promiscuityand heterodoxy.A certainwoman from Ostrahhad intimaterelationswith a convertoutside her wedlock. Her lover killed her Jewish husband but did not harm the daughter.Blindnesswas eithermetaphorical(she was the only one who did not understandthe resultsof her sickness) or real, inflicted by the harshtreatmentof the Jewish woman by the convert. Perhapsthe implicationsof heterodoxymade Hillel subsequentlytransferthe exorcismto outsidethe centerof the town.63The proxelaboratedby MarionGibson in "Witchcrafttrials-how to read them"and "Deconstructinggeneric stories,"in Reading Witchcraft:Stories of EarlyEuropeanWitches(Londonand New York:Routledge, 1999), 50-109. It is also supportedby ChristineWorobec'sstatementthat certaintypes of possession "representa socially understoodillness as opposed to a medical disease,"see ChristineD. Worobec, Possessed: Women,Witches,and Demons in Imperial Russia (DeKalb: NorthernIllinois University Press, 2001), 17. My approachfinds supportalso in YoramBilu's statement:"The validationof the moral ascendancyof religious leadersthroughthe dybbukidiom contributedto social control ... The exorcisticritualconstituteda conservativemechanismthatfacilitatedthe perpetuationof the traditional status hierarchyin the community."See YoramBilu, "The Taming of the Deviants and Beyond: An Analysis of DybbukPossession and Excorcismin Judaism,"in SpiritPosession in Judaism:Cases and Contextfrom the MiddleAges to the Present, ed. MattGoldish (Detroit:WayneStateUniversityPress, 2003), 64. 61. The motif of an evil spiritor a spiritof a deceased person sitting on a tree and addressing the vagabondsappearsalreadyin Sefer hasidim. See JehudaWistinetzkiand Jacob Freimann,ed., Sefer hasidim(Frankfurta/M: WarhmannVerlag, 1924), 37 (siman 35); this book is based on ParmaMS. Cf. Reuven Margalioted., Sefer hasidim (Jerusalem:Mosad ha-Ray Kook, 1957), 176-178 (siman 170); this is based on Bologna MS. 62. According to the evidence meticulouslycollected by Nigal, evil spirits and dibbukimprefer to enter homes either throughdoors not protectedby mezuzotor throughany part of the body of a sick person, in particularpregnantwomen. Fora comprehensivelist of the "preferredentrances"of the dibbukim,see GedalyaNigal, Sipurei 'dibbuk'be-sifrutyisrael (Jerusalem:Reuven Mas, 1983), 2628. 63. On a very similarcase involving a Jewish woman and her husband,Jan Serafinowicz,who converted to Catholicism after being attended to by a ba'al shem, see Meir Balaban, Le-toldot ha-
tenu'ahha-frankit(Tel Aviv: Devir, 1934), 57-58. On Serafinowicz, see Shimon Dubnow,History of
228
The Masterof an Evil Name imity of the "enemiesof Israel"and of the "impureplace"-oblique referencesto the nearbychurch-prevented Hillel fromfully applyinghis powers.64In addition, the local priests perhapswere awareof the incidentand tried to resolve it by converting the woman.65Very likely the exorcism led to confessions offensive to Christianity,and Hillel decided to transferthe operationelsewhere to avoid publicity. On the otherhand,exorcism led to confessions on the partof the womanthat were offensive to the Jewish communityat large. Nobody liked the fact that Hillel made the OstrahJews wash their dirty laundryin public.66 Hillel portraysthe exorcism in great detail. If SH presents it accurately,at least in regardto Hillel's modusoperandi,one featureof Hillel's practicesbecomes particularlysalient. It was the dybbukthat instructedHillel aboutthe methods of exorcism, its time and place, the preparationit required,and its possible outcome.67The dybbukallegedly told Hillel to bring seven Torahscrolls and seven pristineboys ("who have not sinned").He advised Hillel to take the boys, before the procedure,to the ritualbath and to the morningprayer.He purportedlyindicated that Hillel should go to the town of Tutchin,not far from Ostrah(samukh le-kik ostrah),andfinish the ceremonythere.Finally,the dybbukencouragedHillel: "Andyou, Rabbi, should not be scaredand do not run away from me."68In terms of endorsementof his activities, Hillel briefly mentions the amulets of R. Zevi HirschbenAvraham,whichhe used forthe exorcism,yet, when it cameto the procedureitself, his only spiritualinstructor-his personalmaggid-was the dybbuk.69 the Jews in Russia and Poland (Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety, 1916-1920), 1:173; Israel Halpern,ed., Pinkas va'ad 'arb'a 'arazot(Jerusalem:Mosad Bialik, 1948) p. 265 par. 549; Hundert, Jews in Poland-Lithuania,75 and 141; Rosman,Lords'Jews, 206-207. 64. Hillel resortedto the dybbuk' assistanceto explain the reason for his own weakness:"You arethe Rabbiwho has been acting for alreadysix days.Youhavepronouncedoaths againstme andhave tried to exorcise me using holy names. However,althoughyou did not manage to do anything(shum pe'ulah) againstme, you have somewhatweakenedthe wicked forces which surroundmy soul, and you have harmedmy members,sinews, and bones. However,this is not the rightplace thatallows applying the holy names, because the strongholdof evil stands next to-distinguish!-the holy synagogue. If you like to accomplishyour work, you should bettertry a differentplace"SH, f. 125a. 65. The woman/dybbukwarnedHillel aboutthe possible impactof local priests:"Thesearethe priestswho give theirbad advice thatthey derivefromthe powersof theirtradition.Theiradvice comes from theirmouths [in the form of] fire and flames, and theirwordsare not true.They will surrenderto you, if God wants it" SH, 125b. Like ba'alei shem, both Easternand WesternChristianChurchesresorted to exorcism as to an effective ecclesiastical ritual aimed at obtaining confession. See Stuart Clark, Thinkingwith Demons: The Idea of Witchcraftin Early Modern Europe (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), 428-434; Worobec,Possessed, 23-25, 45-48. 66. Hillel discoveredoutrageousand by no means flatteringfacts about the community:"And he [the evil spirit]revealedpubliclyhorribleand nasty things which had happenedin thattown among the Jews.And the Jews understoodthatthe birdfromheavenraisedits voice, the time hadcome, and the end of all ends. All the secretsbecame knowndue to the powers of heavenlyand earthlyoaths.All the secrets impossibleto convey here thathappenedin thattown were finally disclosed"SH, f. 127a. 67. In addition,Hillel a priori relinquishedany responsibilityfor the operationandburdensthe dybbukwith it: "Theonly thing which I do not know is whetherI will leave her body without her soul or with it,"confesses the dybbuk.SH, f. 127a. 68. SH, f. 125b. 69. On the dichotomydybbuk-maggid,see the groundbreakingarticlebyYoramBilu, "Dybbuk
229
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern Due to the "instructions"of the dybbuk,who wantedthe ba'al shem to banishhim, Hillel was a success, and socio-psychologicalorderwas restored: I pronounced onegreatoathandone greatpetitionin thepresenceof tenappropriate Elul,5493[1733],thespirit peopleandtheTorahscrolls.Thursday, leftthebodyof thatwomanthroughthelittletoeof herleftleg fromunderher littlenailso thatsomebloodcameoutof hertoe.70Afterthatshebeganseeinga littlebitandshestartedgoingto thesynagogue,to thecemetery,andto all otherplacesas shefoundfit. However,shecouldnotsee atallthroughthe onlyeyeby whichthespirithadenteredherbody.71 The Ostrahcase suggests a clear-cutpatternof relationsbetween the bacal shem, the communal(kehillah) authority,the ordinaryJews of the town, and the spirit.The ba'al shem performedexorcism in the atmosphereof public contempt. Although mistreatedby the inhabitantsof the town, Hillel was still respectedby the kahal. He dependedcompletelyon the decision of the local authority.He started to operateonly when he obtainedthe official consent of the kahal elders.72The difference in attitudesto Hillel Ba'al Shem manifeststhe interestsof the communal leaderswho employedthe ba'al shem as an instrumentto strengthentheirpower. While the kahalused Hillel to instill fear of promiscuityand restoresocial and psychological orderin the community,Hillel used the dybbukto instructhis audience and instill some awe toward,if not belief in, the ba'al shem's magic. As we will see, this pragmaticusage of the dybbukfor self-promotionwas not atypical for Hillel's modusoperandi. Paradoxically,the only creaturein SH that acknowledgedthe wisdom and high statusof Hillel Ba'al Shem was the evil spirit,Hillel's alter ego.73The Ostrah dybbuknot only "helped"Hillel to understandthe situationin the communitybut
and Maggid:TwoCulturalPatternsof Altered Consciousnessin Judaism,"AJSReview21 no. 2 (1996): 341-366. 70. In this case Hillel Bacal Shem closely follows the advise of Haim Vital who in his Shacar ruah ha-kadesh in the name of Isaac Luriastronglyrecommendedthat practicalkabbalistsmake the evil spirit leave humanbody througha toe so that it does not harmthe body. Eventually,the little toe on the left foot became a "classical"place for the exit of an evil spirit. Fora comprehensivelist of the "preferredexits" of the dibbukim,see Nigal, Sipurei 'dibbuk'be-sifrutyisrael, 54-60. 71. SH, f. 127a. 72. "Andthat man [beadle] went to the parnas ha-hodesh and relatedto him the words of the spirit.And theparnas ha-hodesh sent the beadle for me and asked me on behalf of the whole community to do some good for that woman,"SH, f. 126b. Generally,the Jewish communityof Ostrah(Ostrog) is mentionedseveraltimes in Shivheiha-besht.Forinstance,in story no. 26, a certaindoctorfrom this town is referredto as a staunchopponentof the Besht who mocks his magic powers. Similarly,in SH the holy communityof Ostrahdoes not seem very hospitableto Hillel Ba'al Shem.They also mock him. They openly mistrusthim while he is workingout ways to banish the dybbuk.They startto hate him even more so when the communitylearnsa lot of nasty and revealingthings aboutitself duringthe exorcism. The general commotion caused by Hillel Ba'al Shem in the communityis also quite obvious. Cf. Bilu, "Tamingof the Deviants,"55-59. 73. SH, f. 125a.
230
The Master of an Evil Name also taughtthe Jews how to behaveand serve God.74Hillel'sassumptionis clear:if the communitydid not trustHillel BacalShem,let themlistento a dybbuk.Inthe Ostrahepisode only the dybbuk,the spiritof a deadJewishconvert,addressedHillel as here to discuss the reliabilityof the evidence of early"ha-rav"It is inappropriate eighteenth-centurydemons,yet SH clearlyindicatesthattherewas nobodyelse who respected Hillel: after the dybbuk"revelations"and successful exorcism, Hillel seems to have been left alone. Had therebeen some benign arrangementbetween him and the local kahal, Hillel, who looked for a stableposition in a community, would have mentionedit. His reticenceimplies that,again,he was doomedto loneliness, solitude,and wandering.Indeed,to make evil powershis only advocatewas Hillel's clever ploy in the face of his situation.But the magicianwho was at home with dybbuksandevil powerswas balancingon the brinkof the permitted.Hillel did not realizehe was causinghis own failure-which was aroundthe corner.
IV BAcAL
SHEM AMONG HIS COLLEAGUES
Three factors caused Hillel's downfall: first, competition in the marketof East EuropeanitinerantKabbalists;second, the rise of publicationsof practical Kabbalahbooks; and third,the crisis of the profession of ba'alei shem. His personal failures,which causedhis distressand depression,were simply the resultsof these overarchingreasons.75 Hillel suffered mostly because of his colleagues, pseudo-ba'alei shem, alleged impostors,troublemakers,and unscrupulouscompetitors,who exacerbated the constraintsin the marketof practicalKabbalah.Hillel depictedthem as "robbers" and "false hasidim" (hasidim shakranim)who sacrilegiously introduced themselves as experiencedkabbaliststo the communalleadership.76Hillel complained thatthey neverused Kabbalahfor its own sake (li-shemah);whateverthey did, they did only for money.They obtainedfalsified endorsementsfrom insignificant rabbisand producedbogus miracles that had nothing to do with the honest opera sacra of a genuine ba'al shem.77They caused skepticism among Jews towards amulets and holy names and subsequentlytowardsall those healers who earnedtheirliving honestly.78As a result,when a realba'al shem arrivedin a community and provided valid endorsementsfrom renownedrabbis, nobody would trust him.79Therefore, from Hillel's vantage point, it was absolutely pivotal to 74. "Theonly thing I would tell you-through my stories and the deeds of my wicked handsis thatpeople should learn from me and throughme how to serve the blessed Name,"SH, f. 125b. 75. Hillel complains:"I shouldnot say morein the time of my distressanddistressof my daughters, yet I failed and got up and not let my foes rejoice over me [Ps. 30]. I failed several times in several nasty places involved with evil forces ." See SH, f. 74b. ... 76. SH, f. 319b. 77. ForHillel's repeatedcomplaintsof pseudo-ba'alei-shem,see SH, f. 95a, 172b, 276b-277a, 321b. 78. SH, f. 299b-300a. 79. Kahanaprovidesa numberof cases provingthatat the beginningof the eighteenthcentury the itinerantba'alei shem or practicalkabbalistswere often identified with and treatedas crypto-sabbateans. See David Kahana, Toldotha-mekubalim,ha-shabta'imve-ha-hasidim (Odessa: Moriyah, 1914), 18- 19. Kahanaseems to follow Ya akov Emden'ssharpcriticismof ba'alei shem, most of whom
231
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern distinguishbetween a real bacal shem and a charlatan.Hillel suggested that the community should investigate, if not interrogate,any ba'al shem to verify his knowledge of Kabbalahbooks, his understandingof holy names, his haskamot (whetherthey were writtenby ordinaryor well-knownrabbis),and finally,his personal behavior(how he prays,fasts, performsritualablutions,etc.).80 Hillel was deeplyconcernedthatcharlatanshadunderminedthe trustof common folk in the magic of the ba'al shem. Skepticismand disbelief of the ordinary Jews towardsthe kabbalists,accordingto Hillel'sobliquereferences,had sabbatean implications.Hillel illustratedthe spiritualdamagecaused by itinerantsabbateans through a peculiar incident that happenedin the county of Pokutain Bukovina Provincein the town of Tismenits(Tysmienica),some 70 miles west of Chernovitz: A wickedmanwhowasa scribeandrenownedKabbalist cameintotown.He for there several until house of thegreathasidand weeks he entered the stayed Kabbalist YosefHols,of blessedmemory,whopassedawayleavingbehinda kosherandsacredTorahscroll.Theabovemanwentto [RabbiHols's]widow to [inspect]thescrollandfoundit perfect.Laterhe forgeda cut(hakikah)[in thescroll]anddemonstrated it in public.Thenhedemonstrated themistakeof the[late]Rabbito themostillustrious in the town. The next nightRabpeople bi [Hols]appeared[to someone]in a dreamandrevealedeverythingthatthis scribehadcommitted, includingthetime,thebook,thechapter,andthecolumnin whichthescribehadmadehis forgery,prohibiting himto disclosethis to the scribe.Soon afterwards information the scribesteppedon a slippery path.He wasbanishedandwentto anothercountry,to LittlePoland.81 In this peculiarepisode, a scribe andkabbalistwhose reputationwas in good standingabusedthe credibilityof the community.He insertedcertainmisspellings into a Torahscroll with the aim of denigratingthe formerspiritualauthority.The forgery was not a simple misspelling (hisaron or yeter); otherwise it would have been easy to correct.The scribedemonstratedthe mistakein public because it was impossibleto correctit accordingto Judaicscriballaws (hilkhotSTAM).82Forreasons of self-censorship,Hillel preferredto make oblique allusions withoutactually spelling out the "mistake."But in the context of early-eighteenth-centuryEast Emden, by no means unbiased,identified as sabbateans.See, for example, the treatmentof Eliyahu Ulianov, Shmuel Essingen, and Moshe Pragerin Ya'akovEmdenSefer hit'abkut28; idem. Torathakin'aot 118-119. However,Scholem convincinglyproves the sabbateanorigin of these practicalhealers, see GershomScholem, Mehkarimu-mekorotle-toldotha-shabta'ut,ed. YehudaLiebes (Jerusalem: ZalmanShazar,1994), 110-111. However,assessing the spreadof pietisticdoctrinesandmysticalideas in eighteenth-centuryPoland,Hundertnotes that some of the pietists "wereundoubtedlyalso adherents of Shabbateanism,but others were not."He also arguesthat the borderseparatingold-style (preBeshtian) pietists and crypto-sabbateanswas blurred.See Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuania,121122, 152. 80. SH, f. 173a. 81. SH, f. 94b. 82. See KuntresMishnat sofrim on Mishnah Berurah, 36 and Mishnah Berurah on Shulhan ;Arukh'OrakhHayim 32:20. On the scribal laws related to mistakes in the Torahscroll, see Yizhak ShteinerandYizhakGoldshtein,Dinei sefer torahshe-nimzahbo taut (Jerusalem:OT, 1984).
232
The Masterof an Evil Name Europeancrypto-Sabbateanisman uncorrectable"mistake"implied perhapsone and the same notorioustrick:The followers of SabbataiTsevi, scribes in the first place, were known to insert the name of the pseudo-Messiahinsteadof the tetragrammatoninto sifrei STAM-phylacteries, mezuzas, and Torahscrolls. One may want to compareHillel's descriptionwith the following testimony of Rabbi Moshe Hagiz, Hillel's contemporary,known as a persecutorof cryptosabbateanspar excellence. The text is taken from his Gebiat 'edut, translatedby Elisheva Carlebach: InPolandonewitnesstestifiedto a different of thesacred:R. sortof profanation Nathan,headof thestudyhall,hada Torahscrollfromwhichthenameof God wasomitted.Instead,he inscribed Zebi.Therewereapthenameof Sabbatai of Zholkiew who of R. souls knew this, amongthem, proximately fifty Hayyim andtheydidthesamewithphylacteries. Whentheyinvestigated them,he tearfullyconfessed;whenit wasall foundto be true,theyburnedthescrollandthe Thecommunal scribehadcontaminated manypeoplewiththese phylacteries. him and the and communal leaders phylacteries, whippedhim... 83 exposed ApparentlyMoshe Hagiz and Hillel Ba'al Shem depict identical behavioralpatterns, which Hagiz tracedto crypto-sabbateansand Hillel to false bacaleishem. It would be temptingto reinterpretHillel's referencesto the predominanceof charlatansamong Jewish East Europeanhealersin the context of the crypto-sabbatean schism.84This might be particularlyimportantin view of the parallelHillel traced between pseudo-magiciansand the dybbuks.As if sharing common knowledge, sometimes the contemporaryJewish community did perceive crypto-sabbateans as possessed by dybbuks.85In this context, the rapidexplosion of the population of itinerantba'alei shem was perhapsa responsenot only to the growing number of those possessed by dybbuksand needing exorcism, but also to the expansionof crypto-Sabbateanisminto Poland and the necessity to identify, neutralize,or excommunicatethe harbingersof heresy.86 83. Carlebach,Pursuit of Heresy, 184-5; Zvi Mark,"Dybbukand Devekut in the Shivhe haBesht:Towarda Phenomenologyof Madnessin EarlyHasidism,"in SpiritPosession in Judaism: Cases and Contextfromthe MiddleAges to the Present, ed. MattGoldish (Detroit:WayneStateUniversity Press, 2003), 274-280. 84. Cf. Scholem'sportrayalof SabbataiRafaelfromMistra(Misithra)the first to combinepractical Kabbalahwith sabbateanpropaganda.Scholem, SabbataiSevi, 783-789. 85. Bilu, "DybbukandMaggid,"352, Scholem,SabbataiSevi, 606; cf. literaryreflectionof this parallelin Isaac Bashevis Singer,Satan in Goray,Trans.Jacob Sloan (New York:Avon Books, 1955), chap. 13. Forthe analysis of sabbateanunderpinningsin Singer'snovel, see Bezalel Naor,Post Sabbatian Sabbatianism:Study of an UndergroundMessianic Movement(Spring Valley,NY: Orot, 1999), 98-103; for more literaryvariationson this topic, see RobertAlter,After the Tradition(New York:E. P. Dutton, 1969), 61-75. 86. In the sixteenthandseventeenthcenturies,ProtestantsandCatholicsalso identifiedheretics as demons or possessed; see Clark, Thinkingwith Demons, 387-88, 534-37, and esp. 385-88. One may see obliqueevidence of this parallelin the reversetakingplace in WesternEuropein the eighteenth century,when, due to growing religious tolerance,the numberof witch-huntingcases radicallydiminished. See MarijkeGijswijt-Hofstra,Brian Levack, and Roy Porter,Witchcraftand Magic in Europe:
233
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern Hillel was not unawareof the righteoushealers among his colleagues. He describesthem with one of his favoritewords,zanua' (modest), which in SH indicates the highest level of spiritual purity and personal righteousness."7Only zanuaC,a modest person, is able to produce a truly effective amulet (kameyac mumheh).88Among the real wonder-workersHillel mentions a numberof righteous magicians89such as Eli[yahu] Bacal Shem,90Joel Bacal Shem,91Naftali Kaz,92RabbiYekovsky[possibly Jenowski] BaCalShem,93Perez Bacal Shem,94 The Eighteenthand Nineteenth Centuries(London:Athlone Press, 1997), 42. On the other hand, in eighteenth-centuryRussia, due to the Nikon schism and persecutionsof the Old Believers (perceived as witches), witch-huntingcases were on the rise, especially between 1690 and 1739. See, for example, the fundamentalresearchby AleksandrLavrov,Koldovstvoi religiia v Rossii, 1700-1740 (Moscow: Drevlekhranilishche,2000), 347-354. 87. In Judaictraditionthe usage of the notionzanua' is inseparablefrom the secretknowledge. The twelve-letterName of God, for example, was transmittedby the sages to zenudimshe-bi-kehunah, that is, the "discrete(modest) among the priests."Also, the secret forty-two-letterName of God, according to R. Yehudaha-Nasi, was transmittedonly to a "discrete(modest) one:" ein mosrim oto ela le-mi she zanua'. See B. Kiddushin71a. 88. SH, f. 153a. Razi'el ha-mal'akhmakesthe same claim and uses the same word,zanuad.See Sefer Razi'el ha-mal'akh,8a and 33a (Medzhybozh, 1819). 89. Firstfour ba'alei shem-SH, f. 277a; second two-SH, f. 155a. 90. EliyahubarAaronYehudaMehalem(b . 1550), the headof the rabbiniccourtin Chelm, studied in Lublinat the yeshivah of R. Shlomoh Luria.See Etkes, Ba'al ha-shem, 18 and 33. In SH Hillel reproducesin greaterdetail one of the famous stories about EliyahuBacal Shem that appearedalso in Toldot'adam, siman 86. Cf. SH, f. 44b. 91. Joel ben Uri Heilperin(Hilpern)fromZamogc,the famousba'al shem and grandsonof Joel bar IzhakAyzik Heilperin,Bacal Shem from Zamoic (ca. 1690-ca. 1755), was one of the most wellknown practicalkabbalistsof his time. He endorsedand penned a numberof famous books on practical Kabbalah,amongthemZevahpesah (1722), Mif ~alot'elokim(1710), and Toldot'adam(1720). See a detaileddiscussion of him in Moshe Hillel, Ba'alei shem (Jerusalem:MakhonBney Issakhar,1993), 54-64, 90-179; Etkes, Bacal ha-shem,41-50; Matras,"Sifrei segulot,"141-143; and Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuania,150-152. On the importanceof practicalKabbalahbooks in the developmentof be-hasidut,"in Zadikve-cedah, early Hasidism, see HavivaPedaya,"Ha-degemha-hevrati-dati-kalkali ed. David Assaf (Jerusalem:MerkazZalmanShazar,2001), 434-397, esp. 364-366. 92. RabbiNaftalibenYizhakha-Kohen(Kaz) fromPosen (Pozna, 1649-1719), one of the leading authoritiesin practicalKabbalah,was known for his wonderfulamuletsand successful exorcisms. He endorsedmanybooks on practicalKabbalah,includingMif 'alot 'elokim(sometimes even ascribed to him-see, for example, Lembergedition, 1872). He personallyknew the famous bacalshem Binyamin Beinish of Krotoszynand endorsedhis Amtahatbinyamin(Wilhelmsdorf, 1716). See the discussion in Matras,"Sifrei segulot,"n. 11 on pp. 2-3 of the supplementbetween pages 141-142. On Katz see GedalyahNigal, " Al rav naftali kaz mi-pozna,"Sinai 92 (1983): 91-94; Ariel Bar-Levav, "Ha-mavetbe-'olamo shel ha-mekubalnaftali ha-kohenkaz" (Ph.D., Hebrew University,Jerusalem, 1990); YehudaLiebes, "A Profile of R. Naphtali Katz FromFrankfurtand His AttitudeTowardsSabbateanism,"in Gr6zingerand Dan, Mysticism,Magic and Kabbalahin AshkenaziJudaism, 208-222 and Rachel Elior, "R. NathanAdler and the FrankfurtPietists:Pietist Groupsin East and CentralEurope duringthe EighteenthCentury,"in Jiidische Kulturin Frankfurtam Main von den Anfdingenbiz zur Gegenwart,ed. Karl-ErichGr6zinger(Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz,1997), 135-177. 93. Most likely Yacakovben Moshe Kaz fromYanov(Pol.: Jan6w,therefore,Yanovski),the authorof Minhatyaakov solet (Wilhelmsdorf,1731), the book on practicalKabbalah,amuletsand remedies. See Etkes,Ba'al ha-shem,43, 46 n. 83. Yacakovb. Moshe'sbook was endorsedby Joel Bacal Shem from Zamod, see Moshe Hillel, Ba'alei shem, 164. 94. I was not able to identify him.
234
The Masterof an Evil Name and Heshel Ba'al Shem.95The conductof these ba'alei shem seems to correspond to Hillel's high standardsof personalpurityand asceticism establishedin SH. Hillel did not hesitate to copy from their books and reproducetheir amulets.To use his own parlance,these wonder-workersand experts in practicalKabbalahwere true hasidim-in contrast with the false hasidim, charlatans,and fake ba'alei shem. However,even these righteousbaCaleishem troubledHillel. Theirimmaculate conductnotwithstanding,Hillel felt deeply hurtby the fact thatthey began to publicize secret mystical knowledge and put theirbooks on practicalKabbalahto press. There is nothing else in SH thattroubleshim as much as the publicationof books of ba'alei shem.96 A number of prominent eighteenth-centuryrabbis, among them Yonatan EybeschuetzandYa'akovEmden,did not welcome the disseminationof books on practicalKabbalahand opposed the whole idea of their publication.97It does not seem strangethat Hillel Ba'al Shem was also unhappy,even deeply depressed,because of theirpublication.Hillel's own reasons,however,were differentfromthose ofYaCakovEmden. First,being published,esoteric secrets lost their secrecy; anyone was able to copy an amulet from a newly publishedkabbalisticbook and use it at his own discretion.Second,publishedbooks nullified the importanceof Hillel's knowledge of the secret techniques he used to write and apply the amulets. Third,Hillel cites an authoritativewarningagainstpublishingbooks on Kabbalah: Mystical books should not be published,and if published,should not be used for the sacredwork of a ba'al shem.98Hence, Hillel's indignation: In ourgeneration, manybookswithholynamesandamulets,all of themsecret,werepublished.Do not use them-not in this worldnor in the world to come, for they helpthe wicked.Someonepurchasesa book for himself 95. It is tempting to identify Heshel Bacal Shem from SH with Heschel Zoref, a crypto-sabbatean,whom Gershom Scholem identified with RabbiAdam, the mystical teacherof the Besht. See In Praise of the BacalShem TowvTheEarliest Collection of Legends about the Founderof Hasidism, trans.and ed. Dan Ben-Amos and JeromeMintz (Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress, 1970), 1518, 31-32; the discussion of RabbiAdam as Heschel Zoref in GershomScholem, "Ha-naviha-shabtayi r.heshel zoref-r. 'adambacalshem,"in his Mehkereishabtaut,ed. YehudaLiebes (Jerusalem:Am Coved,1991), 579-599; for criticismof Scholem'sidentificationsee Moshe Hillel, Ba'alei shem, 305316. Rosmanrejects Scholem's identificationand stronglysupportsthe viewpoint of Chone Shmeruk, who identified RabbiAdam as the legendarylate-sixteenth-centuryfigure from Prague,rejectingthus any connectionbetween him and Heshel Zoref. See Rosman,FounderofHasidism, 144-145. Forbetter understandingof Hillel Ba'al Shem it is importantthat despite his sabbateanreputation,Heschel Zoref was toleratedby such kabbalistsas Zevi Hirsch Kaidanover,see Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuania, 125. 96. Fora list of books on practicalKabbalahprintedin Z61kiew,see YeshayahuVinograd,'Ozar ha-sefer ha-civri.2 vols. (Jerusalem:ha-makhonle-bibliografiamemuhshevet,1993), 2:306-308. 97. Moshe Idel, Hasidism:BetweenEcstasy and Magic (Albany:State Universityof New York Press, 1995), 34, 36. 98. Hillel constantlyreiterateshis criticism:"I have found in severalbooks of great Kabbalists of previousgenerationswho warnedagainst the usage of mystical books,"SH, f. 172a-b. And again, "Ina couple of smallbooks publishedin Zholkvathey issued severalamulets(segulot) andlots of names (shemot) yet everythingwas printedwithout any sense (bli ta am); one should not rely on them,"SH, f. 188a.
235
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern [such as] Toldot,99Zevah pesah,'00 and Po'el gevurot'0' printedin Zholkva
[Z6lkiew].Thesebooksneverrevealsecretsbut only confusepeople.One shouldrevealsecretsonlyto themodest(zanua').102 Accordingto Hillel, the unscrupulousnessof certainba'alei shem is the most important reason against the publication of books on practical Kabbalah.Printed books foundtheirway easily into the handsof impostorswho did not behavethemselves in accordwith the pietistic requirements,thus obtainingan easy opportunity to cheat.103That is why, claims Hillel, the publicationof practicalKabbalah books has corruptedhis generation.104In addition,Hillel stresses the intellectual problem:The recipientsof the newly publishedKabbalahbooks do not understand the intrinsicmechanisms of the amulets and do not know how to produce new amuletson the basis of the publishedones. Indeed,implies Hillel Ba'al Shem, the printedKabbalahkills while the oral revives. Further,in orderto understandhow to use a handwrittenor publishedamulet,whatits connectionwith the Torahis, and in what cases it might be effective, one needs Hillel's oral explanationor clarification. Ultimately,Hillel is tryingex postfacto to win a lost battle:He fights against publicationof practical Kabbalahbooks and democratizationof the kabbalistic knowledge since real knowledge for him is oral, elitist, and manuscript-based.'05 99. Toldot'adam(Z6?kiew,1720). 100. Z61kiew,1722. 101. There was no such book published in Z61kiewor elsewhere. Most likely, Hillel refers to Mif'alot 'elokim(i6lkiew, 1710 and 1724), but confuses the title. 102. SH, f. 172a. 103. books on practicalKabbalahwere printedin pocket-size format.Zevahpesah inSZ6kiew dicates this characteristicon its title page. The publicationof small-size books allowed Z61kiew,first, to producea cheapproductand reachout to a wider Jewishaudience,and,second, to put to press more books thanthe maximum700 annualkuntrasim(in this case, book copies), permittedto Z6lkiewprinting press by the Council of FourLandsas a result of the fierce competitionbetween Lublin,Z61kiew, and Cracowprintingpresses at the very end of the seventeenthcentury.Forthe decisions of the Council, see Shlomo Buber,Kiryahnisgavah:hi ha-cirZolkiv(Cracow:Bi-defuso shelY. Fisher,1903), 104105. For a brief history of the Z61kiewprintingpress, see Meir Balaban,"Batei defus yehudiim bezolkiv,"in Gelber and Ben-Shem, Sefer zolkiv, 215-224; Haim Dov Friedberg,Toldotha-defus bepolanyah (Tel Aviv: Barukh Fridberg,1950), 62-68; Israel Halpern, Yehudimve-yahadutbe-mizrah eropa: mehkarimbe-toldotehem(Jerusalem:Magness, 1968), 83-84. 104. "In our generationeveryone buys a book Toldot'adam for himself. The book, which is a waste of ink andpaper,everyonebuys very cheap and becomes ba'al shemot.Yet,those who buy it, do not know anythingaboutthis world and about the world to come. They even do not behave according to the good behaviordescribedin that small book Toldot'adam."SH, f. 155a-b. 105. Mention should be made of the similaritybetween Hillel's, JonathanEybeschuetz's,and Jacob Emden'scriticismof the publicizingof the Kabbalahbooks, see Idel, Hasidism, 35-36. On the dichotomy"booksvs. manuscripts"in the context of a demonopolizationof the elitist knowledge and democratizationprocess in East EuropeanJewish culture, see ElchananReiner,"TheAshkenaziel1ite at the Beginningof the ModernEra:Manuscriptversus PrintedBook,"Polin 10 (1997): 85-94; Moshe Rosman,"Le-toldotavshel makorhistori,"Zion 58 (1993): 175-214. Forthe more generaldiscussion of "manuscriptvs. printedbook dichotomy,"see Ze'ev Gries, Ha-Sefer ke-sokhentarbut:ba-shanim 460-660 (1700-1900) (TelAviv:ha-kibbutsha-meuhad,2002), 12-13 and bibliographyhe assembles in notes 5 and 6.
236
The Master of an Evil Name Not only do books deny his manuscript;they rejectthe indispensabilityof Hillel's personalinvolvementimplied in SH.'06 The impactof the false and genuine ba'alei shem on Hillel's careerwas that rank-and-fileJews became skepticalaboutthe magicalpowersof all healers.Common disbelief in the ba'al shem contradictedthe very core of the healing process, which, accordingto Hillel, requiredstrongbelief in the magical powersof the baCalshem. Even a professionallymade amuletwould not operateif one did not believe in it, argues Hillel.107 Hillel provides dreadful stories that illuminate the fatality of such disbelief. In one case, which took place in Keidan, Lithuania,in 1739, a womanrefusedto follow the advice of her relativesto get ridof the amulet. She kept it and managedto save herself from the evil Lilith.'08Her husbandtook his amuletoff, but Hillel does not sharewith his readerwhathappenednext. In another case, which took place in Wilkowysk, Grodno Province, the dybbukhad been banishedfrom a body of a woman,yet, because she had takenher protecting amuletfrom her neck and allowed skepticalrelativesto open it, the spiritreturned and destroyedall the efforts of the ba'al shem.109It is very likely that one or both of these episodes depict the failures of Hillel. The chronologicaljuxtapositionof Hillel's failureswith the beginningof his workon the SHmanuscript(around1739) makes one surmisethatHillel decided to restorehis reputationdemonstratingthat he is a knowledgeable,well-connected, reputed,and pious ba'al shem. His socioeconomic position was precarious.Hillel consideredwriting a book as his last chance. Hillel makes it clearthaton severaloccasions his performanceas ba'al shem was a complete failure.011As the resultof his failurehe was eitherbanishedfrom a numberof localities or put undertemporaryherem.It is evident, however,that he could not continuepracticingas ba'al shem."' He had lost his reputation.Hillel's attemptto assimilate with scribes, preachers,slaughterers-"secondary intelligentsia"-and to establishhimself as a healer and kabbalist,that is to say, an 106. "People bought [printedbooks on practicalKabbalah- YPS] so that they came into the hands of riff raff who don't know or understandany book or wisdom; only whateveris in these little books. They don't know how things occur, and they don't even performa properpracticeas it is prescribed. Obviously,they don't know the origins or functions of the names, for they do not have the slightest knowledge even of the exoteric partof the holy Torah."SH, f. 119b. 107. SH, f. 277a. 108. Perhapsthe origin of this amulet is to be found among the popularmedievaltales of Ben Sira that connect the destructivefunctions of Lilith to the circumstancesof the creation of the first woman and thatrequirefrom a healer responsiblefor writingthe amuletspecial spiritualand physical qualities.See EliYassif,Sipureiben sira be-yemeiha-beynayim(Jerusalem:MagnesPress, 1985), 231234. 109. SH, f. 34b, 54b-55a. This episode happenedafter the 1725 incidentwhen an amulet on a womanwas discoveredcontainingsabbateansymbols purportedlywrittenby R. Eybeschuetz.The similarityof these episodes suggests thatthe Jewish communitymistrustedthe productionof baCaleishem on the groundsof their alleged involvementin heresy. See Perlmuter,Ha-ravyehonatan eybeschuez, 37-42; Scholem, Mehkereyshabta'ut,228-230, 707-733. 110. SH, f. 74b. 111. "Theonly thing I am seeking is a nice place to which I could come and regainmy profession."See SH, f. 74b.
237
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern "official"ba'al shem in a particularJewish locality ended up in fiasco.112Perhaps Hillel expected that his manuscript,SH, would prove that he was a great healer, thathe was awareof new developmentsin practicalKabbalahand deservedbetter treatment.Hence, he conceived SH as an encyclopedia of practicalKabbalahin generaland as his expandedresum6in particular." Due to this twofold purpose, SH combined the vademecumof a practicalkabbalistand a personalconfession. V. HILLEL'S VADEMECUM
Following the tradition of Sefer ha-zohar and Razi'el ha-mal'akh,Hillel claims thatSH is a holy book.114He identifies two reasonsfor this. First,SH comprises a wealth of holy names, quotations from sacred kabbalistic sources, and amulets-in fact, SH itself may be regardedas a talisman,the holiness and effectiveness of which is undeniable.Second,Hillel arguesthat essentiallySH is much older than any printedbook on practicalKabbalah.He claims that all the printed books had been merely copied from SH, which remainedunknown until Hillel Ba'al Shem obtainedthe privilege to disclose it. However,Hillel did not have a maggid-a mystical teacher;a double, like Yosef Karo'smaggid mesharim"115 to secretly convey to him the contents of the book. Insteadof cleaving to esoteric celestial wisdom through the maggid, Hillel reaches out to it through pseudoepigrapicmediators--secret kabbalisticbooks and teachings.116 Twolegends cover the origins of SH. Accordingto the first, Ashmodai,king of demons, revealedsecret knowledgeto King Solomon, who recordedit, titled it SH, and hid it in the WesternWall of the Temple."7 It was uncoveredin the times 112. It was Yosef Weiss who put forwardand elaboratedthe concept of "secondaryintelligentsia"(he called it ha-nodedet,vagabond;me-madregahshniyah, second-rank,and ha-bilti-rashmit, non-official) that comprisedwanderingethical teachers,preachers,healers, etc. and that socially cemented the rising hasidic movement. See his "Reshit zemihatahshel ha-derekhha-hasidit,"Zion 16 (1951): 49-56. Forthe critiqueof Weiss, see Haim Lieberman,Ohel rahe"I(New York:H. Lieberman, 1980), 3-5. 113. Hillel perceives his writing of SH as a pious act and his perceptionresemblesthe attitude to writing among hasidei ashkenaz. See Colette Siratet al., La conception du livre chez les pietistes ashkenazesau moyenage (Genbve:Droz, 1996), 144. 114. "Seferha-kadoshha-zeh,"SH, f 194a, 314a, and throughout.Cf. "ba-seferha-kadoshhazeh," "mi-hokhmatha-sefer ha-kadoshha-zeh,"reiteratedten times at the beginning of Sefer razi'el (Amsterdam,1701), f. 3a-4b. On traditionof a sacredbook in the EuropeanJewish pietistic tradition, see Sirat,La conceptiondu livre, 37-63. 115. See R. J. Zwi Werblowsky,Joseph Karo:Lawyerand Mystic (London:OxfordUniversity Press, 1962). 116. In additionto pseudoepigraphicsources, SH containsreferencesto such well-knownkabbalisticsourcesas Seferyeszirah(34b, 318a);SodotofNachmanides( 15b,32a-b); Seferha-zohar( 171a, 187a-Pekudei; 302a, 302b, 303b, 305b, 306b-Bereshit); Tikkuneizohar (84a); Lurianic Kabbalah (14a, 16b, 23b, 30a, 70ff); Natan Neta Hannover'sLurianicsiddurSha arei zion (73b, 186a-187b); Sefer ha-pardes(20a);'Emekha-melekh(20a); Ma'aseh'elokim(35b); Sefer razi'el [ha-mal'akh](62b, 117a); Toldot'adam(74b, 105b, 155a-b); Korbanshabat (327a); Zevahpesah (both 172a). 117. SH, f. 117b-119b. Apparentlythe literaryroots of this legend date back to the encounter between King Solomon and Ashmodai, King of Demons, whom Solomon captured,incarcerated,and made reveal the secrets of shamir, a wondrousworm instrumentalin cutting the stones indispensable for the buildingof the Temple,depicted in B. Gittin.However,the idea of a secret book is absentfrom
238
The Master of an Evil Name of the Sanhedrinand transferredthroughgenerationsuntil it came into the hands of Hillel. Accordingto the second legend,Hillel himself discovered"theold book SH" and drew heavily from it.11isYet, Hillel's legend is not consistent:In a number of places, for example, Hillel notes SH and the writings of his mentorTsevi Hirschas two differenttexts, whereaselsewherehe claims thatSH was eitherwritten by Zevi Hirschor belonged to him."•19By the same token Hillel also attributes SHto his friendRabbiEfraimfromVissa.120EvidentlyHillel does not have a clearcut version of his own versus the esoteric tradition.Intellectuallyhe is too shy. In a similar situation,the Besht also maintainsthat he was in possession of unique manuscripts-in his case, of an enigmaticRabbiAdam Ba'al Shem. However,the Besht takes the decisive step towardsspiritualappropriationof his mystical manuscript. He claims that besides him and the Patriarchsperhapsnobody else ever knew the contentsof the manuscript:"Theywere in the handsof Abrahamthe Patriarch,may he rest in piece, and in the hands of Joshua,the son of Nun, but I do not know who are the others."'21Hillel Ba'al Shem would not dare make such a bold statement.Direct connection to the secret celestial library(Liebes) is something he cannotafford.The gravityof his magic groundedhim.'22 SH depicts a world split into two parts. Living beings inhabitits first part; spiritual powers inhabit the second. Each part is divided into two subsequent realms.This world,ha-'olam ha-zeh, has a borderseparatingJews from gentiles. The other world is split into the realm of holy names and angels, shemot hakedushah,and evil names and powers,shemotha-tum'ah.Each of these four parts has a pronouncedhierarchyof values and is integralper se. That is why SH starts with the extensive explanationof this parallelism: Andhereare32 rulesthatmatch32 pathsof wisdomas frontandback.As theyoperate,thankGod,in theupper[spheres]-we will be ableto operatein thelowerones.As therearetenevil sephirotmatchingtenholysephirot,there areholynamesandtherearefoulnames,therearecelestialangelsandthere areangelsof theearth(mal'akhey de-'ara).123 this source. See B. Gittin68a-b. It appearsonly in Sefer which lists fourbooks thatSolomon ha-zohar, received from Ashmodai, namely: the book containingmagical material,the book of the wisdom of Solomon, the book on physiognomy,and the book on the knowledge of precious stones. See Sefer hazohar 3:194b, 3:193b, 2:70a, 1:225b.Formore detail, see Louis Ginzberg,TheLegendsof the Jews, 6 vols. (Philadelphia:The Jewish PublicationSociety of America, 1968), 6:301-302 n. 93. 118. SH, f. 90a. 119. Forexample, he says "ThusI heardfrom the greatrabbiand he showedto me in his book Sefer ha-heshekand I copied severalpages."SH, f. 173b. 120. Forexample, Hillel recollects seeing an amulet in the book "Seferha-heshek[written]by the great rabbi,renownedhasid and kabbalistEfraim,maggid mesharimfrom Vissa." 121. Shivhei ha-besht, no. 187. See Ben-Amos and Mintz, In Praise of the Ba'al Shem Tov, 196-97. 122. It is interestingto compareHillel's manipulationswith the holy names and the interpretation of magic/mysticalin Yosef Karo:"Thedifferencebetween legitimateand illegitimateuse of Holy Names is thereforenot of pure (spiritual)versus selfish (magical) intentions..,. but between formulae of ascent and formulaeof descent."See Werblowsky,Joseph Karo, 73. 123. SH, f. Ib.
239
Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern The same reflectioncharacterizesbothrealms:Tenheavenlyemanationsarerepeated in ten impureemanations,whereasthe angelsof heavensarenegativelyparalleled by the angels of earth.All elementsoppose each otherand mirroreach other.Holy sefirahketer(the Crown)is paralleledby an abominablesefirahkaret(literally"cut off by God");good angelKatriel(literally"theCrownedLord")is overshadowedby a corruptangel Kartiel(the DestroyedLord).124However,the dividingbordersbetween them are not impenetrable.A Jew can become an apostate;a demon can appearto the Jews disguisedas a scribeor even as a ba'al shem;good angels become evil as a resultof a mere change of the orderof lettersin theirnames. SH is full of antithesesand,to use the parlanceof RomanJacobson,negativeparallelism.125 The permeabilityof the antitheticalrealms representsa constant threatto simple folk. As in the case of Macbeth'switches, it is difficult, if at all possible, to distinguishbetweenfairandfoul in Hillel's shamanicbeliefs. The threatof an eruption of evil powersinto the mattersof this world makes life dangerousand people suspicious. Hence, the importanceof the ba'al shem. He functions as a mediator between the four realms. He controls them semiotically throughtheir signs and names.He knowshow to differentiatebetweenthemandhow to transformthe powers of one into the powersof another.Finally,the ba'al shem reestablishesthe balance between them. Who, if not the bacalshem, is able to identify evil powers in the guise of a kabbalistor a scribe?And who can exorcise these powers,if not the ba'al shem? In the languageof social anthropology,SH introducesthe ba'al shem as a shamanwith a pronouncedmediatoryfunctionto restorecosmic, theological, societal, and psychological order.126Thus, the ultimategoal of SH, informingits style and genre, is to clarify to a reader-whether communalauthorityor wealthy protector-the indispensabilityof the ba'al shem.Tojustify his mission, Hillel depicts the complexity and dangerof the spiritualworlds. According to Hillel, sitra' 'ahra' (the evil power) and its wicked heirs, the demons, areubiquitous.127The numberof amuletsprescribedin SH testifies to the astonishingability of sitra' 'ahrato adaptto any environment.128 To keep it under 124. SH, f. 298a. In the traditionalkabbalistictexts, Katriel(Akhtariel)is partof the celestial dichotomyKatriel/Metatron,and not of the ManicheandichotomyKatriel/Kartiel.See the discussion in ArthurGreen,Keter:the Crownof God in EarlyJewish Mysticism(Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press, 1997), 62-65. 125. See RomanJacobson,Selected Works(The Hague:Mouton, 1979), 5:311-312. 126. Rosmanwas the first to insightfullyplace ba'alei shem in the contextof shamanism,which he explainedin the terms of MirceaEliade'ssocial anthropologyand which has become standardsince his 1996 book on the historicalBesht. See Rosman,FounderofHasidism, 13-15, 17-19. 127. Demons follow the commandmentto multiply much betterthan do humanbeings (83b). They are not afraidof and cannotbe stoppedby sifrei STAM(94b). Neither the great rabbinicauthority such as the head of a rabbinicalcourt and roshyeshivah, nor the learningfervorof the lomdimcan stop them (107a). They prefernewly built houses (293b). A special prayeris requiredto preventtheir appearance(46b-47a). If the prayerdoes not help, special secret names have to be pronouncedto banish the evil (341b). Sometimes damnationis requiredto put evil undercontrol (344b). 128. Hillel prescribesprotectiveamuletsthatshouldbe placedon the frontdoor(since a mezuza would not help, 188a,297b), abovethe threshold(103b), andovereach of the doorsof the house (297a), and still additionalamuletsare requiredagainstfire (188b, 317a), thieves (156b, 173b), evil eye (41b), demons (291a), evildoers (194b-195a), and dybbuks(198b, 132b-135a).
240
The Master of an Evil Name control,Hillel extensively employs the names of abomination(shemotha-tum'ah) thatcoverin SH a separatechapter;he even establishesan immediatedialoguewith evil powers.129Hillel not only designs amuletsagainstthe powersof kelipah(here: evil), but also makes kelipahinstrumentalin achieving practicalpurposes.SH includes amuletsthatallow observingevil powersin corpore(316a). It offersamulets that disable people (195b), induce sleep (196a), interruptrest (212b, 293b), bring evil powersinto a house (196b), preventsuccessful copulationbetween a husband and a wife (197b), and revive the dead in a dream(310a). It also offers effective imprecationsagainst enemies. SH offers one of these curses among its amendments to the Eighteen Benedictionsprayer,including it, quite surprisingly,in the petition of health and recovery(refa'eni): to thewordsof theHoly Maythenameof PlonibenPlonibecursedaccording the be due the to blessed to One, he, permission fight Christians.130Godof Yisrael,maythesonsof thismanbecomeorphansandhis wife a widowand recordedinthisTorahbefallhim.Forhe mayallthediseasesandpunishments is thetrustworthy andmercifulKing....'31 ThereforeSH is not only a kabbalisticbook but also a witchcraftprimer.It is obsessed with kelipot, forces of evil, and it seems not to be interestedin nezozot,divine sparks.Hillel is readyto use his magic to protectan individualor individuals from evil, but he is not readyto uplift an individualor individualsresortingto his mystical worldview.To paraphraseMoshe Idel, SH oscillates between mysticism and magic, but gravitatestowardsmagic.132Hence SH sharplycontrastswith the bulk of CentralEuropeanbooks of practicalKabbalahand resembles East European ones such as Zevah pesah, Toldot'adamor Mifadalot'elokim.Yet its unparalleled necromanticnuances, absent in Zevah pesah or Mifacalot'elokim,firmly place the book in the context of eighteenth-centuryPolish and Russiankoldovstvo (witchcraft).The significant amountof Slavic wordsand entirepassages of Slav129. Hillel appliesthe "namesof abomination"extensively (9a, 33b, 58b-59a, 60b-62a, 11la, 354a, 380b-381b). He interactswith the dybbuks(125a-127b, 135b-138b, 235a, 238a, 239b). In his interactionswith evil powers, Hillel was not particularlyinnovative:evil names appearedin the kabbalistic literaturelong before the spreadof LurianicKabbalah.Writtenca. 1488 and 1504 in Morocco, Sefer ha-meshivcontaineddescriptionsof evil names (shemotha-tumah),demonologicreferences, as well as descriptionof methodsto neutralizeevil power.See GershomScholem, "Le-ma'aser yosef della reina,"Meassefziyon 5 (1933): 126-127; idem., "Le-ma'asehr' yosefdella reina,"in Studies in Jewish Religious and IntellectualHistory,PresentedtoAlexanderAltmannon the Occasion of His SeventiethBirthday,ed. Siegfried Stein, RaphaelLoewe (University:Universityof AlabamaPress; London: Instituteof Jewish Studies, 1979), 101-109. 130. Tentative translationof two consecutive abbreviations:RF'EL [rashutpituah 'emz'ey lahimah]YHN"H [Yeshuaha-Notsri(ha-mekulal?)]. 131. SH, f. 68a. 132. Idel discusses differencesandsimilaritybetweenmysticalandmagic elementsin Hasidism and arguesthatmystical-magicmodel is prevalentin the entirecorpusof the hasidic literature.See Idel, Hasidism, 82-112. ForHillel, however,magical and mystical are two poles of the dichotomythatcannot be synthesized: Mysticism is a privilege of a kabbalist,whereas magic is for the popular consumption.
241
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern ic incantationsand imprecationsin SH, to be discussed elsewhere, testify to the fundamental commonality between the practices and worldview of a Slavic znakhar' (herbalhealer)and a Jewish ba'al shem.133
ID VI. HILLEL'S Who was Hillel Bacal Shem? Obviously,he was not a charlatanwho cynically exploitedandpreyedon the most paganprejudicesof simple folk, like ba'alei shem depictedby JoshuaTrachtenberg.134 Suffice to mentionthat the ba'al shem and large segmentsof the communitysharedthe same values and beliefs. Nor was Hillel a halakhic authority,a rabbinicscholar, or a rabbi, as those ba aley shem portrayedby ImmanuelEtkes.135 Rather,Hillel's worldviewand his tragic fate resemble those itinerantbacalei shem, vagabond shamans, members of the communal "secondaryintelligentsia"and practicalkabbalists,thirsty for some social leadershipand a permanentposition in the community,as describedby Gedalyah Nigal,136Michal Oron,'37 and Moshe Rosman.138Hillel could do nothing but dream of the status of Rabbi JonathanEybeschuetzor Joel Heilperin-junior.The former practiced the art of ba'al shem and occupied the lucrativeposition of a town rabbiin Prague,and the latterwas a community-sponsoredpracticalkabbalist in Zamos~. Hillel could not claim, like the charismaticand very authoritative Naftali Kaz from Pozna, that he personally had met the Angel of Death; he did not have the necessary positive charismato counterbalancethis encounter. Rather,Hillel must be comparedto BinyaminBeinish from Krotoszyn:both Hillel and BinyaminBeinish complainedof the vicissitudes of an itinerantlife; they both were self-taught kabbalistswho knew Lurianicsources and the Zohar,but both failed to establishthemselves in the community.Indeed,strikingstylistic and 133. This commonalityis manifestedin the significance for both the Slavic znakhar'and the Jewish ba'al shem alike of the phenomenaof "popularreligion,"that is, magical manuscriptscombin" and "Trebnik ing prayersandhealingremedies(Rus.: "Travnik "), blackmagic, andthe unityof prayer and incantation.See Lavrov,Koldovstvoi religiia v Rossii, 75 ff., 92-93, 127. I use here the Slavic notion znakharonly to give an additionalEast Europeanflavorto Moshe Rosman'sshrewddefinition of the ba'al shem as shaman. See Rosman,Founderof Hasidism, 13-19. 134. Trachtenberg,Jewish Magic and Superstition,79, 144, 196, 200. 135. ImmanuelEtkes, "Mekomamshel ha-magiyahu-va'alei ha-shembe-hevrahha-ashkenazit be-mifneh ha-me'otha-yud-zayin-ha-yud-het," Zion LX (1995): 87-89. 136. Nigal, Magic, Mysticism,and Hasidism, 10-12. Nigal highlightsthe dualisticfunctionof a ba'al shem: "twopersonalitiesare capableof dwelling within the same person:the personalityof the Rav-Philosopher-Leader(and even posek) and the personalityof a wonder-workingba'al-shem.Apparently,no one in that period thoughtthat these two personalitieswere in any way contradictory;to the contrary,all believed that they could exist harmoniouslywithin the same person,"ibid., 20-21. 137. In her article on RabbiSamuel Falkknown as BacalShem from London,Oronaccurately highlights the ba'al shem's constant strive for social leadershipand his desire to use his magic practices with the aim of establishing himself socially. See Michal Oron, "Dr. Samuel Falk and the Eibeschuetz-EmdenControversy,"242-245. Also see Oron, Mi- "ba'alshed " le- "ba'alshem." 138. Rosmandefines the commondenominatorofbaalei shem as their"abilityto employ magical techniquesfor manipulatingthe nameor namesof God to achievepracticaleffects in everydaylife" and of their practiceof "whatwas termed practicalkabbalah."Rosman demonstratesthe presence of ba'alei shem at various levels of society. See Rosman,FounderofHasidism, 13-15, 17-19.
242
The Master of an Evil Name thematicparallelsexist betweenBinyaminBeinish'sSefershem tov katanand Hillel's Sefer ha-heshekthatdeserve separatediscussion. On the otherhand,although he was not a town rabbi, Hillel resembles Hirsh Franklfrom Shwabach(16621740). Like Frankl,Hillel sufferedfrompersecutionsandwas deprivedof the right to operateas ba'al shem. Frankl'sbook did not survive persecution,yet from its German renderingit is obvious that both Hillel and Frankl shared Manichean worldviews,were at home with evil powers,and were inclined to black magic and witchcraft.139Ultimately,Hillel resemblesIsraelben Eliezer,the Besht, beforethe latter settled down ca. 1740 in Miqdzyboz as a kahal-supportedmystic and magician.140Hillel and Israel Besht both were itineranthealers and practicalkabbalists, neitherwas a rabbinicfigure, andboth were looking for a tenuredposition. We will speculatelaterwhetherthe differencesbetweenthem stemmedonly from the fact thatone (the Besht) was more successful in the communalmarketthanthe other (Hillel). Like most of the East Europeankabbalists,referredto in SH as hasidim,Hillel Ba'al Shem was a classical pre-Beshtianhasid. He belonged to the generation of late- seventeenth and early-eighteenth-centurymystics, who, as Gershom Scholem indicates, combined learningKabbalahand practicingasceticism. Neither the Kuty kabbalisticcircle nor the kloiz of Brody were mentionedin SH, yet Hillel's rigorousbehavioralrequirementsseem to correspondfully with the patterns of personalconductadoptedby hasidimin Kuty,Brody,and othergroups of EastEuropeanpietists.141 Moreover,SHmay be used as a sourcefor the pre-Beshtian Hasidism that provides detailed descriptions of hasidic mystical practices (hanhagot).142Hillel reiteratesthat ritual purity (tevilah, tefilah ve-taharah) is indispensablefor a kabbalistengaged in holy work. Hillel meticulouslydescribes when it is forbiddenor allowed to write amulets. He introduceshis peculiarcalendarof "clean"and "unclean"days for those who are"modest."He designs a special calendarfor oaths and damnations.He stresses that a person cannotbe a true healer, ba'al shem, unless he is a true kabbalist,ba'al sod.143 According to Hillel's rites, a healer should pray with profound kavanah, alone, not necessarily with a quorum.144 A week of abstinence and daily ritual 139. GedalyahNigal, Ba'al-shem le-ma'asar'olam: Goralo ha-tragi shel ha-rav hirshfrankl (Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University Press, 1993), 11-16. Mention should be made of the dramaticdifference between Hillel's Manicheanusage of the evil powers and the idea of the transcendedevil in LurianicKabbalah.See IsaiahTishby,Toratha-racve-ha-kelipahbe-kabalatha-'ari (Jerusalem:Mifal ha-shikhpul,1962). 140. Rosman,FounderofHasidism, 63-82, 159-170. 141. See YaakovHisday,"Eved ha-shem-be-doram shel avot ha-hasidut,"Zion 47 (1982): 253-292; Hundert,Jews in Poland-Lithuania,119-142; JosephWeiss, "Pneumaticsin Pre-Hasidism," 27-42; Rivka Shatz Uffenheimer,Hasidism as Mysticism:QuietisticElementsin EighteenthCentury Hasidic Thought(Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press; Jerusalem:The Magnes Press, 1993), 111143; AbrahamJ. Heshcel, TheCircle of the Baal Shem Tov:Studies in Hasidism, ed. Samuel Dressner (Chicago and London:Universityof Chicago Press, 1985), esp. 4-14, 45-56, 113-151. 142. For an in-depthdiscussion of the books on hasidic behavioralpatterns,see Gries, Sifrut ha-hanhagot.
143. SH, f. 2a, 105b, 153a, 154a, 314b. 144. SH, f. 62b. Cf. the personalconduct of the Besht who was reportedto pray in the loneli-
243
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern ablutionsare requiredfor particularamulets.Writingthe amuletrequirespietistic conduct and a tranquilenvironment.The kabbalistshould preparean amulet in a clean room. He must be alone in this room. He should write an amulet on a fine parchment.There shouldbe nobody else in the house: no rituallyuncleanwomen, no charlatanssuspectedof makingforgeries,and,amazingly,no repentantsinners, ba'alei teshuvah.145Indeed,deliberateself-restraintfrom physical pleasures, the applicationof kavvanotand fastingbeforeandafterthe performancemakeHillel's conduct particularlyclose to the membersof the pneumaticcircles, predecessors of the BeshtianHasidism.'46However,in vain would one look in SH for such notions of the Beshtian Hasidism as devekut.147Nor does SH requireconcentration on the letters of the amulets.148 Nor does one find in SH-except in traditional formulaicstatements-an indicationof its author'sstrong concern with communal redemption.Divine sparkshave no place in the darkrealms of SH-perhaps this is one of the reasons that in SH there are no traces of a joyous spiritualityso characteristicof BeshtianHasidism. VII. CONCLUSIONS Hillel was both a typical and an atypical ba'al shem. He was deeply immersed in a Manicheanuniverseinhabitedby powerfuldemons, evil spirits,dybbuks, and devils.'49 In his mind, these powers were ubiquitous, as in the Weltanschauungof the famous kabbalist Shimshon of Ostropolie (d. 1648), to whom Hillel refers,and in his nephewYaCakov ben Pesah'sZevah (26lkiew, pesah.
ness of the Carpathianwoods. See Shivhei ha-besht, stories nos. 8 and 9; Ben-Amos and Mintz, In Praise of the Ba'al Shem Tov,18-23. 145. SH, f. 154a, 226b-227a, 331b. Hillel interpretsliterallythe famous statement"inthe place of the ba'alei teshuvah the righteouszaddikimare not able to stand."His interpretationfollows R. Yohananand not R. Avahu,see Berakhot34b and Rashi ad loc. Interestinglyenough, as in a numberof othercases, here, too, Hillel seems to be arguingagainstcrypto-sabbateanreadingof classical sources, in this case, of the gemara. See, for instance, the sabbateaninterpretationof Berakhot34b that emphasizes the superiorityof a ba'al teshuvahover zaddikgamur,in Naor,Post SabbatianSabbatianism, 22-25. However,in othercases Hillel inclines towardsabbateanideas. Thus, for instance,he resortsto a sabbateaninterpretationof the planet Saturn,which for the sixteenth-centurykabbalistsymbolized six profanedays of the week and not Shabbatbut for ShabbetaiTsevi and his followers came to symbolize Shabbatand JubileeYear.See Elliot K. Ginsburg,TheShabbatin the Classical Kabbalah(State University of New YorkPress, 1989), 198 and 240-241; Moshe Idel, Messianic Mystics (Yale:Yale University,1998), 192-196; Scholem, SabbataiSevi, 430. At this point I thinkthe questionof Hillel's inconsistentcrypto-Sabbateanismhas to be left open. 146. The Besht was also stringentaboutrules of writingamulets.Cf. Shivheiha-besht,no. 187; Ben-Amos and Mintz,In Praise of the Ba'al Shem Tov,196-197. 147. On the importanceof devekutin Hasidism, see GershomScholem, "Devekutas Communion with God,"in TheMessianicIdea in Judaism(New York:SchockenBooks, 1971), 186-191, 206211. 148. On the importanceof contemplativeandecstaticpracticesin Hasidism,see Idel,Hasidism, 45 and 75. 149. It will be fruitfulto compare(and differentiate)the worldviewof Hillel and that of AbrahamYagel(1552-ca. 1623), an Italian-Jewishdoctor,magician,andkabbalistwho resortedto the work of Aristotle to prove the physical reality of demons. See David B. Ruderman,Kabbalah,Magic, and Science (Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1988), 43-58.
244
The Masterof an Evil Name 1722), which Hillel often quotes.'50Hillel's familiaritywith and closeness to this world informsthe second meaningof his title thatI propose:the Masterof an Evil Name. Hillel starts with making a dybbukhis only respectableinterlocutorand ends by makingevil powerspredominantin his thinking.Hillel says, for instance, thatany operation(pe'ulah)thatresemblesa burntoffering(ketoret)shouldbe forbidden because burntofferings nurturedemons; any imitationof the burntoffering will benefit evil powers.'5' To be on the safe side, one should not disturbevil, Hillel seems to argue. But should evil appear,Hillel's knowledge of how to control its advancewould be crucial. Again, the contrastwith the Besht is illuminating.Havingbeen rebukedfor smokinghis pipe, the Besht is reportedto haverepliedthatwhile smokinghe thinks about the incense (ketoret)in the Temple.Througha kavanahmechanismhe spiritualizesa suspicioushabit,imagininghimself serving God in the Templeand thus achieving a higher status of devekut(cleaving to God).152 Besht came to be perceived as a pietist who mysticallytransformsevil, elevating humansouls trapped in it. 53In contrast,Hillel eitherengages with evil or keeps it at bay,but always is bound by evil names or an Evil Name, with which he magisteriallyoperatesand, perhaps,whose victim he becomes.154 150. On Shimshon and his worldview,see YehudaLiebes, "Halom u-mezi'ut: le-demuto shel ha-kadoshha-mekubalr. shimshonmi-ostropolye,"Tarbiz52 (1982): 83-109. See SH, f. 42b. 151. SH, f. 229a. A particularpredispositionof demons to the smell of incense is mentionedin variousJewish sources. For instance, in a Yiddish text on Yosef de la Reyna writtenin Amsterdamby crypto-SabbatianLeib ben Ozer Rosenkrantz(d. 1727), the incense is depictedas a powerfulremedy thathelps demonsto acquireadditionalpower,breakthe chainsthatbindthem,andliberatethemselves. See Zalman Rubashov(Shazar), "Ma'asehr. yosef de la reyna be-masoretha-shabtait,"in Eder hayekar:divreisifrutu-mehkarmukdashimle-shmuelaba gorodetsky,ed. EmanuelBin-Gorion(TelAviv: Devir, 1947), 110-114. An episode in Sefer ha-zohar, ParashatTerumahdepicts burntofferings, the smell of which helps demons to cause nocturnalpollutionto men. Althoughthe Zoharicmotif does not emphasize the direct impact of the incense on demons, it is functionallyclose to the incense/demon motif since it demonstratesthe ability of evil angels to nurturethemselves from the smell of the offerings (korbanot).See Zohar 2:130a. 152. Forthe Beshtianconcept of the spiritualmeaningand theurgicalpowerof burntofferings, see the discussion in Rosman,FounderofHasidism, I11. Sabbatiansconsideredsmoking tobacco one of the ways to neutralizeevil powers.This behavioralpatternwas later inheritedby the Hasidim,who consideredsmoking the way to substituteincense offerings in the Temple.Mitnagdim,authorsof antihasidic writings such as Zamirarizim and Sheverposhim, were quick to depict and mock this hasidic custom. For a comprehensivelist of sources on tobacco smoking among sabbatiansand hasidim, see Gries, Sifrutha-hanhagot,205 n. 109. Louis Jacobs, however,considers smoking tobacco "peripheral" for the hasidim, see his "Tobaccoand the Hasidim,"Polin 11 (1998): 25-30. 153. See, e.g., the story about the Besht uplifting the soul of a man turnedinto a frog for disobeying Jewish legal practicesand trappedby Satan,see Ben-Amos and Mintz, In Praise of the Bacal ShemTov,par. 12, p. 24-26; also see a story aboutthe Besht neutralizingevil and upliftingthe soul of a divorcedand "loose" woman ready to convertout of Judaism,ibid., 245-247 par.238. It is significant thatthe Besht made an attempt(thoughunsuccessful)to make a tikkun(correction)and uplift the sparkof ShabbetaiTsevi, see ibid., par.66, p. 86-87. 154. As far as the furtherdevelopmentof Hillel's healing methods and the usage of the "holy and impurenames"(shemotha-kedushahandshemot ha-tum'ah),the eighteenth-centuryhasidic literaturemoved far away from "magic"to "mysticism,"insisting on the predominanceof spiritualrather
245
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern Hillel's life story and his book furnisha numberof tricky questions. If one takes into considerationthe crypto-sabbateanovertonesof the notion "modest"in eighteenth-centuryEast Europe, one might ask whether Hillel was only a preBeshtianHasid,zanuac,or also a repentantcrypto-sabbatean.155 Hillel mentionsa numberof times thathe is "repenting."His repentance,teshuvah,could have been the confession not only of a ba'al shem who has had some spectacularfailuresbut also of a crypto-sabbateantrying to come to grips with the Jewish community.156 Indeed, for the purpose of exorcising dybbuks,that is to say, schismatics, there was nobody betterthan a formercrypto-sabbatean:he knew the disease and was able to take care of it. Fromthis vantagepoint it wouldbe temptingto reassess the early-eighteenth-centurydybbuksas schismatics and to reconsiderexorcisms in the Polish-Jewishcommunityin the context of the communalstruggle againstthe crypto-sabbateanheresy and its ramifications.Forexample, before he left for the Landof Israel,R. Naftali Kaz from Posen, namedin SH amongprominentba'alei shem, was reportedto have met the Angel of Death in the disguise of a beggar.157 But it is well-known that the "Angel of Death,"Mal'akh ha-mavet, was the euphemism for the notorioussabbateanHayyim Malakhused in all the bans of excommunicationspronounced,repeated,and enforced in Centraland East Europe againsthim and his followers.158 Was R. Naftali Kaz using the languagethat was transparentfor his contemporariesbutobscureonly for us? WhenZ61kiew,this uncrowned capital of the crypto-sabbateans,startedan unparalleledpublicationof books by ba'alei shem, was thatan attemptto combatthe heresy or to disseminate it? At any rate, these speculationsare particularlypivotal in view of the dramatic than naturaltypes of medicine. Forexample, analyzingthe Degel mahanehefraimby Moshe Ephraim of Sudylk6w,the grandsonof the Besht, Alan Brill observes that"Incontrastto bacaleishem literature, the Degel does not discuss demons or naturalcures. Instead,the spiritualstatusof the zaddik is based on his connectionto the inner light of the Torahand his sense of the Divine vitality within objects that cures and gives powerover nature."See Brill's"The SpiritualWorldof the Masterof Awe: Divine, Vitality, Theosis, and Healing in Degel MahanehEphraim,"Jewish Studies Quarterly8 (2001): 27-65; the quotationis on p. 31. 155. While I leave this questionopen, I need to mentionthat one does not find in SH traces of a propheticfervor,which, accordingto the recent research,was pivotal for the sabbateans.See Matt Goldish, TheSabbateanProphets(Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 2004). 156. This is not to rule out the possibility of placing Hillel's teshuvahin the context of pietistic practicesthat were establishedby hasidei ashkenazand subsequentlyinformedmuch of pre-Beshtian hasidic rites. Cf. Yosef Dan, HasidutAshkenaz(TelAviv: Misradha-bitahon,1992), 72-76. On the decisive impact of hasidei ashkenazon the formationof the religious values of the early Polish-Jewish communities,see IsraelTa-Shma,"Onthe Historyof the Jews in Twelfth-ThirteenthCenturyPoland," Polin 10 (1997): 287-317. 157. Nigal, "RavNaftali Kaz,"92. 158. On Haim Malakh, see Gershom Scholem, "Berukhiyahrosh ha-shabtaimbe saloniki," Zion 6 (1941):119-147, esp. 123-24; idem., "Iggeretme'et rabiHayimMalakh,"Zion 11 (1946): 168174; idem., "Le movementsabbataisteen Pologne,"Revieude I'histoiredes religions 143 (153): 209220; idem., "Malakh,Hayim,"Ha-entsiklopedyahha-ivrit(JerusalemandTelAviv: Hevrahle-hotsa'at entsiklopedyot,1963), 23:524-525; EncyclopediaJudaica, s.v. "Malakh,Hayimben Solomon";Gershom Scholem, Mehkarimu-mekorotle-toldot ha-shabtautve-gilguleyah(Jerusalem:Mosad Bialik, 1974), 100-109. Also, see Jan Dokt6r,Sladami Mesjasza-Apostaty.Zydowskieruchymesjanhskiew XVIIi XVIIIwieku(Wroclaw:Leopoldinum,1998), 70-71, 113-114.
246
The Master of an Evil Name demographicincreaseof ba'alei shem in East Europeat the turnof the eighteenth century-and their abrupt decrease at the end of the eighteenth century. One should not forget that it was an abundance,and not scarcity,of various types of ba'alei shem that irritatedthe authorof Sefer ha-heshekand made his ordealsbitter. Hillel could have been irritatedand even intimidatedbecause he constantly felt the pressurefromanothertype of his competitors,the so-calledfeldshers(originally,formerbarbershiredby the armyto attendto the woundedsoldiers andprovide primarymedical assistance,who at a later stage became paramedics).These semiprofessionaldoctors "withbelow universitylevel education"rapidlygrew in numbersin the late-seventeenthand early-eighteenthcenturies.Perhapssome of them turnedto privatepracticein Easternand CentralPolandas soon as they left Jan Sobieski's army,which boasted quite a numberof Jewishfeldshers. Others could have migratedwestwardfrom Russia and left-bankUkraine,where, in the 1710s, Peterthe Greatestablishedat least fifty militarygarrisonhospitals staffed withfeldshers as well as special institutionsfor trainingthem. Finally,some doctors could come from Germanlands where Jews, startingfrom 1721, were granted the right to study medicine at universities. 59 Hillel was one of the last early-modernitinerantkabbalistsinvolved,to use Moshe Idel's parlance,in magic and mysticism; as such he was challenged from the one side by the rapidprofessionalizationof the field of popularKabbalahand from the otherby the rising professionalizationof popularmedicine. Feldshers and doctors, and, late in the eighteenthcentury,new Beshtian Hasidim were slowly but steadily pushing oldfashionedhealers such as Hillel out of the East Europeanmarketplaceby making them altogetherredundant. Anotherreasonthatcaused so manygrievancesto Hillel was perhapsthe fact that Hillel was not a learnedTalmudicscholar (talmid hakham).Hillel does not seem to have received a consistent rabbinic(yeshivah) education.He could hardly compete with rabbis and scholars who, in addition to their main occupation, practicedas exorcists and healers.160Fromthis viewpoint, Hillel's failureobliquely explains the success of the Besht, who was no talmid hakhameither.Yet the Besht, despite the attemptsof the editorsof Shivheiha-Beshtto emphasizehis divinely inspiredknowledge and diminishhis reputationas a rabbinicscholar,managed to set and accomplisha task the tracesof which we do not find in SH. In his letterthe Besht wrote to GershonKutover,his brother-in-law,the Besht attempted synthesizingmidrashicreferences,Kabbalah,popularJudaicbeliefs, theurgy,and magic in the frameworkof a mystically shapedpropheticvision. We are not able to look at the prose writtenby the Besht or at the letters composed by Hillel, but 159. See EdwardKossoy and AbrahamOhry, The Feldshers: Medical, Sociological and HistoricalAspects of Practitionersof Medicine with Below UniversityLevel Education(Jerusalem:Magness Press, 1992), 68-71, 135-36, 144-45; JohnM. Efron,Medicineand the GermanJews: a History (New Haven, CT:Yale UniversityPress, 2001), 60-61. 160. In his review of Rosman'sbook on the Baal Shem Tov,Gries mentionedthatthe statusof talmidhakhamwas pivotal for a practicingba'al shem eager to sell his amulets and healing remedies to his clientele. See his "Demutoha-historitshel-ha-besht:bein sakinha-minatehimshel ha-historiyon le-makheloshel hokerha-sifrut,"Kabbalah5 (2000): 423.
247
YohananPetrovsky-Shtern in comparisonwith the somewhatclumsy and sometimes not very articulateHillel, one may want to observe thatfrom a literaryperspectivethe Besht is more talented: he does look like a talmid hakhamwho is proficient in classical Hebrew sources and who masteredthe style of a rabbinicepistle. Finally,in the vein of a purespeculation,let us considerdifferencesbetween Hillel Ba'al Shem and the Ba'al Shem Tov.Unlike Hillel, Israelben Eliezer "was a ba'al shem parexcellence, offering the promiseof collective securityfor the entire House of Israel and not just magical defense for individualsor his own community."161 Perhapsdue to this strongcommitmentto the mystical,communal,and salvific-which we do not find in SH-Israel ben Eliezer became a charismatic personality,a sedentaryba'al shem supportedby the community,and eventually, in the hasidic memory,the founderof the movement.This appraisalof the Besht has been furthersubstantiatedby the careerof Hillel, who apparentlynever tried to transformmagic, failed to establishhimself in a Jewishcommunity,andfell into oblivion. YohananPetrovsky-Shtern, NorthwesternUniversity Evanston,Illinois
161. Rosman,Founderof Hasidism, 181. Rosman is right arguingthat "[t]his was apparently one of the featuresof his activity that singled him out as a ba'al shem par excellence."Also see idem, "InnovativeTradition:Jewish Culturein the Polish-LithuanianCommonwealth,"in Culturesof the Jews: A New History, ed. David Biale (New York:Schocken Books, 2002), 551.
248
The Artist as a Mother and the Birth of Terrible Beauty in the Post-Holocaust World: Ruth Almog's "The Inner Lake" Author(s): Rachel Feldhay Brenner Source: AJS Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Nov., 2004), pp. 249-271 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131523 . Accessed: 20/07/2011 02:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 28:2 (2004), 249-271
THE ARTISTAS A MOTHERANDTHE BIRTH OF TERRIBLEBEAUTYIN THE POST-HOLOCAUST WORLD: RUTH ALMOG'S THEINNERLAKE*
by Rachel Feldhay Brenner I havethe feeling "Whydidyou becomemy friend?"I askher."Sometimes thatyoureallyhateme." "Ineeda mother,especiallya Jewishmother,andthispartsuitsyouquite well ... Butsincewe aretalkingaboutit, whydidyou becomemy friend?" "Becauseyou addsomefreshnessto my life, you fill it withyourstormy mothmoods,I amholdingon to youryouthand,as youhavesaid,apparently erhoodis mydestiny." "SoI amyourbaby." "Ina way." andherprotagonist -The narrator-writer in Ha-cagamha-penimi(The InnerLake)'
In her path-breakingstudy of Israeli women's fiction, Yael Feldmanconcludes her analysis of RuthAlmog's Roots ofAir (1987) with an insightfulobservation. In this major work, Feldman claims, Almog trespassed into the male writers'territoryand became the first among Israeliwoman writersto producean autobiographicalfiction of the "portraitof an artistas a young girl."2Feldmanconcludes that, once the stage of "therapeutic"self-examination,which encompasses "boththe oedipal fixation andthe daughter-motheridentification,"has been completed, "Almoghas now embracedthe motherin herself."3Indeed,Feldmanidentifies the next stage in Almog's artistic evolution in her collection of stories, *Thisarticleis partof a book on RuthAlmog'sfiction, whichwill appearin the seriesMigdarim [Genders]of Ha-Kibuzha-me'uhad,edited by Prof. HannahNaveh. I would like to thankthe International ResearchInstituteon Jewish Women/BrandeisUniversityfor its supportof this study. 1. RuthAlmog, Ha-'agamha-penimi(TheInnerLake)(TelAviv: Ha-Kibuzha-me'uhad,2000), 79. Here afterIL. All quotationsare taken from this text; paginationfollows citation.All translations are mine. 2. It is importantto mention here Amalia Cahana-Karmon's1966 short story "Ne'ima Sasson kotevet shirim"("Ne'ima Sasson Writes Poems")as early precursorof the "portraitof the artist as a young girl."The story can be found in English translationin the collection Ribcage: Israeli Women's Fiction, A HadassahAnthology,ed. Carol Diament and Lily Ratok (New York:Hadassah, 1994), 4871. 3. YaelS. Feldman,No Roomof TheirOwn:Genderand Nationin Israeli Womens Fiction (New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress, 1999), 223.
249
Rachel Feldhay Brenner ArtisticMending(1993), suggesting thatnow the story of anotherhas become the focus of Almog's artisticconcern. InArtisticMendingthe writerturnsher "motherly"attentionto life stories of children,mainly second-generationHolocaustsurvivors, seeking ways to understand,but also "mend"the damagingeffects of the tragic historicallegacy. Yet,Almog who, since the beginning of her artisticcareerin 1969 with the collection of stories TheNightlyCharitiesofMargaritahas provedone of the most complex and innovativeIsraeliwriters,seems to shift fromthe orientationofArtistic Mending in her recent, and, so far, latest, work, The Inner Lake (2000). This work of fiction, arguablyone of the most challenging in Israeli literature,abandons the causal, teleological story line thatcharacterizesboth Roots ofAir and the stories in ArtisticMending.Almog did not make the interpretivetask of TheInner Lake easy. In an interview,she claimed to have discardedthe plot: "Theplot does not interestme. By its very naturethe realisticgenre, which is saturatedwith plot, distractsand entertainsand its shallowness diminishesthe richness of the human being." She admits to having constructeda text that defies the normativedefinition of the novel: "I call my new book a 'hibur' ('connection'),4because 'hu hibur shel' ('it is a connection of') poetry and prose, fiction and reality, myths and mythologicalcharacters,lots of nature,especially swans and peacocks."5 Does The Inner Lake reflect the author'sconceptualizationof the text as hibur? Or, to recall D. H. Lawrence'famous dictum "Nevertrust the artist,trust the tale,"should we treatthe author'sdescriptionof her work as a randomcollection of various materialswith a measure of skepticism?At first sight, the constructionof the book reaffirmsthe absenceof the plot and reinforcesthe notion of an encyclopediccollection.The structureof TheInnerLakeis symmetrical;it consists of two main sections entitled "The Notebook of the Swan"and "The Notebook of the Peacock,"each of which contains seventy-one numberedsegments. The segments, which deal with swans and peacocks, are presented as separate, completeepisodes.Thereis no "nature,"thatis, no descriptionsof the birdsin their naturalhabitat,but, rather,scientific informationon the birds, the history of ornithology, and the portrayalsof swans and peacocks in literature,especially in myth. The narratorhas indefatigablycollected stories of swans and peacocks in Greekand Romanmythologies,in Irish,Scandinavian,and Europeanlegends, and in the studies of medieval Christianand Moslem ornithologists,as well as in the theology of the little-knownYazidicommunityin Iraq. The book concludes with an Addendum,which containsclarificationof the externalmaterialsincorporatedinto the book and additionaldocumentationabout swans and peacocks. The Addendumalso explains some of the myths used in the text, and includes Almog's brief acknowledgmentof the people "who helped me 4. Hibur also means "addition,""linkage,""connection,"as well as an essay, anda piece of creative writing. The most common usage of mehaber,which we shall encounterin a moment, are, according to Milon Even Shoshan, "author,"or "composer." 5. RuthAlmog in interviewwithYehudaKoren,"'Anilo makirah'anashimme'usharim"(I don't know happypeople), Yediot'aharonot(Feb.11, 2000): 26. Translationfromthe Hebrewmine.
250
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake to compose (be-hibur) this book"6 (IL 140-2, my emphasis). The Addendum, which begins with the informationthatthe poems includedin the book were either translatedor written by ha-mehaberet(the author), makes an explicit autobiographicalconnectionbetween "me,"the authorwho wrote the Addendum,and the the writerof the book, who appearsas first-personnarrator.The blending of the boundariesbetweenthe fictional text andthe externaltext is reinforcedby the cross acknowledgementof Professor Liebes's contributionof information about the Yazidicult, in the Addendumand in the text. The first-personnarrator'smention of the professoras "an importantscholarof religion"also refers the readerto the Addendumto seek more informationabout Liebes's contribution(IL 107). This identificationof the authoroutside the fictional text with the narrator,who is also, as we shall see in moment, the writerof this fiction is only one of the examples7 thathighlightthe autobiographicalcomponentin the text. We recall Feldman'sobservationthat with Roots of Air, Almog has completed the self-portraitof her emotional growth as daughterand moved on to "motherly"writing, which expresses concern with the other.Are we then to deduce that in The Inner Lake Almog returnsto the genre of autobiographicalfiction, or, rather,that the autobiographicalcomponents,which blur the factual and the fictional, are partof the literaryexperimentof the hibur? I arguethat the use of the autobiographical"I"to removethe boundariesbetween imaginationand reality, betweennarratorand author,signals a particularconceptionof this autobiographicalfiction. As I propose to show, this autobiographicalfiction investigates the constructof the authorin the post-Holocaustera. TheInnerLakereversesthe acceptednotion of autobiographyas the life stoof its author.Rather,it examines the relationshipbetween the artistand her art. ry More specifically, the text explores the process of becoming a matureartist, or, metaphoricallyspeaking, a process gives birthto the mother in the artist.Rather thanwritingabouthow she writes, or how she has shapedher vision, Almog shows how her art, or, more specifically, the powers of her artistic imaginationhave shaped her as a matureartist.This particularapproachto autobiographicalselfanalysis reflects an understandingthat artisticmaturitysignifies the readinessof the artistto submit to the creativeprocess. In today'sworld,compliancewith the call of creativityis by no means easy. In view of the recenthistoryof horror,it signifies a fearfulconfrontationwith sufferingand evil. Paradoxically,a degree of authorialempowermentderives from the recog6. The constructbe-hiburfollowed by the object sefer zeh (this book) takes the meaningof the process of compositionthatproducedthe book. 7. Such as, for instance,the epigraphfrom a poem by ElizabethBishop, to which the narrator refers several times in the text (we shall discuss the thematic importanceof this "combination"later on). Anotherexample of the autobiographicalaspect of the text is the omission to name the first-person narrator.Her namelessness leads to an understandingthat she is the same person who wrote the Addendum.The authorof theAddendum,which is not signed, identifies herselfas mehaberet("theauthor"),whose name, RuthAlmog appearson the cover. Perhapsthe most telling evidence of the autobiographicalcomponent is the fact that the narrator,the fictional writer of The Inner Lake calls her book a hibur(IL 16).
251
Rachel FeldhayBrenner nition of the limitationsof the artist in the age that experiencedthe horrorof the Holocaust.It is the recognitionthather aestheticdesire for an unperturbed,remote world of eternalbeauty and tranquility,which transcendstime, must coexist with the ethical issues of the world of here and now, a world that has experiencedthe collapse of all moral values. The concern about the world signals the birth of the motherin the artist.The maturityof the artistemerges in the recognitionof the omnipresenceof evil, and at the same time in the desireto fend off its expansion.The aspirationto create beauty not only as an expression of the aesthetic, but also as an affirmationof ethical values, marksartisticmaturityin the age of terror. TheInnerLakepresentsthe artisticprocess as an ongoing collision of forces, which constantlypulls the artist in opposite directions.The ideal of eternal,perfect beauty collides with the imperfectionsof this world. "My life story,"the narratortells us, "oscillates between the swan and the peacock" (IL 18). On the one hand,the temptationof withdrawalinto the cold spheresof purityand innocence, as representedby the swan and its deathsong, is irresistible;on the otherhand,the attractionand the sinfulness of the world,as representedby the peacock in the arrogantdisplayof its colorfultail, claim involvement.While the formerlures her to the spheresof the nonhumanbeauty of tranquilityand repose, the latterdemands her engagementwith the humanworld,whose beautyhas been marredby a history of violence and terror. The white swan, "sails gracefully in silence"; it is pure and vulnerable,and it is only when its sinuous, slim, delicate neck is brokenthat "it utters ... a magnificent and raresong."In contrast,the peacock cannot sing. Its voice is ugly and wicked. Nonetheless "the bird'sspectacularplumage and his emeraldeyes know aboutthe world and bewitch it when it spreadshis tail and displays it in its rahav [hubris]and in its desire"(IL 16). As the narratorsees it, each bird is a workof art, and also a creativeartist.The dazzling white beautyof the gracefullysailing swan and the stunningcolorful display of the peacock's tail evoke equally magnificent visualizations of the birds. At the same time, the swan's death song and the peacock's act of seductionidentify the birdsas accomplishedartists.The swan transforms its agony into a lamentation,and the innocentbeauty of its song transcends death.The peacock is a deceiver and a performingartist;the boastful show of its tail seduces the world and celebrateslife. The swan and the peacock are presented as emblems;the former is an emblem of an art of impassionatepurity,while the latteris an emblem of an art passionatelyengaged in life. As we shall see in the following discussion, even though the narratorwould preferto be a "swanartist," that is, the poet of the eternalswan song, the aspect of the "peacockartist"of seductive earthybeauty and life experience cannot be left out; in fact, it is an integral and vital motive in the formationof the matureartist. The magnetic attractionto tranquilbeauty is signaled in the choice of the epigraphto the book. These are the opening lines from ElizabethBishop's "The ImaginaryIceberg:" We'dratherhavetheicebergthanthe ship, Althoughit meanttheendof travel. Althoughit stoodstock-stilllikecloudyrock 252
RuthAlmog's TheInner Lake Andall thesea weremovingmarble. We'dratherhavetheicebergthantheship.8 Bishop does not remainoutside the text; she is the narrator's"mostbeloved poet" (IL 25), and halfwaythroughthe Notebook of the Swan, we find a directreference to the imaginaryiceberg. Here the narratoragrees with Bishop's final affirmation that "Icebergsbehoove the soul" (IL 43). Let us note the following lines that provide an explication: "(both being self-made from elements least visible)/to see them so: fleshed, fair, erected indivisible."The association of the iceberg and the soul elucidatesthe common aspects of abstractionand detachment,of invisibility and indivisibilitythat connect the iceberg and the soul. Yet, in the final segment of the Notebook of the Peacock, which concludes the book, the narratorchanges her mind: Whatis seekingthesoulthatwandersfromportto port?Evenatnightwillthe peacockshakeits tailandscream. .. andlikea flamewill its colorsdaze... Andtheiceberg-cuts itsfacetsfromwithin-dangerous,powerfulandtransparent.Butsometimeswe'dratherhavetheshipandthereforegood-bye,we say,good-bye,farewell(IL139myemphasis). The preferencefor the iceberg is no longer absolute.As the ship sails from port to port, and the peacock dazzles with its colors and screams in its ugly voice, there emergesthe consciousness of an engagementwith the world.Whatdeterminesthe ship as an option?The answeris suggestedin the descriptionof the iceberg,which, like a diamond,"cutsits facets fromwithin."This qualityof self-makingand selfcontainmentis reinforcedby the lines that follow in the original version: "Like jewelry from a grave/it saves itself perpetuallyand adorns/only itself."We recall that,as the title of Bishop'spoem tells us, the iceberg is imaginary.The artisthas, therefore,fallen underthe spell of an imaginedobject, which not only is powerful and menacing,but also completely self-absorbed,as it createsand recreatesitself, for its own sake, in perpetualnarcissisticself-admiration.The image of the grave alludes to the lifeless quality of this self-adornment.The iceberg'sbeauty is enclosed withinitself, andit can mirroronly itself.9By admittingthatthe ship "sometimes"may be preferredoverthe iceberg,the narratorreneges on the desire for the self-sufficient, self-containedsoul, removedfrom the troublesof the world. This is not the first time that the importanceof the ship is recognized.The choice of the ship overthe iceberghas been mademuch earlierand in a muchmore decisive way by anothervoice. It is the voice of a characterthatthe narratorintroduces along with herself in the beginningof the book:"Iam a bird-watcherby profession and so is Metuka,my protagonistof many names" (IL 9, my emphasis). 8. ElizabethBishop, TheCompletePoems (New York:Farrar,Strausand Giroux, 1969), 4. My emphasis. 9. Interestinginterpretationsthat inspiredmy readingof Bishop'spoems can be found in Anne Colwell, Inscrutable Houses: Metaphors of the Body in the Poems of Elizabeth Bishop (Tuscaloosa:
Universityof AlabamaPress, 1997), and Susan McCabe,ElizabethBishop: Her Poetics of Loss (University Park:PennsylvaniaState UniversityPress, 1994).
253
Rachel Feldhay Brenner The othernames of the protagonistare Glyceraand Dolce, and I shall discuss the meaning of the triple naming in a moment. Now I focus on Glycera,who represents the most prominentaspect in this composite constructof the protagonist. The narrator'sclaim to her protagonistis short-lived.Though conceived in the narrator'simagination,the protagonistquicklyassertsher independence,when she decisively rejectsBishop'spoem. The protagonist,who hasjust made an independentdecision to change her name from Metukato Glycera,declaresthat she is not at the "theend ofjourney, but at its beginning,"and she states,"I came here to watch the ship, not the iceberg"(IL 25). Glycera'srejection of the iceberg foreshadowsherwillfulness.Againstthe narrator'sdesire for the iceberg,Glycerapulls in the opposite direction,towardpassionateand tragic involvementwith life. The opposition is already signaled in the visual aspect, which contraststhe solitary, transparent,and immobile icebergwith Glycera,a wanderer,whose skin is the color of honey, whose hair is flaming red, and who always dresses in red. She is an airhostess who travels the world, and an experiencedwoman who has had many lovers. Glycera'sconstant wanderingsassociate thereforewith an unending sea voyage, andher fiery hair,extravagantappearance,andunpredictablebehaviorrecall the earthypeacock, which bewitches the world with its daringcolors, audacity, sensuality,and life experience. While the epigraphfrom Bishop shows the remote, pristine, self-contained solitude of the iceberg and its refractionin the image of the swan, the excerpt I have chosen as the epigraphto this essay reveals Glycera's"peacock"characteristics, which point to intense involvementwith the "ship"of life. Glycerabewitches the narratorwith her unpredictability,her vitality, and her neediness, seducing her into "adopting"Glyceraas her "baby."Glycera'sperceptionof the narratoras her mothercannotbe over estimated.I have alreadyarguedthat TheInnerLake is an explorationof the motherin the artist,thatis, of an artistmatureenough to recognize and to submit to the forces of her imagination.The fact that it is the protagonist that ventures the definition of her ties with the narratoras motherdaughterrelationshipattests to the protagonist'sautonomyin the text, and, at the same time, to her need to affiliate with the narrator.And the fact thatthe narrator endorses her protagonist'sperceptionas her mother communicatesnot only the narrator'srecognitionof her affiliation with her protagonist,but also the extent of powerthatthe imaginaryprotagonistwields over her creator.The mother-daughter relationshipindicates a turbulentkinshipof the artistand her creation. This powerof the protagonistis furtheraccentuatedby her claim of the narratoras her Jewish mother.Since Glycera's"biography"will show in a moment that the protagonistnever had a Jewish mother,this deliberatechoice of a Jewish parentdemonstratesthe wish to replot the story of her life. I do not use the term "plot"inadvertently;as we recall,Almog rejectsthe plot, which, as she sees it, diminishes the richnessof the humanbeing. Nonetheless, I arguethat,thoughoften enigmatic,sinuous,andcertainlynonconformist,Glycera'stragiclife storyweaves its way among the myths and stories about swans and peacocks. Glycera'sstory, a bizarreconfigurationof mystery,romanticlove, and picaresquetravelogue,tells the story of a child of the Holocaust generation.It is a life story shapedand consumedby an obsession with the tormentedJewish-Ger254
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake man symbiosis thatthe tragedyof the parentsbequeathedto the children.Glycera is the daughterof AlbertCohen, a Greeksurvivorof the Holocaustwho lost all his family,and of Hiltrud,a Germanwoman,whose father,a Nazi, conductedmedical experimentson Jews. Hiltrud,who wishes for tikkun(mending),persuadesCohen to marryher and move to Israel.Cohen calls theirdaughterGlyceraafter a Greek girl he loved as a boy. Upon his returnfrom the concentrationcamp, he found out thatthe girl had been killed duringthe war in an air raid. Cohen is a sailor,and he takes Glyceraon his ship to his Greekisland,where he shows her thathe is bereft of the family childhood home and tells her aboutthe dead Glycera. Hiltruddies, andGlyceragoes to hermaternalgrandmother,who has neverforgivenHiltrudand who hates Glycera.Glyceradoes not know that her Nazi grandfatherlives in hiding. Meanwhile,she meets Joachim.Joachimis the son of a Jewishwomanwho is a survivorof the Holocaustand who marrieda formerNazi guardin Matthausen, the camp where Glycera's father was imprisoned. Joachim's mother dies, bequeathingto Joachimher last wish, which commandshim to avenge Nazi crimes. To fulfill his mother'swish, Joachimorganizesa gang to huntNazis and gets implicated in terroristactivities. He knows who Glycera is and suspects that she knows her grandfather'swhereabouts, but when they meet, they fall in love. Joachimwishes to abandonhis mission of a Nazi avenger,because he loves Glycera and wants to build his life with her, but he is trappedin his terroristenvironment. Joachimis constantlyaway on his clandestinemissions, and Glycera, who thinks that she saw him on a tall ship, constantlyfollows him from port to port, though she does not trust him; as it turns out in their final and tragic encounter, Glyceradid not even disclose her name to him. Glycerarefuses to live in Israelbecause she cannotaccept its bloodshed,war,and violence. Every time she lands in Israel, she is subjectto a terroristattack.Yet, Germanyis hostile and full of antiSemitic hatred.When Glyceradiscoversthat her grandfatheris alive, she decides to complete the tikkunthat her motherwished for by exposing the Nazi, the embodiment of evil, to the world. She forces the narrator,who is petrified with fear and who vehemently opposes Glycera'splan, to come with her and witness the event in orderto tell it to the world.The momentthe terrifiednarratorandthe frantic Glycera finally confront the grandfather,Joachim and his gang burst on the scene and gun down both the old Nazi and Glycera,while the narrator,speechless with terror,watches the carnage. Even though short and certainlyincomplete,this "biographic"synopsis reveals the contrastingaspects of hatredand love, mistrustand loyalty,murderand rebirth,revenge and the overridingintentionof tikkun.Interestingly,similarcharacteristicsarise in the mythsthatthe motherlynarratorconstantlytells Glycerain a futile attemptto distracther daughterfromexcessive preoccupationwith evil. At a certainpoint, after hearingthe myth about lo, the heifer; Zeus, her treacherous lover;Hera,thejealous andvengeful wife; Argos, the guardianof a thousandeyes; Hermes, the slayerof Argos; and the peacock who inheritedArgos'seyes, Glycera observes to the narrator,"Love,jealousy,revenge,murder,tikkun.That'sthe whole story ... ."The narratoragrees thatthereis "awfulthinness"in the myths, and explains, "Thatis why variationswere created,to create some diversity,which will rescue us from this boredom ...." (IL 83). 255
Rachel Feldhay Brenner This short exchange implies a distinction,which illuminatesthe irreconcilable discrepancybetween the myth and the post-Holocauststory.It is the component of tikkunthat Glyceranotes in the mythicalpatternthathighlightsthe failure of tikkunin the world afterthe Holocaust.Glycera'sstory is, in essence, the story aboutthe failureto redeemthe worldthatexperiencedthe catastrophe.As already noted, her story ends in violent death. Joachim fulfils his mother'sinjunctionof tikkunandkills the Nazi, but, at the sametime, he kills Glycera,who has been striving to complete her mother'stikkun.As the guilty and the innocentdie together, the attemptat tikkunturnsinto a parody,or, rather,into a travesty,of redemption. Ratherthan mending the post-Holocaustworld,the pursuitof justice contributes to the perpetuationof evil. The failureof tikkunin the story of the post-Holocaustgenerationdirectsus to the myth and itsfulfilled promise of tikkun.Whereshould we look for redemption in a mythicalstory,which, almost by definition, representsa worldmoved by betrayal,revenge, rape, unbridledpassions, and capriciouskillings?As the narrator suggests,the redeemingaspectof the mythicalstory emergesin its "variations" and "diversity."A myth can be told in many ways; it may convey many messages, and,while the basic plot is "thin,"that is, repetitive,its variabilityoffers a wealth of perspectives. Rescuing us from monotony,the variationsalso save the story from the finality of a single tragic ending. The certaintyof yet anotherversion of the myth,which promisesa differentending, defuses the sense of the tragic.At the same time, it infuses the hopefulness of the never-exhaustedpossibility of an alternative.In the realm of the myth, nothing is irreversible,while every transgression is redeemable. RobertoCalassocorroboratesthis perceptionwhen he defines mythsas "stories with variants."Calasso makes the distinctionbetweenthe novel andthe myth. He claims that, unlike the charactersin the novels "who never go beyond a single gesture ... mythical figures live many lives, die many deaths .... But in these lives and deaths all the others are present,and we can hear their echo."' In contrastwith the determinismof the teleological plot, the variantsof the mythvalidate the hypotheticalspeculation:"Whatif?" It is a question that legitimizes optional story lines. Thus,unlike the plot, which evolves towardthe finality of the telos, the myth always remains open to new possibilities. "Myths,"Calasso tells us, "are made up of actions that include their opposites within themselves. The hero kills the monster,but even as he does so we perceive thatthe opposite is also true:The monsterkills the hero. The hero carriesoff the princess, yet . .. we perceive that the opposite is also true:The hero deserts the princess. How can we be sure?The variantstell us.""11 The characterscan thus transformfrom virtuous figures into villains, from pursuedinto pursuers,from victims into victimizers, and vice versa. Ironically,the constantin the myth is the variabilityof its metamorphoses. The Notebook of the Peacock in Almog's hibur illustrates the metamorphoses of the peacock in myth, legend, history, and theology of various cultures 10. RobertoCalasso, TheMarriageofCadmus and Harmony,trans.Tim Parks(New York:Vintage Books, 1994), 281, 22. 11. Calasso, The Marriage of Cadmus and Harmony, 280-81.
256
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake and traditions.The beauty of the peacock's colors delineates, metaphorically,the spectrumdefined by the poles of virtue and sanctityand of sinfulness and evil. In Romanmythology,the peacock was sanctified to Hera/Juno,and the artistsin the Roman Empireused the peacock as a decorativemotif (IL 114). In early Christianity,the peacock was considereda sacredbird whose flesh never putrefies (IL 11). Thatis why it became the symbol of immortality.Furthermore,in early Christianity the regrowthof its feathersevery spring made the peacock the symbol of the resurrectionof the dead (IL 114).12 The peacock is mentionedin the Jewish tradition,especially in the midrash. The bird was consideredpure for sacrifice. At the same time, a legend tells that the peacock was one of the sinful creaturesin the Flood generation.In othertraditions, the peacock assumes even more sinister dimensions. In the Moslem legends the peacock is identified with Satanand with the snake. He is blamedfor the OriginalSin and for the expulsion from Eden (IL 114). Similarcharacteristicsare attributedto the peacock by the Yazidis, a small religious communityof Kurdish descent.13 The Yazidisbelieve in the existence of evil that comes from God, who is distantand whose name cannot be pronounced.They also believe that Satanis all-powerful. Satan is a fallen angel whom God restoredto his formerglory. He representsconstant danger and therefore needs to be appeased and treatedwith deepest respect (IL 120-1). In the Yazidi tradition,it is forbiddento pronounce Satan'sname, and so the peacock has become the representationof Satan,and "is known as the seducer,Beelzebub, the Prince of Darkness,the strong,the wicked, the enemy"(IL 128). TheYazidiscall SatanMelek Taus,that is, "PeacockAngel." The most reveredobject of the Yazidiworship is the statue of a peacock, named Ancient Peacock. The name and the image of the peacock is the symbol of their religion (IL 120-1). The Yazidi worship of the peacock communicatesa peculiarmessage. The peacock serves a resemblance,an "approximation"of Satan, as Satanhimself is too fearfuland dangerousto be directlyapproached.As a replacementand,at the same time, displacementof Satan,PeacockAngel does not signify the disappearance of the demonic forces in the world. On the contrary,the worshipof the peacock is a manifestationof the hauntingconsciousnessof the powersof destruction, as well as it is a precautionnot to provokethese powersat any cost. Fromthis perspective, it is possible to see in theYazidivariationof the peacock story an implied rationalefor the componentof variationsin the myth at large. In light of the Yazidi theology of evil, the variantsof the story, which defuse the sense of finality, demonstratean evasive attitudetowardevil. As Calasso indicates,the mythsmend each otherthroughtransformationsof theircharactersfromvillains to virtuoushe12. Jung tells us that the peacock is "an old emblem of rebirthand resurrection,"while "[in] alchemythe peacock is synonymouswith the Phoenix."C. G. Jung, TheArchetypeand the Collective Unconscious(Princeton:Hollingen Series, 1990), 375. 13. According to the entry on the Yazidis in AvrahamSela, ed., Political Encyclopediaof the Middle East (New York:Continuum,1999), the Yazidislive in northernIraq,Syria and the trans-Caucasianrepublics.TheirreligioncomprisesSabean,Muslim,Christian,Zoroastrian,andpaganelements. TheYazidis,who do not believe in evil, sin, andthe devil, are wronglydescribedas Devil-Worshippers
(800). 257
Rachel FeldhayBrenner roes and vice versa. The consistent indeterminacyof the myth protects from the terrifyingencounterwith evil. The protagonist,however,adamantlyrefuses to listen to the advice that her "Jewishmother"wishes to impart.Even the positive variantsof the peacock myth fail to change Glycera'snihilistic perspective.When she tells Glycera about the peacock's"hiddenthirdeye,"which "allows humanbeings to look inwardas well as envision eternity"and about"apeacock feather,"which signifies eternallife (IL 106), the narratorevokes a fearful,enragedrejectionof the peacock'sassociations with inner life and eternal life intendedto defuse the fear of death. "To look inward,"Glyceraexclaims, "I know there is nothing there! It is empty! And if there is somethingI don't need for sure, it's a peacock feather.Eternallife! Indeed,who needs life!" (IL 107). Glycera'ssense of emptiness reflects her mood of desperation and hopelessness, which indicatesher death wish. Glycera communicates her despair through constant repetition of a text, which depictsthe inherentand irredeemableevil of humannature.In hermeetings with the narrator,she obsessively quotes from Saul Tchemichowski'spoem, "The Ballad of the Wolf."A great Hebrewpoet, Tchernichowskiwrote "The Ballad of the Wolf" in 1942, at the time of the Holocaust.To highlightthe history of Jewish suffering,the poet returnsto the persecutionsof the Jews in Germantowns by the Crusaders.The poem startswith the lines that Glyceracompulsively14recites: A regimentof Crusaders travels fromtownto town: inAachen, Theyslaughtered will they slaughterinTreves. Theywill continueto slaughter: andthebellwill ring, Together theywill sharetheloot: thepiousandthemob.15 The poem presentsa tragicallyironic illustrationof the motto homo homini lupus est ("manis a wolf to man").After having slaughteredthe Jews, the Crusadersleft the burialof the terriblyinjured,dying victims to the inhabitantsof the city. The Christiansarebusy prayingand,at the same time, looting the propertyof the Jews. Ironically,it was the wolf that compassionatelykilled the victims of the slaughter,thus relieving them from horribleagony. RabbiJospha,one of the victims, bestowed a blessing on the wolf: Its seed will not disappearuntil all human beings havebecome wolves, andpresumablyare as righteousas the wolf which redeemed him from his suffering.Ironically,as the poem concludes, these days the blessing has been fulfilled, as humanbeings have indeed turnedinto a species of wolfish predators,while the species of the compassionatewolf had long become extinct. 14. The excerpt fromTchernichowski'spoem appearson pages 78, 100, 108, 116, 129. 15. Saul Tchernichowski,Mivhar(Selection) (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1964), 93-97. Translationfrom the Hebrewmine.
258
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake Glycera'sobsessive dwelling on this hopeless, nihilistic image of the world terrifies her creator.The narratorfinds it difficult to deal with her protagonist, whose despairturnedher into "anempty woman, a bundle of rattlingbones,"who is unableto "sense anything,"and who "feels like a dead person"(IL 24). Her fear of Glycera'sdespairoften makes her ignoreGlycera'scalls and lettersandengages her even more deeply in the comforting stories of swans and peacocks. Yet, the "Jewish mother" cannot stay away for long from her difficult and demanding "daughter"who "entersher [night]dreams"and who invadesher daydreaming(IL 129). The tormentedrelationshipwith Glyceraraises the questionwhy this insubordinate,depressed and depressing protagonist,a protagonistobsessed with the darkestperiodof Jewishhistory,was admittedto a story,which fromthe outsethas declaredits preferencefor a life of serene contemplation.Why should the narrator disruptthe serenityof the iceberg fantasyas well as her innocuousoccupation as a bird-watcherwith a turbulentand ineluctablylost battle to mend the postHolocaustworld? Ourinitial premisethatthe maturityof the artistis forged in her submission to the demandsof artelucidatesGlycera'sdisturbingpresencein the narrator'stext. Glycera'svoice of terrorantagonizesthe artist;her tone of despairchallenges authorialcontrolby signalingthe incompletenessof the worldof serene icebergsand comforting myths. Glycera'sappearancepresents the authorwith a dilemma:To silence her voice would have amountedto deliberatelyexcising an aspect of creativity;to let her enterthe text would expose the narrator'svulnerabilityin face of her unpredictableprotagonist,who is consumedby pain and fear.In fact, the narratoradmits to having tried to eliminate this frighteningpresence. Quite graphically, she describes her violent attemptsto eradicatethe voice that clamors to be heard. "The truth is," she confesses, "that I killed her; I killed her many times. Every time that she spreadsher wings to fly, I beat her up. I breakher wings" (IL 11). Ironically,havingkilled her "winged-self"anddrownedit in her"innerlake" (IL 12), the narratorbecomes a bird-watcher,a passive observer and collector, ratherthan a creator.She loses access to "the golden box," which lies underthe "coppermountain"in "the inner lake." In the box, "the seven little birds of her soul" (IL 9), which are also "thetruth"of "all her poems,"(IL 11) are buried.The loss of the creativetruthturnsher into a make-believeartist.As long as the "golden box,"the soul of her creativity,remainsout of her reach, she "walksbarefoot," "stealsanythingshe can put her handson,"and "pretendsto be alive"(IL 11). Not only is "stealing"from others an undignified practicefor a writer;but, more importantly,it also signifies the end of creativity.Having "killed"the call of art, all she can do is produce a hibur of entries, information,and myths. To restorecreativity, it is necessary to renege on resistanceand to overcomethe fear of the unknown. Only throughcourageousself-exposureto the unpredictablecan the artist give birthto the story that demandsto be born. Indeed,the desireto enterthe fearfulworldof creativityprovesstrongerthan the fear that this desire has evoked. Eventually,the narratormust face her denied yearning:
259
Rachel FeldhayBrenner I wishto holdon to freedom.I wantto do all I want,unconditionally, beyond all conventions, whileonlyone,fullof rahav[hubris] againstall conventions, need guides me, the need most sinful of all, the needfor a terrible beauty to be born ... I know thatthis rahavmightbringgravepunishmentupon me, but
I alsoknowthatwithoutit, nothingcounts(IL19-20 myemphasis).
This proclamationof creativefreedom signifies a radicalshift in the narrator's orientation.The language and, in particular,the choice of references, communicatethe extent of the transformation.The intertextof the "terriblebeauty"in Yeats's"Easter,1916,"and the intratextof the twice repeatedhighly literaryterm rahav,used previously,as we recall, to describethe peacock'sarrogance,markthe change.These referencessignify an expandingperspectivefrom the "beyondlife" beauty of the swan to the earthy,devious, arrogant,sinfully beautifulpeacock.16 The "terriblebeauty"in "Easter,1916"is bornout of the violence of the Irish uprising against England,which broughtabout an extraordinarychange in ordinary, even vulgar human beings. The beauty of their self-sacrifice for the Irish cause transformedthe rebels into nationalheroes for "nowand in time to be."And yet, the terrorof theirheroismraises doubtsaboutthe choice they made.Wastheir single-minded,deeply emotional resolve worth the bloodshed and violence that cost them their lives? While admiringthe courage of the dead heroes, the poet 16. In orderto appreciatefully the courageto respondto the story of the Holocaust,we need to recall the narrator'spreferenceof the swan in her referenceto Yeats.The narratorwould ratherher life story gravitatedtowardsthe story of the swan, its grace, and its deathsong. "Forme,"she declares,"the swan is the most beautifulof birds"(IL 16). "Andbeauty,"she adds,"is beyond life" (IL 19). This wish for immortalityemerges in the narrator'sallusion to the "great Irish poet," whose poem "The Wild Swans at Coole" is "a lamentationon the disappearanceof the swans"in the Irish legend of Caer (IL 32). (The narrator'sunequivocaladmirationfor the swan emerges, perhapsmost prominently,in her fascinationwith the Irishlegend of CaerOrmaith,the "swan-lass,"who, at certaintimes, ascends from the world of deathonly to disappearonce again behindthe gates of the underworld.Referencesto this myth appearon pages 27-29, 32, 132, and 136). Indeed,Yeats'poem commemoratesthe eternal beauty of the swans, while deploringhis old age and the inexorablyapproachingdeath: But now they drift on the still water, Mysterious,beautiful; Among what rushes will they build, By what lake'sedge or pool Delight man'seyes when I awakesome day To find they have flown away? (W B. Yeats,"TheWild Swans at Coole,"in TheCollected WorksofW B. Yeats,Vol. I [New York:Scribner, 1997], 131.) The disappearanceof the swans, which have flown away to an undisclosed destination, signifies, in effect, the poet's departurefrom the world of the living. The legendary swans live forever,whereastheir humanadmirersage and pass away.We note, however,that, the poem inspired by the swans is the poet's swan song, a work of art, which will not pass away.In his art, the poet immortalizesnot only the transcendentbeautyof the swans, "thosebrilliantcreatures,"but also, "the autumn beauty" of fading life. In "The Wild Swans at Coole," Yeats immortalizes what Jefferson Holdridgecalls "the tragic calm with which he must learn to build his soul in preparationfor death." (Jefferson Holdridge, Those Mingled Seas: The Poetry of WB. Yeats,The Beautiful and the Sublime [Dublin:UniversityCollege Dublin Press, 2000], 92.)
260
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake struggleswith pervasivedoubt,"Wasit needless deathafterall?"" "Easter,1916" is reflexivein its skepticismaboutthe meaningof the artit has produced.The poem is dismayedat its hubrisof having createdan art thatdeclaresbeautifulthe poetic search for humankind'sbeauty in the terrorof violent death. Yeats'smisgivings aboutthe aestheticof the representationof terrorcharacterize what JeffersonHoldridgein his study of Yeatscalls the "modernsublime." It is, as the critic claims, the impossibilityof a harmoniousresolutionin the violent realityof the modernworld.Modernhistory,its bloody revolutions,wars, and social upheavals, fissured the Romantic Weltanschauung,which perceived the beautifulas a symbol of achievableharmonioustotality,or oneness,with the world. Holdridge considersYeats'sphrase "terriblebeauty""indicativeof how sublime events distort or redefine the harmoniousbasis of the beautiful."'8The growing discrepancybetween the aestheticof artisticcreationand the deteriorationof ethical values reflects the disintegrationof the modem world,in which, in Yeats'famous words, the centercannothold. Holridge'sexplicationof the oxymoron,"terriblebeauty,"in terms of the irrevocablebreakupof values in the modernworldelucidatesthe predicamentof the narratorin TheInner Lake.The intentionto representthe "terriblebeauty"of the sublime in our day and age verges on rahav.The search for beauty in a world affected by, or, rather,infected with, the horrorof the Holocaust amountsto an act of hubris.Consequently,the audacityto granther protagonistthe freedom to express her emptiness,despair,and deathwish forebodesthe tragic fall of the artist. To forestall the collapse, the narratorevokes the other aspects of her protagonist "of many names";these are the aspects of Metukaand Dolce. The energy of the formerand the goodness of the latterintendto mitigate Glycera'sdeath wish. Metukarepresentsthe rebellious,combative,physicallypowerfulrefraction of the protagonist. She associates with the narrator'srecollection of a seventhgrade fellow student,who was a Holocaustrefugee. The narratorremembersthat Metuka,who marriedat fifteen, was big and wild, herblue eyes gleaming. She was involved in fights. The narratorand her classmates,who used to mock and intimidate other refugee girls, were afraidof Metukaand kept their distance from her (IL 22-3). Metuka,who escaped the deathof a Holocaustvictim in Europe,refusedto become a victim in her homeland.Her self-defense against school bullies and her early marriageattestto her physical and sexual prowess,which counteractthe image of the despised, weak strangerthat the peer community impressed on the refugee children.Now, envisaged as a protagonist-"I am a bird-watcherand so is Metuka,my protagonistof many names"-Metuka refuses the passive role of a bird-watcheras an imitationof the bird-watchernarrator.In fact, she joins forces with Glycera,and the two become indistinguishable.Her rebelliousrefusalto defer to hercreatorforebodesdestruction:"Listen,"Metukatells the narrator,"Iwarn you, freedom will crush you, it will disintegrateeverything,it will blur the contours;no image will emerge, no picture,no character,no story"(IL 20). Metuka's 17. Yeats,"Easter1916,"in Collected Works,182-184. 18. Holdridge, ThoseMingled Seas, 2, 3.
261
Rachel Feldhay Brenner threatelucidatesthe ironicpredicamentof the artist.Whereasthe narrator'sfear of artistic freedom forebodes the destructionof the artist,the challenge of creative freedom threatensno less a calamity.Finally given the liberty to speak, Metuka has gained the powerto destroythe story,which writes her into existence;thus she intendsto destroynot only herself,but also her maker,the artist.Her ominous prediction of emptiness, shapelessness, and chaos forebodes a definitive victory of the terribleover the beautiful. Ironically,in searchfor a source of hope, the narratorturnsto the tragic story of Dolce. The story reaches us in the lamentof R. Eliezer ben Judahof Worms for his wife, Dolce, who, togetherwith her two daughters,was murderedby the Crusaders.Writtenin the MiddleAges, at the time of terriblepersecutions,the eulogy counteractsthe message of "TheBallad of the Wolf,"writtenin the twentieth century in the midst of the most terriblepersecutionof all. As we learn from the "Ballad,"the history of eight hundredyears between the two texts, which culmithatreaffirmed natedin the terrorof the Holocaust,has erasedthe Weltanschauung faith and love at the terribletime of the Crusades. Eliezer's lament draws upon the famous praise of the woman of valor in Proverbs31. The eulogy portraysDolce as a pious, virtuous,andcharitablewoman. She stitched about forty Torah scrolls, she washed the dead and sewed their shrouds, she sang Sabbathhymns sweetly, and apparentlyshe was a successful merchant(IL 130).19 Significantly,the eulogy does not dwell on Dolce's tragic death,but, rather,on her meritoriouslife. Unlike the graphicdepictionsof terrible sufferingand death in Tchernichowski'spoem, the horrorof Dolce's murderis attenuatedby an idealized portrayalof a woman of good deeds, totally devoted to her husband,her children, and the community at large. The composition of the lamentexpressesnot only her husband'slove, but also the desire to keep her memory alive for her contemporariesas well as for posterity.To reaffirmthe continuing relevance of the tradition,the lament resortsto the biblical text. The biblical model of the woman of valor not only enhances the virtues and the honor of the victim; the referenceto the scripturesalso bringsconsolationto the mourninghusband and the communityat large. Producedunderthe terribleduress of persecutions and out of grief for the loss of materfamilias, the lament seeks reassurance in the biblical foundationsof Jewish family tradition.In this sense, therefore,the eulogy representstikkun;it tells the listenersthatthe mendingof the world lies in the continuationof the Jewish way of life, which adheresto the eternallessons of the Bible. The juxtapositionof Eliezer's lament and "The Ballad of the Wolf" makes clear that the example of Dolce cannot offer a solace of tikkunto the post-Holocaust protagonist.The redeemingpowers of the reaffirmationof the traditionin Dolce's eulogy arisesfroma cleardistinctionbetweengood andbad,sin andvirtue. This distinctioncommunicatesthe unshakenconviction that, despite, or perhaps because of, the terribleoutburstof evil, the concept of goodness, and especially, good deeds, has remainedvalid and indispensableto the society. In contrast,as 19. See JudithBaskin,"JewishWomenin the MiddleAges," inJewish Womenin HistoricalPerspective, ed. JudithBaskin (Detroit:WayneUniversityPress, 1991), 106. Also see 113 n. 45.
262
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake "TheBallad"shows, in today'sworld,where even the "good"wolf has become extinct, all restraintson evil have been removed.Protectivebarriersof traditionare no longer valid in the historicalreality of the Holocaust,whose terrorhas permeated the world at large. The evil of the perpetratorsaffected the victims. Consequently,the parental experienceof evil shapedthe legacy of the post-Holocaustchildren,both German and Jewish.As the tragic story of Glycera and Joachimshows, the childrenhave become heirs to a legacy that will eventuallydestroythem. To gain a more comprehensive understandingof the problem of the children facing the legacy of parentalgeneration,I turn to Almog's first novel, Be-'erezgezerah (Exile), published in 1971. Already at this early stage of her writing career,Almog examined the impactof evil on children,both Jewishand German,born afterthe Holocaust. Here it is importantto note that the theme of difficult relationshipswith parents who experiencedthe Holocaust emerged even before in Almog's writing. In her first collection of shortstories (1969), Hasdei ha-laila shel Margarita(TheNightly CharitiesofMargarita), Almog drawson her own difficult personalexperience as a child of Germanrefugees. In Exile, Margarita,the Jewish protagonist-narratormeets the charactersof Marianneand Bastian, the children of an old and unrepentantNazi general. The burdenof their Nazi heritagehas irreparablydamagedthe psyche of the siblings, infusing a sense of identity,which robbedthem of normal lives. Marianne'sselfloathing, which results in self-abuse, leads to a psychosomatic sickness and attempts of suicide. Bastian maintains his sanity by adopting the attitude of an objectivephilosopher,andbecomes relentlesslyjudgmentalof others.This attitude distanceshim from humanity;he admitsto Margaritahis inabilityto love even his own sister.20 Margarita,whose parents'andespecially her father'slegacy of the Holocaust made her sick, feels strongaffinity with the Germansiblings. Marianna'shopeless desire to discardthe burdenof the heritagethat her fatherimposed on her makes Margaritasee their common unhappiness,an understanding,which generatethe feeling of closeness, "Atthis momentI understoodclearlythe meaningof my love for her, such instantlove."2'An even greatersense of closeness emerges when she realizes thatBastian'sinabilityto love is the resultof his brutalmistreatmentat the hands of his father.Longing for the days of Hitler'sglory, which he wishes to restore (E 125), the Nazi generalwished to raise Bastianas a soldierto continuethe military traditionof his aristocraticfamily. When Bastian refuses to comply, the fathertreatshim with terriblecruelty.Bastian'smisfortuneremindsMargaritaof her disastrousrelationshipwith her father.A fugitivefrompre-HolocaustGermany 20. I would like to drawattentionto Alan L. BergerandNaomi Berger,Second GenerationVoices: Reflectionsby Childrenof Holocaust Survivorsand Perpetrators(New York:SyracuseUniversity Press, 2001). Especially relevantto our discussion are the parts"Confrontinga RepressedPast"and "Is Dialogue Possible?"which raise the issue of the responses to the childrenof Nazis to the family history.To a remarkableextent, the autobiographicalstories and testimonies corroborateAlmog's literaryrepresentationsof the second generationGermans. 21. RuthAlmog, Exile (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1971), 161. Henceforthpage numberwill appear in the text precededby E. Translationsfrom the Hebrewmine.
263
Rachel Feldhay Brenner who lost everything,Margarita'sfatherdemandsthatshe get marriedandhavechildren in orderto ensure the continuityof the family.When she refuses to comply, he becomes ruthless,treatsher with great cruelty,and eventuallydisowns her. The similaritiesbetween Margaritaand Bastian'srelationshipswith theirfathersbring fortha new understanding."Itoccurredto me,"Margaritathinks,"that the connectionbetweenmyself and Bastian... an unspokenagreement,a connection between a Jewess and a German... was somethingfundamental,something that emerges between people when divisions collapse" (E 137). The abuse of the childrenon both sides for not fulfilling the expectationsto rebuildthatwhich they did not destroygives Margaritaanother,even more radical,insight:"It occurredto me how ridiculousis our division of the world into the accused and the accusers, into the victims and the murderers"(E 132). Margarita'srecollectionof her cruel father,which emerges when facing Bastian,the victim of his despotic father,has createda categoryof victims andvictimizersgroundedin differentiationsotherthan religion,ethnicity,or history.Margarita'snew perspectivehighlightsthe deleterious impactof fathers,who, it must be emphasized,underdiametricallyopposed (victim as opposedto victimizer)circumstances,weretouchedandtransformedby evil. Crueltyvitiates the perpetrator;but it touches and transformsthe afflicted as well, and the corruptingpermutationsof evil damagethe lives of the children. This brief referenceto Exile, a novel I discuss in more detailelsewhere,22directs our attentionto the impactof evil uponthe family nucleus.While in Exile the childrenpay a terribleprice for theirrefusalto comply with parentalwishes, in The InnerLakethey pay equallydearlyfor theiradherenceto parentallegacies. The obsessive desire to live up to parentalexpectationsdeprivesthe childrenof the sense of identity,which would allow a measureof independence.WhenJoachimdeclares his love for Glycera,he claims that, because of their mixed, German(Nazi)-Jewish parentage,their marriage"will be a great victory" (IL 123). He can see the world only throughthe prism of the mission of tikkunthat his motherimposed on him; it is a mission that determineshis life of crime and terror.Joachim'sinability to extricate himself from his terroristidentity representsa terribleparody of tikkunin the post-Holocaustworld. Glycera, who "neverreally understoodwho she was" (IL 31), finds herself in an even more complex predicament.While she declares to be looking for the man she claims to love, but whom she nevertrusts,she even more franticallyseeks an answerto the hauntingquestionof her identity.The obsessive recitationof "The Ballad of the Wolf" indicatesGlycera'simpossible split identity:Wereher ancestors the persecutorsof the Jews in this Germantown, or rather,their,Jewish victims? The burden of the mixed parentageis furtheraggravatedby her parents' legacies, which, quite literally,designatedher personas an embodimentof tikkun. On the one hand,Glycera incarnatesher mother'sattemptat expiation for her father'slife as a Nazi. On the otherhand,namedafterthe first Glycera,she becomes, in a sense, the reincarnationof her father'sdead lover. 22. An essay on Exile will be incorporatedin the book on Almog. The main points of this essay were presentedin a paperdeliveredat the NationalAssociation of Professorsof Hebrew(NAPH) conference in 2002.
264
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake The traumaticlegacies of the childrenattestto the transformationof parental attitudesof the Holocaust generation.Ratherthanprotection,unconditionallove, and good prospectsfor the future,the parentsgive theirchildrenthe task of mending their pasts. In this sense, the childrenare preventedfrom writing, so to speak, theirown life stories.To elucidatethis point, it is interestingto note SlavojZizek's observationthatwe first constructour life stories and then live them out; that is to say, the true action comes before the actual performance.Zilek contends that "when we intervene in the world througha particularact . . . the real act is of a strictly symbolic nature,it consists in the very mode in which we structurethe world,our perceptionof it in advance ... the real act thusprecedes the (particular-factual) activity."23FollowingZi'ek's observation,it is commonplaceto argue that,undernormalcircumstances,the mode of the perceptionof the worldthatprecedes the concreteact is shaped,at least to an extent,by externalfactors,which include parentalinfluence.Life perceptionevolves andchanges overtime, due to the environmentand its many stimulations.Thus, the modes of perceptionperchance shift and change, determiningnew kinds of interventionwith the world. In contrast,Glyceraand Joachim'slife stories were predetermined,even before they were born.There is no option to modify the modes of perception.Literally, theirraison d 'tre is to bearthe consequencesof acts they did not commit, to make up for suffering they did not undergo, and to replace losses that were not theirs. In sum, they were predestinedto bring a catharticresolutionto the historical tragedyin which they had no share. The sameness of their raison d 'tre elucidates Glycera's identification of Joachim as her twin. Joachim, she claims, is her twin not only because of their common German-Jewishheritage;the connectionis even deeper,because, as she claims, they both have "the same problemthatnobody understands,which can be summed up in three words-the problem of the perennial escape [becayathaberihahha-matmedet]"(IL 35). The statementis puzzling.As alreadynoted,it is the aspectof chase andpursuit that seem to govern both Glyceraand Joachim'slife stories. What is then the hauntingspecterthatthey havebeen foreverrunningawayfrom?In a way,it is possible to claim that both characterstry unsuccessfully to escape the mode of perception into which they were locked. This perception,which decreed Joachimas a hunterand Glyceraas a wanderer,preventedthem from creatingtheir own perception of the world. On this level, theirobsessive pursuit,which comes to its end with Glycera'sdeath, indicates their failure to set themselves free from the roles that they were assigned. At a deeper level, however,it is possible to see Joachimand Glycera'spersistentpursuitof othersas an escape from a truththat is even more traumaticthan the legacy neither can abandon.Even harderthan a life of constant restlessness would be the realizationof parentalbetrayal.To stop running, the protagonists would need to acknowledgethatthey serve as instrumentsof theirparents'obsessive need to settle accountswith history.Fromthis perspective,it is possible to un23. SlavojZifek, TheSublimeObjectof Ideology (London:Verso, 1989), 215-216. (Emphasis in the text.)
265
Rachel FeldhayBrenner derstandthe narrativeelementof the perennialescape, which in turnstructuresthe life of perennialpursuit:The realizationof having been born to performa task, ratherthan to be loved, is too devastatingto be consciously confronted.Consequently,the defense mechanism,which protectsthe childrenfrom such traumatic realization,locks them in the fate of pursuers.At one point, Glyceratriesto change her identity as a wandererby renamingherself Calypso, after the mythical goddess, and like Calypso, the ruler and dweller of an island, where she concealed Odysseus, establish a permanenthome with her lover; Joachimmakes desperate efforts to change his identity as a Nazi hunter and quit the gang to marry his beloved. These desires notwithstanding,the commitmentto their missions always prevails,and the escape from the pain of parentallovelessness continuesuntil the tragic denouement. The absenceof the parentshighlightsthe children'sfixation on parentallegaWe note that neitherthe death of the mothers,nor the disappearanceof the facy. thers ends the chase-escape patterns.In particular,the story of Glycera'sfather underlinesthe tragic dimensions of this commitmentto the legacy that spells the disintegrationof humanistvalues. The name of Glycera'sfather,Albert Cohen, evokes anotherAlbert Cohen, the great Jewish-French-Swisswriterof Greek origin. The association highlights, by contrast,the horrific legacy of emptiness and deaththatAlbertCohen,the characterin TheInnerLake,bequeathedto his daughter. The writerAlbert Cohenwas born on the Greekislandof Corfuin 1895 and died in Geneva in 1981. He witnessed the Holocaust from the shores of England. Cohen, who was deeply affectedby anti-Semitismas a child, and who, despite his love for European,especially French,culture,always felt an outsideron account of his Jewish origins,believed in the special mission of the Jew.As one of his critics maintains:"Ledestinjuif de Cohen est donc un destin dupoete, porteur de la douloureusecondition humaine."24Indeed,in his work, Cohen fulfilled the destiny of the Jew as a poetic caretakerof the humancondition. In the aftermathof the Holocaust, Cohen producedhis masterpiece,Belle du Seigneur (1968). The plot of the novel takes place in the 1930s. Cohen'sJewish protagonist,Solal, is a symbolic figure of a self-appointedMessiah who strivesto redeemthe world. He has a global vision of reconciliationof Jews and non-Jews,of East and West, and of the differencesthat divide humankind.Solal's attemptsat tikkunend in failure. However,even as he fails, he still clings to the hope for humanityand to his faith in love and in humankind.The beliefs of his hero reflect Cohen'sconvictions. Indeed, in his contemplativework, O VousFreres Humains, published soon after Belle du Seigneur, in 1972, Cohen reaffirmedhis belief in human fellowship: "Pourmoi qui vis avec ma mort depuis mon enfance,je sais que 1'amourand sa soeur cadette la bonte sont les seules importances.Mais commentlefaire croire a mesfreres humains?0 vous,freres humains,connaissezlajoie de nepas hair."25 24. D. R. Goiten-Galperin,Visagede Mon Peuple:Essai surAlbertCohen(Paris:LibrairieA.G. Nizet, 1982), 21. "Cohen'sJewish destiny is that of a poet, who takes upon himself the pain of the human condition."(My translationfrom the French.) 25. AlbertCohen, O Vous,FreresHumains(Paris:Gallimard,1972), 22. "I who have lived with
266
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake The recognitionof the ultimatevalue of love andgoodness would,in Cohen'sopinion, resolve the problemof hatred.Cohen thus reaffirmsthe humanisttenet that each humanbeing has the potentialof becoming an ethical humanbeing. Because of his people's long history of suffering,it is the responsibilityof the Jewish poet to teach this truthto humanity. Cohen'sinherentlyhumanisticview of the worldexplainswhy he situateshis novel in the pre-Holocaustworld.As David Cowardmaintainsin his introduction to Belle du Seigneur, "hadhe [Cohen] extended the time-scale, it seems reasonable to think that the horrorsof the Holocaust could not have been kept at arm's length in quite the same way and that Cohen's generous, conciliatory humanism would then have been harderto sustain."26The fictional story of Albert Cohen in The Inner Lake seems to corroborateCoward'sastute observation. Indeed, the tenets of humanismhave become meaningless for the Albert Cohen who did experience the horrorof concentrationcamps and who lost everything:his family, the girl he loved,his home, andhis family'sproperty.Unlike Cohenthe writer,who continuesto deliver a message of hope to hisfreres humains,Cohen, the character, cannotmaintainany hope for the future.A victim of the Holocaust,for whom his native island became a ghost island,Cohen "turnedinto a grave"(IL 30). Despite the appearanceof normality,and the attemptto establish a family, his soul has become a memorialto the deathof all those he loved and who loved him. Unlike the Cohen who, in his fiction, leaves his readerswith the legacy of trustthat humanenesswill prevail,the legacy thatthe fictional Cohen leaves his daughteris a story of deathand despair. The legacy of deathanddespairextendsto the generationof the childrenand destroysit. It is in this sense of the encompassingand perpetuatingimpactof evil that we can understandthe narrator'sobservation,"As far as I know,the philosophersof the second half of the twentiethcenturydid not deal with the issue of evil, though, as I see it, evil is the fundamentalexperienceof those born in this century" (IL 122). The detrimentaleffects of pervasiveevil raise the questionof the aesthetic of the sublime. Can there be any beauty born in a world, which resonates with terror?Is it still possible to reviveany of the humanisticvalues in a world imbued with the consciousness of evil? Is thereany hope for tikkun?With reference to such questions, Jean-FrangoisLyotardpostulates that in the postmodernage, which has "givenus as much terroras we can take,"the beautyof wholeness is no longer possible. The postmodernaesthetic of the sublime, Lyotardargues, "puts forwardthe unpresentablein the presentationitself.., it denies itself the solace of good forms, the consensus of the taste ... it searchesfor new presentations,not in orderto enjoy them but in orderto imparta strongersense of the unpresentable."27 I argue that The Inner Lake presents an alternativeto Lyotard'sposition. deathsince childhood,I know thatlove and heryoungersister,goodness, are the only importantthings. But how shall I make my fellow-brothersbelieve it? ... O, my fellow-brothers,recognizethejoy of not hating."(My translationfrom the French.) 26. David Coward,"Introductionto Albert Cohen,"in Belle du Seigneur, trans.David Coward (London:Viking, 1995), xvi. 27. Jean-FrancoisLyotard,The PostmodernCondition:A Report on Knowledge,trans. Geoff Benningtonand BrianMassumi(Minneapolis:Universityof MinnesotaPress, 1993), 81.
267
Rachel Feldhay Brenner Ratherthan searchingfor new presentationsof the unpresentable,the text seeks new presentationsto defend itself against the terrorof the unpresentable,which threatensto collapse all forms of representation.The sublime of violence and destruction,or "the fundamentalexperience of evil" has invadedour world as well as our selves; thoughunpresentable,this pervasive,ominouspresenceof senseless terrorcannotbe denied. Senselessness signifies the disintegrationof the story and thereforethe end of the art of telling. In other words, a representationof senselessness is bound to become senseless. Consideredfrom this point of view, Lyotard'ssearchfor presentation,which "denies itself the solace of good forms, the consensus of the taste, and enjoyment,"spells senselessness, which forebodesdisintegrationof literaryforms and consequentlyextinctionof the literarytradition. Obviously,the text of The Inner Lake acknowledges the portentsof terror with regardsto art.At the same time, it seeks new forms, not in orderto "putforwardthe unpresentable," but, rather,in ordertofend offits invadingpresence.This the reflects approach position of a matureartist,one who is conscious of the defensive position of art in this day and age. The consciousness of the encroaching unpresentablegives birth to the mother in the artist, who, while recognizing the terror,which truncatesthe story, nonetheless insists on protectingthe fragments. To deter the unpresentable,she invokes old forms to forge them as means of resistance againstthe menace of formlessness. We could claim thatthe fabricof TheInnerLake implies the threatof chaos. The randomnessof the hiburreflectsthe disintegrationof literaryconventions.The loose collage of fictional and nonfictionalmaterialscommunicatesthe breakupof the acceptedliteraryforms.The writer'sabdicationof the traditionalrole of the author as teller of stories, deviser of causal plots, and constructorof plausiblecharacters forebodes chaotic formlessness. The danger of the decomposition of the centerlesstext is furtheraugmentedby the blurredboundariesof the authorial"I" and the fictional "I." The motif of the iceberg, and,more specifically, the wish to "have"the icerather thanthe ship, illustratesthe desire to exit the fearfulworld of anarchy berg, and chaos. The perfectionof the swan underlinesthe desire to returnto the age of innocence and purity.But the historicalreality of terrorwould allow neithera retreatinto the atemporalmagnificence of the icebergnor identificationwith the innocent beautyof the swan. Rather,it engages the artistin a battle,which portends the victory of evil. Indeed,the portentactualizes in Glycera'stragic and horrible death,whichjoins her with her Nazi grandfatherand thus symbolicallytaintslove with evil. It wouldappearthatthe deathof the protagonistsignifies the artist'sfailure to forestallthe terrorof the unpresentable.The "Jewishmother"has failed to protect her "daughter."Neither the myth of the peacock and its featherof eternal life, nor the lamentover Dolce, the eulogized woman valor,could defuse despair. The stories failed to providea viable alternativeto the unpresentable,which would prevent,as Glycera'sdeathproves, the victory of evil over love. Yet, since the episode of Glycera'sterribleend is not the end of the story,the victory of evil has not yet been determined.The progressionbeyond the death scene implies resistanceto an end of senseless violence and meaningless silence.
268
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake To assess the significationof this resistancein termsof the developmentof the mature artist,I returnonce again to Exile. Like Glycera in TheInnerLake, Margarita dies a violent death. Having returnedto Germany,to her father'shome village, she evokes the rage of the villagers.To escape theirassault,she jumps to her death fromthe attic of her father'shouse, her last wordsbeing, "I crawledto the entrance and collapsed on the thresholduntil morning"(E 189).28In the morning, she is found dead.Like Glycera,who is destroyedbecause of her desireto expose the old Nazi and thus symbolically disempowerthe forces of evil, Margarita'sdesire to confrontthe villagers with their anti-Semitichatredends in her violent death. Though the stories of the two protagonistsreveal correspondences,their forms differ.Let us recall thatMargaritais the protagonist/first-personnarratorof her autobiographicalstory.Her death is, therefore,the deathof the double "I,"the "I"of the narrator,which is also the "I"of the protagonist.Since the teller dies with her character,the "double"death pronouncesnot only the end of the story, but also the impossibility of a futurestory. Margaritaand her story thereforedie in an outburstof primitive,senseless violence, followed by the silence of unutterable terror. Unutterableterroris also the first reactionof the narratorto Glycera'sviolent death. "I opened my mouth,"she tells us, "butno sound came out" (IL 134). Significantly,the sound does come out in the following segment, and the fact that the narratorcontinues the story draws the distinctionbetween the person of the narrator,who survives, and thatof the protagonist,who does not. This distinction emerges clearly in the opening sentence of the segment, which follows the death scene, "Thus,Metukaand I," the narratorobserves, "havecompleted our mythical sea voyage, and we find ourselves in the startingpoint"(IL 134). The specification"Metukaand I,"as well as the pronoun"we,"indicatesthat the "I"of the narratordoes not merge with the personaof the protagonist.At this point it is importantto recall that, as I have shown in the beginning of this essay, the "I"of the narratordoes merge with the "I"of the author,ha-mehaberet("the author")of this hibur. The fact that the narratoris the creatorof the protagonist and, at the same time, an autobiographicalrefractionof the authorreemphasizes the fictionality of this fiction. Paradoxically,the intentionalemphasis on fictionality reaffirmsthe role of the storytellerin the age of the unpresentable.The insistence on suspending belief that is, the exposure of the process of makingthe storyprovesthe possibility of creativitydespite the menace of terror.We have noted the dead end of the story in Exile. Margarita,the daughterwho struggles with her father,loses herself in her story, having failed to maintaindistance from her creation. She dies, and the story ends with her death. In contrastwith the irrevocable finality in Exile, the motherin the artistin TheInner Lake allows her story to lead her towarddestructionwhile remainingconscious that "Thevoyage never ends. Even before the end, the story startsanew"(IL 125). The story never ends, because anotherversion, or the "opposite,"as Calasso taughtus, is an integralpartof the story.Thus, immediatelyafterthe episode of 28. A referenceto the deathof the Levite'sconcubine in Judges 19.
269
Rachel FeldhayBrenner the protagonist'sviolent death,the narratorregainscontroloverher story.She ushers her protagonistto the worldof myth,where deathis neverfinal. The peacock's feather,which the narratorgives herprotagonist,promisesher eternallife (IL 134). Anotherversionresolves the problemof the protagonist'sancestry.Identifyingherself with the Jewish tradition,as representedby Dolce, the Jewish woman of valor, the protagonistenters a "small,old graveyard"where "ancienttrees cast deep shadow"and "deep grass hides ancient tombstones."There, she lies on the grass and closes her eyes (IL 127). It seems thatshe has finally foundpeace of mind and soul. The thirdversion, however,indicatesthatthe consciousness of terrorcannot be eliminatedor suppressedby resortingto the old traditionsof storytelling.On the contrary,the hope for tikkun,howeverpartialandimperfect,is predicatedupon the acknowledgmentof the presence of evil. Thus, paradoxically,to be rescued from complete fragmentationand formlessness, the story must recognize the terror which forebodes its ending. The red flower that the narratorplaces on Glycera's grave represents such recognition. The mother in the artist remembers Glycera'sdespairand her sense of emptiness, and feels as if "she had been violently torn out of my heartand left it hollow" (IL 128). The recognitionof despair gives birth to terribleemptiness. Unlike the Yazidi worshippers,who succeed in evading direct confrontationwith Satan,the narratorcan no longer evade the encounter.The "fundamentalexperience of evil" in the twentiethcenturyhas created a sense of irretrievableloss and disconsolatedespondency. The concrete, physical sense of hollowness cannot be ignored,but the responsibilityof the motherin the artistis to outweighthe birthof terribleemptiness with the birthof terriblebeauty.Indeedin a magnificenttableau(IL 135-6), which incorporatesbeautyandterror,the narratorkisses herbaby,Caer,the mythicalIrish "swan-lass,"who arises once a year from the land of the dead. Now the narrator has been transformedfor a momentinto the queen mother,who, as the legend has it, gave birthto Caerby swallowing a butterfly.As the queen mother,the narrator finds herself in the position of giving birthto a new myth. In this myth, Caercalls her "mommy"twice, first showing her "a womantrampledin her blood,"and second, pointing to Aphrodite'schariot,harnessedto swans, which traversesthe sky. The cosmic image, which associates Aphrodite,the goddess of love with the perfect beauty of the swan, must, from now on, coexist with the consciousness of the death of love, as representedby the terribleimage of Glyceralying in blood. Indeed,it is the precariousbalanceof terrorand beautythatinformsthe stothat must continuein the age that has alreadyseen the destructionof all forms ry and values. Thus the swans line togetherwith the peacocks on the shore of the inner lake, watching"the seven little birds,"which representthe freedomto create. The birdsareunderconstantthreatfromthe "hunter,who lies in wait.""Ifthe birds die," the narratorknows, "the woman will die" (IL 138-9). In the age of terror, creationof beauty has become a dangerousundertaking.But it would be equally dangerousto renouncebeauty.Against the notion thatdismisses solace, taste, and pleasurein today'sart, TheInnerLakearguesfor the continuinglegitimacyandviability of solace, taste, and pleasurein the reality of senseless evil. In a world that
270
Ruth Almog's The Inner Lake has eliminatedthe hope for tikkun,the consciousness of traditionsgroundedin the certaintyof redemptionrepresentsthe only possibility of preventingevil from its ultimatevictory of formlessness. Rachel FeldhayBrenner Universityof Wisconsin-Madison Madison,Wisconsin
271
"Chiseled from All Sides": Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition Author(s): William Kolbrener Source: AJS Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Nov., 2004), pp. 273-295 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131524 . Accessed: 20/07/2011 02:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 28:2 (2004), 273-295
"CHISELEDFROM ALL SIDES":HERMENEUTICS AND DISPUTE IN THE RABBINICTRADITION
by William Kolbrener*
Among contemporaryliterarytheorists-and in the humanitiesin generaltheological approaches toward interpretationhave been dismissed in favor of hermeneuticmodels committedto the contingency,partiality,andhistoricityof all interpretativepractice.Against the grain of this tendency,which tends to dismiss all vestiges of theology frompostmodernhabitsof readingand interpretation,critics like Daniel Boyarinand David Stern,have, overthe past decades, attemptedto recoverthe distinctlyJewish modes and discoursesof readingand interpretation. In the process, they have, as Boyarinhimself underlines,introduceda specifically Jewishmode of reading-that of midrash-into the literarytheoreticalcanon.1 Such a task was beset by obstacles from the outset: not only the pervasive prejudicesamong scholars ("religious conviction,"Stanley Fish quotes Mill apbut also the scholarlyrefusalto recogprovingly,requires"narrow-mindedness"), nize an autonomousset of Jewish hermeneuticand epistemologicalparadigms.2 "The liberalterm 'Judaeo-Christian,' as Boyarinhas remarked,"marksa suppression of thatwhich is distinctlyJewish."It "means'Christian,"'Boyarincontinues, and by not acknowledgingas much, the term rendersthe "suppressionof Jewish discourses even more complete." In retrospect, the rehabilitationof midrash throughoutthe eighties can be seen to parallelthe New Historicistmoment in literary studies, which similarly entailed the archaeologyof suppresseddiscourses and knowledges.3 *The researchfor this projecthas been generouslysupportedby the IsraelScience Foundation. I would also like to acknowledgethe guidance and assistanceof Rachmiel Daykin, MenachemFisch, Susan Handelman,Michael Kramer,and JeffreyPerl. 1. Daniel Boyarin,Intertextualityand the Reading of Midrash(Bloomington:IndianaUniversity Press, 1990), xi; David Stem, Parablesin Midrash:Narrativeand Exegesis in RabbinicLiterature (Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1991), 1. 2. Stanley Fish, "WhyWe Can'tAll JustGet Along,"First Things60 (February1996): 23. 3. Boyarin,Intertextualityand the Reading ofMidrash, xi. Otherimportantworks on midrash and literatureinclude Steven Fraade,From Traditionto Commentary:Torahand Interpretationin the MidrashSifreto Deuteronomy(Albany:StateUniversityof New York,1991); SusanHandelman,Slay-
273
William Kolbrener For Geoffrey Hartman,whose Midrash and Literature(with Sanford Bumarked the formal entry of midrashinto literarystudies, the suppressionof dick) rabbinicdiscoursesremainsembeddedin a very specific history,of which his own work becomes a belated part: Mymotivesin studyingMidrasharenotpure.I ama raiderof thelostarklookItis notforthesakeof heavenI studybutto bringbackvoices ingfortreasure. andtypesof interpretations of whichthatarkis as full as Noah'swas with andhowpublicigbeasts.I cannotforgethowthesewritingswereslandered, noranceabettedsuchslanderin theNaziera. As a "raiderof the lost ark,"Hartmanseeks to penetratebeneaththe surfaceof"ignorance"and"prejudice"and,in this "age of restitutions,"to participatein the rescue of Jewishexegesis fromNazi "slander."Againstthe attributionof "a crass and stubborn literalism" to Jewish tradition, Hartman celebrates the "interpretive bounty of a text" for which midrashbecomes a symbol. The promiseof this "interpretivebounty"has broughtmidrash(and its close cousin, aggadah) into the precinctsof literarycriticism.Thoughthe "Naziera"and the "impactof the hurban"are never far from Hartman'smind,he also calls attention to the "shift in contemporaryintellectuallife from identity-philosophies to theoriesof differencebasedon an appreciationof the intertextualcharacterof writing."4Midrashbecomes, for Hartman,both an example and symbol for this kind of writing, made possible-after Auschwitz-because of its avoidance of conceptual monovocality and its embrace of "difference."Indeed, with its obvious concern for "polyphony"and "intertextuality," midrash gained currency with a generationof literarycritics schooled on the Derrideandiffirance. In Hartmanand Budick's introduction to their 1986 volume, they find connections between midrashand the notion of literature,which, by the mid-eighties, had reached its ascendancy: Whatwe areconcernedwiththroughout this volumeis a varietyof "open" modesof interpretation, thatis experienced a life in literature or in scripture as in the shuttlespacebetweenthe text.Abidingin the sameintermediary spaceis a wholeuniverseof allusivetextuality. . . whichlatelygoes by the name intertextuality.5
The Derridean echoes are unmistakable,as the authors continue, celebrating midrash'sproductionof "a continuumof intertextualsupplements,"which are ofers of Moses: TheEmergenceofRabbinicInterpretationin ModernLiteraryTheor' (Albany:StateUniJournalof Religion 74 (1994): versityof New York,1983); GeoffreyHartman,"Midrashas Literature," 338-355; Emmanuel Levinas, Nine TalmudicReadings (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990); GeoffreyHartmanand SanfordBudick,ed. Midrashand Literature(New Haven,CT:YaleUniversity Press, 1986); Marc-Alain Ouaknin, The Burnt Book: Reading the Talmud(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995); David Stern, Midrashand Theory:Ancient Jewish Exegesis and ContemporaryLiteraryStudies (Evanston,IL:NorthwesternUniversityPress, 1996). 4. Hartman,"Midrashas Literature," Journal of Religion 74 (1994): 338, 342. 5. Hartmanand Budick, Midrashand Literature,xi.
274
Hermeneuticsand Dispute in the RabbinicTradition fered"ina spiritof highly seriousplay."6Hartmanwould furtherelaboratethe connection between midrashand the Derrideanmoment in his 1994 piece, when he pronounced(if perhapsa bit belatedly),"Asknot what deconstructionmay do for Midrash,ask what Midrashmay do for deconstruction."7 Though not as a battle cry, Betty Roitman,in Midrashand Literature,pursues a similar argumentwhen she asserts "the mobility and indeterminacyof midrash. .. explainsits attractivenessto present-daytheoreticianswho understand midrashin a way that feeds their faith in an infinite unfolding of textual signification."MyrnaSolotorevskyechoes: "Theconceptof the inherentpolysemy of the literarytext which nullifies the possibility of a univocalinterpretationis one of the arch principlesof midrash."The "infinite unfolding of textual signification"and the "inherentpolysemy of the literarytext,"for both Roitmanand Solotorevsky, demonstratethe perceivedconjunctionbetweenmidrashicmethodologyand literary theory in the eighties.8 To assimilate rabbinicthoughtto a poststructuralistepistemology of difference, however, has raised its own problems, even-or perhaps especially-for those scholars who have expressed the greatest affinity to midrashic literary method.9Forwhile midrashmay be celebrated,halakhah,thatis, Jewish law,is eitherignoredor condemnedas midrash'sinferiorhandmaid.10Whatconstitutesthis so-called inferiorityis what Roitman,for example, calls, Jewish law's supposition of a "standardof truth"-both in the "metaphysicaland logical sense"-of the terms.1'The invocation,however,of an ostensiblymetaphysical-or even Platonically informed-realm of Jewish law (halakhah), against the polysemy of midrash, unnecessarily bifurcates rabbinic thought. Indeed, the assertion that 6. See also in this light Susan Handelman,"'Everythingis in It': RabbinicInterpretationand ModernLiteraryTheory,"Judaism35 (1986): 429-440, and her "Fragmentsof the Rock: Contemporary LiteraryTheory and the Study of Rabbinic Texts-A Response to David Stern,"Prooftexts 5 (1985): 75-95, where she arguesthat"midrashtakes delight in preciselythose aspects of languageto which poststructuralistcriticismhas alertedus,"renderingthe text "a field of play." 7. Hartman,"Midrashas Literature,"354. 8. Betty Roitman,"SacredLanguageandOpenText"in Hartmanand Budick,Midrashand Literature, 159; Myrna Solotorevsky,"The Model of Midrashand Borges's InterpretativeTales and Essays" in Hartmanand Budick, Midrashand Literature,255. 9. For the problemsof employing poststructuralisttheory as a lens for understandingthe rabbis, see David Stern'sreview of Susan Handelman'sSlayers, "Moses-cide:MidrashandContemporary LiteraryCriticism,"Prooftexts4 (1984): 193-213, as well as the subsequentexchange of letters in Prooftexts5 (1985): 75-103. 10. David Stern has remarked,("LiteraryCriticismor LiteraryHomilies?: Susan Handelman and the ContemporaryStudy of Midrash,"Prooftexts5 [1985]), thatin "historicalfact,"midrash"has been the neglected stepchildof rabbinicliterature,ignored and subordinatedto the more practicalserious rigors of halakhah"(97). In contemporaryliterarycircles, however,this hierarchyhas been reversed. 11. Roitman,"SacredLanguage,"159;see also EdithWyschograd,"Trendsin PostmodernJewish Philosophy,"Soundings 76 (1994), who writes that since "law is governedby an arche outside of itself,"rabbiniclegal exegesis is "Platonic"(159). See in the Soundingsvolume Jose Faur,"The Limits of ReaderlyCollusion in RabbinicTradition,"which contraststhe interpretivefreedomof midrash with the limitationsimposed by the Law (153-161).
275
William Kolbrener midrashis "dialogic"andhalakhah"absolutist"is to get both of themwrong. Such categorizations are informed by western-indeed ultimately Platonic-categories, which make relativismand absolutismthe only possible options. That the theoreticalstarting-pointfor recent considerationsof rabbinichermeneuticshas been French poststructuralistthought has helped sustain the impression that midrashicmethod does, in fact, provide a precedentfor a postmodernistepistemological relativism.The startingpoint, however,for this study is different:not in Frenchpoststructuralismbut, rather,in the empirical and hermeneutictraditions of Britainand Germany,respectively.To attemptan understandingof rabbinicinterpretationand a notion of interpretativedisagreementthat skirts between the poles of relativism and absolute truth, I turn towardsthe hermeneuticsof Hans Georg Gadamerand to QuentinSkinner'smethod of intentionalistaction. On the surface,Skinnerand Gadamermay seem like an unlikely-if not an impossible-pairing. Skinner'smeticulousfocus upon intentionwould seem to be irreconcilablewith the Gadamerianinsistenceuponhermeneuticcontextsor "interpretivehorizons,"as he calls them, in which readingsof texts are engendered,if not produced.Put simply,Gadamerianhermeneuticswould seem to lead to an interpretive relativism(and has been attackedfor engenderinganarchyin interpretation), while Skinnerianintentionalismwould seem to be foundedupon a hopeless idealism about recoveringthe intentionsthat are meant to inform a text.12Rendering Gadamerschematically(as has been inevitablythe case in contemporaryrepresentations of his method)would have him celebratingthe paradigms,models, or subjective frameworksthatproducethe interpretationof texts;whereasSkinnerwould be seen to emphasizethe objectivelyidentifiableintentionsthatunderliethe writing of a text. Such simplificationsmay have an heuristicfunction,but in theirsimplicity they turn Skinnerand Gadamerinto antagonistswhen in fact there are manyandI will argue,significant-points of agreement.Such agreement,put simply,begins in theircommon acknowledgementof the failureof a theoryof interpretation thatdependsuniquelyuponeithersubjectiveparadigmsor objectiveintentions. To be sure, interpretivemodels thatpresupposesuch a dichotomywill necessarilyproducethe options of eithera subjectiverelativismleading to anarchyor, by contrast,an objective absolutismturninginto a kind of essentialism.A recent scholarlysymposiumon counter-transference attemptedto show the problemsinherentin maintainingrigiddistinctionsbetweensubjectivityandobjectivityin psychoanalysis.'3 Articulating the hermeneutics of the rabbinic discourse of the Talmuddemandsa similar attempt,for neithersubjectiveapproaches,which celebrate the "polyphony"of a Jewish tradition,nor objective approaches,which lamentthe essentializingnarrownessof a Jewish legal theology, will do justice to 12. Forthe attackon Gadamerian"anarchy"in interpretation,see E. D. Hirsch, Validityin Interpretation(New Haven, CT: Yale University Press 1967), 231; for attacks upon Skinnerianintentionalism, see the essays collected in JamesTully,ed., Meaningand Context:QuentinSkinnerand his Critics (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988), esp articles by Keith Grahamand John Keane, which both invoke the name of Gadamer;see also John Hall, "IlliberalLiberalism,"British Journal of Sociology 31 (1980): 297-299. 13. Forthe beginningof the symposium,see AntonO. KrisandStevenH. Cooper,"Objectivityand CommonKnowledge4 (1995): 174-196. Subjectivityin Psychoanalysis:A HistoryandIntroduction,"
276
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition conceptionsof rabbinicinterpretation.14 Independently,neitherthe simplified version of Gadamernor Skinnercan providean adequatemodel for approachingthe hermeneutics of the Jewish Oral Law. From the bridge between Gadamerian hermeneuticsand Skinnerianintentionalism,however,and fromtheircommon acknowledgementof the reciprocalrelationshipbetween subject and object, there emerges a methodologycapableof doing some justice to the hermeneuticprinciples thatunderlieTalmudicdiscourse.Fromthis point of view, rabbinichermeneutics will reveal itself to entail an accommodationof difference unlike the one implicit in most versions of poststructuralistargument. The rabbinicaccommodationof difference, while entertainingan unfathomable complexity,necessitateswhat Daniel Boyarinhas called "pilpul"(or what he understandsas the dialectical "logic of commentary").'5In anotherregister,it entails a version of Adorno'sfractured"totality,"which maintainsitself, entailing the possibility of the relationshipbetween particulars,even in their "diffuse, divergent,and contradictorycondition."•6That is to say,the rabbinicconception of differencedoes not engenderthe consequencesof postmodernrelativism-rhetorical andpolitical models of conversationsbased upon incommensurabilityandanimus or what Alasdair MacIntyre simply calls "shrillness."'7Rather, rabbinic models of differenceallow for a conceptionof disputewhich courtsneitherthe extremeof unmediateddifference(and relativism)nor authoritarianunivocality(and absolute truth).As a consequence, an accommodationof difference emerges unlike those availablewithin the conceptualcategoriesof the West. BETWEEN ABSOLUTE TRUTH AND RELATIVISM
To suggest the commensurabilityof Gadamerianhermeneuticswith Skinnerian intentionalism,however,raises problems-primarily from Skinner'sown attacksupon Gadamer,dating back to the mid-eighties. In his introductionto the Returnof GrandTheory,Skinnerlamentsthat"Gadamerhas cast doubton whether we can ever hope to reachthe traditionalgoal of interpretation,thatof graspingan alien action, utteranceor text 'objectively' in its own terms."Because Gadamer had underminedthe possibility of renderingthe intentionsof a text "objectively," Skinnerwarnedthatit would be just a "shortstep to the anarchisticconclusionthat we oughtnot to thinkof interpretationas a methodof attainingtruthsat all."'8Here Skinnerhimself invokesthe dichotomydescribedabove, arguingexplicitly for ob14. See R. Joseph Soloveitchik, The Halakhic Mind:An Essay on Jewish Traditionand Modern Thought(London:Seth Press, 1986), which sought the reconciliationof the opposing methodologies of the Newtonianscientist andnineteenth-centuryhumanistin the figure of the quantumscientist. See also William Kolbrener,"Towardsa Genuine Jewish Philosophy:Halakhic Mind'sNew Philosophy of Religion,"Tradition1996 (30): 21-43. 15. Daniel Boyarin,"Pilpul:The Logic of Commentary,"Dor le-dor 3 (1986): 1-25. 16. Theodor W. Adorno, Aesthetic Theory,trans. C. Lerhardt,eds. GretalAdorno and Rolf Tiedemann(New York:Routledge & K. Paul, 1984), 13-14. 17. Alasdir MacIntyre,After Virtue:A Studyin Moral Theory(Notre Dame, IN: Universityof Notre Dame Press, 1981), 8. 18. QuentinSkinner,ed., TheReturnof GrandTheoryin the HumanSciences (New York:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1990), 7.
277
WilliamKolbrener jectivity in interpretationagainst the subjective-indeed, anarchic-excesses of Gadamerianhermeneutics. Skinner'sown method-emerging from the twin strandsof Austinian language philosophy and the historicaltraditionsof Collingwood and Butterfieldalways emphasizesthe importanceof reconstructingauthorialintentions.Before, however, his methodological protest against the avatarsof the "GrandTheory," Skinnerhad otherinterpretivemodels in his sights-particularly those of the New Criticism.19Writingin 1972 againstWimsatt'snew criticalrejectionof intention, Skinnerfashioned a methodthat would shift emphasis "off the idea of the text as an autonomousobject" and towardan understandingof the text that would take into account what he would call "intentionalistaction."20Skinner,rejectingNew Criticalprinciples,would turnto the "ideaof the text as an object linkedto its creator,and thus on to the discussion of what its creatormay have been doing in creating it." Skinner would thus emphasize not only intention, but also Austin's "central insight" about the performative nature of language, distilled in the Wittgensteinianinsight that, as Skinnerquotes him, "wordsare also deeds."This is to say,Skinner'sintentionalismentailsa focus not on the text in itself, but, rather, on what he terms, following Austin, the "particularforce with which a given utterance ... may have been issued on a particularoccasion."Skinnerthus invokes discursive contexts-or Wittgensteinian"languagegames"-as a means for reconstructing the intentions of particulartexts, or, as Skinner following Austin would have them, texts as performativeutterances.Althoughacknowledgingthat it is impossible "to step into the shoes of past agents,"and "still less into their minds,"Skinnernonethelessholds out the hope of the recoveryof the "intentions with which their utteranceswere issued, and hence what they meant by them."21 Against this hope, Skinner'scritics have regularlyinvoked Gadamer.John Keane, for example, rejects Skinner's"dusty antiquarianism"and his "old-fashioned positivism."Since language is always situatedand interpretersalways bear the unavoidablemark of Gadamerian"prejudice,"Keane argues, interpretations are not discovered,but producedas a function of present concerns.There are, in any event, "no selfless researchers,"as Skinneris meant to presuppose,who are "detachedfrom their object."Similarly,Nancy Streuver,citing David Hull, finds Skinner's"preoccupationwith anachronism"a "fussy minor therapy,"rejecting both his interpretivemodel and what she sees as his relegationof past texts to the "statusof antiques.""Presentism,"that is, the taking into account of the interpretive schemes, paradigms,and prejudiceswielded by the contemporarysubjectenHere again, counteringa text, is a "necessaryelement in good historiography."22 19. See also Skinner's"A Reply to My Critics"in Tully,Meaning in Context,esp 276-281. 20. See Skinner's"Motives, intentions,and the interpretationof texts" in Tully,Meaning and Context,68-78, and esp 70-72 and 233-34. 21. Tully,Meaningand Context,260, 279. Skinner'scritiqueof Wimsattmay seem, atthis point, both datedandirrelevant.Forhis confrontationwith a triumvirateof morecontemporaryfigures (Barth, Foucault,and Derrida),see 272-281. 22. Nancy S. Streuver, Theory as Practice: Ethical Inquiry in the Renaissance (Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 1992), x.
278
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition authorialintentionis rejectedas a chimera,with textual meanings understoodas the resultof the Gadamerianproductiveact of interpretation. Notwithstandingthe conflict emerging between the avatarsof Skinnerian and Gadameriancamps, there is a case to be made, nonetheless, for methodological affinities between the two thinkers.To be sure, a full reconciliationof Skinnerian intentionalismand Gadamerianhermeneuticswould be impossible: their own agendas are very much informedby the particularcontexts-historical and philosophical respectively-in which they were nourished.Yet notwithstanding the explicit attackof the GrandTheoryvolume, Skinnerhas shown himself to be moving in the direction of some kind of a rapprochementwith Gadamerian hermeneutics.Skinner,it should be noted, almost always refrainsin his more recent work from a head-on attackon Gadamer,more usually arguingagainstthose who invokeGadamer'sname.23Indeed,in the 1988 Meaningand Contextvolume, Skinner,citing Kuhn,acknowledgesthat "wheneverwe reportour beliefs, we inevitablyemploy some classificatory scheme"with the resultthatnone of these different schemes can "ever be uncontentiouslyemployed to report undisputable facts."This is not to deny,however,Skinnercontinues,"thatthereareundisputable facts to be reported."24Different conceptual schemes, however,Skinnerhimself acknowledges,will come to reveal differentaspects of the world.25 Skinneris even more explicit aboutthe reciprocalrelationshipbetween subjective and objectiveconstraintsin interpretationwhen he claims, in the same volume, that historians"inevitablyapproachthe past in the light of contemporary paradigmsandpresuppositions,the influenceof which may easily serve to mislead us at every turn."Yet he continues,"I have also concededthatthe enterpriseof recoveringthe kinds of intentionsin which I am interestedrequiresa level of historical awarenessand sheer eruditionthat few of us can aspire to reach."Skinner's insistenceuponthe roleof "contemporary mayhave paradigmsandpresuppositions" been implicitin his earlierwork;the acknowledgementof thatrole in the response to his critics shows Skinnerdemonstratingan awareness-indeed, incorporatingthe Gadameriancritiqueinto his own methodology.Of course, even the acknowledgementhere is balancedby the everpresentSkinnerianemphasison the importance of eruditionand the knowledge of discourses:very simply, to know what Hobbes,or Locke, or Miltonmight have been doing, one has to know,Skinneradmonishes, a very greatdeal. (CertainlySkinnerwould be right to point to the way the invocationof new criticalmethodin the sixties,as well as Gadamerian hermeneutics in the eighties, may not have been felicitous for the actualjob of writinghisto23. For a notableexception, see Tully,Meaning and Context,338, n. 172. 24. Tully,Meaning and Context,257. Foran earlieracknowledgmentof the influence of Kuhn on the CambridgeSchool, see J. G. A. Pocock, Virtue,Commerce,and History: Essays on Political Thoughtand History,Chieflyin the EighteenthCentury(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1985), 3, 61. 25. Skinner'srecent Visionof Politics (New York:CambridgeUniversityPress, 2002) also asserts an affinity with Gadamer:Gadamer'sarguments,writes Skinner,embody "a salutaryreminder aboutthe need to be awareof our inevitabletendencytowardsprejudgmentand the fitting of evidence into pre-existingpatternsof interpretationand explanation"(15).
279
William Kolbrener ry).26Notwithstandingthe acknowledgmentof the role for subjectiveelementsin interpretation,Skinner'semphasisremainson the recoveryof authorialintentions. Gadamer'shermeneuticmodel, by contrast,would seem to rule out any possibility of an interpretivemodel based upon objective coordinates and founded upon intention.Indeed,in his attemptto undercutthe claims of a nineteenth-century "objectivist"epistemology, Gadamerassociates the notion that "we must transposeourselves into the spirit of the age" with what he calls the "naive assumption"of an earlierpositivist historicism.The "importantthing"to recognize, for Gadamer,is that "temporaldistance"provides the "positive and productive conditionenablingunderstanding."ForGadamer,thereareno unhistorical,thatis, unsituated,interpretations.The "hermeneuticalsituation,"irreduciblyhistorical,is not only constitutiveof the text, but also constitutiveof "whatseems to us worth inquiringaboutand what will appearas an object of investigation."But what follows from Gadamer'sanalysis of the constitutiveact of understandingand from the appreciationof the "finitudeof our historicalexistence"is the particularlydisturbingconsequence to which Skinnerhimself had pointed:"thatthere is something absurdaboutthe whole idea of a uniquecorrect interpretation."27 Gadamer'sassertionthatthe inescapablehistoricityof interpretationrenders "absurd"the very notion of "correctinterpretation" would seem to leave him open to the very claims of anarchisticinterpretationwhich Skinnerhad leveled at him, andto make theirreconciliation,on any level, impossible.Yet,just as Skinner'sapparentlyobjectivist emphasis on intention is qualified by his concession to the more subjectivistrealm of "paradigms"and "presuppositions,"so Gadamer'sapparentlysubjectivistemphasison the constitutiveaspect of the hermeneuticsituation is qualified by his acknowledgementof the demandsexertedby the object of interpretation.Gadamer thus qualifies his argument about the absurdity of a "uniquecorrect interpretation,"by asserting that interpretationdoes not simply emerge as a functionof the "meresubjectivevarietyof conceptions"of the interpreter,but of the "work'sown possibilities of being."Here, significantly,the "subjective varietyof conceptions"is limited by the "variety"of "aspects"located by Gadamerin the work itself Further,Gadamerwarns, seeming almost to migrate into the Skinnerianposition, if "one regardsthe variationspossible in the presentationas free and arbitrary," then "one fails to appreciatethe obligatoriness"of the All "subjectivevariations,"Gadamercontinues are object under interpretation.28 "subjectto the supreme criterionof 'right' representation."Although Gadamer's insistence on rightrepresentationacknowledgesthe impossibilityof attainingunmediatedaccess to the text (or what Skinnercalls more prosaically"steppinginto the author'sshoes"), he does, however,maintaina belief in the "truemeaning of the object."As an interpreterof texts, Gadamerargues, one should "be awareof one's own bias, so thatthe text can presentitself in all its othernessandthus assert 26. Tully,Meaning and Context,257, 281. 27. Hans George Gadamer,Truthand Method, 2nd revised ed., trans. Joel Weinsheimerand Donald G. Marshall(New York:Crossroads,1993), 297, 300, 120. 28. For Hirsch'sextended critiqueof Truthand Method, see "AppendixII" in Hirsch, Validity in Interpretation,245-264.
280
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition its own truthagainst one's own fore-meaning."That is, Gadamer'smuch-vaunted "methodologicallyconscious understanding"only makes prejudices"conscious," so "as to check them and thus acquirerightunderstandingsfrom the things themselves." Notwithstandingthe primaryrole of the interpreterand his prejudices, Gadamer'sexplicit goal is that we may be "able to open ourselves to the superior claim the text makes."29 Gadamer's language-inherited from the traditions of German philosophy-certainly entails differentcommitmentsand emphasesthan Skinner'sown empiricalintentionalism.Yet both thinkersgesture towardsthe very extreme that their own thought is alleged to oppose, if not renderimpossible. What Gadamer and Skinnerboth seem to recognize, and what gets lost in the polemical attacks putforwardby some of theirfollowers,is thateven the hermeneutistGadamerturns to the constraintsimposed by the object itself, while the intentionalistSkinneracknowledges the power of the paradigmsand schemes that interpretersemploy. Away from the scene of polemical appropriationand debate, there emerges some common groundaboutthe natureof the interpretiveenterprisebased on both subject and objective frames of reference. From them emerges a hermeneutic,removed from the binary between the relative and the absolute, suitable for encounteringthe hermeneuticuniverseof the Talmud.Foronce the polemical debate shifts awayfromthe obsessive invocationof subjectivityon the one hand(and the anarchyit is meantto entail), and objectivityon the other(andthe naive idealism it is said to presuppose),an opening emerges for an articulationof rabbinic hermeneutics.30 THE TEMPTATIONOF TRANSCENDENCE
"Philosophy,"Wittgensteinwrote, "oughtreallyto be writtenonly as aform of poetry."31 In many ways, classical rabbinic meditations on questions of hermeneutics, epistemology, and even metaphysics are written in poetic-certainly nonphilosophical-form. In the Talmud,as Adin Steinsaltz has remarked, "thereis a deliberateevasion of abstractthinkingbased on abstractconcepts."32 The midrashic or aggadic-that is, the narrative-treatment of philosophical problemsserves as a way of avoiding,if not resisting,the abstractconcepts of philosophy.In rabbinicdiscourses,metadiscussionsupon the natureof interpretation are almost always renderedthroughmidrash.Only the language of explanatory commentary,we shall see, requiresthe use of a language of dualism, which the narrativeregistersof midrashand aggadah managethemselves to avoid. One such talmudicnarrativeinvolves the legal disputebetween two rabbis; 29. Gadamer,Truthand Method, 118, 298, 269; emphasisadded. 30. Alan Sokal's attack upon the humanitiesthat emerged from the Social Textcontroversy hinged largely upon his attributionof a simplistic notion of "subjectivism"to all avatarsof humanist method againstthe ostensibleobjectivityof the sciences. One might arguethatneithermodel, by itself, is appropriateeither for the humanitiesor the sciences. 31. LudwigWittgenstein,Cultureand Value,trans.PeterWinch (Oxford:B. Blackwell, 1980), 24e. 32. Handelman,Slayers, 61.
281
WilliamKolbrener as the often-cited story goes (B. Bava Mezica59b), in the midst of the dispute, a voice-a bat kol-went out from the heavens,proclaimingthatthe law was to be determinedin accord with one of the disputants.33Withinthe context of the narrative,the heavenly voice is itself rejected (along with a numberof supernatural events which had proceeded),with RabbiYehoshuaciting a verse from the Torah as a means of supportingthe rejectionof the divine intercession.In a commentary of the Gaonicperiod,Nissim ben Jacobben Nissim Ibn Shahin(RabbenuNissim) explains that: theintention of the"batkol"[thevoicefromheaven]wasonlytotesttheSages intheirhandsandthe thetradition [tosee]if theywouldorwouldnotabandon said,"it[theTorah] teachingintheirmouths.Andthisis whatRabbiYehoshua is notinheaven"-meaning,theTorahof Godis perfect,andhasalreadybeen givento us at Sinai(M.Berakhot19b). The episode, as RabbenuNissim explains, not only thematizes the post-Sinaitic priorityof humaninterpretationover divine command,but also enacts the temptation of transcendence-that is, the temptationof aspiringtowardsa grasp of the absolute.RabbiYehoshua'scitationof a verse fromthe Torahnot only providesthe relevantproof text, but also enacts a process of interpretationthat is alreadyoutside of the scope of furtherdivine intervention.The narrative-in RabbenuNissim's understanding-rejects the appeal to the absolute, asserting, after the moment at Sinai, the priorityof interpretation. The rejectionof divine interventionand the concomitantembraceof interpretationentails, correspondingly,a rejectionof the possibility of what Gadamer calls "a uniquecorrectinterpretation." The emphasison multiplicityin interpretation is manifested in a series of midrashicnarrativesrelated in tractateTemurah (1 5a- 16a). Centeringaroundthe deathof Moses, in these midrashicaccounts,the relationshipbetween the loss of access to the absolute and the emergence of interpretivemultiplicity is elaborated:"RavYehudahsaid in the name of Shmuel: Threethousandlaws were forgottenduringthe periodof mourningfor Moses ... ." The death of Moses, and the loss of his privilegedaccess to God, entails a loss of the law as well. The narrative,however,continues:"Afterthe death of Moses, if those [rabbis]who pronounced[ritually]unclean were in the majority,they declaredthe object impure,and if those who pronounced[ritually]purewere in the majority,they declared it clean." Lacking the clarity of insight available to the prophetMoses, the interpretiveprocesses of the rabbis (after the propheticmo33. Forthe most salient discussions of the episode, see Boyarin,Intertextualityand the Reading of Midrash,34. MenachemFisch, however,takes exception to a Boyarin'sreading,which, Fisch claims, goes to "the point of interpretiveanarchy"(Menachem Fisch, Rational Rabbis: Science and TalmudicCulture[Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress, 1997], 85). Forothertreatmentsof this narrative, see Michael Rosensweig, "EluVa-EluDivre Elokim Hayim:HalakhicPluralismand Theories of Controversy,"Tradition26 (1992): 4-23; Eli Turkel,"TheNatureand Limitationsof RabbinicAuthority,"Tradition27 (1993): 80-99; ShalomCarmy,"Pluralismand the Categoryof the Ethical,"Tradition 30 (1996): 145-163; and Avi Sagi, "'Both are the Wordsof the Living God': A Typological Analysis of HalakhicPluralism,"HUCA 65 (1994): 105-136.
282
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition ment) are governed by the apparentlydemocraticprinciplewherebythe legal decision is determinedby a majority.Importantly,whereasfor Moses, the law would have been transparent(and the object eitherpure or impure),for the rabbis,it becomes a subject for debate. Such dispute, however,is itself sanctionedby the divine, as the heavenly voice affirms, after a three-year-longdispute between the schools of Hillel and Shammai,"theseand these are the wordsof the Living God" (B. 'Eruvin 13b). Against the ideal world figured in the propheticexperiencethathas passed, the rabbisthemselves inhabita realm governedby loss, disagreement,and multiplicity.34Yet, as a later legal commentatorexplains in the introductionto his collection, Kezot ha-hoshen, the status of Torah is not compromised through its immersion in dispute and multiplicity, and in fact only emerges through the processes of interpretation,"theTorahwas not given to ministeringangels; it was given to man with a humanmind. He gave us the Torah,"the Kezotcontinues, "in conformityto the ability of the humanmindto decide, in accordancewith the conclusions of the humanmind."In what from a Westernphilosophicalperspective would amountto the overturningof the hierarchiesrepresentedin Plato's"divided line,"in which the contingentis dismissedin favorof the ideal of transcendence, the Kezot affirms, "Let the truthemerge from the earth;the truthbe as the sages decide with the humanmind."35 Yet the very allusion to Plato (even in the suggested reversalof his model) does not do justice to rabbinicconceptions of interpretation.Forthe legal principle, "these and these are the words of the Living God,"which the preceding accounts exemplify, cannot be usefully compared to simple western versions of relativism.Althoughit maybe true,as Rambanwrotein his introductionto the Talmud, Milhemetha-shem, that "thereare no absolute proofs in disagreements"in the Talmud,this is not to reject the notion of truthor validity in interpretationaltogether.36Forthe principle"these and these,"which licenses the validity (if not, to risk a term,the truth)of differentperspectives,is affirmednot only on whatwe might call subjectivistgrounds,but objectivistones as well: opposingrabbinicinterpretationsall representconcreteembodimentsof the Torah. Of course, such a principle, when seen philosophically,runs right into the Aristotelianprincipleof noncontradiction:the subject of the dispute between le34. Formore on the principlesof loss andmourningin rabbinichermeneutics,see WilliamKolbrener,"Hermeneuticsof Mourning:MultiplicityandAuthorityin Jewish Law,"CollegeLiterature30, 4 (2003): 114-139. 35. The "dividedline" in Book VI of TheRepublichad diminishedthe ontological validity of the phenomenal(in relationto the noumenalforms or ideas); the rejectionof poetry in Book X echoes the allegory of the divided line by placing imaginationand poetic representationon both the lowest ontological and epistemological levels. As Plato's Socrates claims, the "artof representationis ... a long way removed from truth,and it is able to reproduceeverything because it has little grasp over anything,and that little is of a mere phenomenalappearance"(Plato, Republic, ed. Henry Desmond PritchardLee [London:Penguin, 1987], 364). Aryeh Lev Yosef Ha Cohen, Kezot ha- hoshen (Jerusalem, 1972), 3. 36. Ramban,Introductionto Milhemetin tractateM. Berakhot(precedingthe commentaryof R. Alfasi).
283
William Kolbrener gal adversariesrevolved,moreoften thannot, uponquestionsof permittedandprohibitedbehavior-questions which would hardlyseem to allow for disagreement, let alone outrightcontradiction.Which is to say, how can the separatedeterminations that an act is "permitted"on the one hand or "forbidden"on the other both representthe truth.How can they both be the "wordsof the Living God"?So ask the Ba'alei ha-tosafot and Ritba (R. YomTov ibn Asevilli), who would elaborate theirquestion(perhapsinstigatedby an awarenessof the Aristoteliancategoriesof scholastic philosophy): Therabbisof Franceaskedhowis it possiblethattheyareboththewordsof andthisone [saysit is] the livingGod,[when]thisone [saysit is] prohibited to And when Moses went answered: up theAboveto receive permitted? they theTorah,it was shownto himon everymatterforty-ninewaysto prohibit, andforty-ninewaysto permit.And[Moses]askedtheHolyOneBlessed-beHe aboutthis,andHe saidthatthis will be passedto the Sagesof Israelof andit will be decidedaccordingto them.37 everygeneration, Ritba understandsthat a multiplicity of different legal perspectives were themselves already implicit in the original revelationto Moses at Sinai. Thus the appearanceof various opinions-even on the same matter-does not compromise the objectivistcriteriaof the Torah.The judgmentsthat emerge in particularsituations, though contradictory,are nonetheless both "the words of the living God." The Torahitself, and the experienceof Sinai, accordingto Ritba, is the guarantor of truthin multiplicity. While Ritba emphasizes such a multiplicitygroundedin the experience at Sinai itself, latercommentatorswould turntowardsthe role of the interpreter.Indeed the principlearticulatedin tractateNiddah (20b)-"a judge can only decide by what appearsto his eyes"-provides a Talmudicprecedentfor this subjectivist criterion.Seeming to transformthis principleinto a broaderinterpretiveprinciple, Maharshal(R. Solomon ben Yehiel writes, in apparentdisagreementwith Ritba, that differencesbetween the sages emergednot because of the multiplicityinherent in revelation,but, rather,because each of the sages "perceivedthe Torahfrom his own perspective in accordancewith his intellectual capacity as well as the statureand uniquecharacterof his particularsoul."38Fromthe perspectiveof Maharshal,differenceof perception-purely subjectivecriteria-constitutes an integral part of the Sinaitic revelation. Maharshal'sprinciples certainly do not compromisehis commitmentto Law (as his commentaryon the Shulhan cArukh avows), which atteststo the necessity of an objectivecomponentunderlyingan interpretiveapproachthat emphasizesthe subjective. Ritbaand Maharshal,therefore,arenot so much disagreeingas they areproviding differentperspectiveson the principle"theseandthese arethe wordsof the Living God" (their dispute would, in fact, come underthe aegis of the very principle they are coming to explain). Indeed,Ritba himself hints at the corollaryin37. Yom-Tov benAvraham Ishbilli,Hidusheiha-Ritba"alha-shas(Jerusalem,1974),3:107. toYamShelShlomo,BavaKama. 38. Introduction
284
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition terpretationof Maharshalwhen he asserts that, in additionto the explanationthat he had alreadyoffered,and "accordingto the ways of truth"(in all likelihooda reference to the Zohar),there is yet another"hiddenexplanationof the matter."For certainlyRitbahimself would have to providesome account-touching upon subjectivist criteria-which would explainthe emergenceof the differentperspectives in differenthistoricalperiods. The commentariesof Ritba and Maharshalare already,in their response to the question of Tosefot, inflected (thoughnot explicitly) with binaryphilosophicalcategories:Ritbaemphasizingobjectivity,Maharshal subjectivity.Though even here the distinctionsdo not emerge out of a desire for mutualexclusion, but only as a matterof emphasis. In the event, no such philosophical distinctions are present in the midrashicnarrativesthemselves, which meditateon problemsof interpretationwithouteliciting these distinctionsthatare, in fact, a functionof commentary. Thatthe divine and human,and hence subjectiveand objective,are mutually implicatedreceives furtherexplicit articulationin the account in tractateGittin centeringon anotherrabbinicdisagreement.After describingthe disputebetween R. Avitarand R. Yochanan(on the correctinterpretationof an episode in Judges), the gemara (6b) provides an account of R. Avitar'sencounter with Elijah the Prophet,"R.Avitarwent andfound Elijahthe Prophetandasked,'Whatis the Holy One Blessed-be-He doing now?' The Prophetanswered:'He is busy with the dispute between R. Yonatanand R. Avitar,'and he is saying the following, 'So says my son Yonatan,so says my son Avitar."'The midrashdemonstratesboth divine assent to the notion of multiplicity in interpretation,and to the way in which the divine and humanremainentangled.The precise natureof this dynamic,however, remainshere ambivalent,and is again only fully broughtout in the writings of later commentators.The twentieth-centurycommentaryof R. Chaim Friedlanderin Siftei hayim explains by comparingthe two talmudic disputantsto Moses at the time of the revelationat Sinai: ThuswhenR. AvitarandR.YonatanstudiedTorah,thiswastheTorahwhich wasgivenat Sinai,andjustas on MountSinai,theHolyOneplacedthewords of Torahin themouthof Moses,so atthetimeof theirstudying,theydidnot saytheirownwords,buttheWordsof theLivingGod.39 By referringback to the Sinaitic moment,Siftei hayimemphasizesthe precedence of the divine and groundsthe differences in opinions between R. Yonatanand R. Avitarin the originalexperienceof revelation(much like Ritbahad done in his account of "these and these").Nefesh ha-hayim,the work of R. Hayimof Volozhin, providesthe complementaryexplanationin which not objective, but, rather,subjective, variablesseem to be most prominent,"Becauseof the fact that R. Yonatan and R. Avitarwere studyingTorah,so the Holy One repeatedtheir words in their entirety."40 In this perhapsmore strikingrendering,interpretationitself seems to take 39. R. ChaimFriedlander,Siftei hayim(Benai Brak, 1996), Mocadim,v. iii, 171. 40. R. ChaimVolozhin,Nefesh ha-hayimayim(Jerusalem, 1989), 217.
285
William Kolbrener precedence,with God authorizinginterpretivemultiplicityas he repeatsandtherefore validatesthe disputeonly afterthe fact. In the version of the Nefesh ha-hayim, unlike that of Siftei hayim,emphasis is placed not upon God and Sinai, but upon the presentrealityin which disputeis engendered.Focusingon one of the accounts of the narrative(which equally accommodatesboth renderings)might lead to a simplified version of a rabbinicinterpretivemodel-as being determineduniquely by eithersubjectiveor objectiveconstraints.41But again,the two commentaries presupposeone another:following the patternof RitbaandMaharshalbeforethem, the latercommentaries,in my reading,come to extrapolatethe opposingemphases implicit in the midrashicnarrative,which are themselves both "wordsof the Living God." Rabbinic interpretationis simultaneouslylinked to Sinai and the authority that it accords and to a creative present in which new meanings are produced.Laterrenderingsof the narrative,which in some sense are alreadyresponding,if only implicitly,to the Aristoteliandemandsof noncontradiction,provide necessarilysimplified accountsof the nonphilosophicalregistersof midrash, or what we might call, following Wittgenstein,rabbinic"poetry."In such poetry, the divinely sanctionedmultiplicityof "theseand these"emergesbetween the extremesof whatwe call in ourimpoverishedphilosophicallanguagesthe twin poles of the subjectiveand the objective. Between these poles emerges both a notion of truth,as well as a conception of disagreement,which defy Westerncritical conceptions. To explore these notions-and the attitudesupon which they are presupposed and which they engender-we turnnow to the languages of halakhah, seen from a perspective informed by both Gadamerianhermeneuticsand Skinnerianintentionalism. ANDINTERPRETIVE CHARITY DISAGREEMENT, DITCHES, Any discussion of rabbinicmeditationson interpretationmust turnto a discussion of rabbinicinterpretationin action. Indeed,by looking at a particularexample of rabbinicdisagreement,we can see the way in which the more generalhermeneutic principles discussed above lead to a very particularrabbinicattitudetowards the natureand conduct of disputes.ThatTorahis only manifestedthroughinter41. MenachemFisch, though not relying upon the distinctionbetween subjectivityand objectivity, nonetheless bifurcatestalmudicthought into what he calls "traditionalist"and "antitraditionalist" voices. For Fisch, the antitraditionalistvoice, according to his reading "camouflaged"in the BabylonianTalmud,emphasizes"criticalappraisal"and "skepticism"(roughlycorrespondingto what I havebeen referringto as subjectivetendencies)ratherthanthe traditionalist"unquestionedreception" of "inheritedteachings"(correspondingto the objectivetendenciesin the heuristicof this study;Fisch, Rabbis,xix-xx). Fisch'sbifurcationof what seems to him contradictory,andthereforenecessarilyindependent,approacheswithin the Talmudmay derive from his Popperianbiases and his more general inclinationsas an analyticalphilosophernot to entertaincontradiction.My own sympathies-informed by the sense that Talmudicdiscourses refuse the dichotomies of Westernphilosophy-lie more with MenachemFisch'slate father,HaroldFisch, who sees not contradictionbetween opposing voices, but, rather,paradoxas a means of Talmudicargumentand expression (see HaroldFisch, Be-seter 'elyon: paradoks u-setirahbi-mekorotha-yahadut[RamatGan: Bar Ilan University Press, 2001], especially chap. 10, 124-133). A full response,however,to MenachemFisch'scomplex and sometimesprovocative argumentsgoes well beyond the scope of the currentessay.
286
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition pretation(throughwhatwe might call subjectiveelaborationsof an objectivetruth) will, by necessity, entail the applicationof what Moshe Halbertalcalls, following WillardQuine, the "principleof charity."Such a principle,as Halbertalexplains, entails adoptinga stance such that"a speaker'swordswill make sense andthe sentence that he utters can have meaning."This principlehas a special place in rabbinic hermeneutics,not only in the context, as Halbertalis concernedto show, of the interpretationof the canonical texts of the writtenTorah,but in the realm of disputeswithin the context of the OralLaw itself.42 Forin as much as the Torahcan only be revealedthroughinterpretation,and such interpretationnecessarilyentails multiplicity,the persistentattributionof incoherenceor falsehoodto one's opponents(the rejectionof difference)amountsto a rejectionof the Torahitself. To be sure, the Talmuditself provides,among other things, a vast collection of disputes.These disputesremainunresolvedin the sense that, in most cases, disagreementpersists;yet nonetheless supremehermeneutic effort is exertedto maintainthe coherence of the competingperspectivesin such disputes.Not only does this entail a practicalacknowledgmentof the necessity for multiplicityin the realm of the Law itself, but it also demandsa constantapplication of the Quineanlaw of charity.Forto reject one's opponentout of hand-that is, to assume the incoherenceof one's interlocutor-entails, again, a rejectionof the processes thatmake up Torah.To rejecta subjectivity-which is genuinelyengaged with Torah(that is, engaged in learningTorahfor its own sake, or li-shema)-is to reject Torahitself.43 Thus, to see halakhic discourse as celebrating either an unboundedpolysemy (as has been claimed of midrash),or, on the other hand,a Platonic standardof absolutetruth,is to fail to see the distinctiveconception of rabbinicdisagreement,and rabbinictruth. In this reading,rabbinicinterpretationalwaysbegins with an extremeversion of the Skinnerianmodel, which is to say thatrabbinicinterpretersexertan extraordinaryeffort in understandingthe intentionsof the texts that precedethem. In the case of the Talmuditself, this entailsthe effortsof Amoraim(200 to 600 CE) to understandthe utterancesof their predecessors,the Tannaim(200 BCE to 200 CE). Briefly, the utterancesof the Tannaim("those who teach")form the basis of the OralLaw or Mishnahwhich, once a strictlyoraltradition,was codified by R. YehudahHa-Nasiat the end of the tannaiticperiod.The tannaiticutterancesof the Mishnah providethe basis for all laterarticulationsof the law, and are authoritativefor all futuregenerations.Amoraim(literally"thosewho say")derivelegal principles and concepts from the earliertannaiticsources (never,however,contestingthe authorityof those sources);indeed,the articulationof such principlesalmost always depends upon both acknowledgmentand incorporationof those earlier texts.44 42. Moshe Halbertal,People of the Book: Canon, Meaning, and Authority(Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1997), 27 and ff. The principleis codified, in a mishnahin PirkeiAvot, not only in relationshipto texts, but as a more general behavioralpractice.The mishnahenjoins to "Judge every person in the directionof their benefit"-that is, to attributeboth coherence and goodness to their actions in the absence of unavoidablycompelling evidence to the contrary. 43. Formore on the principleof Torahli-shema, see Volozhin,Nefesh ha-hayim,235. 44. Fora detailedscholarlyintroductionto the subject,see HermannLeberechtStrackandGiinter Stembeger,Introductionto the Talmudand Midrash(Edinburgh:T&T ClarkInternational,1991).
287
William Kolbrener That is to say thatAmoraim,who build their own diverse systems of halakhahin what has come to be known as the gemara (that is, "learning"or Talmud), inevitablydebatethe meaningof tannaiticsources as they arguefor the authorityof theirown halakhicprinciplesand interpretivesystems.Any amoraicstatementthat is contradictedby a precedingtannaiticstatementis, by definition, subjectto rejection. Yet, amoraicstatementsthat, on the surface,may seem to be contradicted by earliertannaiticutterancesare in point of fact almost never rejected.45Talmudic invocations of alternativeconceptual and interpretiveschemes become the means by which the apparentlyincoherentutterancebecomes coherent and understandable.This entails the applicationof somethingresemblingthe "principle of charity,"and will lead us, as we shall see, on a path from the Skinnerianemphasis on intentionto the Gadamerianemphasis on interpretivehorizons. Such a path can only be traced,however,throughturningour attentionto a brief account of the intricaciesof a particularrabbinicdispute.Grantingrabbiniclegal argument such attentionis not for the sake of finding explicit metadiscussionson the nature of interpretation.Unlike midrash,the legal discussions of the Talmuddo not openly meditateon the natureof interpretation;but in the very forms and attitudesof legal argumentemerge more clearly the natureand demandsof rabbinicdispute. The first mishnah in the second chapterof tractateBava batra(17a) deals with the limitationsimposed upon a landowner'suse of his own propertybecause of damagethatmay be incurredto a neighbor'sproperty.The mishnahbegins with the precautionsthat a propertyowner must take, including the requirementthat when digging a ditch, he must distance it from the wall of his neighbor'sditch by a distance, in the gemara'smeasurement,of three arms-breadths.As mentioned, the mishnah' proclamationsare non-negotiablefor futuregenerations;what remains, however,is the extrapolationof principlesfromthe mishnahitself into other contextsandcases. The gemaratakesup the case of one who wantsto dig a ditch nearthe boundaryof his own property:can he do so if his neighborhas not yet dug on his own property?On this question,the mishnahdoes not offer any explicit ruling. Thus, for the Amoraim, the question becomes a matterof dispute-that is, does the Torahpermit someone to initiate digging on the edge of his propertyor not? That is, does one have to take into account the possible futureactions of a neighbor when digging on one's own property?In the ensuing debate between Amoraim,Abayerules thatone may place the ditchnearthe boundary,while Rava, by contrast,rules that one may not, and should distance his ditch appropriately. Both of theseAmoraim,however,mustclaim thattheirrulingis in consonancewith the intentionof the authorof the mishnah.The gemaragoes on to test these amoraic utterancesto show their adherenceto this tannaiticantecedentof the mishnah, as well as all the other tannaiticsources that reflect on the issue. In fact, in this case, this mishnahitself would seem to accommodateboththe perspectivesof Rava and Abaye; the questions on their respective perspectivesemerge most strongly from othertannaiticsources.46 45. There are exceptions, however,in which refutationsinvolve final rejectionsof certainTalmudic opinions; see for example, B. 'Eruvin 16b. 46. In the continuationof the gemara,however,Abaye'sruling is questionedfromthe language of the mishnahitself.
288
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition Ourunderstandingof the amoraicdiscussion is complicatedby the fact that the dispute itself exists in two versions in the gemara(the significance of which will be discussed later).We shall only focus upon the second of these two versions, and the way in which, in this context, the gemaraitself strugglesto justify the positions adoptedby RavaandAbayeagainstthe possible attacksfromothertannaitic texts. In this, the second accountof the disagreementbetweenRavaandAbaye,the two Amoraimare said to agree in the case of landwhere it is not customaryto dig ditches. This is to say, even Rava will agree with Abaye, in this set of cases, that one can approachthe very boundaryof one's propertyand dig. Even before the gemara'saccountof the disagreementbegins, the point of disputeis narrowedto a very particularset of cases. Indeed, rabbinicmethodology almost always maximizes areas of agreement.In this instance, the gemaraconstructsthe amoraicargument in such a manner as to show that the only place where the Amoraim disagree is on land where people are accustomedto dig ditches (in the otherversion, the disputeconcerns land where people do not habituallydig). Here Ravaagainst the more lenient ruling of Abaye-will insist upon the distancing of the ditch from the boundaryto safeguardagainstthe possible damagingof neighboring property,especially since it is customaryto dig on such property. The gemaraproceeds by citing early tannaiticsources as a means of interrogating,if not openly questioning,the positions of RavaandAbaye.As partof the process,the gemarainvokesa mishnah-and a tannaiticdisputebetweenthe Sages and R. Yose-which would seem to renderincoherentboth the positions of Rava andAbaye. Forthe earlierdisputebetweenthe Sages and R. Yose (renderedin full in the same tractate,25b), thoughnot on the questionof the digging of ditches, implies principlesaboutdamagesthatexplicitlycontradictthe rulingsof the laterdisputants.To Abaye'sclaim that it is permissibleto dig near a boundary,the gemara brings the opinion of the Sages, who arguethat one must distance a tree twentyfive cubits from the ditch of a neighborlest its roots damage the ditch. (R. Yose, by contrast,whose position will be elaboratedmore fully below, articulatesthe seemingly more lenient position that licenses propertyownersto use theirland as they see fit.) Here begins the Skinneriananalysis of tannaitic intentions, as the gemarainvokes the utteranceof the Sages as a means of renderingAbaye'sposition incoherent:how can Abaye maintain the permissibility of digging near a boundarywhen we see that the Sages articulateda principlewhich offers protection against actions taken on adjoining properties?That is to say, from the perspective of the questionerin the gemara(likely sharingor, at least adopting,the assumptionsof Rava,andcoming on behalfof his perspective),the intentionof the Sages was surely and clearly to preventactivity that would cause damage to adjoining property.47Abaye, whose own utterance,by definition, needs to be consistent with the "language-game"in which the Sages participate,seems insteadto have articulateda position thatopenly contradictstheirposition. Yet, ratherthan rejectAbaye's opinion as ridiculous,non-normative,or in47. It should be noted, that although the gemara presents a whole series of explicit attacks againstboth RavaandAbaye, the specific languageof the gemarahere rendersthe questionsonly implicitly.
289
William Kolbrener coherent,the gemaragoes on to elaboratea context in which Abaye makes sense. Against the previous attackof the gemarabroughtimplicitly in Rava'sname, the defenders of Abaye (here the anonymousgemara) goes on to elicit what Abaye would maintainarethe real intentionsof the Sages in theirargumentwith R. Yose, and thus to refine our sense of Abaye'sintentions-in his argumentwith Ravaas well. The Sages, Abaye would argue,did not intendto limit all forms of potentially damaging activity; their intentionswere, in fact, much more specific. The questioner,the defendersof Abayewould argue,did not understandthe precise nature of the Sages' conversationwith their interlocutor,and thus failed to understand their true intentions. While it is true that the Sages had required the distancingof the tree, they had only made such a demandin a case wheretherehad been a preexistentditch. In the presentcase, however,of the amoraicdiscussion of the question of digging on boundaries,there is no ditch in the neighboringproperty, and thereforeAbaye's ruling is not only correct, but in accordancewith the very opinion which was meantto contradicthim (as well as what we shall discover to be the apparentlymore libertarianopinion of R. Yose). Havingre-elaborated the parametersof the Sages disputewith R. Yose, Abaye'sopinion emerges as coherent-consistent with the views of all the relevanttannaiticantecedents. The defense of Abaye representsa characteristicset of Talmudicmoves. As is well known, expressions such as "Rathersay" [i.e., "this is what the text really means"],"Thisis what is meant,"and "Withwhat are we really dealing?"abound throughoutthe gemara,as the intentionsof tannaitictexts are reevaluatedand reformulatedin the process of defendingthe integrityand coherenceof lateramoraic statements. If, as Wittgenstein puts it, the "sign (the sentence) gets its significance from the system of signs, from the languageto which it belongs,"48 then the tannaitic"sign"gets its significance first from the languageto which it belongs, that of the Mishnah.This "language,"however,initially defined in terms of a synchronicrelationship,itself is explained,refined, and recreatedin the different languages of individualAmoraim.In our discussion, at the point of the attack leveled againstAbaye, with its assumptionsaboutthe natureof the intentions of the Sages, Abaye'sperspectiveseems hopeless. The shift of perspective,however, which entails a reconsiderationof the intentionsbehind the utteranceof the Sages, revealsthe coherence-if not the actualcomplexity-ofAbaye's utterance, as the Sages utteranceis reconfiguredwithin the context of Abaye'sperspective. RatherthanrejectAbaye'sutteranceas incoherent,the gemaraelicits the intentions of the antecedenttannaitictext (the Sages restrictthe placementof a hazardonly where the object liable to be damagedis alreadypresent)by re-elaboratingthe real context for theirutterance.The resultof this reframingof contexts is to show how the Sages themselves would not argue against, but, in fact, would countenance Abaye's legal ruling. In the continuationof the gemara,it is Rava'sposition that comes underattack: While Rava had ruled that one who wants to dig a ditch must distance from a propertyboundary,R. Yose had argued,against the Sages, that "justas this one digs within his own property,so this one plantswithin his own property."Herethe 48. Ludwig Wittgenstein,TheBlue and BrownBooks (Oxford:Blackwell, 1958), 5.
290
Hermeneuticsand Dispute in the RabbinicTradition question,informednow by the perspectiveof Abaye, sees the intentionsof R.Yose quiteclearly:one is not requiredto distancepotentialharmfulagentsfroma boundary (there is no prohibitionagainst plantinga tree even where it is liable to damage the pit of one's neighbor).It is, in fact, incumbentupon the threatenedparty to protecthis property.Again, fromthe perspectiveelaboratedin the question,just as we saw in the case of Abaye, the very integrityof Rava'sstatementseems to be contradictedby the preexistentutteranceof R. Yose. Ravamight, we would speculate, accede to the question and fall back on to the opinion of the Sages (whose emphasis on precautionarydistancingwould seem to providean obvious support for his position). But the gemaradoes not even attemptthis as a last resort:for the workingassumptionof the gemarais thatthe opinions of the Amoraimshould be accommodatedwith all previous tannaitic statements,and that some context be constructedwhich would allow for the coherence of Rava'sstatement,according to not only the perspectiveof the Sages, but even from the perspectiveof R. Yose as well. This is not only to maximize agreement(such that Rava will have to be consistent with both the Sages and R. Yose) but to resist interpretiveframeworks which would bifurcatethe tradition(andthe Torahitself) with R. Yose andAbaye on one side and the Sages and Rava on the other (with the both sides remaining opaque-if not incoherent-to one another).Althoughtheremaybe disagreement registeredin the words of the Tannaim,the later interpretiveefforts of Amoraim are meantto maximize the points of agreementwith all precedenttannaitictexts. In the event, in defense of Rava,the gemaraonce again shifts conceptualperspectives and finds a new way of understandingthe intentionsbehind the statement of R. Yose; R. Yose, the gemaraargues, intendedonly a limited application of his less interventionistprinciple.Rava'sruling, this new perspectivereveals, is actually in accord with R. Yose, who would have distinguishedbetween the case of plantinga treewherethe potentiallydamagingroots arenot yet in existence, and the presentcase, where the digging of a ditch weakensthe surroundingland,rendering it unsuitablefor furtherditches.That is, accordingto R. Yose, one need not anticipatefuturedamages,butone must,of course,guardagainstthe damagingconsequencesof presentactions.Underthe pressureof the questionof the gemara,not only R. Yose'sintentionscome more clearlyinto focus, but also, as a directconsequence, Rava'sown. Whereasat the beginningof the discussion, Rava'sstatement, like thatof Abaye, seemed to have meritedoutrightrejection,by the end of the discussion, his statementseems not only coherent,but importantlyin accordwith all tannaiticpredecessors-even with the opinion of R. Yose, which on the surface seemed to directlycontradictRava'sposition.In both cases, the shift in the analysis of the intentionsof antecedenttexts is motivatedby the need to mountan appropriate defense for the position underattack.These defenses, importantly,can only be justified in the gemarathroughelaboratingdiscursivecontextsresponsiveto the actual language-that is intention-of the texts themselves.Neither the defense of Ravanor that of Abaye would have been successful had the wordsof the Tannaim been unableto accommodatethe interpretations thatthe gemaraproposes. The process, briefly consideredhere, of the reconciliationof the utterances of Amoraimagainstthe attacksimplicit in tannaitictexts was informedby a Skinnerianconceptionofintention-elaborated throughthe constructionof contexts.Yet, 291
WilliamKolbrener the process also necessarilyentails a rejectionof a simplified versionof Skinner's methodology.Tobe sure,the gemaraconstantlyoperatesaccordingto Skinneriancriteriain tryingto drawout the parametersof tannaitic(andeven amoraic)disputeslike the one we have examinedbetween R. Yose and the Sages (as well as that of Abaye and Ravathemselves).Only an intentionalanalysis-and the attemptedrecovery of the discursivecontextfor theirargument-would adequatelyrevealwhat the Sages intendedin theirruling,and what R. Yose'swas doing in his responseto theirstatement.Yet,even in oursimplifiedrenditionof a smallsectionof the gemara, we have seen the way in which the discursivecontextsof the argumentbetween R. Yose andthe Sages undergotransformation, as do, inevitably,the intentionsthatinform their utterances.For,at this point in our simple analysisof the text, we have identifiedtwo versionsof the disputebetweenR. Yoseandthe Sages;theirargument takes on a differentaspectas the gemaramoves fromthe perspectivethatinformed the questionagainstAbayeto the one thatinformedthe answerofferedin his defense (or, more simply,from the perspectiveof Ravato Abaye).The shiftingof perspectives-informed by the everpresentrabbinicinvocationof the principleof charitydemandsa move from a simple and monovocalview of intentionto one wherethe intentionsof individualagentstransmuteandmultiply.Thatis to say,whatcould be termeda kind of Skinnerianattentionto intentionand languagegames may indeed be an indispensablemeansfor understandingrabbinicdisputes-provided thatsuch attentionalso accommodatesthe proliferationof frameworksand contextsthat alThe framesprovidedby differentinterpretive ways attendsrabbinicinterpretation. contextsforthe verysame discussionprovide,in ourreadingof the gemara,two versions of the intentionsof both the Sages and R. Yosef. This is both to affirmthe Gadameriannotionthatinterpretationis the means "thework explicates itself.., in the varietyof its aspects,"as well as, of which by Skinner's concession thatthe existence of differentclassificatory schemes course, the compromises very notion of"undisputablefacts."Which is to say,the constant demandfor the shiftingof perspectivesin gemararequiresnot only a single analysis of a discursivecontext or languagegame, but also the analysis of thatlanguage game frommanydifferentperspectives.What,for example,R.Yosewas doing with his responseto the Sages will dependon the perspectiveone has:Abaye'sor Rava's. Further,it is not only the versions of the dispute between R. Yose and the Sages thatmultiply,but also in ourdiscussion,the versions of the disputebetweenAbaye and Rava themselves as the gemara,as mentioned,reportstwo separateaccounts of their argument.In the account we have passed over (whereinthe dispute concerns landwherepeople do not habituallydig), the contextof Rava'sdisagreement withAbaye(andthe intentionsthatinformtheirstatements)will be completelydifferent,as will, undoubtedly,the argumentsof R. Yose and the Sages, whose opinions their argumentsmust continue to accommodate.What Gadamerrefers to as interpretivehorizons(andalso as the meaningsengendered)only continueto multiply as the argumentsof the gemaraitself are constructed,in latergenerations,in the works of medieval exegetes. All of these commentaries,however,only claim their authoritythrougheliciting the intentionsof the texts they explain:the multiplicity of interpretivehorizonsreveals the fecundityof the words of the Tannaim, which lend themselves to so many diverse-sometimes even contradictory-ex292
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition planationsthatare,nonetheless,all grantedthe statusof Torah.Which is to say,the words of the Sages and R. Yose, by the lights of both Rava and Abaye, are the "wordsof the Living God."To rejectthe perspectiveof eitherone is not merely to reject a single opinion, but to put an end to the everproliferatingtruthsof Torah. Thereis then no distinctionbetweenTorahand the individualswho disseminateit, provided-and this is a largeproviso-as Nefesh ha- hayiminsists, thatthose who are engaged with Torahdo so for its own sake and not for self-aggrandizement.49 Subjectiveconstraints,as Gadamerconstantlyemphasizes,areindispensableto the productionof Torah;but they are only productivein so far that they remainfaithful, in the Skinneriansense, to the intentionsthat informthe texts themselves. "FROM EVERYSIDE"
In tractateNedarim (38a), the gemaraexplains that while Torahwas given to all of Israel, originally,pilpul-what Boyarincalls the "logic of commentary," or simply,dialectic-was given first to Moses, andthenbestowedby him onto further generations.Pilpul, as the early modem commentator,R. Bezalel Ashkenazi explains,entails understandinga matter"incisivelyand with insight ... like a person who is exacting in his halakhahand chisels it from every side to clarify it."50 or "logic-chopTalmudicdialectic,often referredto pejorativelyas "hair-splitting" an from all issue possible perspectives-chiseling ping,"similarlyrequiresseeing it from all sides. Pilpul, thatindispensablepartof the interpretiveprocesses of the Talmud,requiresthe dialectical awarenessof the multiple hermeneuticperspectives thatreveal the intentionsof antecedenttexts in their fullness. Pilpul, then, is a kind of antidotefor the monovocalthinkingwhich seeks to embraceone side of a dispute at the expense of another,without, however,entailing a rejectionof the notion of truthaltogether.To be sure, Jewish behaviorallife is governedby legal decisions which establishnormativecommunalbehaviorin no uncertainterms,but the realmof study is characterizedby the need for a cognitive openness which appreciates-indeed, demands-the truthof Torahin its many-faceteddiversity.51 To put it in othervery differentterms,the studyof Torahentails trainingthe mind to see the famous picture of Wittgenstein'sPhilosophical Investigationsas both a rabbitand a duck (Figure 1). Fromthis point of view, the study of Torahbecomes an exercise in attemptingto inhabitperspectivesthatmay not, at first, seem accessible. As BernardWilliams writes in the Wittgensteinianframework,mental efforts may allow "those who had one picture ... to see the point ... of another picture,and also perhaps... to understandwhy those who had it, did so."52Limud 49. As the Nefesh ha-hayimputs it, "Atevery momentthata person is workingand cleaving to the words of the Torahin the appropriatefashion, the Wordsrejoice as if they were given from Sinai" (225). In philosophicalterms, only when subjectand object merge is trueTorahproduced. 50. Betzalel Ashkenazi,Shita Mekubzet,tractateNedarim(Jerusalem, 1997), 154. 51. For furtherdiscussions of the "openness"of Talmudicdialectic, see Ouaknin,BurntBook, 159-163, and David Kraemer,TheMindofThe Talmud:an intellectualhistoryof the Bavli (New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1990), 99-138. 52. BernardWilliams,"Wittgensteinand Idealism"in UnderstandingWittgenstein,ed. George Vesey (Ithaca,NY: Cornell UniversityPress, 1974), 87.
293
WilliamKolbrener
Figure 1. Torah-the studyofTorah-thus presupposesan interpretivecharitywhichstrives to elicit the coherence of differingperspectives,and in fact, as much as possible, to inhabitthese differingperspectives.Such a process of study,in fact, mirrorsthe amoraicconsiderationof earliertannaitictexts;just as the gemaraattemptsto reconcile amoraicstatementswith all preexistenttannaiticstatements,so the study of Torahremainsa process which attemptsto come to terms with (and elicit the coherence of) all previousutterancesin the tradition.ForAmoraim(like those, perhaps,confrontedin the Wittgensteiniancase with the pictureof the "duck/rabbit"), though wielding differentinterpretiveparadigms,are simply eliciting aspects implicit in the workitself. (It shouldbe added,however,that"theseandthese" is also an exclusive principle:"theseand these,"but not those. Thatis to say that some interpretationssimply did not fall underthe validatingaegis of the divine precept. Though this may also be consistent with the principles implicit in the Wittgensteiniananalysisof the "duck/rabbit": we only need imagineourresponseto someone who, looking at the picture,claimed to see, for example, a pig.) Seeing the Torahin its multiplicityprovidesan antidoteto the attitudeembodied in the Biblical figure of Korah,who as Rashi explains (following Targum Onkelos), "separatedhimself from the rest of the communityin orderto maintain dispute"(Numbers 16.1). Korah,becomes the paradigmin the traditionfor a kind of dispute,not pursuedfor the "sakeof Heaven,"but based insteadupon the pursuit of self-interestand self-aggrandizement(M. Avot 5.17). Counteringthis model standthe argumentsof both Hillel and Shammai,which, pursuedfor "the sake of Heaven,"are of "lastingworth."Such disputesare of lasting worthnot because they are resolved, but precisely because they remain unresolved.As Maharalof Pragueexplains in his commentaryon this mishnah (5.17), the disputes of Hillel and Shammaiwere actually"belovedby God,"for bothparticipantssoughtto elaboratethe truthsimplicit in Torah:their own conceptualmodels, though leading to contradictoryinterpretations,would bring out truthsimplicit in the Torahitself.53 The acknowledgmentof the possibility of truth-claimsoccupying a space between relativismand absolutismand unconstrainedby simplistic models of interpretationtied to either subjectiveor objective coordinates(in this account, associated with the extremes of Gadamerian and Skinnerian perspectives respectively)does not lead, in the Talmud,to the end of disputes. It does, however, lead to the end of animus and the spirit of rejectionismthat informs disputes modeled afterthe separatismof Korah.Against Korah,Beit Hillel themselves be294
Hermeneutics and Dispute in the Rabbinic Tradition come the figures for a principlenot of a mere (liberal)tolerationof difference,but of interpretiveempathy,as well. For,as the midrashgoes, in theirdisputewith Beit Shammai,they merited"to have the law establishedaccordingto their view" because, as the gemara explains, they, "were easy and forbearing,and they would study their own rulings and those of Beit Shammai,and would even mention the actions of Beit Shammaibefore their own" (B. 'Eruvin 13b). Beit Hillel thus becomes a model for an interpretivecharitythat explicitly.embraces,understands, andrehearsesthe perspectiveof theiradversaries-even in theirrejectionof it. For althoughBeit Shammai,to Beit Hillel, representsan adversary,their arguments, also pursuedfor the sake of Heaven, and thus also "belovedby God,"need not be merelytoleratedandrespected,but also understood.Forfromthe utteranceswhich emerge fromboth Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai,not despite of, butratherbecause of their subjectivelimitations,emerges the objective truthof Torah,the words of the Living God. William Kolbrener Bar Ilan University RamatGan, Israel
53. YehudahLoew, Derech ha-hayim(Tel Aviv:YadMorechai, 1975), 604.
295
Priestly Men and Invisible Women: Male Appropriation of the Feminine and the Exemption of Women from Positive Time-Bound Commandments Author(s): Natan Margalit Source: AJS Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Nov., 2004), pp. 297-316 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131525 . Accessed: 20/07/2011 02:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 28:2 (2004), 297-316
PRIESTLYMEN AND INVISIBLEWOMEN: MALE APPROPRIATIONOF THE FEMININE ANDTHE EXEMPTIONOF WOMEN FROM POSITIVETIME-BOUNDCOMMANDMENTS
by Natan Margalit
In this paperI will examine the rabbinicexemptionof women from the obV nt ligation to perform any "positive time-boundcommandment"(pTrnwrma are it in women as This states that Kiddushin 1:7. rule M. exempt appears nra), fromthe obligationto performthose commandments,such as, for example, sitting in a Sukkahon the Feast of Tabernacles,or saying the kri'at shemca,the declaration of God's Oneness, morning and evening, in which the requirementfor the mandatedaction comes aboutwith the arrivalof a specific time. I offer this analysis of a particularrabbinicruling, in its literarycontext in the Mishnah,as a case study in what I claim to be a majorcomponentof the rabbinicdiscourse of gender:the male appropriationof the "feminine"into theirown identities,and the resultantexclusion of women from those areasof appropriation.In this paperI will employ a literary/anthropologicalapproachto readingthe Mishnah,which I believe is very useful in uncoveringsuch underlyingculturalpatternswithin its succinct, legal writing style.1 1. A literaryapproachto rabbinictexts has become increasinglyimportantin recent yearsand an importantbody of work is being established in this area.YonahFraenkel'swork on rabbinicaggadah has been foundationalfor my work, especially in his emphasis on chiastic structures(see, e.g., YonahFraenkel,Darkhei ha-aggadah ve ha-midrash[Tel Aviv:YadL'Talmud,1991]). Of course, my teacher,Daniel Boyarin, has been a major influence. His insistence on seeing the text as a part of an entire culturaldiscourse has helped me to connect the literarywith the anthropologicalsides of my work. See especially his Intertextualityand the Reading of Midrash(Bloomington:IndianaUniversity Press, 1990) and Carnal Israel: Reading Sex in TalmudicCulture(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993). Excellent reviews of literaryapproachesto rabbinicwritings, as well as important original contributions,may be found in Aryeh Cohen, RereadingTalmud:Gender,Law and the Poetics ofSugyot (Atlanta,GA: Scholars Press, 1998), and David Kraemer,Reading the Rabbis: The Talmudas Literature(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress, 1996), as well as in JeffreyRubenstein,Talmudic Stories: NarrativeArt, Composition,and Culture(Baltimore:John Hopkins UniversityPress, 1999). Jacob Neusner first suggested in the 1970s that anthropologymay be the best lens throughwhich to view the Mishnah,with its "religionof pots and pans"and emphasis on structuralmodes of organizing material,and this has been a fruitful insight indeed. See his Method and Meaning in AncientJu-
297
Natan Margalit In suggesting that the male appropriationof the feminine and the resultant exclusion of women fromthose areasof appropriationis a majorcomponentof the rabbinicdiscourse of gender,the work of Daniel Boyarinhas been a majorinfluence. In an article entitled "JewishMasochism:Couvade, Castrationand Rabbis in Pain,"Boyarin discusses couvade, the male imitationof pregnancy,as an importantfactor in gender formationwhich has been much ignored. In discussing couvade he writes: of thesephenomena havebeenofferedin the Althoughvariousexplanations the one thatseemsmostplausibleis thattheseritesreflectan unliterature, derlyingmaleanxietyaboutandenvyof thefemalebodyandits overwhelming plenitudevis-a-vis the miserablylackingmale body, which cannot becomepregnant, widemenstruate, givebirth,orlactate.Thegeographically spreadnatureof couvade,alongwithotherrelatedpractices,suchas maleimitationof menstruation, suggeststhepossibilitythatmaleenvyof the female in a of enormousexplanatory bodyis, fact, psychicuniversal,one,moreover, power.2 I wish to take up Boyarin'ssuggestionthatthe idea of male envy of feminine reproductivecapacities has enormous explanatorypower, specifically in underdaism, Brown Judaic Series Vol. 10 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979), 34-35. See also William Scott Green, "Readingthe Writing of Rabbinism:Towardan Interpretationof Rabbinic Literature," Journal of the AmericanAcademy of Religion 51, no. 2 (1983): 191-206. I claim, however, that Neusner,by not engaging in close readingsof the text, has not fully exploited his own insight into the anthropologicalmodes of thought in the Mishnah(see Shaye J. D. Cohen, "JacobNeusner, Mishnah and Counter-Rabbinics,"ConservativeJudaism 37 (1983): 48-63, as well as Rubenstein, Talmudic Stories, 5, and A. Cohen, RereadingTalmud,43-69, all of whom have discussed Neusner'stheoretical opposition to close literaryreadingsof these texts). Fora fuller discussion of my own approachto combining literaryand anthropologicalanalysis of the Mishnah see Natan Margalit,"Life Containing Texts:The Discourse of Genderin the Mishnah,a Literary/anthropologicalAnalysis"(Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 2000) and Natan Margalit,"Not by Her Mouth Do We Live: A Literary/anthropologicalReading of Gender in Mishnah Ketubbot,Chapter 1,"Prooftexts20, no. 1 (2000): 61-86. I would be remiss if I did not mention that I was first inspired to look more deeply into the meanings and modes of thought in the Mishnahoutside of the purely academic framework, in what might be called the "nontraditional/traditional" yeshivot located in the Katamonand Baka sections of Jerusalem during the 1980s and early 1990s. These include the Pardes Institute, Beit MidrashElul, andYakarLearningCommunity.Dov Berkowitzwas especially influentialin these settings with his intuitivecombinationof traditionalapproachesand his acute literarysensitivity.Avraham Walfish, who was on the faculty of Pardeswith Berkowitz in the 1980s, went on to study with Yonah Fraenkelat Hebrew University and wrote "Tofa'ot sifrutiot ba-mishnahu-mashma'utanhaCarikhatit veha-ra'ayonit"(Master'sThesis, HebrewUniversity, 1994) as well as to publish articles in the journal of Mishnahstudy that he founded,Netu'im. See especially his master'sthesis, pages 3560, for his analysisof the first chapterof M. Kiddushin.In yet anotherreadingtradition,Moshe Kline's highly formalistic approachto the Mishnah, which he traces to the Maharaland kabbalisticreading strategies,is also often useful and provocative.See Moshe Kline, TheStructuredMishnah (Mishnah ki-darkah),http://www.chaver.com/Mishnah/TheMishnah.htm. 2. Daniel Boyarin, "JewishMasochism: Couvade, Castrationand Rabbis in Pain,"American Imago 51, no. 1 (1994): 3.
298
Priestly Men and Invisible Women standingthe classic texts and institutionsof Judaism.As the title of his articles indicates, Boyarinhas concentratedon the theme of masochism, the pain of childbirth,andthe feminized,nonaggressiverabbinicmale. I wish to exploremale envy of the feminine power of birth,not specifically focusing on the pain of birth,but, rather,on the powerfulidea of generation,of bringinglife into the world.This study of the exclusion of women from positive time-boundcommandmentsis one exampleof this phenomenon,which I suggest runsthroughmuch of biblical andrabbinic cultures. Couvade,or as Boyarinpoints out, a general envy of the feminine capacity for birth,has not been often presentedas an explanationfor ancientIsraeliteor rabbinic phenomena.Bettelheim'sSymbolicWoundson couvadeand circumcisionhas been provocativebut has not generateda traditionof scholarshipon Jewishsources in its wake.3Exceptionsto this rule includeAlan Dundes, who has offered an explanation of the creation stories in Genesis in terms of couvade,4 Ilana Pardes, whose workhas shed light on many of the femininemotifs in the male texts of the Bible,5 and Nancy Jay,in her book, ThroughoutYourGenerationsForever,where she discusses a theoryof biblical (amongother)sacrifice as male cooptationof the feminine power of birth.6 HowardEilberg-Schwartz'sbook, God's Phallus, discusses a theory of Israelite religion in which the males were placed in a feminine position vis-a-vis God, but he focuses almost exclusively on (hetero)sexuality,and thus on "thecontradictionsinherent in men's relationshipwith a God who is explicitly male."' Thus, althoughEilberg-Schwartzdeals in depthwith the feminizationof Israelite and rabbinicJewish males, he does not concentrateon the factorof male envy of women'sreproductivecapacities. I arguethatthis greatlyweakensthe explanatory power of his thesis. It does not take into account the centralityof fertility and birthas metaphorsin Israeliteculture,nor does it take into accountthe possibility of feminine aspects of God. Furthermore,anthropologicalevidence suggests, as Boyarinpoints out, that the male envy of feminine powers of birth is very widespread,perhapsuniversal. In this regardthe work of SarahCaldwell on the cult of Kali in contemporary Kerala,India, has been extremelyenlightening.The parallelsof male feminization and female exclusion are all the more strikingbecause Kali is a female deity, ruling out the theory of male feminizationas a heterosexualgambit. In her 1999 book, Oh TerrifyingMother:Sexuality,Violenceand Worshipof the Goddess 3. BrunoBettelheim,SymbolicWounds(New York:Collier, 1962). 4. Alan Dundes, "Couvade in Genesis," in Folklore Research Center Studies (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1983), 35-54. 5. IlanaPardes,Countertraditionsin the Bible:A FeministApproach(Cambridge,MA: Harvard UniversityPress, 1992); IlanaPardes, TheBiographyofAncient Israel (Berkeley: Universityof California Press, 2000). 6. Nancy Jay,ThroughoutYourGenerationsForever:Sacrifice, Religion, and Paternity(Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, 1992). 7. Howard Eilberg-Schwartz,
(Boston: Beacon Press, 1994), 1.
Gods
Phallus and Other Problems for Men and Monotheism
299
Natan Margalit Kali, Caldwelldescribesthe mutiyetturitual/performancesof Kerala,in Southern India.' The mutiyettuare ritualsentirelyperformedby men, in which the prominent feature is the main male performer'simpersonationof the female goddess Kali. Caldwellnotes: hereexploresthejunctureof psychoerotic andsocio-politMy interpretation ical powerunderthe guiseof ritualpower,andthe waysthatmalesmystify theseto the detrimentof women.The supernatural Saktiof the goddessbecomesthepropertyof males,whotherebycompensate fortheirenvyandfear of themother'ssexual,procreative this body.By coopting powerin transvestite possessionperformance, malesreclaimthe enviedfeminineprocreative powerwithintheirownbodies,whiledenyingactualsocial,sexual,andpoliticalpowerto women.9 Male appropriationof a feminine power of birthtogetherwith exclusion of women has been noted in many cultures.' An interestingexample of work in this areaincludes thatof FromaZeitlin. In Zeitlin's 1996 book, Playing the Other,and especially in the chapterbearingthe same title, she studies this incorporationand exclusion as it is found in ancient Greek theater.She notes that this chapter"reviews the phenomenonof women'spuzzlingpredominancein the theaterand speculates on the uses that feminine interventionand characterizationmight serve in this all-male theater,in which male actors by convention are necessarily called upon to impersonatewomen."'' As an ancientMediterraneanexample,the Greek theateris relativelyclose to the biblical and rabbinicculturalworldswe are examining. Thereare interestingsimilaritiesin thatboth the rabbisand the playwrights are attemptingto constructautonomousmale identities,and at the same time both needed to incorporatethe feminine within thatmale identity.'2 8. SarahCaldwell, Oh, TerrifyingMother:Sexuality,Violenceand the Worshipof the Goddess Kali (Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress, 1999). 9. Ibid, 189. 10. See, for example (out of many that could be cited): Rita Gross, "Menstruationand Childbirth as Ritual and Religious ExperienceAmong Native Australians,"in UnspokenWorlds:Women's Religious Lives in Non-WesternCultures,ed. Nancy Falk and Rita Gross (San Francisco:Harperand Row, 1980), 277-92; GilbertH. Herdt,"SambiaNosebleeding Rites and Male Proximityto Women," Ethos 10, no. 3 (1982): 263; Jean S. La Fontaine,Initiation (Manchester,UK: ManchesterUniversity Press, 1986);Ian Hogbin, TheIsland of MenstruatingMen: Religion in Wogeo,New Guinea(Scranton, PA:Chandler,1970). 11. FromaZeitlin, Playing the Other(Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press, 1996), 14. 12. Herexamples arerich andvaried,andpointespecially to the way thattheaterinitiatedmales into male identityparadoxicallyby expandingthatidentityto includeaspects associatedwith the feminine. On the subjectof women'srole in the tragedies,she writes,"Womancomes equippedwith a 'natural'awarenessof the complexitiesthatmen would resist, if they could. Situatedin hermore restrictive and sedentaryposition in the world,she is permitted,even asked,to reflect more deeply, like Phaedra, on the paradoxesof herself. Throughthese she can come closer to understandingthe paradoxesof the world that she, much betterthan men, seems to know is subject to irreconcilableconflict, subject as well to time, flux, and change (the very themes, I might add,ofAjax's great deceptive speech). Hence the final paradoxmay be that theateruses the feminine for the purposes of imagining a fuller model for the masculine self, and 'playing the other' opens that self to those often bannedemotions of fear
300
Priestly Men and Invisible Women
The exemptionof women frompositive time-boundcommandmentsappears in the Mishnah,M. Kiddushin1:7.13 Thereare severalreasonsthat it is important to explore this particularrule. First,this exemptionhas been very far-reachingin its effect on the religious lives of Jewish women and men. This is because, even thougha womanmay voluntarilychoose to performa ritualact, because she is not obligated as a man is she cannot fulfill the obligation on behalf of a man, therefore women have been excluded from leadershiproles that involve doing an act on behalf of the community. The rule also poses intriguingtextual and religious questions.For example, Judith Hauptmanhas pointed out that the category "positive time-bound commandment"only comes into being for the purposeof excluding women. It is not a category of commandmentsthat appearsin any context otherthan that of gender. What was the reason for the creationof this category?Furthermore,as the BabylonianTalmud'sdiscussionof this issue (B. Kiddushin34a-35a) makesclear,there are as many exceptions to this rule as there are cases that follow it.14So, we may ask, what purposedoes this rule serve? Whatgood is it to the rabbiswho wrote it into the Mishnahand invokedit throughoutthe centuries? The Talmudicsources do not offer any explicit explanationor reasoningbehindthis rule.The first recordedrationalesaremedieval,such as thatof JacobAnatoli (thirteenthcentury),who suggestedthatthis would make it easier for the wife to attendto the husband'sneeds,15 and the fourteenth-centuryscholar David b. Joshua'Abudarham,who explainedthat this rule was needed so that the woman would not be put in the position of havingto fulfill the contradictorydemandsof two masters:God andherhusband.16 The generalideathatthis rule freesthe woman to her primaryrole as responsiblefor the domestic realm has remaineda popular explanationto this day." Anothercontemporaryexplanationhas it thatwomen are excludedfrompositive time-boundcommandmentsbecause women are on a higher spiritualplane thanmen, and thereforedo not need these extracommandments. In her book Rereadingthe Rabbis,•8JudithHauptmanhas made a very useand pity."Zeitlin, Playing the Other, 363. See also Margalit,"Life ContainingTexts,"79-80, for a fuller comparisonof Zeitlin'sexamples to the case of the rabbisof the Mishnah. 13. The other places within tannaiticliteraturewhere this rule appearsare Mekhiltade-rabbi ShimonbarYohaion Exodus 13:9, and Sifrei Beshallah 115, as well as in the Tosefta,Kiddushin1:10 and Sukkah2:5. 14. Foran excellent, detailedanalysis of the Talmudicsugya see Jay Rovner,"RhetoricalStrategy and Dialectical Necessity in the BabylonianTalmud:The Case of Kiddushin34a-35a," HUCA 65 (1994): 177-231. Foran analysisthatfocuses on the problematicstatusof this rule even within the Talmud'sown system, see Kraemer,Reading the Rabbis,95-108. 15. JacobAnatoli, Malmadha-talmidim,ParashatLekh Lekha,Lik ed., no. 15;TalyaFishman, "A KabbalisticPerspectiveon GenderSpecific Commandments:On the Interplayof Symbols and Society" AJS Review 17, no. 2 (1992): 199-247, esp. 209 n. 44. 16. Sefer 'Abudarham,1340. 17. See, for example, Saul Berman,"The Statusof Womenin HalakhicJudaism,"in TheJewish Woman,ed. ElizabethKolton(New York:Schocken, 1976), 114-28. 18. JudithHauptman,Rereadingthe Rabbis:A Woman'sVoice(Boulder,CO: Westview Press, 1998).
301
Natan Margalit ful analysis of the questions surroundingthis rule, and,though she reaches different conclusions, some of her observationsare very suggestive for my argument.I will thereforestartfrom her discussion. She takes the standthat one of the underlying reasons for the exemption of women from time-boundpositive commandments is their lower social status.19She points out that the two currentlypopular apologetic approachesto understandingthis rule, mentioned previously,are not convincing.In regardto the line of argumentthatholds thatwomen areexemptbecause of their heavierdomestic burden,she notes that at the time of the Mishnah bothmen andwomen had very heavy workloads.If they were not wealthy,both the man and the woman in a household would have many essential chores to fulfill, and if they could affordservants,then both would have more free time. Also, she notes, at the time of the Mishnah,women lived with the husband'sfamily,so there wouldhavebeen otherwomen aroundto help. Further,manymitzvot,such as hearing the shofar blast on Rosh Hashanah,take very little time. She concludes that "the most pointed critiqueof the domestic theory of exemptionis that one of the most time-consumingof all mitzvot,prayer-the set of eighteenpetitionaryblessings that had to be recited twice or even three times daily-is obligatorynot just upon men but also upon women (M. Berakhot3:3)!"20 Hauptmancriticizes the other currenttheory-that women have a different nature,a higher level of spiritualitywhich does not requirethem to performthese commandments-as not backed up by any textual evidence whatsoever.Further, she points out that this theory is contradictedby the many religious rituals(even time-bound,positive commandmentssuch as grace after meals and daily prayer) that women were obligatedto perform. Rather,Hauptmanputs forth the theory thatsocial statusis the primaryunderlyingfactor in this distinction.She writes: TheTalmudmentionsthephrase"positivetime-bound" or"non-time-bound" mitzvotonlyinconnection to women.Thatis, thisdistinction wascreatedsolebetweenwomen'sritualobligationsand ly forthe purposeof distinguishing herexemptions. Itwasnota categorythathadanyotheruse.Formen,whoare obligatedto performall positivemitzvot,thereis no significanceto thisdistinction... Butsincethisdistinctionwas devisedonlyto createa category fromwhichwomenareexempt,thereasonfortheexemptionhasto lie in the meaningof thephraseitself,namely,thatthesearethekeymitzvotof marking Jewishtime.It is notthattheytaketime. Womenwereexemptedfromtheessentialritualactsof Judaism,those thatyearin andyearout markJewishtime,in orderto restricttheirperformanceto men,to headsof households; onlypeopleof thehighestsocialstanding,accordingto therabbis,doesGodconsidermostfit to honoror worship 19. As opposed to the idea that women are not completely free to serve God because they are underlegal obligationto serve theirhusbands.This clearly,of course, is relatedto the questionof lower social status,but is not identical. I will not be dealing with this rationalein this paper,although it clearly needs to be approached.I do not believe thatthe existence of this rationaletakes awayfrom the explanationthat I offer in the case of the questionof lower social status. 20. Hauptman,Rereadingthe Rabbis, 225.
302
PriestlyMen and InvisibleWomen Him in this important is reminiscentof way.Thishierarchical arrangement of social individuals the kohanim, Templeprotocol.Only highest standing,as evidencedbytheirmorestringentrulesformarriage, ritualpurity,andphysiThepointis cal fitness(Leviticus21), couldserveas Templefunctionaries. thatthosewho serveGodmustthemselvesbe especiallyworthy.In rabbinic forthetime-bound societythismeantthatonlymaleswerefittingcandidates the form of ritual act.21 commandments, positive highest Hauptmanmakes the importantobservationthat it is the regular,ritualnature of these commandmentsthat distinguishesthem from other,non-time-bound commandments.I believe this is the key point, not because I accepther conclusion that social statusis the underlyingfactor,but because it specifically indicatesthat it is the priestly, ritual commandmentsthat men designated as exclusively male territory.I argue that the priestly role is the primarylocus of male incorporation of the feminine. She is makingthe importantpoint of how the rabbinicmales followed in the priestly mold. In the above quotation,Hauptmancomparesthe situationof the regularritual commandmentsto the Temple protocol and the greater obligations of the priests. However,I would arguethat it is precisely here that her theory of higher social standing breaks down. The significance of the priesthood in considering gender configurationsis not simply their high social status (and I am not arguing againstthathigh status,or women'slow status),but, rather,their emphasison genealogy and on the body, and, ironically,their particularrelationshipto the feminine. It is precisely the priestlycharacterof the rabbinicmales, with its interesting, rich arrayof culturalassociations and history,that engendersthis culturallysignificant and anomalousprohibition-not the one-dimensionalscale of social status. An example of the complexity involved in the status of the priesthood is clearly seen in the last categorythat Hauptmanmentions:the physical fitness requiredof the priests. Ratherthan provingthat the priests had a high social status, this concern with the blemish-freebody connects the priests with those of lower social status,even with the nonhumanmembersof the Israeliteworld:the sacrificial animals.The biblical text itself makes a point of this comparison.In Leviticus 21 it is stated that a priest must be physically unblemished,and twelve specific physical blemishes thatdisqualifya priestfrom service in the sanctuaryare listed. In a clear literaryparallel, Leviticus 22 lists twelve similar blemishes that disqualify sacrificial animals! Jacob Milgrom has cogently shown that this literary parallelismis an intentionalpart of the editing of Leviticus.22While it might be arguedthatsacrificialanimalsindeedpossess a high social statusin a certainsense, this clearly is a differentsense thanthe one Hauptmanis discussing. Furthermore,and more directly addressingmy argumentfor parallels between priestsand women, it states in the Mishnahitself (M. Ketubot7:7) that"any blemish which disqualifies a priest (from service in the sanctuary)also disquali21. Ibid,227. 22. Jacob Milgrom,AnchorBible Leviticus 17-22 (New York:Doubleday,2000), 1836-40.
303
Natan Margalit fies a women (from receiving a ketubbahpayment if her husbandarbitrarilydivorces her)." Both these examples make it clear that the requirementthat the priests' bodies be unblemishedis not an indicationof high (or low) social status. Rather,the common factorhere is the religious importanceaccordedto the body. I suggest elsewhere that the bodies of priests symbolically representthe wholeness and integrityof the Israelitenation, and in a parallelmanner,married women's bodies representthe wholeness and integrityof the family. Drawingon MaryDouglas'stheoryof "naturalsymbols,"I claim thatthe bodies of women and priestsareutilized as importantculturalremindersof the importanceplaced on the wholeness and integrityof the social categories,the family,and the nation.Along these same lines I have exploredthe parallelsin the biblicaltexts betweenmarried women andpriestsin termsof the symbolismand laws surroundinghairandclothing.23Both marriedwomen and priests are requiredto keep theirhair covered(or at least bound).The operativeword connecting them is paruah (nrun)-wild or untamed-which is a forbiddenstate for the priestly head and a disgracefulstate for the married woman's. The power that is associated with both women and priests,especiallythe powerof giving life, is also somethingthatneededto be controlled.Thatthis controlandorderlinessbecame associatedwith life and wildness and disorderwith deathis seen in the fact thatthe symbol of mourningis the tearPriests ing the clothes andlettingone'shairgrow wild (again,the sameword, •,rn). are specifically prohibitedfrom engaging in these acts of mourning,they must remain intactrepresentations(embodiments)of the life of the community. I claim that these parallelsin body symbolism and control reflect an incorporationon the partof the male priests of symbols of the feminine as part of their priestly role. This may be tracedto the priests' role in the Temple,which itself is figured feminineas the receptacleof God's(male) presencein earthandwithinthe Israelite nation.As the protectedcentral enclosure within the Temple, contained within the walls of Jerusalem,containedwithin the land of Israel (see M. Kelim 1:6-9), as the womb of the nation,fertilityflowed from the Holy of Holies.24The Holy of Holies was the erotic center, as is hinted by RabbiAkiva's equating the erotic Song of Songs with the Holy of Holies. RabbiAkiva is quoted as saying, "Allthe books of the HebrewScripturesareholy,but the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies" (M. Yad'aim3:5). On one level this simply means that it is more holy thanthe otherbooks, but it also hints to the place knownas the Holy of Holies, the innerchamberof the Temple.The implied meaning, then, is that the eroticism of the Song of Songs is to be equatedwith this place, the Holy of Holies; the meeting place of God and his beloved People. This eroticism is seen more graphically in the descriptionin B. Yoma54a of the cherubimon the arkin the Holy of Holies. There the Talmuddescribes how, on festival days, the cherubimwere revealedto the public. If the Jewishpeople were doing God'swill the cherubimwouldbe seen 23. Natan Margalit,"Hairin TaNaKh:The Symbolism of Genderand Control,"Journal of the Association of GraduateStudentsin Near Eastern Studies 5, no. 2 (Spring 1995): 43-52; Margalit, "Life ContainingTexts,"209, 290. 24. See e.g. B. Sota 48a., which states thatwhen the Templewas destroyednot only was fertility lessened, but also the pleasurein sex left the world.
304
Priestly Men and Invisible Women in sexual embrace, if not, they were turnedaway from one another.The laws of modesty,specifically prohibitionson staringandon touch, which were appliedlater to women, closely parallelthose that we find in the biblical text applied to the temple and the tabernacle.25 On a more basic level, the priests were a genealogical clan. It is they who championedso stronglythe principlesof genealogy,which became centralin biblical and then rabbinicJudaism.Infantcircumcision,endogamy,pronatalism-all can be tracedback to the priests and their concern for orderlyreproduction.The role of physical reproductionwas of paramountimportanceto this priestly clan, and it affectedthe deepest characterof the Judaismthatwould follow it. This concern with reproductionon the partof a patrilinealclan, and the resultingincorporationby males of feminine traits,is clearlycapturedin the famousgenealogies of the Genesis narratives,which are attributedto the priestly writers.According to these lists, all the "begetting"is done by males, withoutmentioningthe partplayed by any females. Here, Nancy Jay'sabove-mentionedtheory is important:biblical sacrifice was a means of transferringthe symbolism of blood and birth from the female to the male sphereand for the males to claim the genealogical links of filiation as their own.26 Thus, I arguethatit is not the higheror lowerstatusof men and women that evokes the new category of "positive time-bound commandments"from which women are excluded. Rather,it is precisely in the much more specific categoryof males as "priestly"conveyersof the covenant.As priestlymen, markingthe sacred calendarof Jewish time, they participatein the incorporationof the feminine, and thus continuethe exclusion of women from "priestly"roles, such as markingritual time. Hauptmancorrectly,I believe, places the emphasis not on the time it takes to performthe action, but on the fact that these are the ritual actions that define Jewish time. In the post-Temple,rabbinicera of Judaism,the sacred space of the Temple was replacedby the increasedemphasis on sacred time. The priestly duties of honoringGod shifted from the realm of priests in the Templeto the male householdersin the field of time. An example of this shift from space to time, and fromprieststo male householders,may be illustratedin the very first mishnahof the entiremishnaiccorpus. It states there (M. Berakhot 1:1), "Fromwhat time may one say the shemcain the evening? From the time that the priests enter (the Temple) to eat their priestsofferings."Thispassage looks innocentenough.However,the choice of "thepriests enteringthe Templeto eat theirpriests-offerings"as a markerof time is not an expected one. The usual markerfor nightfallwould be simply "whenthe starscome out"(t0a3 n nKx). Froma literaryperspective,the choice of the priests entering the Templeas a markerof time serves to connect the recital of the shemcaback to the Temple,and to facilitatethe transitionthatthis mishnahis recording/creating. The recitalof the shemcais one of the centralpartsof the liturgy,which will come to replacethe sacrificial system as the focus of Jewishworship.Thatthe editor of 25. I thankAvrahamWalfish for pointingthis out to me. 26. Jay,ThroughoutYourGenerationsForever,94-111.
305
Natan Margalit the Mishnahchose to place the emphasis on its timing and to juxtapose this with the spatialdescriptionof the priests enteringto eat theirpriests-dueenacts an elegant shift in modalities. By invokingthe earlierfocus of religious life, the priests in the Temple,the editor facilitates a smooth transitionfrom priestlyTemplecult to the new religious patternof householdersmarkingsacredtime throughliturgy. While this mishnahdoes not emphasizethe maleness of the householders,others make this assumptionclear.A mishnahin the same tractate(M. Berakhot3:3) explicitly exempts women from the time-boundrecital of the shemca(invoking, at least accordingto the Talmud'sexplanation,our rule of women's exemptionfrom positive time-boundcommandments).Thus, time has become the arenafor priestly action, now takenon by the male householders. III M. Kiddushin1:7, FeminizedPriests, Priestly Men In orderto build my claim that the males imagined in the Mishnahwere acting in the model of the priests, and that this priestly role was borrowedfrom the symbolism of the feminine, we will now turnto the Mishnahitself and to a bit of its context.The passage in which the exemptionof women from positive time-bound commandmentsappearsis the 7th mishnahin the first chapterof the M. Kiddushin (Betrothals)in the Mishnah'sOrderof Women.Thereis much to be said aboutthe placementof this mishnahin this particularcontext. In fact, I considerit impossible to really understandthe meaning of a mishnahoutside of its literarycontext within a chapterand tractateof the Mishnahas a whole. Elsewhere,I have made a detailed studyof the literarystructureof this chapterof the Mishnah.27Here I will discuss it only briefly. The chapterin which this mishnahappearsmay be divided into two halves. Scholarshaveshownthatthis chapterwas craftedfromtwo previouslyexisting collections of mishnayot.28The first half has been called the "chapterof acquisitions" because it deals with the betrothal(acquisition)of a womanby a man. It then goes on to deal with other examples of acquisitions:slaves, animals,and land. Clearly this is a very problematiccollection of laws from a feminist point of view. It can be shown that in the first half of the chapter,the mishnayotare arrangedin a chiastic structure,which focuses attentionon a parallelbetweenwomanandland.This is not a surprisinganalogy,as the connectionbetween women and land is a common one not only in the ancientJewish contextbut also in the ancientMiddle East and in otherparts of the world.29The basic structureis best seen througha chart of the methods of acquisition:
27. Margalit,"Life ContainingTexts,"125-216. 28. See J. N. Epstein,Mav'o le-nusah ha-mishnah(TelAviv: Dvir, 1964), 51-53; andAvraham Weiss, Al Hamishnah(TelAviv: Bar Ilan Press, 1956), 81. 29. See, e.g., Carol Delaney, The Seed and the Soil: Gender and Cosmology in Turkish Village
Society (Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1991).
306
Priestly Men and Invisible Women A (m. 1) women money,document,sexualintercourse B (m. 2) Hebrewslave money,document C (m. 3) Canaanite slave money,document,usucaption B1 (m.4) animals pulling,lifting,passing Al (m. 5) land money,document,usucaption This literarystructureis as subtleand intriguingas its message is problematic (notto say offensive)fromtoday'sperspective.The firstthreemishnayotareclearly a subsectionand a minichiasmus.They all deal with the acquisitionof people, however,A and C (women and Canaaniteslaves) list a method of acquisitionnot sharedby the Hebrewslave.The analogybetweensexualintercourseandusucaption (acquisitionthroughparadigmaticusage) is clear,and clearlydamningin termsof the rabbis'view of womenand marriage.In the fourthmishnahwe are movedfrom thehumanto the nonhuman,and"money,document,intercourse/usucaption" arereplaced by "moving,lifting, etc."But the three familiarmethodsreturnin the fifth mishnah,drawingattentionto the analogybetweenthe beginningandthe end. Several scholarshave notedthe descendingorderof this list and attemptedto explainit in those terms.30The issue of autonomyor mobility certainlyseems to go in descendingorderin these five mishnayot.However,the signs of chiasmusare clearly evident in the special statusaccordedto land,and thus we find a patternwhich is very characteristicof the Mishnah'schiastic structures:progression(or in this case digression)coupled with return.The ending is both like and unlike the beginning. In simplestterms, I claim thatthis structurepresentsan ideology of acquisitionthatplacesthe permanentandthe fruitfulabovethe transientandthe casual.That women in marriagearethe most autonomousin this list is not to be forgotten-this distinctionwas also importantto therabbis.However,in thisstructuretherabbiswere emphasizingthe value they placedon women in commonwith land-as partnersin theirmost permanent,socially(religiously)sanctioned,intense,fruitfulrelationship. An analysisof these methodsof acquisition,anda surveyof the generalanalbetween women and land,reveala hierarchyof values in the types of acquisiogy tion. It is useful in this analysis to draw on the anthropologicalliteratureon gift exchange.The gift, as opposed to a commodity,carriesan emotionalcharge.It is even eroticin the sense of its symbolismof drawingthe partnersin exchangecloser together.The gift is tied to the identitiesof the giverandthe receiver,andit is a public, communalfact, takingon the auraof the religious/communalties of society.31 Commodities,on the otherhand,are seen as representingunattached,private,egotistical interactions.The commodityis not closely associatedwith identityor reli30. Noam Zohar,"Women,Men and Religious Status:Decipheringa Chapterin Mishnah,"in Approachesto AncientJudaism:New Series, Volume5, Historical, Literary,and Religious Studies,ed. HerbertBasser and Simcha Fishbane(Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1993), 33-54; AvrahamWeiss, "Le-hekerha sifruti shel ha mishnah,"Hebrew Union CollegeAnnual 16 (1941): 1-33. 3 1. See Marcel Mauss, The Gift: Formsand Functions of Exchange in ArchaicStudies, trans. IanCunnison(New York:W.W.Norton, 1967); Lewis Hyde, TheGift:Imaginationand the EroticLife of Property(New York:Vintage Books, 1979); and Annette B. Weiner,InalienablePossessions: The Paradoxof Keeping WhileGiving (Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1992) as basic introductions to the large anthropologicalliteratureon gift exchange.
307
Natan Margalit gious/social meanings.Those "acquisitions,"like women and land,which are seen to be permanent,to enhancethe man'sidentity,andto involvestrongemotionalties, are valuedabovethose, such as the Hebrewslaves (B) and animals,(Bi) which are relativelyimpermanentand do not involve emotionalattachmentor religious,public significance. In other words, those that have the characterof short-termcommodity are devalued,while those with the characterof gift are more highly valued accordingto this structure.Thus,the characterof acquisitionof women in marriage that is being advancedin this "chapterof acquisitions"is one of the gift, in which emotional,religiousvalueis placedon permanenceandan almostnatural,inevitable relationship.Forourpurposes,this qualityof relationshipwill be importantas it sets the stageforthe relationshipthatmen wish to establishbetweenthemselvesandGod throughthe mitzvot. Although the focus of those mishnayot seems to be on items (including women)thatareacquired,an analysisof its genderimplicationsshows thatit serves to reinforce/createthe gender role of men as autonomoussubjects. Men are the free subjects,those who acquire,as opposed to those who are acquired.32My abbreviateddiscussion of the first set of mishnayotprovidesa preludeto our primary focus, which is the second collection. It is importantfor us to note, however,this first collection's establishmentof the parallelismbetween women and land. This is an example of the ubiquitoussymbolism in rabbinictexts of the importanceof the feminine powers of fertility and its importancein the male identity.The male needs to acquire a woman and land in order to guaranteethe continuity of his household,his name, and his legacy. This is one form of "incorporation"of the feminine:owning and controllingit. The second half of the chapterhas been labeled the "chapterof commandments"because it deals with differencesin obligations in commandments;sometimes, as in our mishnah,the obligationsvary accordingto one's sex. The focus is still, not surprisingly,on the men (who, afterall, arethe main subjects,writers,editors, and audienceof the Mishnah).More surprisingly,however,the focus on the commandmentsturnsthe tables such that the men, throughtheir performanceof the commandments,are the ones being acquired-by God. That is, they are in the feminine position vis-d-vis God. The implications of "acquisition"noted in the first half of the chapter,focusing on the aspects of permanence,emotional ties, public, religious meaning, and natural,inevitableconnection are clearly desirable in the relationshipto God. The male Jew's relationshipto God throughthe commandmentsis presentedas the mirrorimage of thatrelationshipbetweenmen and women.The emphasisin both cases is on the closeness, the permanence,the fruitfulness, andthe natural/inevitablequalityof the relationship.This analysisis in no way meant to be an apology for the inequalitiesfrom which Jewish women have sufferedas a result of the framingof marriageas her "acquisition"by the man. It is an attemptto understandthese mishnayotin termsof theirparticulargenderdiscourse of male incorporationof the feminine. 32. For an example of this dynamic from ancient Greek theater,see Virginia Wohl, Intimate Commerce:Exchange, Gender,and Subjectivityin GreekTragedy(Austin: Universityof Texas Press, 1998).
308
Priestly Men and Invisible Women As in the first collection, thereis a clear chiastic structureto the second collection of mishnayotas well. This is best seen in the first words of each mishnah: A m. 6 kolha-na'aseh B m. 7 kolmizvah C m. 8 ha-semikhot B1 m. 9 kol mizvah Al
m. 10 kol ha-'oseh
On the level of the wordsthemselves,thereis a chiastic structurein the framof ing B and B 1 with identicalopening phrasekol mizvah(every commandment). The outer frame,A, Al, is likewise identicalexcept that there is an elegant reversal of the verb from passive to active, suggesting closure of the literary unit, "every(thing)thatis done [or made] ... every(one)thatdoes."33An analysisof the content of this group of mishnayotwould reveal that there is a progressivemovement towardsthe end of the chapterin which the commandmentshave more of the characterof an emotionalattachment,and a natural,inevitableconnection.The final mishnahin the chapteris the mitzvahof learningTorah.This is a commandment that, in the rabbis'eyes, is in a category by itself. It is the basis for a close and sometimeseven eroticattachmentbetweenthe male Jew and God (throughthe Torah).34The themes of fruitfulnessand permanenceare emphasizedby weaving the idea of land once again into the text. (The artfulediting of this chapteris again revealedby the parallelsbetween the structureof the first and second collections: A, B, C = human;B1, Al = land, in both.) I will returnto some of the structures of the chapter,but in orderto progressin my argument,we will need to focus on the 7th mishnah, and the exemption of women from positive time-bound commandments. Mishnah7 incumbent on thefatherconcerningtheson:menareobAnycommandment onthechildren incumbent ligatedandwomenareexempt.Anycommandment both males females are and concerning parents: obligated.Anypositivetimeboundcommandment: menareobligatedandwomenareexempt.Anypositive commandment which is not time-bound:both men and womenare whethertime-boundor not timeobligated.Any negativecommandment, bound:bothmenandwomenareobligated,except(thatmenareobligatedin) notcuttingthebeard,notcuttingthecornersof one'sheadhair,and(inthecase of priests)notbecomingimpurewithdeathimpurity. As is clearly seen, this mishnahdeals with the differences in obligations in commandmentsbetweenmen and women.The first partof the mishnahdeals with 33. Meir Paran,Darkhei ha-signon ha-kohani ba-torah (Jerusalem:Magnes, 1989) uses the term "closing deviations"in relationto the biblical priestlywritings. 34. See the chapter"Lustingafter Learning"in Boyarin,Carnal Israel, 134-66.
309
Natan Margalit commandmentsconcerning parentsand children, the second part deals with the categoriesof positive and negativecommandments,with the additionalcriteriaof time-boundor non time-bound. MiriamPeskowitzhas pointed out that it is importantthat the work of gender role creation,performance,and reiterationis done in a concealed way.35The goal is to make the gender distinctions,(including the inequalities)seem natural and unremarkable.This raises a question about this mishnah.There must be another kind of work being done here, one in which the Rabbis felt the need to explicitly discuss the male/female dichotomy. I suggest that the first statementof the mishnahgives us the hint as to why the rabbis are explicit here in their gender distinctions. "Any commandmentincumbenton the fatherconcerningthe son: men are obligatedand women are exempt."This is, on first brush,a surprisingstatement:In those obligationsof parents to children,men are obligatedand women are not. Is child rearingan exclusively male duty in the eyes of the Mishnah?Clearlynot. However,I would claim thatthe subjectof the first half of this mishnahtouches one of those areas,which is so feminine in its connotationsfor the rabbisthatthey have to explicitly say thatit is not. The raising of children, in other words, is an area where the males were specifically drawingon a feminine imagery and claiming it for themselves. The Tosefta(a parallelrabbinicsource from approximatelythe same period as the Mishnah, often seen as commenting on or filling gaps in the Mishnah) specifically poses the questionsthatnaturallyarise from the first statementof our mishnah:What does it mean that the obligations of the parents to child are incumbenton the fatherand not the mother?The answerof the Toseftais thatthe father is obligated in circumcising (the male), redeeming him (from the priest), teachinghim Torahand a craft,finding him a wife, and some say, teachinghim to swim.36Thus, the Mishnahis not interestedin the day-to-daynurturing,the feeding and clothing of the child,but, rather,it is concernedwith what LawrenceHoffman has labeled the "covenantalobligations."'37 These covenantalobligationsare those thatthe fathermust undertakein orderto continuehis line. Whatis interesting aboutthese obligationsis thatthey are not only personalbut religious as well. They are covenantalin thatthese are the obligationsthat directlyhelp to carrythe covenantbetween God and the Jewish people into the next generation-through the male line. Thus, it is importantto understand,it is not only in the domestic area of raisingchildren,but also in the deepersense of reproductionin generalthat the first half of this mishnahis "feminine."In orderto continuethe male line, the men need to appropriatethe symbols of birth.Following the priestly genealogists who 35. Miriam Peskowitz, Spinning Fantasies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). She writes:"Thisbook is about how the early rabbisused fantasiesaboutspinningand the spinningof fantasyto makegenderinto sense ... In understandingandproducingtheirculturalworldthroughthese things-and of course in combinationwith many otherthings-social meaningsof genderwere naturalized,made to seem familiar,commonplace,natural,expected,and very, very ordinary"(24). 36. Saul Lieberman,ToseftaNashim (New York:JewishTheological Seminary,1995), 279. 37. Lawrence Hoffman, Covenant of Blood (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 80-81.
310
Priestly Men and Invisible Women createdmiraculouslymale-only lines of reproduction,the rabbishavethe symbols of continuityexclusively in the provinceof the males. Here we can begin to make a connection between the Rabbinicmales, the feminine symbolism of birth, and the patrilinealcaste which made up the priesthood. While the later two (or three, if one counts swimming) on the list may be seen in a practicalsense as facilitatingthe young males' continuinghis life andline into anothergeneration,the first three-circumcision, redeeming the firstborn, and teaching the male child Torah-are intimatelyconnected to the priestly ritual. The biblical texts where these appeartie them togetherand, like our mishnah, explicitly highlight exclusive maleness while drawing on underlying feminine symbolism. The common scripturalcontextfor these commandmentsis the exodus from Egypt. This is not the place to go into a detailed explication of the gender symbolism of the exodus, but the symbolism of birthis quite evident:the blood of the Passoveron the doorpostsof the house, like the birthpassageway,symbolic of the blood of birth; God's saving the Israelites, giving them life, taking them out throughthe birthcanal of the sea; and many otherexamples-all point to the underlyingmythic symbolism of birthsurroundingthe exodus story.38 The connection of these covenantalcommandmentsto the exodus is most clearly seen in the redemptionof the firstborn,which appearsin Exodus 13:1116 and is linked with the slaying of the first born Egyptians.39The place of circumcision in this nexus is seen most clearly in the puzzling passage in Exodus 4:24-26 in which God attacksMoses, who is savedby Zipporah,who circumcises theirson and throwsthe bloody foreskinat Moses' feet. It shouldbe noted thatimmediately before this passage (in verses 22, 23) is the first time that God names Israel"myfirst-bornson."Thus,the parallelis establishedbetweenGod'sfirstborn son who is saved,and Egypt'sfirstbornsons, who are killed. Moses' dangerin the face of a destroyingGod and the apotropaicrite of circumcisionis set up as a microcosm of the nation of Israel'sdangerfrom the Destroyer(God) and the saving power of the blood of the Passoveron the doorposts in the nationalexodus. The life-giving powerof women, seen in Zipporahhere, and in the midwives, Miriam, and Pharaoh'sdaughterin the nationalexodus, is also quite clearly an underlying theme of the exodus. The covenantalcommandmentof teachingone's son Torahmay at first seem out of place among classic priestly commandmentssuch as circumcisionand re38. Foran excellent discussion of this symbolism see the chapter"Imaginingthe Birthof a Nation" in Pardes,BiographyofAncient Israel, 16-39. 39. "Andwhen the Lord has broughtyou into the land of the Canaanites,as He swore to you andto yourfathers,andhas given it to you, you shall set apartforthe Lordevery first issue of the womb: every male firstling that your cattle drop shall be the Lord's.But every firstling ass you shall redeem with a sheep; if you do not redeem it, you must breakits neck. And you must redeem every first-born male among your children.And when, in time to come, your son asks you, saying, 'What does this mean?'you shall say to him, 'It was with a mightyhandthatthe Lordbroughtus out of Egypt,the house of bondage.When Pharaohstubbornlyrefusedto let us go, the Lordslew every first-bornin the landof Egypt, the first-bornof both man and beast. ThereforeI sacrifice to the Lordevery first male issue of the womb, but redeemevery first-bornamong my sons.'"
311
Natan Margalit demptionof the firstborn.However,teaching is an integralpart of the memorialization of the exodus as describedin Exodus 13:13-14: andyoumustredeemeveryfirst-bornmaleamongyourchildren.Andwhen, in timeto come,yoursonasksyou,saying,'Whatdoesthismean?'youshall say to him,'It waswitha mightyhand... theLordsleweveryfirst-bornin the landof Egypt,the first-born of bothmanandbeast.ThereforeI sacrifice to the Lordeveryfirstmaleissueof thewomb,butredeemeveryfirst-born amongmysons." Even thoughwe may thinkof the intellectualactivity of teachingTorahas the polar opposite of priestlyritual,here it is revealedto be partof the male/priestlyrites of continuity.40In a mythical,only partiallyconcealed birth,the male God gives life to the line of Israel,and the rites of redemptionof the firstbornmale, circumcision, and teaching Torahall commemoratethat male birth and set the tone for the priesthood,which coopts the feminine powerof birth.The rabbinicmales will follow in the footsteps of theirpriestlypredecessors. To returnnow to the structureof the chapter,looking at the next mishnah, 1:8, we see a clear continuationof the theme of priestlyobligations. Mishnah8 Layingthehands(on a sacrificialanimal),waving(a portionof theanimal), presenting (theanimalto thealtar),pickingout(mealto offeron altar)offersacingincense,killinga sacrificialbird,collecting(bloodfroma slaughtered rificialanimal)sprinkling(bloodon the altar)arepracticedby menandare notpracticedby women.ExceptfortheSuspected Adulteress(withher)meal offeringandthe(female)Nazirite,whowave(a portionof theanimal). Here thereare obviouslypriestlyduties, and it is interestingto note thathere there is not simply an exemption from obligation;the phrase "arepracticedby" implies that there is a prohibition of women performingthese duties. This is the center of the chiasmus and the apex of the distinctions between men and women in terms of commandments.The fact that the focus is directly on the priestly duties strengthensmy point that the previous mishnahwas also dealing with males as quasipriests.In fact, there is a literarytransition(as is common in the Mishnah) between mishnah 7 and mishnah 8. The ending of mishnah 7 lists the exceptions to the rule that in negative commandmentsboth men and women are obligated.These are the prohibitionsagainst shavingthe beard,cuttingthe side of the head, and coming in contact with a corpse. These are listed as "male"commandments,but in fact there are relevantonly to the priests in the last case, and in the formertwo cases, shavingthe beardandthe sides of the head,areclear cases 40. For an excellent discussion of the connection between circumcisionand teaching see Harvey Goldberg,"Cambridgein the Landof Canaan:Descent, Alliance, Circumcisionand Instructionin the Bible,"JANES24 (1996): 9-34.
312
Priestly Men and Invisible Women of biblical priestly obligationswhich then were laterinterpretedas binding on the male householders. As noted earlier,the second collection parallelsthe structureof the first collection in that the first three mishnayotdeal with humanrelations,while the last two deal with land or objects connected to land. Thus, the comparisonsbetween men and women end in mishnah8, and we move to mishnah9, which deals with the comparisonbetween obligations inside the land of Israel and outside. The phrasenoheg ("is practiced")is continuedfrom the previousmishnah.I would argue that this term implies a more natural,almost inevitableconnectionthan does the wordoseh ("he does"), which is more volunteeristic. The last mishnah combines this theme of land with the introductionof the study of Torah. Mishnah 10 Whoeverperformsone mitzvah:goodis doneforhimandhe is givenlength of daysandhe inheritstheland.Andwhoeverdoesnotperformonemitzvah: andhe doesnotingoodis notdoneforhim,andhisdaysarenotlengthened, heritthe land.Andwhoever(studies)neitherScriptures norMishnah,nora craft:thispersonis notwithincivil society.Abouttheone whograspsall of these,Scriptures says,"Thethreefoldropeis notquicklybroken." This mishnahdepartsfrom the rest of the chapterin discussing not the details of the commandmentsthemselves, but, rather,the rewardsfor performing them. Many of the themes of the chapterare woven into this last mishnah and I will not be able here to discuss them all. Clearly,the theme of land is important, not simply as a locus for doing commandments(as in mishnah 9), but as the reward,the place where one may happilylive out one's life and achieve fulfillment. The first part of the mishnah lists three rewardsfor doing "one mitzvah":wellbeing, length of days, and inheritingthe land. These are very plausiblyconnected to the original topic of this chapter-marriage and family-and thus returnsto and reinforces the theme of the first half of the chapter:marriage,fertility,and land.The rewardof "inheritthe land"wouldbe practicallyachievedby havingchildren who continue the family's presence on the land. The first reward,"wellbeing" ( 15pa'sn,literally"good is done to him")may be relatedto the statement in B. Yevamot62b thata man who has no wife has no goodness (" n'tu"). "Length of days"may be seen as a bridge between the goodness, which the man finds in his own lifetime, and the thirditem, "inheritthe land,"which has the implication of passing it on to one's progeny. Literarily,mishnah10 refersus back to marriageandthe first mishnahof the chapterin its emphasison the numberthree.The three ways in which a woman is acquiredmentionedin the first mishnahof the chapterare hereparallelednot only by the directmentionof "Thethreefoldrope,"but also by the threerewards(goodness, length of days, land) and the three obligations (Scriptures,Mishnah,craft). The argumentthatthis is a purposefuldevice is strengthenedby the absence of the numberthree in the body of the chapter.It appearsonly at the beginning and the end. 313
Natan Margalit The ending of the chapterrefers to land in the mention of someone being a~1'rn p•, translatedhere as "partof civil society" but having the implicationof a society settled on the land. The wordinghere is perhapsreminiscentof the verse in Isaiah45:18, "The Creatorof heaven who alone is God, who formed the earth and made it, who alone establishedit, He did not create it a waste, but formed it for habitation which is the rabbinicsource text for the command(nx;•i nmwtu)," ment of "be fruitful and multiply."41 The verb lashevet ("for habitation")is reflected in its noun form, ha-yishuv("settlement").The "one mitzvah"mentioned may itself be hintingto this very commandment.The term "one mitzvah"is by no means clear. It has been interpretedto refer to the one commandmentthat a man does over and above the amountof his sins, thus resultingin a reward.But in the context of this chapter,with its focus on marriageand the creationof family, it is plausiblethat"one mitzvah"refersto the first mitzvahmentionedin the Torah:be fruitfuland multiply.42 The commandmentto studyTorahis here not seen so much as an obligation, but,rather,as somethingthatbringsrewards,muchas the firststatementof this mishnah describesrewardsfor doing "onecommandment." It is a commandmentthatresults in one beingpartof society or a contributingmemberof the settlingof the land. The languageused is similarto thatused in the previousmishnahin that it does not describethe studyof Torahas a commandmentor even as an actionto be performed, but, rather,as a stateto be "in.""Whoeverhas Scriptures,Mishnah,a craft"would perhapsbe a bettertranslation.This again reinforcesthe idea thatthese commandmentsarenot incidentalperformances;rather,they aremoreakinto statesof being, permanentattributes.The value, as in marriage,is not in the quick enjoymentof a reward,but in the stable,long lastingconnectioncreatedby being "in"Torah. Thus, in the last mishnah,the two halves of the chaptercome together.The male's performanceof the commandments,his fulfilling his obligations,createsa connectionbetween him and God; he becomes God's acquisition,and the resultis that the rewardsof the first half-continuing in the land,children,and all fulfillments of marriage-are achieved.The man who fulfills commandmentsis fruitful, rewardedwith goodness, and is plantedin the land.The acquisitionof a wife describedin the first half of the chapteris partof the rewardfor the male being in the feminine position vis-a-vis God in the second half of the chapter. CONCLUSION
I have examinedthe rule that women are exempt from positive time-bound commandmentsas it appearsin the Mishnah,M. Kiddushin1:7. I have arguedthat 41. See M. Gittin4:5, M. Eduyot 1:13, Bereshit 19:5, 20:8, and Bamidbar12:4 for the use of this verse as a proof text for the commandmentto be fruitful and multiply. It is interestingthat this verse, which includes the context of settling the land,is more often used than the seemingly more obvious commandin Genesis 1. This strengthensthe connectionbetween humanfertility and the whole context of humansociety settling on fertile land. 42. See YehudaShaviv,"Kiddushinperek rishon:seder ve-tavnit,"Netuim 3 (May 1996): 5455, who also makes this point, andAvrahamWeiss, "Sedermishnahkiddushin,"Kovetztorahshe b'al pe (1968): 16-23, who notes the general comparisonbetween this mishnahand the first mishnahof the chapter.
314
Priestly Men and Invisible Women the basis for this rule can be found in the idea thatmales, especially in the priestly role, are incorporatingthe feminine into themselves and thereforefeel a need to exclude actual women from those rituals and performanceswhich most closely embody the feminine for the males. In examiningthis mishnahit has been useful to explore some of the biblical texts thatstandin the backgroundof this idea. I examinedthe dependenceof the biblicalpriestson the symbolism of the feminine in their emphasis on genealogy and circumcisionas a kind of male birth.This was played out in the story of the exodus and in the commandmentsthat stem from it such as redeemingthe firstborn.These depend on a similar incorporationof the symbolismof birthby the male priesthood.I arguedthatrabbinicmales continued this priestly role in many ways, and with that continued in the cooptation of the feminine. It has also been importantto examine the literarycontext of the mishnahitself. This context suggests a structurein which males acquirefeminine powerspecifically of birth,life, and continuityin the land throughacquiringa wife-in the first half of the chapter,but, more importantlyfor my argument,performcommandmentsthat put the males themselves in the feminine position as being the "possession"of God, permanentlyand naturallyconnected to God, in the second half of the chapter.This connection throughthe performanceof commandments, we learnin the end, resultsin the rewardof all those gifts of the "feminine":goodness, length of days, and permanencein the land throughchildren. The rule that states that women are exempt from positive time-boundcommandments,then, must be seen in the context of a wider phenomenonof men excluding women precisely when the men are attempting to incorporate into themselves those qualitiesthatthey perceive as feminine. The implications of these findings are potentially wide-ranging. I would ventureto propose that the recognitionof the envy and the desire to incorporate the feminineon the partof the males makes for a more subtleunderstandingof the exclusion of women throughoutmuch of Jewish history. Studies of the extreme exclusion of women from aspects of Judaism,such as LawrenceHoffman's study of circumcision (which has been noted here), or those of Elliot Wolfson in Kabbalah,43in which there is a clear, scholarlydeterminationto look at gender inequalityin Judaismstraighton, without flinching or apologetics, are indeed important,but they may tell only part of the story.My researchandthe workof SaraCaldwellandotherswouldput such exclusions in perspective, remindingus of the feminine which is very much present in the very exclusion itself. I am quick to emphasize that I do not agree with apologists who downplay the exclusion of women, claimingthatJudaismhas alwayscelebratedthe feminine and so forth. We cannot pretendthat the exclusion did not (and does not) exist, even if we find that there is more to say about it. Rather,noting the hidden feminine behind the exclusion may open some doors to understandingthat reappearance of the feminine in Judaism.An example of this reappearanceof the feminine 43. See, for example, Elliot Wolfson,Circlein the Square:Studiesin the Use of Genderin Kabbalistic Symbolism(Albany:State Universityof New YorkPress, 1995).
315
Natan Margalit may be found in the work of ChavaWeissler in her study of women's spirituality in the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, and especially in her investigation of women'sSabbathcandle lightingon the model of the High Priest.44She explicates women'stekhines,Yiddishpetitionaryprayers,basedon kabbalistictexts thatplace women lighting candles before the Sabbathin the model of the High Priestlighting the menorahin the Temple.Kabbalistically,just as the High Priest unites upper and lowerworldsby his act in the Temple,so does the women in herhome. The fact that the analogy between women and the High Priestreemergesin laterJewish culture(this time, however,with women reclaimingthe role of "highpriestess," as it were) lends supportto my claim thatthe role of the priest(especially the High Priest) drew from the beginning on feminine imagery.I suggest that the connection between women and high priests is not a chance textual connection,but has deep roots. This example may lead us in the directionof uncoveringmore of the underlyingfeminine in Judaism,not to claim apologeticallythat there was never exclusion, but to uncoverwhat has been hidden,but is still not lost. Natan Margalit ReconstructionistRabbinicalCollege Wyncote,Pennsylvania
44. ChavaWeissler,"WomanAs High Priest:A KabbalisticPrayerin Yiddishfor LightingSabbath Candles,"in Essential Papers on Kabbalah,ed. LawrenceFine (New York:New YorkUniversity Press, 1995), 525-46.
316
Kabbalistic Physiology: Isaac the Blind, Nahmanides, and Moses de Leon on Menstruation Author(s): Sharon Faye Koren Source: AJS Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (Nov., 2004), pp. 317-339 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131526 . Accessed: 20/07/2011 02:38 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 28:2 (2004), 317-339 KABBALISTIC PHYSIOLOGY:
ISAACTHE BLIND, NAHMANIDES,AND MOSES DE LEON ON MENSTRUATION
by
SharonFayeKoren Science and faith were inextricablyintertwinedin the Latin Middle Ages.1 Clerics would attendto both spiritualand physical needs because the need to care for the body coincided with the need to care for the soul.2 Until the rise of universities in the twelfth century,monasterieswere the centersof scientific knowledge. And, even afterthe professionalizationof medicinein the thirteenthcentury,Christian physicians continuedto look to the Bible, in additionto their license, as the source of their authority.3Indeed,many Christianphysicians who received medical degrees went on to pursuehigherdegrees in theology.4It is thereforenot surprising that several Christiantheologians used medical theories in the service of theology.5 This nexus between science and faith was not limited to Christianity.Although Jews were excluded from universities, some aspiring Jewish physicians 1. On the intersectionof science and religion among Jews, see Tsvi Langerman,"Acceptance and Devaluation:Nahmanides'AttitudetowardScience,"Journal ofJewish Thoughtand Philosophy 1 (1992): 223-245; David Ruderman,Jewish Thoughtand Scientific Discovery (New Haven, CT:Yale UniversityPress, 1995); idem, Kabbalah,Magic, and Science: The CulturalUniverse of a SixteenthCenturyJewish Physician (Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1988). Among Christians,see PeterBiller and Joseph Ziegler,Religion and Medicine in the MiddleAges (Rochester,NY: YorkMedieval Press, 2001); Joseph Ziegler, Medicine and Religion c. 1300: The Case ofArnau de Villanova, (New York:Oxford UniversityPress, 1998); GuenterRisse, MendingBodies, Saving Souls: A History of Hospitals (New York:OxfordUniversityPress, 1999). 2. Courtenay,"Curersof Body and Soul: Medical Doctors as Theologians," in Biller and Ziegler,Religion and Medicine in the MiddleAges, 69-75. 3. The most popularsource of medical authorityin the Bible was Ecclesiastes 38:1-15. See Ziegler'sdiscussion in Biller and Ziegler, Religion and Medicine in the MiddleAges, 5. 4. Courtenay,"Curersof Body and Soul,"69-75. 5. One of the best examplesof the fusion of medicine andtheology is thatof Arnauof Villanova, who pursueddual careersin medicine and theology for twenty years (Ziegler, Medicine and Religion c. 1300; Michael R. McVaugh,"Momentsof Inflection:The Careersof Arnaude Villanova,"in Biller and Ziegler,Religion and Medicine in the MiddleAges, 47-68). On PeterLombard'suse of medicine in his Sentences, see Biller, "An Inquiryinto the Origins of the Idea of 'Sex Ratio,"' in The Worksof Jacques LeGoffand the Challenge of Medieval History, ed. Miri Rubin(Rochester,NY: Boydell and Brewster, 1977), 27-52; On Hildegardof Bingen, see Jacquart,"Hildegardet la physiologie de son temps,"in HildegardofBingen: TheContextofHer ThoughtandArt(London:WarburgInstitute,1998), 121-134.
317
SharonFaye Koren studied medicine unofficially with members of the medical faculty and others studiedprivately.6Just as many Christianphysicianswere also theologians,many Jewish doctorswere also Rabbis,7and as such could employ scientific theories in supportof theological and legal arguments.In fact, Kabbalahemerges contemporaneouslywith the rediscoveryof Galen andAristotle in the LatinWest,and some thirteenth-centurykabbalistsendeavoredto discern divine secrets with the aid of this new knowledge. There is, however,no such thing as knowledge in the abstract.Michel Foucault has taughtus thatno knowledgeexists outside of the confines of a given culturalcontext.8And the inequalityof the sexes in medievalculture9expresseditself in medievalmen'smedical andtheological conceptionsof women.10The mystical rationalesfor the laws of the menstruatingwomanare a case in point. In Leviticus, menstruantswere deemed rituallyimpurefor cultic practice(15:19) and prohibited to their husbandsin a catalog of forbiddensexual relations(20:18). After the 6. Joseph Shatzmiller,Jews, Medicine,and MedievalSociety (Berkeley:Universityof California Press, 1994), 22-35, 39-55. 7. Ibid., 140. 8. Michel Foucault, Power/Knowledge,ed. and trans. Colin Gordon (New York: Pantheon Books, 1980); idem, History of Sexuality,VolumeOne: An Introduction,trans. R. Hurly (New York: PantheonBooks, 1985). 9. A lengthydiscussion on the statusof women in medieval society is beyond the scope of this paper.I will thereforetake the inferiorstatus of women as a given and refer the readerinstead to the vast literatureon the subject. See, inter alia, James A. Brundage,Law`Sex, and ChristianSociety in MedievalEurope(Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, 1987); Angela Lucas, Womenin the Middle Ages (New York:Saint Martin'sPress, 1983); Penny Shine Gold, TheLady and the Virgin(Chicago: ChicagoUniversityPress, 1985);DavidHerlihy,MedievalHouseholds(Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity Press, 1985); ShulamitShachar,TheFourthEstate, trans.ChayaGalai (Londonand New York: Methuen, 1983); Martha C. Howell, Women,Production, and Patriarchy in Late Medieval Cities (Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press, 1986). On the statusof medievalJewish women, see, interalia, JudithBaskin,"JewishWomenin the MiddleAges," in Jewish Womenin HistoricalPerspective,ed. Judith Baskin (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1991); AvrahamGrossman,Hasidot u-mordot (Jerusalem:MerkazZalman Shazar,2001). 10. See for example, VernBullough, "MedievalMedical and Scientific Views of Women,"Viator 4 (1973): 485-501; CharlesWood,"TheDoctor'sDilemma:Sin, Salvation,andthe MenstrualCycle in Medieval Thought,"Speculum 56 (1981): 710-727. Writing women, by contrast, presented themselves in a far more positive light. Consider,for example, the way in which Hildegardof Bingen describes female physiology.See Hildegardof Bingen, Cause et Cure,CC 78,8-79,3 and CC 102,20110,37, in HildegardofBingen on NaturalPhilosophyand Medicine,trans.MagretBerger(Cambridge: D.S. Brewer,1999), 79-84; BarbaraNewman, Sister of Wisdom:St. Hildegard'sTheologyof the Feminine (Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1987), 42-75, 117-148. On the intersectionbetween the statusof Jewish women and mysticaltheology, see Elliot Wolfson, Circlein the Square:Studies in the Use of Gender in KabbalisticSymbolism(New York:State Universityof New YorkPress, 1995); idem, "The Face of Jacob Inscribedon the Moon,"in The Seduction of Myth in Judaism: Challenge and Response, ed. S. Daniel Breslauer(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997); idem, "Woman-The Feminineas Otherin TheosophicalKabbalah:Some PhilosophicalObservationson the Divine Androgyne,"in TheOtherin Jewish Thoughtand History: ConstructionsofJewish Cultureand Identity,ed. LawrenceJ. Silbersteinand RobertL. Cohn (New York:New YorkUniversityPress, 1994). On the Greek example, see, G. E. R. Lloyd, Science, Folklore,and Ideology (Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress, 1983), 58-111, 168-200.
318
Kabbalistic Physiology destructionof the Temple,sexual relationswith menstruantscontinuedto be forbidden on the basis of Leviticus 20:18. Isaac the Blind (1165-1235), one of the first kabbalistsin Provence,and Nahmanides(1194-1270), the leaderof the Jewish communityin Barcelona,both used medieval naturalphilosophy and science in the service of kabbalistictheology to explain the mystical secret inherentin this prohibition.Isaac the Blind adopts a Galenic model of menstruationto locate the menstruatingwoman within the sefirah of Judgment,the locus of evil in the sefirotic realm. Nahmanides,by contrast,uses an Aristotelianmodel with far more devastatingresults: medieval medicine, naturalphilosophy, and Kabbalahreinforce one anotherto createan image of the menstruatingwoman as the humanincarnationof the demonic other side (sitra''"ahra'). Isaac the Blind and The Origin of MenstrualBlood The Mishnah identifies five different types of impure menstrual blood. These flow from the "room,"or "fountain"(makor),terms traditionallyused for the uterus." In one of the earliestkabbalisticdiscussions of gynecology, Isaac the Blind refines this anatomicaldescription,defining the termmakoras the left section of the uterus.Accordingto this reading,impuremenstrualblood,describedby the Mishnahas coming fromthe makor,flows not fromthe entirewomb but rather from the left section alone. Isaac explains that only sinister blood is impurebecause "all things which come from the left, the side of stern Judgment,are governed by impurity,as it is written, 'from the North shall evil break loose"' (Jer. 1:14).12 The menstrualflow is thus the materialmanifestationof the powers of stern Judgment;its red hue reflects the fiery color of its source. Isaacthe Blind'stheology of menstruationdemonstratesa nexus amongkabbalistic theosophy,medicine, and naturalphilosophy.Medievalscientific attitudes towardmenstruationwere governedby ancientGreekscience andphilosophy.The low esteem in which women were held in Ancient Greece expressed itself in contemporarygynecology in a dichotomy of left and right.'3 In his article, "On the Pre-eminenceof the Right Hand,"RobertHertz explains that dualismwas essential to the social organizationof developingsocieties. "Onthe one side, thereis the pole of strength,good, and life, while on the other there is the pole of weakness and evil ... All oppositionspresentedby nature[includingthe oppositionof male 11. M. Nidah 2:5-6. 12. JoshuaIbnShue'ib,Be'ur'al perush ha-Ramban,24c; cf., ShemTov ibn Ga'on,KeterShem Tov,MS London Montefiore42b; Isaac of Acre Sefer me'iratceinayim29. Ibn Shue'ib'soften quotes Isaacthe Blind and identifies him simply as the pious Rabbi(ha-ravhe-hasid). Moshe Idel, "Wehave No KabbalisticTraditionon This,"in RabbiMoses Nahmanides:Explorationsin his Religious and Literary Virtuousity,ed. IsadoreTwersky(Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1983), 55; Haviva Pedaya,"'Flaw' and 'Correction'in the Conceptof the Godhead,"Da'at 6 (1987): 189 n. 23. Formore on ibn Schue'ib, see Carmi Horowitz, TheJewish Sermon in FourteenthCenturySpain (Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1989), 14-16, 159-70. 13. Leslie Dean-Jones, Women' Bodies in Classical GreekScience (Oxford:ClarendonPress; New York:OxfordUniversityPress, 1994), 42-43; Lloyd,Science, Folklore,and Ideology, 59. On the status of women in Greek society, see W.K.Lacey, TheFamily in Classical Greece (Ithaca,NY: Cornell UniversityPress, 1984).
319
SharonFaye Koren and female] exhibit this fundamentaldualism."'4A dichotomybetween the right and left sides of the body was a naturaloutgrowthof this worldview.The rightrepresented everythingsacred, strong, and male, while the left representedthe profane, weak, and female.'5 This assumptionwas implicit in Greekcultureandbecame the basis of Hellenistic medical conceptions of sexual differentiation.16 For example, the Hippocratic Superfetation explains that the right and left testicles emit semen independently.Semen emittedfromthe left testicle engendersfemales, and semen from the right, males. OtherHippocraticwritings suppose that sex is determined by the placementof the seed in the uterus.If seed is placed on the left side of the uterus,the child will be female;if placedon the right,the child will be male. 7 Later, Galen supplies physiological justification for Hippocrates'understandingof sexual differentiation.Hippocratesassumedthatthe humanwomb, like the wombs of othermammals,containedtwo or more pockets. Aristotlecomparedthe womb to testicles and concluded that the uterus must also be made up of two parts.'8 Galen believed thatthe chambersof the uteruscorrespondto the numberof teats. Since women have two breasts,the humanuterushas two distinctcavities, a right and a left.19 The right side of the uterus receives cleansed blood from the large blood vessels, the vena cava and the "arteryfrom the great artery,"while the left side of the uterus receives bloods that "do not startfrom the great vessels themselves, but fromthe vessels passing throughthe kidneys."Galen explainsthat"the left testis in the male andthe left uterusin the female receiveblood still uncleansed, full of residues,wateryand serous, and so it happensthatthe temperamentsof the instrumentsthemselves that receive the blood become different. Forjust as full blood is warmerthan blood full of residues, so too the instrumentson the right side, nourishedwith pureblood,become warmerthanthose on the left."20The sex of the child is thus determinedby the conditionsin which the seed grows. If a seed 14. Robert Hertz, "The Pre-eminenceof the Right Hand,"in Right and Left: Essays on Dual Symbolic Classification,ed. Rodney Needham (Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press, 1973), 9. 15. This duality continues to the modem period and has been discussed at length by scholars of genderstudies. See, interalia, Simone de Beavoir,TheSecond Sex, trans.H.M. Parshley(New York, Vintage Books, 1989), 3-38, 253-266; Susan Bordo, UnbearableWeight:Feminism,WesternCulture and the Body (Berkeley and London:Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1993), 165-184; H161neCixous and CatherineClement, TheNewly Born Woman,trans.Betsy Wing (MinneapolisMN: University of MinnesotaPress, 1986), 63-132; H616neCixous, "The Laughof the Medusa,"in FeministTheory:A Reader, ed. WendyKolmarand FrancesBartkowski(MountainView, CA: Mayfield PublishingCompany, 2000), 212-218; Sherry Ortner,"Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture?"in Kolmar and Bartkowski,FeministTheory,203-211. 16. G. E. R. Lloyd, "Right and Left in Greek Philosophy,"Journal of Hellenistic Studies 82 (1962): 56-66. 17. AnthonyPreus,"Galen'sCriticismof Aristotle'sConceptionTheory,"Journalof the History of Biology 10(1977): 68. On Hippocrates'use of rightand left, see MonicaGreen,"TheTransmissionof AncientTheoriesof FemalePhysiologyand Disease,"(Ph.D.diss., PrincetonUniversity,1985), 14. 18. Dean-Jones, Women'sBodies in Classical GreekScience, 66-68. 19. Green,"FemalePhysiology and Disease,"42. 20. Ibid.,43; Galen On the Usefulness 14:10:641-2; Danielle Jacquartand ClaudeThomasset, Sexualityand Medicine, trans.MatthewAdamson (Princeton,NJ: PrincetonUniversityPress, 1988), 50-51.
320
KabbalisticPhysiology from the right testicle grows on the right chamberof the uterus,the embryo will be nourishedby warmblood and become male; whereas if the seed from the left testicle is implantedin the cold and wet left section, it will become female. Qualitative differencesbetween men and women, therefore,begin in utero. Males are engenderedfrom superiormaterial,in warmand dry conditions,on the highly valued right side of the uterus,while women are createdfrom residue in the cold and wet left. Women'sinferiorityis thus explainedbiologically. These Hippocraticand Galenic ideas on sexual differentiationare absent in the Talmud.2'Rather,the rabbispresentan understandingof sexual differentiation akin to that of Democrites and Aristotle. Many ancient physicians believed that both men andwomen possess generativeseed thatcombinesto createa fetus. Male seed is semen while female seed is eithermenstrualblood or the vaginalfluid emitted duringsexual arousal.22Democritesassertedthat sex is determinedby which of these seeds prevailsin the uterusaftersexual intercourse.23Aristotlemaintains Democrites'essentially"combativemodel"of sexualdifferentiation,yet denies the existence of generativefemale seed.24Semen alone generatesthe form of the fetus, whereasmenstrualblood merelyprovidesthe material.Aristotlecomparesthis process to making cheese:just as rennetcurdlesmilk to create cheese, male seed creates the child out of female matter.Thus, ratherthan attributesexual differentiationto the interactionof two types of seed, Aristotle attributesit to the kind of nourishmentavailableto the child in utero. Semen, being form, will strengthen the fetus and createa male, while menstrualblood, being material,providesnourishment sufficient only to create a female. Gender depends upon which type of nourishmentprevails. "If the male semen gains mastery,it brings [the material menstrualblood] over to itself" engenderinga male. "If it [semen] gets mastered, it changes over either into its opposite [a female] or else into extinction."25The Talmudexplainsthatifa womanemits her seed first, the child will be male, whereas if the male emits his seed first the child will be a female. Although the rabbis cite a biblical proof text as their source, they seem in fact to presenta simplified version of the Democrites and Aristotle.When the first emission of seed is overshadowedby the second, the second sex prevails.26 21. On the similaritiesbetweenHippocraticandTalmudicunderstandingsconstructionsof gender, see CharlotteFonrobert,MenstrualPurity: Rabbinic and ChristianReconstructionsof Biblical Gender (Stanford,CA: StanfordUniversity Press, 2000), 60-63. 22. Preus,"Galen'sCriticism,"84. 23. Ibid., 72-73. 24. Note that Aristotle had never dissected a cadaver and was unawareof the existence of ovaries.After Herophilusengaged in humandissection and discoveredthe ovaries,physiologists were forcedto acknowledgethe analogyof the ovariesto the testes. GalenthereforerejectedAristotle'smodel and affirmedthe existence of female seed. Ibid., 83. 25. Aristotle On the GenerationofAnimals 4:1:12-27. 26. B. Nidah 25b, 31b; see also FredRosner,"Sex Determinationin the Talmud,"in Medicine in the Bible and the Talmud(Hoboken,NJ: KTAV,1995), 173-178. Fora very differentunderstanding, see B. Gittin57a. OnAristotleandthe Rabbis,see JuliusPreuss,Biblical and TalmudicMedicine,trans. FredRosner (New York:SanhedrinPress, 1978), 389; on the influence of Greek medicine on the Talmud, see StephenNewmyer,"TalmudicMedicine and Greek Sources."Koroth9 (1985): 34-57. Note that the Talmuddoes not systematicallyfollow Aristotelianbiological theory.For example, B. Nidah
321
Sharon Faye Koren Isaac the Blind uses this biological theory to interprettheosophicalmysteries. Sefer Yezirah(Book of Creation),for example, classifies the Hebrew letters 'aleph, mem, and shin as the "threemothersof the alphabet."God seals the male with the combination'emesh (wux) and the female with 'asham (twx). Commentatorsundertookto explainwhy the male is identifiedwith the combination'aleph, mem,shin and the female with the 'aleph, shin, mem,that is to say,why the inversion of the letters should determinea change in gender.Isaac the Blind finds his answerin the talmudictheory of sexual differentiation.Just as a woman'sseed is the first componentemitted in the productionof a male child, the female element 'esh (fire), associated with the letter shin, is the first element in the creationof a male, producingthe term 'asham.27Just as a man's seed is the first component emitted in the productionof a female child, the male element, mayim,associated with the lettermem, is the first element in the creationof a female, producingthe term 'emesh.28 Isaac the Blind offers anotherinterpretationof the rabbinictheory of sexual differentiationto justify the puritylaws of the parturient.He comparesthe struggle between the male and female seeds in the uterus to the conflict between Judgmentand Mercy in the sefirotic realm.When a woman emits her impurered seed first, the pure,white, male seed will prevail.White will prevailoverred,right over left, and Mercy over Judgment,and a male child will be born. Because purity triumphs,the parturientremainsimpurefor only seven days. When, however,a man's pure white seed is emitted first, it comes under the dominationof impure red female seed; here, red will prevailover white, impurityover purity,Judgment over Mercy,and a female child will be born.The parturientwill remainunderthe influence of the dominantimpureforces for fourteendays.29 The Talmudwas not Isaacthe Blind'sonly source of medical knowledge.He also drew upon contemporaryscientific theory.Though not a physician himself, Isaac the Blind lived near one of the greatestcenters of medical learning in Medieval Europe,the College of Montpelier.AlthoughJews were officially forbidden to matriculate,many Jews studied with members of the faculty independently. Moreover,his father,Abrahamben David, had writtenBa'alei ha-nefesh,a guide to propersexual behaviorinfluencedby contemporaryChristianattitudestoward sexuality.30It is thereforelikely thatIsaacwas familiarwith popularmedicalideas. 31a presentsthe Galenic idea that both men and women emit seed thatcontributeto the development of the fetus. Male seed is sperm, which generatesthe child's bone, sinews, nails, brain,and the whites of the eyes. Femaleseed is menstrualblood, which engendersskin, flesh, blood,hair,and the pupils of the eye. 27. The element fire is intrinsicto the sefirah of Judgment.Women,who are createdin Judgment, are thereforehewn from this elemental fire. Isaac of Acre Sefer me'irat'einayim 154. 28. Meir Sendor,"RabbiIsaacthe Blind'sCommentaryon SeferYetsirah"(Ph.d. diss., Harvard University, 1994), 3:142-144. 29. Ibn Shue'ib Be'ur calperush ha-Ramban24c. 30. On the curriculumat Montpelierin the twelfth and thirteenthcenturies,see Nancy Siraisi, Medievaland EarlyRenaissanceMedicine(Chicago and London:Universityof Chicago Press, 1990), 72-80. On the relationshipbetweenJewish physiciansand the College of Medicine in Montpelier,see Shatzmiller,Jews, Medicine, and Medieval Society, 27-31; Louis Dulieu La medecine d Montpellier 1:86-88, 94, 187-191; Siraisi, Medieval and Early RenaissanceMedicine, 29. Fora differentunder-
322
KabbalisticPhysiology Greekmedicine remainedinfluentiallong afterthe ancientperiod.After the fall of the RomanEmpire,SyrianChristiansbeganto translateGreekmedicaltexts and the Septuagint into Syriac. Expelled by the Byzantine Church, Nestorian Christiansfrom Syria found refuge in Iran,where they quickly built a school and a hospital.The Muslims who capturedPersiain 636 appreciatedthe Nestorianeffort and encouragedtranslationof Syriacmedical works into Arabic.Galen exerted greaterinfluenceon Arabicmedicine thanHippocrates,Soranus,or Aristotle.31 His gynecological theorieswere systematicallycodified in Arabicmedical treatises and latertransmittedto medievalEuropeby means of Latintranslations.32ConstantinetheAfricanwas the first to introduceGalenicgynecology to the LatinWest in his Pantegni,a translationof al Majusi'sAl Kunnasal Maliki.33By the twelfth century,Galenic gynecology was the standardin medical educationand the opposition betweenthe rightand left chambersof the uterusbecame establishedin the medieval scientific imagination.34 Since a numberof the translatorswere Jewish (the most notable being the standing,see HarryFriedenwahl,"Jewsand the Universityof Montpelier,"in TheJews and Medicine: Essays (NewYork:KTAV,1967), 241-252. On Abrahamben David'sreceptivityto Christianideas, see JeremyCohen,"Rationalesfor ConjugalSex in RABaD'sBa'alei ha-Nefesh,"Jewish History6 (1992): 65-78. 31. Monica Greenexplains that "Galen'striumphin gynecology was due in a large partnot to anythinghaving to do with gynecology per se, but ratherto his overwhelmingpreeminencein medicine in general-a preeminencewhich was itself due to the appealinglysystematicand even symmetrical form of his medical theories."Green,"FemalePhysiology and Disease,"71-2, 76. See also John Baldwin, TheLanguageof Sex (Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, 1994). 32. For more on the transmissionof Greek medical ideas in the early Middle Ages, see Allen Whipple, TheRole of the Nestorians and Muslimsin the History of Medicine (Princeton,NJ: Princeton UniversityPress, 1967); Green,"FemalePhysiology and Disease,"73-87. To be sure,WesternEuropeans did not completely abandonthe medical sciences in the early Middle Ages. Medical works were translatedin NorthAfrica and Ravenna.Yetthe scope of these studies was more limited. Western Europeanphysiciansvalued the practicaluse of medicine over its theoreticalstudy and were therefore more attractedto Soranusthanto Galen. Only four of Galen'sworks were translatedinto Latinbefore the eleventhcenturyand only one of these, Ad Glauconem,mentionsthe uterus.Green,"FemalePhysiology and Disease," 130-173. 33. M. D. Jordan,"The Fortuneof Constantine'sPantegni,"in Constantinethe Great andAli ibn al-Abbds al Majuisi:The Pantegni and Related Texts,ed. Charles Burnettand Danielle Jacquart (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994), 286-302. 34. Ibid., 293; see also, Helen Lemay,ed. Women Secrets: a Translationof Pseudo-Albertus s Magnus's De Secretis Mulierumwith Commentaries(Albany: State University of New York Press, 124. This in 1992), 117, understandinggave rise to a belief a seven chambereduterus:threeon the right, three on the left, and one in the middle.The odd numberof chambersgave rise to a thirdgender possibility-the hermaphrodite.This theory is found in the Pseudo-AristotelianDe Spermate,popularin the Latin West in the twelfth century.On the developmentof this theory,see FriedolfKudlien, "The Seven Cells of the Uterus:The Doctrineand its Roots,"Bulletin of the HistoryofMedicine 39 (1965): 415-423; Siraisi,Medievaland EarlyRenaissanceMedicine,91-96. Jews were also familiarwith this theory.As early as the fourteenthcentury,the exegete David ben Yehudahhe-Hasiddescribes the seven chambersof the uterus,claiming that he learnedof the theory from an unidentifiedGa'on and ibn 'Ezra.Raza rabbah,363. On the belief in the Renaissance,see Ruderman,Kabbalah,Magic, and Science, 197 n. 21; JoshuaTrachtenberg,Jewish Magic and Superstition(New York:Atheneum, 1982), 188, 303 n. 13.
323
Sharon Faye Koren Provengalphysician,Moses ben Samuel ibn Tibbon),Jewishphysicianswere certainlyfamiliarwith Galen'sbicameraltheoryof the uterus.35Indeed,we have manuscript evidence that at least three gynecological texts, includingSefer ha-'em el Galynus ("Galen'sBook on the Womb")were available in Hebrew as early as 1199.36The oppositionbetweenrightand left became so prevalentin Jewishmedicine that Maimonides, who had ridiculed Hippocrates'and Galen's belief that sexual differentiationdependson the rightor left originof generativeforces, nonetheless conceded that "male fetuses, in most cases are conceived by a woman on the right side [of the uterus] whereas the female [fetus is conceived] on the left side. The reverseof this situationonly happensexceptionally.""37 Just as Isaac the Blind used Talmudicmedicine to supporthis theosophical exegesis, he adaptedmedieval gynecological theories to fit his kabbalisticneeds. The dichotomybetweenrightandleft is ubiquitousin Kabbalah.38The left was denominatedfeminine,impure,andevil, while the rightwas denominatedmale, pure, and good. The Galenic theory of the bicameraluterus offers biological evidence for this kabbalisticprecept.Thus Isaac the Blind fuses Galen'sanatomicaltheory with talmudictraditionand restrictsthe rabbinicdefinition of the term makor,the source of impuremenstrualblood, to the left section of the uterus.The sinistersefirah of Judgment,like the left chamberof the uterus,becomes the repositoryof uncleansedimpureblood thatcontributesto the engendermentof female children. Just as the medical theory that women are producedon the left side of the uterus supportsphilosophicalconceptionsof female inferiority,the belief thatwomen and menstrualblood originatein the left chamberof the uterussupportsthe kabbalistic belief in the evil natureof the nidah.39 35. On the Jews as translatorsin medieval Europe,see Norman Roth, "JewishTranslatorsof the Courtof Alfonso X," Thought60 (1985): 439-455. On Jews as physicians,see Shatzmiller,Jews, Medicine,and MedievalSociety. On the Jewishtranslationsof the Pategniin particular,see Ron Barkai, "The Judeo-Arabicand HebrewVersionsof the Kitab Kamil a? ind'a"in Burnettand Jacquart,Constantine the GreatandAli ibn al-Abbdsal Majuisi. 36. This text is a Hebrewtranslationof the Latin,Depassionibus mulierum,version B. See Ron Barkai,A HistoryofJewish GynecologicalTextsin the MiddleAges (Leiden:E. J. Brill, 1998), 20-37, 57. 37. FredRosner, TheMedicalAphorismsofMoses Maimonides(Haifa:MaimonidesResearch Institute, 1989), 266; idem, Maimonides'Commentaryon the Aphorismsof Hippocrates(Haifa: Maimonides ResearchInstitute,1987), 146. See also, idem, Medicine in the MishnehTorahofMaimonides (New York:Ktav, 1984); Maimonides,Perush 'al 'abukrat,trans. Moshe ibn Tibbon, ed. Suessman Muntner(Jerusalem:Mossadha-RavKook, 1961), 5:48; Maimonides,PirkeiMoshe, trans.NathanhaMeati, ed. Suessman Muntner(Jerusalem:Mossad ha-Rav Kook, 1992), 16:24, p. 210. Barkainotes that Maimonides, in general, "heavilyrelied on Galen's medical views when propoundinghis own." Barkai,Jewish Gynecological Texts,65. 38. GershomScholem, Originsofthe Kabbalah,trans.AllanArkush(Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press, 1987), 148-151; Elliot Wolfson, "Left Contained in the Right: A Study of Zoharic Hermeneutics"AJS Review 11 (1986): 27-52. 39. Because the "philosophicalstakes"were so high, the belief in the existence of chambersof the uterus remainedentrenchedlong after it was disprovedby anatomicalobservationon cadavers. JacquartandThomasset,Sexualityand Medicine, 42.
324
KabbalisticPhysiology Nahmanides Like Isaac the Blind, the medieval polymathNahmanides(1194-1270) incorporatescontemporarygynecological theories into his understandingof the nature of menstruants.In his commentary on the Levitical interdiction against approachingmenstruants,Nahmanidesexplains that God permits man to engage in sexual relationsfor procreativepurposesalone. A fetus can be createdonly out of pure female blood. Menstruatingwomen thereforecannotcontributeto the materialcreationof a fetus because theirblood is impure.40Indeed,"howcould menstrualblood create a fetus when it is itself a deadly poison that can kill any living being who drinksor eats it?"41Any fetus that actuallyeats menstrualpoison will die; any trace of menstrualblood in the uteruswill inflict either leprosy or boils. The Torahtherefore forbids sexual relations with menstruatingwomen because they cannotengenderhealthyoffspring.42 Nahmanidesthen shifts the emphasisof his commentaryfrom the "medical risks" of menstrualblood to the dangersof the nidah (menstruant)herself. Nahmanidesreportsthata menstruantwho gazes into a ferrousmirrorat the beginning of her flow will cause red drops, like drops of blood, to appearon the metal. "For the harmfuland evil natureof the issue producesan odor and this foul air attaches to the mirrorjust as a basilisk kills with its gaze."This evil influencemay infect a man just as it does a mirror,and contaminatehis mind and body. Nahmanides readsthis notion into his Torahcommentaryinterpretingthe Leviticalphrase"her nidah will be upon him-" as Biblical proof for menstrualcontagion.43 Nahmanidessupportshis claim on the basis of empiricalevidence, stressing that these powers are not folkloric fantasies but "actualexperiences."He considers the menstruousgaze "one of most miraculousworksin nature"44and warnsof the very real danger of menstrual pollution. In his commentary on Leviticus 20:18-If a man lies with a woman in her infirmity and uncoversher nakedness, he has laid bare her flow and she has exposed her blood flow-Nahmanides explains that the menstruatingwoman is like a fountain(makor)of blood that must not be exposed lest she spew forthherevil and destructivewaters.She is therefore taboo to "the holy seed" (Isa. 6:13) for all the days of her impurity,until she immerses herself in water,for only then will she be purified in her mind and body and become completely clean.45 Nahmanides'focus on the dangersof the menstruantin his Torahcommen40. The thirteenth-centuryphilosopher Thomas Aquinas distinguishes two types of female blood: 1) purified blood that is used to make up the embryo and 2) the waste of this blood, which is menstrualblood. JacquartandThomasset,Sexualityand Medicine, 77. 41. Withthe exception of cats: cats could resist the powersof menstrualblood and snakes. See B. Shabbat75b, B. 'Avodahzarah40b. 42. Nahmanides'commentaryto Lev. 18:19, in Perusheiha-torahle-rabbenuMoshe ben Nahman, ed. ChaimChavel (Jerusalem:Mossad ha-RavKook, 1959), 2:104-105. 43. Lev. 15:24. 44. This is a paraphraseof Job 37:16, "the wondrousworks of Him who is perfect in knowledge." 45. Nahmanides'commentaryto Lev. 18:19, 2:104-105.
325
Sharon Faye Koren tary is in starkcontrastto the originalintentof the priestlywriters,who sought to distance impurityand danger from the menstruant.Leviticus 15 lists four categories of people with issue-the man with an abnormaldischarge(zav), the ejaculant,the menstruant(nidah), and the womanwith abnormaldischarge(zavah)who are barredfrom the Templecult because of the demandsof ritualpurity.The priestly authors,however,only explicitly describethe zav and the zavah as ritually impure (tam'e).This absence is not an oversight. Rather,it likely reflects the priestlyauthors'reactionto the practicesof otherNear EasternCultswho believed thatmenstruantswere dangerousbecause they were possessed by impurespirits.46 Indeed,accordingto Leviticus 15:20-25, menstrualblood contaminates,not the menstruant.She rendersimpureonly thatwhich lies beneathher-that is, objects that could become polluted by menstrualblood. Thus, in contrastto other Near Easterncultic leaders,who concentratedon exorcisingspiritsof impurityfromthe polluted, Israelitepriests distanced impurityfrom the menstruantherself to the items thatshe touched,partlyin orderto suppressthe notionthather impurityconstitutedany kind of possession or contagion.47 Nahmanides'Torahcommentaryis unusualamong his writings in its treatment of nidot. His Hilkhot nidah and his Hidushim 'al masekhetnidah show no disparagementof menstruatingwomen.48 Moreover,Nahmanides was a physician, and we know that he treated gynecological problems.49Elsewhere he describes the menstrualflow as a natural"cleansing of surpluses [of blood]" and disagrees with R. Solomon ben Isaac and Abrahamibn Ezra, who suggest that menstruationis a sickness.50 How could Nahmanides,a physician with medical 46. David Wright, TheDisposal of Impurity:EliminationRites in the Bible and in Hittite and MesopotamianLiterature(Atlanta:ScholarsPress, 1987), 248-254; YehezkelKaufmann,Religion of Israel: FromIts Beginnings to the BabylonianExile, trans.and abr.Moshe Greenburg(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1960). On impurityin Zoroastrianism,see Mary Boyce, Zoroastrians:Their Beliefs and Practices (London and Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1979), 43; JamsheedChoksy, Purity and Pollution in Zoroastrianism(Austin: University of Texas Press, 1989); Emily Culpepper, "ZoroastrianMenstruationTaboos:A Woman'sStudies Perspective,"in Womenand Religion, ed. Judith Plaskowand JoanArnold Romero(Missoula, MN: The Scholar'sPress, 1974). 47. JacobMilgrom, Introductionto Leviticus1-16: A New Translationand Commentary(New York:Doubleday,1996), 44, 936. See also, Fonrobert,MenstrualPurity,40-50. 48. Menstruantswere treatedneutrallyin manyhalakhicworksof the period.See, for example, Abrahamben David Ba'alei ha-nefesh;Solomon ibn AdretHiddusheiha-Rashba'al masekhetnidah; idem Toratha-bayit. 49. On Solomon ibn Adret's description of Nahmanides'treatmentof female infertility,see Samuel Kottek,"MedicalPracticeand Jewish Law:Nahmanides'SeferToratAdam,"in Medicineand Medical Ethics in Medieval and Early ModernSpain:An InterculturalApproach,ed. Samuel S. Kottek and Luis GarciaBallester (Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 1996), 164-165; Sefer teshuvotha-Rashba ha-meyuhasotleha-Ramban127:117-118. Many Spanish physicians were interestedin gynecology. For example, Sheshetben Isaac Benveniste,the Nasi of Barcelona(d. 1209), wrote two gynecological treatises and al-Harizitranslatedthese posthumouslyas the Medicamentfor Pregnancy and Medicamentsand Confectionsfor Women'sDiseases. Nahmanides,who lived in Barcelona,may have been familiar with his work. Ron Barkai,"A Medieval HebrewTreatiseon Obstetrics,"Medical History 33 (1988): 97-98; M. Steinschneider,"Scheschet b. Benveniste,"Hebraeische Bibliografie, 73 (1873): 106-110. 50. Nahmanides'commentaryto Lev. 12:2, 2:65. Formore on ibn Ezra'sapproachto gynecol-
326
Kabbalistic Physiology experience, subscribeto a notion as fanciful as the ocularpowers of the menstruant? Ratherthan dissuade Nahmanides, his scientific education was precisely what introducedhim to the concept of the menstruouseye. During the course of the thirteenthcentury,gynecological theory shifted from the Galenic traditionto the Aristotelian,with unhappyconsequencesfor the statusof women in both Jewish and Christiansociety.51Nahmanides,thirtyyears Isaac'sjunior, incorporated these new ideas into bothhis Torahcommentaryandinto his sermonToratha-shem temimahto supporthis theology.52 Aristotle believed that females were "incompletemales."53Maleness was the norm and femaleness a "lack of maleness."Men representedactive, spiritual form;womenrepresentedpassive, materialmatter.54Among ancientauthors,Aristotle alone deniedthatwomenproduceseed. Aristotlealso construedmenstruation differently.Most Greek physicians believed that menstruationhad a purgative function. Hippocrates,for example, believed that women, being spongier than men, cannot expel fluids easily and must thereforemenstruate.Men can expel wasteby othermeans.55Galensimilarlyexplainsthatmen arewarmerthanwomen and thereforebetterable to purge themselves of superfluousfluids throughphysical activity,perspiration,and excretion.Women,whose humoris cold, must menstruatein orderto excreteexcess fluid andmaintaintheirhumoralbalance.56Here, too, the menstrualflow is purgative.57Aristotle, however, takes a different apogy, see Sefer ha-nisyonot:the Book of Medical ExperiencesAttributedto AbrahamIbn Ezra, ed. and trans.J. O. Leibowitzand S. Marcus(Jerusalem:Magnes Press, HebrewUniversity, 1984), 221-257. 51. Aristotle'sbiological ideas were probablyno more sexist in conception than those of his contemporaries.No Greekphilosopherthoughtwell of women. However,the prestigeof Aristotlealso contributedto his broad influence, and his biological theories fueled antifeministargumentsin other disciplines. Forexample, in his Politics, Aristotlewrites that"therelationof male to female is naturally thatof the superiorto the inferior-of the rulingto the ruled."AristotlePolitics 1:5:1254b;Johannes Morsink,"WasAristotle'sBiology Sexist?"Journalof the HistoryofBiology 12 (1979): 84. Horowitz, on the contrary,contendsthatAristotle'sbiological and psychological ideas "arecircular,self supporting, and anti-feministto the core."MaryanneCline Horowitz,"Aristotleand Woman,"Journal of the History of Biology 9 (1976): 212. On the relationshipbetween medieval misogyny and medicine, see Bullough, "Views of Women,"485-501. Boyarinhas suggested that Maimonides'use of Aristotle's categorizationof men as form and women as matteradverselyaffectedthe statusof Jewishwomen and divergedfrom earlierrabbinictradition.Daniel Boyarin, Carnal Israel (Berkeley:Universityof California Press, 1993), 57-60. 52. Nahmanides,"The Law of the EternalGod is Perfect"in Writingsand Discourses, trans. CharlesChavel (New York,Shilo PublishingHouse, 1978). Hebrewtext "Toratha-shem temimah"in Kitvei rabenuMoshe ben Nahman,ed. ChaimChavel, (Jerusalem:Mosad ha-RavKuk, 1963), 1:167. 53. Aristotle GenerationofAnimals 728a. 54. Ibid., 729a. 55. Dean-Jones, Women'sBodies in Classical GreekScience, 55-56; Green,"FemalePhysiology and Disease," 16. 56. During gestation and lactation,these excess fluids are redirectedto nourishthe child and maintainhomeostasis. Ibid., 46. 57. Amenorrheawas thereforeconsideredvery unhealthybecause it results in the retentionof waste. Note thatAvicennadoes not believe that amenorrheais a sign of illness. Rather,he arguesthat some very strongwomen are more like men and are able to purgethemselves of excess blood through
327
SharonFaye Koren proach. He understandsblood to be bodily nourishment,and deduces that blood not used as nourishmentbecomes bodily residue. Men, who are hot and dry, are able to convert this residue into a generative force, that is, semen, whereas in women, who are cold and wet, it remains"unconcocted"and must be excreted in the form of menstrualblood.58Menstrualblood is, therefore,a manifestationof female incapacity. The "menstruousgaze" that Nahmanides reportsemerges from this Aristotelian view. In Aristotle'streatiseOn Dreams, we readthat menstruationafflicts the entire female body. Because the eyes contain so many blood vessels, they are particularlysusceptible to this "feverishdisorderof the blood."Hence, a fiction about the ocular powers of the menstruant:"Justas that which is heated and becomes hot may heat somethingelse in turn,one not only sees, but the very act of seeing createsan effect."59Therefore: if a womanlooksintoa highlypolishedmirrorduringthe menstrual period, the surfaceof themirrorbecomescloudedwitha blood-redcolor(andif the mirroris a newonethestainis noteasyto remove,butif it is anoldonethere is less difficulty) . . . The reason for this is that . .. when menstruationtakes
place,as a resultof a feverishdisorderof theblood,thedifferenceof conditionin theeyes,thoughinvisibleto us, is nonethe less real;andtheeyes set upa movementin theair.Thisimpartsa certainqualityto thelayerof airextendingoverthemirror,andassimilatesit to itself;andthislayerbecomesthe surfaceof themirror.60 This fiction was a fruitfulone. Pliny,for example, claimed thatmenstruants could dull mirrors.61In the middle ages, the menstruantwas explicitly associated with the basilisk,a poisonous serpentwhose glance or breathwas believedto cause exercise, medicine, nosebleeds, or other wounds. Avicenna Liber Canonis 3:3:25, pp. 373b-373a; Lemay,introductionto Women'sSecrets, 44. For Soranuson menstruation,see Green,"FemalePhysiology and Disease,"26-31. 58. Concoctionliterallymeans cooking. It is a process of sanguificationby which food is transformed by heat into blood. Green,"FemalePhysiology and Disease,"43. 59. Aristotle On Dreams 2:459a. 60. Ibid., 2:459b-460a. Dean-Jonesbelieves that this presentationcontradictsAristotelianbiology. In On the GenerationofAnimals, Aristotle claims that menstrualblood is distinct from other bloods in the body. It is a residuethat the womb collects duringthe course of the month.Accordingly, menstrualblood would neithercause a "generaldisturbance"in the blood nor a swelling in the body. Moreover,Dean-Jonesarguesthattherewas no menstrualtaboo in classical Greeksociety. Menstruating womanwere not scornedany more than nonmenstruatingwomen. Forexample,Aristotleand Hippocratesencouragemen to have sexual intercoursewith menstruants.Dean-Jonesthereforeconcludes that this excerpt was originally a gloss in the marginsand was interpolatedinto the text in the Hellenistic period. She asserts that men introducedmenstrualtaboos in the Hellenistic period in orderto subjugatean increasinglyliberatedclass of women. Dean-Jones, Women's Bodies in Classical Greek Science, 229-230, 234, 248; see also her dissertation,"MorbidityandVitality,"(Ph. D. diss., Stanford University, 1987), 57, 59. Even thoughthe account itself may be pseudepigraphic,it exertedgreat influence on laternaturalscientists and physicianswho were convinced of its authenticity. 61. Pliny NaturalHistory 8:79-81.
328
KabbalisticPhysiology death.62As the basilisk is filled with venom, the menstruantis filled with blood, and by analogy the menstruant'sblood becomes venomous. Both the basilisk and the menstruantemit theirpoison throughtheireyes andcorruptthe air.The airthen transmitsthe poison into the eyes of others. After the thirteenth-centuryrediscoveryof Aristotle in the Latin West,natural philosophers conflated the popular association of the menstruantand the basilisk with the account of the menstruantin On Dreams. AlbertusMagnus, for example, explained that because the eye is a very passive organ, menstrualflow can easily infect the eyes of a menstruantand emit a vaporthat infects everything she sees.63Associating menstruantswith basilisks, he warnshis readersto "to beware of every woman as one would avoid a venomous serpentand a horneddevil."64The Secrets of Women,a populartreatiseerroneouslyattributedto Albertus Magnus,expatiatesupon the dangersof the menstrualeye: Itshouldbe notedthatoldwomenwhostillhavetheirmonthlyflow,andsome whodonotmenstruate, poisontheeyesof childrenlyingintheircradlesbytheir womenby theflowitself,forthehuglance... Thisis causedin menstruating mors first infect the eyes, then the eyes infect the air, which infects the child.
This is the opinionof the philosopherin the book on Sleepingand Waking.65
The text goes on to associate the menstruantwith the basilisk remarkingthat menopausalwomen are particularlyvenomous because they cannot purge themselves of theirbodily toxin.66All womenaresaid to emit menstrualpoison through 62. Medieval bestiariesdrew upon the Roman and Hellenistic legends of the basilisk. On the basilisk, see PlinyNaturalHistory8:33, 57; Aelian OnAnimals2:7:97. In the 1180s, Neckhamclaimed that the basilisk was born out of a cock's egg. The egg was first formed from the waste matterof the kidneys and sexual organsand laterdeveloped in the intestineof a five- or six-year-oldmale chicken. Neckham based his understandingon Aristotle, who claimed that older roostersdevelop a substance resemblingan egg underneaththeirmidriff.This myth fosteredthe confusion between the basilisk and the cockatrice.T. H. White, ed., TheBook of Beasts (New York:Putnam, 1954), 169 n. 1; againstthis idea, AlbertusMagnus,Man and the Beasts, trans.James J. Scanlon (Binghamton,NY: Medievaland RenaissanceTextsand Studies, 1987), 293, 398. 63. On the physiological association between sexuality and eye disease, see Jacquartand Thomasset,Sexualityand Medicine, 181. 64. AlbertusMagnus Quaestiones 11:9;JacquartandThomasset,Sexualityand Medicine,7475, 206-7; Lemay,introductionto Women'sSecrets,48-49. See also, RobertGrossetesteExpositio in epistulamsancti Pauli ad Galatas 3:3:46. 65. Lemay, Women'sSecrets, 11:129. Aristotle does not mention the effect of the menstruous eye on children.On Peterof Abano'ssimilar formulation,see LynnThorndike,History of Magic and ExperimentalScience (New York:Macmillan, 1923-58), 2:901-902. 66. The text draws a furtherconnection between serpents and women: "If the hair of a menstruatingwomanbe takenand placed undera dung heap or clod of earthor wheredung was made during the winter or summerby virtue of the sun there, will be engendereda long and powerful snake." JacquartandThomasset,Sexualityand Medicine, 76. Paracelcus,the Renaissancepolymath,takes this association one step furtherand explains that menstrualblood and semen exposed togethermay give rise to the basilisk "whose poison is similar to that in the eyes or breathof a menstruatingwoman." WalterPagel,Paracelcus:an introductiontophilosophical medicinein the era ofthe Renaissance(New York:Karger,1982), 116.
329
SharonFaye Koren theireyes, corruptthe air with noxious vapor,andtransmitvenom. This methodof transmissioncorrespondsto medieval notions of contagion believed to be an effect of corruptedair.Menstruationthusbecomes a communicabledisease to which the menstruantalone is invulnerable,for she, like the basilisk and othersnakes, is immune to her own poison.67Thus by the thirteenthcentury,the focus of physicians and naturalscientists has shifted from a purgativeto a polluting functionof the menstrualflow.68 This understandinginforms Nahmanides'Torahcommentary.69While the Talmudoften associates women, menstruants,and snakes70and mentionsmagical ocular powers,7' Aristotelian naturalphilosophy influenced Nahmanides commentaryon Leviticus. In his only otherdisparagementof menstruantsin his Torah commentary,he cites "ancientphilosophers"as his source for the menstruouseye. He explains that Rachel does not rise to greet her fatherLabanbecause in ancientdaysmenstruants keptthemselvesvery isolated.Theyweredescribedasniddot(thebannedones)becausetheyneitherapproached norspoke withpeople.Fortheancientsin theirwisdomknewthattheirbreathis harmful, theirgaze is injuriousandmakesa badimpression,as thephilosophers haveexplained.I will mentiontheirexperiencein thismatterin thefuture.72 Moreover,in his famous sermon,"Toratha-shem temimah,"in which he justifies the use of science for the service of Torah,Nahmanidesstates thatthe laws "prohibitingmaritalrelationswith his wife-that is, in the days of her menstruationis due to naturallaw."And,at the end of the section on menstruants,he quotes from 67. JacquartandThomasset,Sexualityand Medicine, 75, 129. This understandinggave rise to the myth of the venomous Virgin, a tale that Jacquartand Thomassetdescribe as "the literaryjustification for the fear of the poison within women's bodies."Ibid., 191-192; cf., the medieval commentaries to Lemay, Women'sSecrets, 130-131. Drawing upon Aristotle, Paracelcus explains that imaginationwas a celestial force that was able to lift man to the divine realm. Imaginationis a magnetic force that the imaginerdrawsinto himself and then impresses upon anotherperson.The female imaginationcan be transformedinto a spirit that acts by means of its materialmanifestation-menstrual blood. This menstrualspirit can cause an epidemic. Pagel, Paracelcus, 122. Thomas Liibler, known as Erastusof Baden (1523-1583) denouncedParacelcus'understandingof the powerof menstruants,explainingthat spiritscannotemerge fromthe eyes of the menstruatingwoman,nor can menstrualblood be harmfulbecause it providesthe originalmatterfor the fetus. Ibid., 316. 68. Lemay, Women's Secrets, 37. 69. Nahmanideswas familiarwith other aspects of contemporarygynecology as well. In his Torahcommentary,for example,he describesthe rabbinic,Galenic, andAristotelianperceptionsof the natureof female seed (Nahmanides'commentaryto Lev. 12:2, 2:65). 70. B. Shabbat75b, 146a;B. 'Avodah zarah22b, 40b; B. Pesahim 11la; B. Yevamot103b; cf., Isaac of Acre Sefer me'irat"einayim154. 71. Therearetwo distinctsuperstitionsknownas the evil eye: 1) the belief thatsome people are able to harmothers at a glance, and 2) the belief thatjealous demons will begrudgemen all forms of happiness.Men endeavorto protectthemselves againstthis second form by disguising good fortuneor by use of prophylacticamuletsandphrases(Trachtenberg,JewishMagic and Superstition,54-56). See also Rivka KernUlmer,"ThePowerof the Evil Eye and the Good Eye,"Judaism40 (1991): 344-353; idem, TheEvil Eye in the Bible and RabbinicLiterature(Hoboken,NJ: Ktav, 1994). 72. Nahmanides'commentaryto Gen. 31:35, 2:177.
330
KabbalisticPhysiology his biblical commentaryand specifies Aristotle as the authorof the menstruous eye, stating: Thereis also a naturalmanifestation of the [harmfuleffect of menstrual blood].Aristotlehaswrittenin hisbook-and it is a trueexperience-thatif, at thebeginningof herissue,a menstruant womanwereto intentlyconcentratehergaze upona glassmirror,therewouldbe appearon the glassa red Nowif [theima dropof bloodas largeas a grainof mustard. spotresembling of will it cleaveto the the more cleaves to the how much age blood] glass, child,thepowerthereofbeingas thatof a viperwhichslaysby sight.73 Thus Nahmanides not only identifies Aristotle as his source, but, like Albertus Magnus,drawsupon medievalfolkloreto call menstrualblood a lethalpoison and comparethe gaze of the nidah to the gaze of a basilisk. This notion contributesto an etiology of leprosy.Both Jewish and Christian traditionshad long associatedmenstruationwith inflammatoryskin conditionsbut no previousJewishsourceofferedan explicit physiologicalexplanationfor thecorrelation.74Once menstrualblood is understoodto be a poison, the link becomes clear: a dose of poison will kill an embryo and the slightest trace will affect fetal development.The exteriorskin illness becomes nature'sway of riddingthe body of the dangerousblood and poison.75Moreover,medievalphysicians did not distinguishbetween leprosy and venerealdisease because leprosy was perceivedas a punishmentfor sexual excess.76 Sexual relationswith menstruants,a form of sex73. Nahmanides,"Toratha-shemtemimah,"1:167. 74. Va-Yiqrarabah (Leviticus Rabbah) 16; Ba-Midbar rabah (Numbers Rabbah)9; Beraita de-nidah 1:2;Efraimbar ShimshonPerush'al ha-torah2:19. An incorrectLatintranslationof IV Ezra producedan associationbetweenmenstruatingwomen and monstrousbirthsin the Christiantradition. The originalHebrewor Aramaicreads, "womenwill give birthto monsters"as a harbingerof the end of days. The Latin translationreads "mulieresparient menstruataemonstra,"that is, "menstruating women give birth to monsters."Thus the Council of Nicea (325 CE) warnedthat husbandswho approachtheir menstruatingwives risk elephantiasisand leprosy for themselves and their unbornchildren. On the development of the association between sexual intercourse with menstruants and monstrousbirths in the Christiantradition,see Jacquartand Thomasset,Sexualityand Medicine, 74, 89; OttaviaNiccoli, "MenstruumQuasi Monstruum,"in Sex and Genderin Historical Perspective,ed. EdwardMuir and Guido Ruggiero (Baltimoreand London:Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990), 403 -428; PierrePayer,TheBridlingof Desire (Toronto:Universityof TorontoPress, 1993), 107-108; ClaudeThomasset, "The Natureof Women,"in TheHistory of Womenin the West:Vol.2 The Silence of the MiddleAges, ed. ChristianeKlapisch-Zuber,trans.ArthurGoldhammer(Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1992), 54-58, 65-66. 75. Forexample, in his On the Miseryof the HumanCondition,InnocentIIIexplains that"conceived fetuses contractthe defect of the seed (menstrualblood), so thatlepersandelephantiacsareborn from this corruption."Innocent III De miseria condiciones humanae 1:4. Medieval physicians similarlybelieved that childrenengenderedduringmenstruationwould have red hairand subsequentlythe all of the negativequalities associatedwith thatcharactertrait.Jacquartand Thomasset,Sexualityand Medicine, 72-73. Cf., the Jewish traditionthat childrenengenderedduringmenstruationwere impudent. Michael Higger, Masekhtotkalah ve-kalah rabati (New York:De-RabbananPublishing, 1936) 16:146;Kalah rabati2:2:190-193. 76. On the physiologicalassociationbetween leprosy and venerealdisease in the MiddleAges, see StephenEll, "Blood and Sexuality in Medieval Leprosy,"Janus 71 (1984): 153-164.
331
Sharon Faye Koren ual deviance,would thereforetransmit"leprosy,"that is to say,venerealdisease to the male partneras well.7 Women,by contrast,were relativelyimmuneto sexual diseases and leprosy because they were immuneto their own poison.78 The historianof science Tzvi LangermanncharacterizesNahmanides'attitude towardscience as one of both acceptanceand devaluation.He explains that scientificknowledge-definedhereas thatknowledgethatis groundedin observationof thephenomena, especiallyasthisstandsin contrastto knowledge thatis receivedthroughtheJewishtraditionor extractedfro
