We have:
35:22 - The men accompanied the women, and those who wanted to make a donation brought bracelets, earrings, finger rings, and body ornaments, all made of gold. There were also all the ones who donated a wave offering of gold to God.
35:23 - Every person who had sky-blue wool, dark red wool, crimson wool, fine linen, goats' wool, reddened rams' skins or blue processed hides, brought these items.
35:24 - Whoever donated silver or copper brought it as a divine offering, and anyone who had acacia wood that could be used for the dedicated work, also brought it.
35:25 - Every skilled woman put her hand to spinning, and they [all] brought the spun yarn of sky-blue wool, dark red wool, crimson wool and fine linen.
35:26 - Highly skilled women volunteers also spun the goats' wool.
35:27 - The tribal leaders brought the sardonyxes and other precious stones for the ephod and breastplate,
35:28 - as well as the fragrances and olive oil for the lamp, the anointing oil, and the perfumed incense.
35:29 - Every man and woman among the Israelites who felt an urge to give something for all the work that God had ordered through Moses, brought a donation for God.
Again and again, we have men and women contributing. Special mention goes to the women for their skills in sewing, the term "chachmat lev" being used for their talents and artistry.
In fact, when we come to these mysterious verses, we find that some interpret this to be referring to the women as well:
36:6 - Moses gave orders to make an announcement in the camp, 'Let no man or woman bring any more material for the sacred offering.'The people stopped bringing,
36:7 - but the materials were more than enough for all the work that had to be done.
The question is, if people were bringing material, why does the verse say there was too much "work" being done? Rashbam answers that it refers to the spinning of cloth which was being donated. Meaning, the women went above and beyond! High praise, indeed.
We gain the impression, then, that the women who were donating cloth were to be commended for their work, and the Torah is praising them for their "chachmat lev."
Yet, somehow it is turned into an insult by Rabbi Elazer. In the Yerushalmi, Sotah 3:4, the story goes like this. I am bringing in the fuller context because it is important. (Also see Bamidbar Rabbah 9:49, Bavli Yoma 66b)
ובן עזאי דלא כרבי לעזר בן עזריה. דתני מעשה בר' יוחנן בן ברוקה ורבי אלעזר חסמא שהיו מהלכין מיבנה ללוד והקבילו את ר' יהושע בבקיעין אמר להן מה חידוש היה לכם בבית המדרש היום ואמרו לו הכל תלמידיך ומימיך אנו שותים אמר להן אפי' כן אי אפשר לבית המדרש שלא יהא בו דבר חדש בכל יום. מי שבת שם. אמרו לו רבי לעזר בן עזריה. ומה היתה פרשתו הקהל את העם האנשים והנשים והטף. ומה אמר בה. הואיל והאנשים באין ללמוד והנשים באות לשמוע. הטף למה בא. אלא ליתן שכר למביאיהן
אמר להן אין הדור יתום שרבי אלעזר בן עזריה שרוי בתוכו
And Ben Azzai [in the Mishna, who said that one must teach his daughter Torah], does not accord with Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya [who said that it is forbidden to teach one's daughter Torah].
As it was taught: It happened that Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka and Rabbi Elazar Chasma were traveling from Yavneh to Lod, and they visited Rabbi Yehoshua in Beki'in.
He said to them, "What innovation was [taught] in the Bet Midrash today?"
They replied, "All are your students, and from your waters do we drink."
He responded, "Even so, it cannot be that there is a Bet Midrash with no innovation every day! Whose week was it [to deliver the discourse]?"
They said, "Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah."
"And what was his portion [of the Torah]?"
"Hakhel - gather the men, women, and children..."
"And what did he say about it?"
"Since the men come to learn, and the women come to listen, why do the children come? Rather, to give reward to those who bring them [the women]."
He said to them, "Any generation that Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya dwells in, is not an orphaned [generation]."Thus, we see that Rabbi Elazar holds that the women do not come to Hakhel to learn, because they are exempt and (according to him) even forbidden from doing so on for its own sake. But, he says that they come to listen to the Torah reading because they are commanded to. And, they get reward for bringing their children along! Even though Rabbi Elazar doesn't ask them to learn beyond what is necessary, he accords them great reward for their actions, and Rabbi Yehoshua considers him a parent for the entire generation for this statement. That is why the next story is difficult to understand.
מטרונה שאלה את רבי לעזר מפני מה חט אחת במעשה העגל והן מתים בה שלש מיתות. אמר לה אין חכמתה של אשה אלא בפילכה דכתיב (שמות לה) וכל אשה חכמת לב בידיה טוו. אמר לו הורקנוס בנו בשביל שלא להשיבה דבר אחד מן התורה איבדת ממני שלש מאות כור מעשר בכל שנה. אמר ליה ישרפו דברי תורה ואל ימסרו לנשים. וכשיצתה אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי לזו דחיתה לנו מה אתה משיב. רבי ברכיה רבי אבא בר כהנא בשם רבי ליעזר כל מי שהיה לו עדים והתראה היה מת בבית דין. עדים ולא התרייה היה נבדק כסוטה. לא עדים ולא התרייה היה מת במגפה. רב ולוי בר סיסי תריהון אמרין זיבה קיטר ניסך היה מת בבית דין. טיפח ריקד שיחק היה נבדק כסוטה שמח בליבו היה מת במגפה.
A certain noble-woman asked Rabbi Elazar, "Why was there but one sin regarding the golden calf, yet they died three [different kinds of] deaths?"
He replied, "The only wisdom for women is in the spinning wheel, as it is written, 'And all the women who were wise in heart spun with their hands' (Exodus 35:25)."
Hyrcanus his son said to him, "Because you didn't answer one thing from the Torah, you have lost me 300 barrels of tithes in one year [for she donates to me every year]!"
He responded, "The words of Torah should be burned, and not given over to women!"
When she left, his students said to him, "Rabbi, you pushed her off, but for us, what is your answer?"
Rabbi Berachia in the name of Rabbi Aba bar Kahane in the name of Rabbi Elazar said, "Anyone who had witnesses and warning died a court-imposed punishment. Anyone who had witnesses and no warning were checked like a Sotah woman. [Anyone] without witnesses, nor warning, died in a plague." Rav and Levi bar Sisi both said, "Anyone who sacrificed and incensed and libated [to the calf] died a court-imposed punishment. Anyone who clapped and danced and played were checked like a Sotah woman. Anyone who was happy in his heart died in a plague."It's one thing to say that a man is forbidden to teach his daughter Torah. But Rabbi Elazar went so far as to insult the woman using a Biblical praise, which is most unusual. And then when his son questions this move for practical purposes, Rabbi Elazar responds (with her apparently still there, as she had yet to leave), that he couldn't care less about the money, because better the Torah be burned than given to women. Which is especially surprising because this seems to be a question on the written Torah, which many hold is permissible to teach women.
What is going on?
One avenue of approach is to understand why Rabbi Elazar was against women learning Torah. Rav Ovadya Bartenura, Tosafot Yom Tov, and Tiferet Yisrael take the Talmud's understanding that it was because he was afraid women, who had no obligation to learn Torah, would take advantage of the little they did know to find ways around laws. This is especially crucial regarding Sotah cases, where there are very real ramifications, such as ruined marriages, and worse, mamzerim.
When they went to fulfill the mitzva of Hakhel, they were learning from the Torah, and bringing children to share in this learning was very important for the Jewish family, and the Jewish woman herself.
The Meiri has a fascinating answer in Yoma 66b, that he was just afraid that if he gave her an answer, many other people who were not knowledgable in Torah would inundate the rabbis with questions, and it would not be good. But not that it was forbidden to answer her. Which makes sense according to his position in Sotah about why not teach a woman Torah is about certain women believing that through knowing a little, they know everything and then make mistakes.
Maharitz Chajes quotes Rav Sherira Gaon in his novella to Yoma there that Rabbi Eliezer was just someone who never repeated that which he didn't hear from his own teachers. So he didn't want to answer her because of that, not because it's inherently forbidden. Maharitz Chajes criticizes Rav Sherira Gaon based on the Yerushalmi, where he answers his students! So he was willing! Rav Henkin suggests that according to the Yerushalmi, he did indeed answer in the name of his teachers, while in the Bavli he didn't because according to them he had no tradition.
But the story of the matron teaches us something. I don't believe it was random that her question was about the three-fold punishment of the golden calf. If you look at the answer, you see that only those who had witnesses but no warning were checked like a Sotah woman. What this woman was really asking was, what criteria is it to be checked like a Sotah woman, and how do I get out of it, fly under the radar while cheating on my husband? I know the answer, but I want you to tell me so I can go do it. It's when there are no witnesses, and no warning, right?
His answer is, basically, get out. If this is what women will use a little bit of knowledge of the law for, then better it be burned.
We can understand this position a bit if that was the problem Rabbi Elazar was facing, and why this might be different today.
But I think a different answer might have been going on there. I think that, as I noted above, the Torah uses the woman's artistry skills as a tremendous praise of their knowledge, and yet, Rabbi Elazar manages to transform it into an insult, "All your brains are in sewing!" How can this be?
I think there's something deeper here, at least on a drush level. Rabbi Elazar was saying, "How can you so misconstrue the theme and message of the calf story? How can you focus on the deaths, when the real lesson is how we were forgiven after? That's the real lesson, and you're missing it! Do you want me to show you how misconstruing the theme of a passage can actually ruin it? How about the line, "The women who were wise of heart spun with their hands..."? How about, that's all they're good for! That would completely misunderstand the statement, don't you think?"
By doing this, he didn't answer her question, and insulted her at the same time. When his son questioned this move, he answered that if the Torah was to be so misunderstood by those not obligated in its understanding, it should better be burned than misunderstood like that.
No comments:
Post a Comment