"Daughters of Israel, Weep for Rabbi Ishmael": The Schools of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Ishmael on Women Author(s): Tal Ilan Source: Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women's Studies & Gender Issues, No. 4, Feminist Interpretations of Rabbinic Literature (Fall, 5762/2001), pp. 15-34 Published by: Indiana University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40326533 . Accessed: 09/09/2013 04:46 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . 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 support@jstor.org. . Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women's Studies &Gender Issues. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions "DAUGHTERS OF ISRAEL,WEEP FOR RABBIISHMAEL": THE SCHOOLS OF RABBIAKIVA AND RABBIISHMAEL ON WOMEN Tal Han TheStudyofS.I. Hurwitz Introduction: RabbiIshmael, to knowwhatRabbiAkivaand his alter-ego, Is itimportant it is only that would A textual women? about say approach thought in if we have textualevidencethatthe issue was any way of important interestto them.A historicalapproachwould say that it is important anyway,because Rabbi Akiva was one of the most importantsages in and his opinionson womenmusthave influenced Jewishlegal history, Thislatterapproachhas itsmeritsin that theirsubsequentlegalposition.1 it certainlyasks the righthistoricalquestions,but if thereis no textual withno to supportan answer,or if an answeris formulated information directrelationto thetextualevidence,the questionitselfmaylose itsjusforexamplein theworkofS.I. Hurwitz. Thisis demonstrated, tification. talAlreadyin 1885,S.I. Hurwitz,an EasternEuropeanJewishpublicist, mudistand Zionist,publishedan articlein the HebrewjournalHashahar entitled"Rabbi Akiva and the Laws of Matrimonyin Israel."2Hurwitz a connection claimedthatthelegal decisionsofRabbiAkivademonstrate in women'ssocial position betweenJewishnationalismand improvement In theinimitablepoeticHebrewofthehaskalah,he wrote and legalrights. in attitudesto women thatcould be seen in the about the differences decisionsofRabbiAkivaand hisrival,RabbiIshmael: of ofthedesirability Even thoughRabbi Ishmaelalso spokeconstantly his restrained he was systemto (interpretative) customary by marriage, whichhis legswereshackled theplainmeaningof thebiblicalverse, Nashim: A JournalofJewishWomen's Studiesand GenderIssues, no. 4. © 2001 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 15 Tallian forhis rulingsand interpretations. whichservedalwaysas a yardstick as Thisdid notallowhimanylicensein alteringthelawsofmatrimony Not so was RabbiAkiva,whoin theyhad been fromtimeimmemorial. his acuityrevealed[to us?] whatwas not even revealedto Moses. ... Rabbi Akiva did not recognizethe supremacyof the old law of and he removeditfromitsdominantposition.3 matrimony, the Hurwitzwas referring to Rabbi Akiva'spoeticlicensein interpreting biblicaltext,well knownto the rabbisof the Talmud and to subsequent scholars. In the 1880s,Hurwitzhad an agendathatmade it desirableforhim to showRabbiAkivain a favorable lightin discussingthepositionofwomen. Akivaunequivocally as a hero.He was Rabbinicliterature Rabbi presents the prime example of an ignoramuswho became a sage, modeling Judaism'smeritocratic ideal. His wifesupportedhis learningcareerand raised his family,so that his familylife embodiedthe ideal marriage promotedby Judaismthroughthe ages. He supportedthe Bar Kokhba rebellionagainstRome and died a martyr's death in its cause.4On the other hand, Rabbi Ishmael, Rabbi Akiva's constantcompanion and the opposite.He has no exalted opponent,usuallyservesto demonstrate biography.In fact,we are told almostnothingof it, but he is usually accused by modernscholarsof havingmade a cowardlyescape from PalestinewhentheBarKokhbarevoltbrokeout.5 details Scholarshiptodaymakesit quiteclearthatrabbinicbiographical are seldomhistoricaland wereusuallycreatedby laterrabbis,who used - muchas Hurwitz thesestoriesto exaltor denigratetheirpredecessors6 did. Hurwitz'sidentityas a Jewishnationalistmade him choose Rabbi Akivaas a model.However,he was equallya modernist who believedin the feminist ideas of equalitycurrentin the late nineteenth and century, he was an apologistforJudaism.It was imperative forhim to provethat Jewishnationalismdid not contradicta move towardmodernityand so as equality.RabbiAkiva'srulingson womenthushad to be interpreted to demonstrate thisfavorable attitude. Hurwitz'swork,however, was cutoutforhim.To borrowhis ownturnof phrase,he had to "reveal[to us] whatwas not even revealedto Akiva himself,"because, as will presentlybecome apparent,thereis nothing benevolentin RabbiAkiva'slegalattitudetowardwomen.This particularly 16 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchoolsofRabbiAkivaandRabbiIshmaelon Women can easilybe demonstrated usingHurwitz'sown firstexample.He opens his discussionofAkiva's rulingsbycitingBT Sotah3a, whichrefersto the bitterwatertest,a quasi-magical bythehighpriest procedureadministered In it,a womanwas made to drinka potionwhosephysical in Jerusalem. consequenceswould reveal to observerswhethershe had committed adulteryor not. The textbeginsby quotingfromthe relevantbiblical passageand thencitesRabbiIshmael'sand RabbiAkiva'sinterpretations: "And a spiritofjealousycame overhim" [Num.5:14]: Rabbi Ishmael [toact upon hisjealousy].RabbiAkivasays:[He says:[He is] permitted is] obligated[toactuponit]. to him At issueis whethera manwhosuspectshiswifeofbeingunfaithful to takeherto theTempleand makeher is obligatedor merelypermitted ordeal. the to submit Readingthe biblicalchapteron the bitterwatertesttoday,we note its so as to instillin instituted It was certainly non-legalcharacter. patriarchal, a womanfearofherhusbandand hispoweroverher.Thus,anyrulingthat ratherthanrelaxesthelaws associatedwiththisprocedurewill reinforces producenegativeresultsforwomen'sposition.Rabbi Ishmaelhere rules against the celebrationof jealousy and in favorof underminingthe and ofthebitterwatertest.7Thus,his rulingis less patriarchal supremacy sawthingsdifferently: towomen.Hurwitz, morefavorable however, Rabbi Ishmaelviewedthe sin of the sotahin lightof the traditional halakhicapproach,whereinthebond of marriagewas no morethana and a womanwas boughtas a chattel.Thus,he businesstransaction, to forgivehis wifefora sin she be permitted a husband decreedthat to is permitted committed againsthim,as anypartnerin a transaction sin of the the viewed Akiva Rabbi But wishes. if he so foregohis rights is sotahfromthereformed pointofview,accordingto whichmatrimony and the of whims on the not covenant man, sacred a dependent forthehusbandto exercisehis he statedthatitwas obligatory therefore in his view,was no longerthatofa husbandagainst jealousy.Jealousy, his fellowbutbecamethejealousyoftheLord God, forthesinnerhas desecratedGod's holiness,and the woman has not only been unfaithful, givingherloveto others,buthas brokenthelawsoftheworld.8 17 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TalHan Hurwitz'sargumentis highlyrhetorical.He beginsby assumingthat RabbiAkivaintendedmarriageto look different fromitsbiblicalform.In the Bible,marriagewas a businesstransaction betweenthebride'sfather and thegroom,in whichthedaughter/wife was thecommodity exchanged. RabbiAkiva,in Hurwitz'sopinion,changedthisapproachbymakingmarHowever,even riagea sacredunionin whichheavenhad a vestedinterest. ifone couldprovethedubiousclaimthatthesetwoapproachesexistin the sources,they are not mutuallyexclusive.Making marriagea sacred does not necessarily makeit less of a transaction. Moreover, undertaking claimingthata husbandis obligatedto be jealous ofhiswifebecauseofthe ofmarriagedeniesthedivineattributes sacredcharacter ofcompassion,of ofsins. therepentance ofsinnersand oftheforgiveness advocating Hurwitz'sargumentis not logicaland not veryconvincing. He did not convincehis contemporary E. Atlas,who,in a reviewoftherelevantissue ofHashaharpublishedthefollowing year(1886) in therivaljournalHa'asij, tookHurwitzto taskon hisclaim.In similarly poeticHebrewhe wrote: Whilewe cannotdenythatthe Talmudim of are benton thebetterment thedaughters ofIsrael,and on securingtheirsafetyevenafterthedeath of theirhusbands,and thattheydecreedthe Ketubbah, with together othersuchdecreesas foundin theTalmud,we do notfindRabbiAkiva particularly excellingin thisabovehis colleagues.Indeed,werewe to go one stepfurther, we wouldhave to decidethatit is the exactopposite, and thatall RabbiAkiva'srulingsdemonstrate the principlethatuone showsno mercyin (administering) judgement."9 Atlas,who was an anti-Zionist, thoughhe was not averseto modernity and was no less an apologistforJudaismthanHurwitz,also claimedthat thetalmudicrabbiswereactingin women'sbestinterest. However,he had no vestedinterest in portraying Akivaas a greatfeminist and was thusable to point out Hurwitz'srhetoricalbent and logical shortcomings. As he out with to the sotah text: rightly pointed regard Rabbi Akiva'sopinionon jealousy... thatit is obligatory and notjust ... showsonlyone ofhis principles ofTorahexegesis,which permissible is that thingsstated in the Torah, even when not formulatedas are also obligatory.10 injunctions, 18 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchoolsofRabbiAkivaandRabbiIshmaelon Women ofHurwitz's workwas verysound.Akiva,it seems,could Atlas'scriticism be a good role modelformanythingsbut probablynot forlegislationon Hurwitzin behalfofwomen.Andyetthehistorical questionthatinterested the 1880s stillremains:What was Rabbi Akiva'slegal positionvis a vis women? In the followinglines I will tryto answerthis question in accordancewiththeanalyticaltoolsofthe1990s.The methodsI willuse to fromhis. However,I answerHurwitz'squestionare completelydifferent willpickup on Atlas'slastpointthattheschoolsofRabbiAkivaand Rabbi Thiswillnotbe in theirexegeticalapproachto scripture. Ishmaeldiffered RabbiIshmael.In fact,it RabbiAkivaor denigrating an essayexonerating willtakelittleaccountof thesehistoricalfiguresand insteadconcentrate on how the editorialactivityin rabbinicliteratureinfluencedwomen's position.RabbiAkivaand RabbiIshmaelwillbe discussedonlybecauseof therolesassignedto themin theeditorialprocess. TheHalakhicMidrashim Thisstudywilldiscussthewaywomen'slegalpositionis expoundedin the on the Pentateuch the tannaiticlegal commentaries halakhicmidrashim, withtheMishnah. in in composed Hebrew, Palestine,contemporaneously the ofthesetwotypesoflegalcompilation, The simultaneous composition and the Mishnah,indicatesthat therewere two conflicting midrashim opinionsin thetannaiticperiodabouthowJewishlaw shouldbe derived. One heldthatwhatis foundin theBibleshouldbe reinforced byreference Sinai11 as the Oral at down handed to custom,whichwas separately Torah.12The otherassumedthatall of Jewishlaw was embodiedin the writtenTorah handed down at Sinai.13Thus, new and unattestedlaws could also be derivedfromthe biblicaltext,when expoundedcorrectly. The firstapproach producedthe Mishnah; the second producedthe halakhicmidrashim. The Mishnah's central position in Judaism,in contrastto the indicatesthatthe firstapproach of the halakhicmidrashim, insignificance won the day.The Mishnahis stillstudiedtodayas a viable code of law, is of an antiquariancharacter. whilethe studyof the halakhicmidrashim One must remember,however,that the compositionof the halakhic ofJewishlaw,and a studyoftheir did playa rolein thehistory midrashim 19 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TalHan contentsis thus not merelyan intellectualexercise.It can also tell us aboutthewayJewishlaw came to be whatit is. Let me, then, something some of the generalresultsof the inquiryinto the begin by surveying natureand character ofthehalakhicmidrashim. One of the excitingdevelopmentsin nineteenthand earlytwentiethof two on thehalakhicmidrashim is theidentification century scholarship on exegeticalschools,each of whichproducedits own legal commentary came the Torah.14Earlyscholarswho scrutinized the halakhicmidrashim to the conclusionthat one of these schools followedthe exegetical approachassignedin theBabylonianTalmudto Rabbi Ishmael- namely, If rulingsand decisions thattheTorahspeaksin plainhumanlanguage.15 notexplicitly foundin thetextare to be extrapolated fromit,thisshould be done bywayoflogicalinferences The natureofthesemidot or midot.16 need notdetainus, sincetheyplayno rolein oursubsequentinquiry.The second school followsthe approachusuallyassignedto Rabbi Akiva namely,thatall seeminglyunnecessaryadditionsand omissionsin the text,such as extra"and"sand uthe"s(in whichbiblicalHebrewabounds), are thereto add nuances thatare not spelled out in the text(e.g., BT Hagigah12a).17The natureof thoseextranuancesis also not absolutely essentialto the characterof the studyat hand.AlthoughI willalso point out competingexegeticalstrategiesemployedby both schools in their pursuitof gender-specific legislation,the midotand the superfluous do notcomeintoplayin theirdifferent prefixes approachesto thisissue. Scholars of the halakhicmidrashim initiallydividedthe extantfour intotwocategories. The Mekhilta compositions belongingto thisliterature derabbiIshmaelon the Book of Exodus and the Sifreon Numberswere assignedto the schoolof Rabbi Ishmael,whiletheSifraon Leviticusand the Sifreon Deuteronomywere assignedto the school of Rabbi Akiva. of fragments fromlost halakhicmidrashim in the However,the discovery CairoGenizahled scholarsto concludethateach oftheschoolsmusthave composed an entire commentaryon the four legal books of the Pentateuch,but some of these compositionssubsequentlywere lost.18 fromthe newlyrecovered Thus, laterscholarsattemptedto reconstruct the MekhiltaderabbiShimeonbar Yohai and Sifrezuta,Rabbi fragments Akiva'smidrashim on Exodus19and Numbers,20 An attempt to respectively. reconstruct a lost midrashof Rabbi Ishmael,the Mekhiltaon Deuteronomy,is nowunderway.21 20 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchoolsofRabbiAkivaandRabbiIshmaelon Women halakhahhave been The conclusionsof the earlyresearchon midreshei bothreinforced and challengedby contemporary scholars,who maintain to the schoolof RabbiAkivaand the thatassigningone set of midrashim otherto thatof Rabbi Ishmaelis rathernaive.22Theydo, however,agree and exegeticaltechniquesused by one set of that the terminology fromthoseused bytheother,and thus, midrashim are decidedlydifferent division. forthesakeofclarity, theystilluse theAkiva-Ishmael I have engagedin this rathercomplexdescriptionof the midrashim lines,I willanalyzetheapproachoftheseschools because,in thefollowing to thelegalpositionofwomen.In so doing,I willmakeuse ofsome ofthe in the differences madebyscholarsaboutthemethodological observations approachesofthetwoschools,usingtheterms"inclusion"and "exclusion" tools of analysis.I willthenattemptto place myconclusions as primary within the frameworkof the editorial activityassociated with the and its overallapproachto the question of tannaiticliterature production ofwomen'sstatuswithinrabbinicJudaism. aboutthe to makea statement it is important BeforeI proceed,however, value.Untilthe textsavailableto thescholarand theirhistorical midrashic had been produced. 1930s,threecriticaleditionsof halakhicmidrashim Ishmaelon Exodus, derabbi Two, the Sifreon Numbersand the Mekhilta wereassignedbyearlier Boththesecomposition wereeditedbyHorovitz.23 Finkelstein Louis Ishmael. scholarsto theschoolofRabbi produced Later, a similareditionof theSifreon Deuteronomy,24 assignedto RabbiAkiva. These scholarlyworkshave since come undercriticismbecause of their textualapproach.Theireditorsfailedto choosea goodmanuscript, publish in the critical variants textual refer to then text and main it as the apparatus.Instead,Horovitzpublishedthe textof the printededitionsas his main text.Finkelsteinpublishedan eclectictext,choosingin each versionthathe deemedsuperiorto the restand instanceone manuscript the it as body of the text,while commentingon textual transcribing The main criticismvoiced against these variantsin the footnotes.25 approachesis thattheyproducemoderntextsthatneverexistedin the past.When Finkelsteinundertookin the 1970s and 1980s to producea criticaledition of the last remaininghalakhic midrash,the Sifra on Leviticus,he took these criticismsinto account.The task consequently thathe nevercompletedit.26 provedso horrendous Scholarshave been warningus eversince to use the criticaleditionsof 21 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TalHan these midrashim withutmostcare, on the assumptionthatthe textsin thembear onlya smallresemblanceto the originalworkson whichthey arebased.27Suchwarnings shouldnoteasilybe dismissed.Myjustification If forusingtheold editionsofthemidrashim, however,is methodological. we assumethatthehalakhicmidrashim had someoriginalshape,whichthe editionsnow in use distorted, and if we likewiseassume thattheywere composed by two differentschools of interpretation (whoevertheir founderswere),thenwe mayalso assumethatthe difference in approach betweenthe schools was consistent.If one school used one exegetical deviceand theotherdid not,thentheuse ofthatdevicein a composition or an interpolation. SinceI assignedto itsrivalschoolcouldbe a distortion wishto pointout the consistentuse of a certainexegeticaltechniqueby each of the schools,I willtreatthe exceptionsas possibleinterpolations, while assuming that the consistentpatternrepresentsthe original In orderto makesense of thisrathercomplexprinciple, I composition.28 willnowmoveon to demonstrate myclaim. ThePremiseofthisStudy I begin this discussionwitha textfromthe Sifreon Numbers(Hukat thepericopebegins 124):29As is commonin theseexegeticalcompilations, witha biblicalpassage,followedby an exegesisbased on the principles adoptedbytheexegeticalschoolthatcomposedthetext. "Thena man (ish)whois clean(tahor)shallcollect[theashesofthecow and depositthemoutsidethecampin a cleanplace]"(Num. 19:9).This means thatthe collectionof the ashes is permitted to all persons(kol "whois adam) ... does thismean thatit excludeswomen?It is written: clean" - includingwomen,accordingto Rabbi Ishmael.Rabbi Akiva says:"a man ... shallcollect"- excludingwomen. The discussionconcernstheburningoftheredheiferin orderto produce purifying water,as describedin Num. 19. Threepersonsare involvedin thisprocedure:the highpriest,anotherpriestwho burnsthe cow and a thirdpersonwhocollectstheashes.All ofthemhaveto be ritually purein orderto takepartin theprocedure, and all emergefromit ritually defiled. 22 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Schools ofRabbi Akiva and Rabbi Ishmael on Women thatthe firsttwopeople involvedin the action The Bible statesexplicitly are priests,and hencetheyare men.But whataboutthethirdperson,the one who collectsthe ashes? Does that personhave to be male? It is to note the contrasting exegeticalapproachesto the question interesting assignedin this textto the heads of the two exegeticalschools.Rabbi Ishmaelmaintainsthatsince the "man"is describedonlyas "clean,"the wordis meantin a generalsense and does not excludewomen.Rabbi "man"as indicating maleness,thusexcluding interprets Akiva,in contrast, women. The two schools, interpreting exactlythe same verse, reach diametrically opposingconclusions.30 DuringtheperiodwhenRabbiIshmaeland RabbiAkivawereactive,the ritualof the red heiferwas obsolete.The issue theydiscusshere is thus and has no directbearingon women'ssocialposition.Neverhypothetical takenbyeach oftheserabbis' theless,it pointsout theexegeticaldirection schools.Rabbi Ishmael'sapproachis inclusivein its approachto women, while Rabbi Akiva's approach is exclusive.A reviewof the halakhic midrashim traditionally assignedto theseschoolsrevealsthatthisexample is notaccidental.In orderto demonstrate this,I willnow analyzegenderone assignedto theschoolof in two halakhic material midrashim, specific Rabbi Akiva (SifreDeuteronomy)and the otherto the school of Rabbi Ishmael(SifreNumbers).Lack ofspacedoes notallowan analysisofall the evidencefromother butI willalso bringsupporting relevantcompositions, thata similar(if somewhat whichwill demonstrate halakhicmidrashim, them. for be made could also less consistent) argument SifreDeuteronomy raisethe questionofwhetherthe Fifteenpericopaein SifreDeuteronomy biblicalversesto whichtheyreferapplyto men and womenalike,and in Thus, twelvecases the answerprovidedby the compilationis exclusive.31 the verse "You will set a kingoveryou" (Deut. forexample,regarding 17:14),the Sifrestates:"a king,not a queen" (SifreDeut. 157).32On the verse"you shall teach themto yoursons" (Deut. 11:19), the Sifrecomments:"Your sons, not yourdaughters"(SifreDeut. 46).33To be sure, some of these exclusivedecisionsare completelylogical. For example, theverse:"Threetimesa yearshallall yourmales see myface" regarding 23 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TalHan (Deut. 16:16),theSifrecomments:'"Males' excludeswomen"(SifreDeut. 34 For examtheexclusionis quitearbitrary. 143). In othercases,however, that"A ple,in SifreDeut. 122we learn,withno appositebiblicalreference, Hebrewslaveservestheson (ofhisdead master)butnotthedaughter."35 about not statements Exclusionand inclusionare exegeticalstrategies, in or in The exclusions deterioration women's improvement position. thesetextsdo notalwaysplace womenin a weakerpositionthanmen.For theverse"AnAmmonite(Amoni)ora Moabite(Mo'avi) example,regarding shall not enter the congregationof the Lord" (Deut. 23:4), Sifre Deuteronomy(249) states:"[Thisrefersto] an Ammonitemale (Anioni), notan Ammonitefemale(Amonit), a Moabitemale (Mo'avi),nota Moabite If the biblicalverseexcludestheAmmonitesand the female(Mo'avit)."36 MoabitesfromjoiningtheJewishpeople,thismidrash, usingtheexclusion thatthe Ammoniteand Moabitewomen,maintaining technique,privileges In does not refer to them. later this was ruling midrash, ruling employedin orderto clear King David of his seeminglytaintedMoabite genealogy Ruth(Ruth4:13-17).37However,in thisearliestofrulingson the through It is issue,David's genealogydoes notseem to havebeen a consideration. rathertheexegeticalstrategy ofexclusionthatis beingputintopractice. SifreNumbers In contrast toSifreDeuteronomy, whichis usuallyassignedto theschoolof RabbiAkiva,theSifreon Numbersis traditionally assignedto theschoolof Rabbi Ishmael.It is thusinstructive to note thatthe statisticsof gender inclusionor exclusionin thiscompilation are reversed. Thisbookcontains twelvegendertraditions, ten of whichare inclusive,while onlytwo are exclusive.38 Thus,forexample,we learnthatthewords"so shallyoubless thesonsofIsrael"in Num.6:23 refernotonlyto thesonsbutto thedaughtersas well(SifreNum. 39).39Similarly, "He whosacrifices" an (hamakriv) in 15:4 and "theyshallbe forgiven" in 15:25referto bothwomen offering and men(SifreNum. 111).40 not in anywaysignifying an Again,inclusionis an exegeticalstrategy, to attempt improvetherealpositionofwomen.It can,in fact,workagainst them.Here is a primeexample.Num. 5:6 reads:"A man or a womanwho shallcommitanyofthesinsofhumanity to transgress againsttheLord...." 24 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchoolsofRabbiAkivaandRabbiIshmaelon Women mentionsbothmen and Thisverseis clearlyinclusive,sinceit specifically women.The Sifreon Numberscommentson this: RabbiJosiahsays:whyis "A man or a woman"mentioned?... In order to makemen and womenequal in all punishments [mentioned in] the Torah. in the Thus,accordingto theschoolofRabbiIshmael,thereis no disparity This for their men women to and meted out transgressions. punishments "That on in thebook.On thebiblicalverse: further principleis reinforced man shall bear his sin" (Num. 9:13), the midrashcomments:"thisalso this passage has an includeswomen" {SifreNum. 70).41 Interestingly, appendixto it: "RabbiShimeonbar Yohai says:That man shall bear his sin' (Num. 9:13) - thisexcludeswomen."Rabbi Shimeonbar Yohai was famedas one ofRabbiAkiva'smostardentdisciples.Thus,theexclusionist school of Rabbi Akiva did not accept the concept of equality in metedout to men and women.A specificexampleofthiscan punishment On the midrashfromSifreDeuteronomy. in a found be gender-exclusionist verse"If a man was guiltyof a sin punishableby deathand you hanghis body"(Deut. 21:23),themidrashstates:"Themanis hanged;thewomanis not"(#/h?Deut.221).42 In theMekhiltaderabbiIshmael,anotherhalakhicmidrashtraditionally assignedto the school of Rabbi Ishmael, the principleof equalityin Forexample: reinforced. is further punishment "Ifmenfightone another[andone smitesanotherwitha stone]..." (Ex. 21:18).Does thisincludeonlymen?Does italso includewomen?So did Rabbi Ishmael expound:since all the damagesin the Torah are not made explicit,but one is [namelyNum. 9:13], and therewomenare made equal to men,so, too,I concludethatwomenare made equal to menforall damagesmentionedin theTorah.43 Thus, accordingto Rabbi Ishmael (here named explicitly)and his in the sorts of there are no gender differences inclusioniststrategy, to whichwomenand men are subjectwhentheybreakthe punishments law. This does not spell privilegeor preference.It does not signify createa systemofequalitybeforethelaw. It does,however, improvement. nottheonly The gender-inclusive approachofSifreNumbersis certainly claim can occasionally exegeticaltechniqueavailablefortheseverses.This 25 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TalHan be reinforced bya comparisonofSifreNumberswiththeextantfragments thesame ofSifrezuta,attributed to theschoolofRabbiAkiva,interpreting verses.Thus,on the verse,"Speakto the sons of Israel ... and theyshall make unto themselvesfringes"(Num. 15:38), Sifre Numbers (115) comments:"Womenare includedin thisruling... RabbiShimeonexempts women from [donning] fringes, because it is a time-bound commandment."44 As statedabove,RabbiShimeon(barYohai) is a typical he opposes of the schoolof RabbiAkiva.Not surprisingly, representative the inclusionistapproachof the IshmaeliteSifreto Numbers.Comparing SifreNumbersto SifrezutashowsthattheAkivanschoolin generaldid not considerthisverserelevantto thegenderissue.Sifrezutacommentson it: "The sons of Israel are obligatedto don fringes.The gentilesare not hereis thatthewords"sonsof The assumption obligatedto don fringes."45 Israel"need notbe interpreted to theexclusionor inclusionof as referring could as well be as referring to theinclusion women;they interpreted just or,morelikely,theexclusionofgentiles. withreference to theverse,"Everything thatis devoted(herem) Similarly, in Israelshallbe Yours"(Num. 18:14),SifreNumbersinquires,"Does this mean onlywhatis devotedin Israel?How do I knowthatit includesthe devotionsof proselytes, womenand slaves?"46 This compositionassumes thatthe verseis inclusiveand refersto women,slavesand proselytes as well as male Israelites.Sifrezutainterprets the versedifferently. It reads: thatis devotedin Israelshallbe Yours.'Does thismean only "'Everything whatis devotedin Israel?How do I knowthatit includesthedevotionsof Here again,whatthe schoolof Rabbi Ishmaelinterpreted as gentiles?"47 women and the school of Rabbi Akiva concerning (and proselytes slaves), as concerning interprets gentiles.Thesetwoexamples,and others,indicate that it was the exegete'sown choice whetherto interpret the verse as or not,sincetherewas nothingin theverseitselfto warrant gender-laden suchan interpretation. Intermediate Conclusions Whatwe haveseen up to nowis thattheschoolsofRabbiAkivaand Rabbi Ishmaelhad a prioriopposingapproachesto thewaygenderis treatedin thebiblicaltext.The schoolofRabbiAkivaassumedat theoutsetthatthe 26 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchools ofRabbi Akiva and Rabbi Ishmael on Women biblicaltextexcludedwomenwhen theywere not mentionedexplicitly. assumedthatunlessotherThe schoolof Rabbi Ishmael,on the contrary, and legislation. wisestated,womenwereincludedin thebiblicalnarrative As we have seen,thisdoes notmean thatthelegislationof RabbiAkiva's school always worked against women. Sometimesexclusion brought withit,but on the whole it promotedinequalitybetweenmen privileges and women beforethe law. Similarly,the inclusiveapproachdid not butitdid,in general,meanexegeticalequality. alwaysspellimprovement, is Up to thispointwe havebeen concernedwithform.Content,however, A closerlook at the examplesprovidedabove, of no smallersignificance. and at othersthatI have not presented,displaysan interesting picture. RabbiAkiva'sexclusiveapproachseemsto be appliedin mattersof major to Jewishsociety,suchas Torahstudy("sons,notdaughters"), importance leadership("King,not queen") and inheritance(SifreDeut. 215).48The inclusiveapproachof the school of Rabbi Ishmael,on the otherhand, seemsto be appliedin secondarymatterssuch as the blessingof women has a wheninclusiveness withmen by the priests.Furthermore, together practicalside, it is onlyto includewomencriminalsin the punishments This last finding, men criminalssuffer. bytheway,was warmlyembraced rulingsin which,in one ofthethreeinclusionist byRabbiAkiva'smidrash, agreesthatthepenal systemappliesto womenas well SifreDeuteronomy, as men.49In fact,a soberview of the fieldrevealsthatthe conflicting ratherthana conflicting exegeticalapproachesproducea complementary fromall that is of women picture.Rabbi Akiva's midrashexcludes in Judaism.Rabbi Ishmael'smidrashincludesthemin all its importance hardships.How can we explainthisphenomenon?Shouldwe viewit as a betweenthe twocompetingschoolsto use everytechniquein conspiracy their power to oppress women? I think such a view is completely We needto lookforanotherexplanation. unfounded. rememberthatbiblicalexegesisin generaldid not produce must One new rulings.It was a techniquedevisedto extrapolatefromthe biblical thatwerealreadyin operation.Although textsJewishlaws and traditions techniques, theschoolsofRabbiAkivaand RabbiIshmaelused conflicting both were using them to uphold the same legal system.50The resultsshouldbe seen in this ratherthan contradictory complementary was possibleonlyon issuesthatwerenotabsolutely decided, light.Conflict I showedabove. as in theminordisagreements 27 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TalHan between Is it possible,then,to say anything at all about the difference thetwoschoolsin theirapproachto women?I thinkso. Withoutrecourse to theactualresultsofthisexegeticalapproach,we maynotethatwomen, fortheschoolofRabbiAkiva,in principle werenotincludedin thebiblical concept"Israel." For the school of Rabbi Ishmael theywere.This differenceis a cognitiveratherthan a practicalone. Does it also have any historical significance? HistoricalContext It seems fitting to open the discussionof the historicalcontextof our fromthe leadingscholarof halakhicmidrashim with a citation findings today,MenahemKahana. In a recentpublication,Kahana revealedthat foundin the archivesof the former inquiryinto manuscriptfragments Soviet Union has broughtto lightremainsof a halakhicmidrashon hitherto unknownto us. Thisnewmidrashderivesfromthe Deuteronomy schoolof RabbiAkivabutis notidenticalwiththeSifreon Deuteronomy, whichis a productofthesameschool.Kahana comments: The existenceofthreedifferent branchesofmidrashim fromtheschool ofRabbiAkiva,comparedto therelativehomogeneity oftheIshmaelite midrashim at ourdisposal,reflects the dominance oftheschool correctly of Rabbi Akivaat the end of the tannaiticperiod.This dominanceis expressedbothin theeditingoftheMishnah,whichfollowstheschool ofRabbiAkiva,and in theprimary positionhis approachmaintainedin thewritings oftheAmoraim.51 Kahana's statementplaces the studyof the halakhic midrashim in a historicalcontext.In the rivalry betweenthe Mishnahand the halakhic theMishnahwon theday.In therivalry betweentheschoolof midrashim, RabbiAkivaand the schoolof Rabbi Ishmael,the schoolof RabbiAkiva won the day.We mayalso assumethatin the exegeticaldisputeoverthe exclusionor inclusionof women,the Akivanvictoryspeltthe demiseof theinclusiveapproach.Is therea historical contextforthisdevelopment? Severalyearsago, I publishedan articlein whichI claimedthatthe Phariseemovement was opento womenand encouragedtheirsupportand 28 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchoolsofRabbiAkivaandRabbiIshmaelon Women was not manifestedin legislative but this encouragement participation, terms.52JudithHauptman, however,has shown that the canonical theTosefta, counterpart, Mishnah,whencomparedwithitsnon-canonical of a move the curtailment indications toward and marked displays Since the Mishnahis the ultimatelegal of women'srights.53 restriction statementof the heirsof the Pharisees,we need to explainthismove.I claim that the disparityis temporal.Early Pharisaism,as a sectarian The rabbinicmovement, movement,encouragedwomen'sparticipation. the heir to the Pharisees,aspiredto nationalleadershipand could no women'smovementand Restricting longerkeep up a sectarianlifestyle. is an aspectofthemovefromsectto establishment. rights in an was also manifested to establishment The movefromsectarianism rabbinic literThis is demonstrated throughout attemptto close ranks.54 ature,butit is mostclearlyevidentin thedecisionin favoroftheschoolof BeitHillel,againsttheentirecorpusof Beit Shammairulings.In a recent I have shownthatBeit Shammai,on thewhole,showeda far publication, in women's humanityand legal rightsthan did Beit interest greater Hillel.55The decisionto discardall the rulingsof Beit Shammaien bloc, the good fromthe bad, meantthatall of the moreunderwithoutsifting standinglegislationof the Shammaiteson issues of womenwas dumped ofwomen'srights. witheverything else,leadingto a restriction together Withthenewevidenceshownhere,we can nowpointto a moveduring thefirstand secondcenturiesCE awayfromtheideas oftheequalityand of women. The benevolentrulingsof Beit Shammai were partnership remainedin decisionsofthetannaim discarded.The moreaccommodating The Mishnah. the into theToseftaand failedto makeit Mishnah,in fact, was editedin lightof Rabbi Akiva'sapproach,which,as we have seen above,viewedexclusionas thepropertoolfordealingwiththepositionof ofhisschooldemonstrate. as thehalakhicmidrashim womenin society, contestfor supremacyin the hint that to seems Rabbinicliterature rabbiniccircleswas a toughone. Therewere manycasualtiesalong the way:BeitShammai,RabbiIshmaeland others.RabbiAkivaand his school won the day.That is whyRabbi Akivais eulogizedin the talmudim (and laterby Hurwitzand others),and has become such a hero. People told not because he was reallya better storiesabouthim in latergenerations, man than Rabbi Ishmael (for example),but because he was a more one. Thathis halakhicapproachto womenwon thedaywas bad powerful 29 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Tallian news forwomen,not because the Amoraim,who told marvelousstories aboutRabbiAkiva,adoptedhis approach,56 but because theyadoptedhis Mishnah.The Mishnah'scentralpositionin Judaismand Jewishlegal historyis undeniableand beyonddispute.It is largelyresponsiblefor women'spositionin Jewishsocietyeversince. An appealto thetextoftheMishnahitselfprovidesan appropriate ending to thispaper.In one ofitsrareaggadicmoments, theMishnahrelates: Therewas thecase ofone whovowedto enjoyno benefitfromhis niece herintothehouseofRabbi (i.e.,he refusedto marry her).Theybrought Ishmael and beautifiedher. Said Rabbi Ishmaelto him: My son, did thisone? He said to him:No. And Rabbi Ishmael youvowconcerning annulledhis vow[so thattheman could now marryhis niece].At that hourRabbiIshmaelwept,saying:"Thedaughters ofIsraelarebeautiful, butpoverty makesthemugly."WhenRabbiIshmaeldied,thedaughters of Israel would mournhim and say: 'Daughtersof Israel,weep for RabbiIshmael.'"(MishnahNedarim9:11) These lastwords,as theMishnahis quickto note,are a paraphraseofthe biblicaldirgeforKing Saul by the daughtersof Israel (2 Sam. 1:24). It seemsto me symbolicthatRabbi Ishmaelis reputedto have weptforthe fate of the daughtersof Israel. Likewise,it is not surprising that the daughtersof Israelweptforhim.Weepingforhis failure,theywerealso weepingforthemselves. Notes: 1. I have discussedthe differences betweentheseapproachesin Tal lian and J. Price,"SevenProblemsin Josephus'BellumJudaicum? JQR,84 (1993/4),p. 207. 2. S.I. Hurwitz, "R. Akivaumishpetei ha'ishutbeYisrael,"Hashahar,12 (1885),pp. 377-384,423-433. 3. Ibid.,p. 383. 4. For a naivebiography of Rabbi Akiva,takingtheselegendary as presentations reliablehistoricalinformation, see Louis Finkelstein, Aqiba: Scholar,Saint and Martyr (NewYork,1936). 5. See, e.g.,I.H. Weiss,Dor dorvedorshav, 2 (Vilna,1901),p. 114; and see also the discussionand refutation of this premisein M. Kahana, "The Importanceof 30 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchoolsofRabbiAkivaandRabbiIshmaelon Women Mekhilta,"Tarbiz, Dwellingin the Land of IsraelAccordingto the Deuteronomy 62 (1993),pp. 501-513(in Hebrew),especiallypp. 511-513. 6. This issue was tackledextensively by J. Neusner.See, e.g., his In Searchof The the Attributed Talmudic Problem of Saying(BrownJudaicStudies70, Biography: and and Ancient Judaismand Contemidem,Reading Believing: Chico,CA, 1984); (BrownJudaicStudies113,Atlanta,1986). poraryGullibility 7. Thatthiswas indeedtheviewoftheschoolofRabbiIshmaelis demonstrated by a textfoundin SifreDeuteronomy118 (ed. Finkelstein, p. 251) but ascribedto to RabbiYoshaya,a typicalIshmaelite,whomaintainsthata husbandis permitted from the thistextderives forego(limhol)his jealousy.Accordingto Finkelstein, producedbytheschoolof Rabbi Ishmael;see parallelMekhiltaon Deuteronomy, his "Prolegomenato an Editionof the Sifreon Deuteronomy," Proceedings ofthe 32. Jewish 3 American Research, (1932) p. for Academy 8. Ibid.,p. 383-384. 9. E. Atlas,Ha'asiJ2 (1886),p. 366. 10.Ibid. fromtheTorahis 11. The idea thatpreceptswerehandeddownin Sinai separately Peah Mishnah see in the found 2:6; Eduyot8:7; Yadaim4:3. The Mishnah, already In ToseftaSukkah3:1a precept miSinai. used thereis halakhahleMoshe expression to one whichappearsclearlyin Bible. contrasted ofthissortis directly in se12. The expression"orallaw {torahshebe'alpeh)" whichappearsfrequently in section an in tannaitic twice aggadic literature, appearsonly condaryliterature, ofSifreDeuteronomy 2:8). p. 351),and in thzSifra(Behukotai, (ed. Finkelstein, 13. On thisproblemsee, e.g.,E.E. Urbach,"The Derashaas a Basis oftheHalakha and theProblemoftheSoferim," Tarbiz,27 (1958) pp. 166-182(Hebrew). Zur 14. The initialresearchintothisissue is foundin theworkof D. Hoffmann, this of A Midraschim halachischen in die topic survey (1986-1988). good Einleitung is foundin M. D. Herr,Encyclopedia Judaica,11 (Jerusalem1971),s.v."Midreshei halakhah,"cols. 1521-1523. 15. FirstvoicedinSifreNum. 112 (ed. Horovitz, p. 121). midotofRabbiIshmaelin Sifra,1:1 (ed. Weiss, 16. See thebaraitaon thethirteen pp. la-3a). 17. For a good surveyof this issue see L. Jacobs,Encyclopedia Judaica,8 pp. 366-371. 1971),s.v."Hermeneutics," (Jerusalem, 18. Herr,"MidresheiHalakhah"(above,note14). d'RabbiSim'onb. Jochai(Jerusalem, 19. J.N.Epstein,Mekhilta 1955;Hebrew). Zutta Números ad 20.. H.S. Horovitz, (Leipzig,1917) 227-336 adjectoSiphre Siphre (Hebrew). Tarbiz54 (1985) oftheMekiltaon Deuteronomy," 21. M. Kahana "NewFragments Ekev and Mekilta the of "Citations 485-551 Deuteronomy idem, (Hebrew); pp. 31 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Tal Han Ha'azinu" Tarbiz,56 (1987), pp. 19-60 (Hebrew);idem, "Pages of the DeuteronomyMekhiltaon Ha'azinu and WezotHa-berakha"Tarbiz,57 (1988), pp. 165-202(Hebrew);and idem,"TheImportance" (above,note5). 22. C. AlbeckIntroduction to theTalmudBabliand Yerushalmi (Tel Aviv,1969),pp. 130-133 (Hebrew);see also, fromanotherangle,G.G. Portón,The Traditions of RabbiIshmael,4 (Leiden, 1982), pp. 66-68. Scholarsalso now believethatthere were probablymore than two sets of tannaiticmidrashiccompositionson the Pentateuch;see M. Kahana, "Citationsfroma New Tannaitic Midrash on and theirRelationshipto theSifreZuta,"Proceedings Deuteronomy oftheEleventh WorldCongress Studies, III/l (Jerusalem, 1994)pp. 23-31 (Hebrew). ofJewish 23. H.S. Horovitz,(completedby I.A. Rabin),Mechiltad'RabbiIsmael(Frankfurt a/M, 1931; Hebrew).I am aware of the othercriticaleditionof thisbook, by butitsuffers fromthesameills.And see also hisSiphread Números. Lauterbach, 24. L Finkelstein, ad Siphre Deuteronomium (Berlin1939;Hebrew). 25. On Finkelstein's editionof theSifresee J.N.Epstein,"Finkelstein, L., Siphre zu Deuteronomium," see, Tarbiz,8 (1937),pp. 375-392 (Hebrew);on theMekhilta M. Kahana, "The CriticalEditionsofMekiltaDe-RabbiIshmaelin morerecently, the Lightof the Genizah Fragments," Tarbiz,55 (1986), pp. 489-524 (Hebrew), and particularly 490-493. pp. 26. L. Finkelstein, Sifraon Leviticus(New York,1989), 4 vols. (Hebrew).These volumescoveronlythefirsttwosectionsofthemidrash. 27. Kahana, "Citations"(above,note22), p. 30: "In viewof thepicturepresented here we should more fullyinternalizehow small and fragmentary is our whichwas much broaderand richerthan knowledgeof the tannaiticliterature, thatwhichwe havebeforeus. Thuswe mustbe particularly carefulwhenwe come to absolute conclusionsbased on the partialevidencewe have at hand" (my - TI). See also hisManuscripts translation AnAnnotated oftheHalakhicMidrashim: 15-16 Catalogue(Jerusalem, 1995)pp. (Hebrew). 28. I may also add thatin none of the commentsI have read on the halakhic midrashim haveanyofthepassagesI willbe discussing been producedas examples of unreliableor distortedtexts.Theyappearin all of the reliablemss.,and the in theirwordingareminor. variations 29. Ed. Horowitz, p. 157. 30. Cf.M. Chernick, "àéù as Man and Adultin theHalakhicMidrashim," JQR,73 (1983),pp. 254-280.Chernickreachesdiametrically opposingconclusionsto mine on thisissue,based on a different formulation of the questionsand a different countingsystem. 31. SifreDeut, 13, 19, 84, 93, 121, 143, 149, 157 (twice),190,216, 218, 221, 248, 253. The threethatareinclusiveare 84, 148 and 190. 32. Ed. Finkelstein, p. 208. 32 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TheSchoolsofRabbiAkivaandRabbiIshmaelon Women 33. Ed. Finkelstein, p. 104. It has been claimedthat§§ 1-54 ofSifreDeuteronomy derivefromthe schoolof Rabbi Ishmael;see, e.g.,J.N.Epstein,Prolegomena ad Uñeras Tannaiticas (Jerusalem,1957) pp. 625-630 (Hebrew);A Goldberg,"The School of Rabbi Akiba and the School of Rabbi Ishmaelin SifreDeuteronomy Pericopes1-54," Te'uda,3 (1983) pp. 9-16 (Hebrew).However,in none of the to as ofspecialinterest to theschool sectionreferred discussionsis thisparticular of ofRabbiIshmael.It maybe Akivan,sinceit is incorporated intoa composition thisschool. 34. Ed. Finkelstein, p. 196. 35. Ed. Finkelstein, p. 181. 36. Ed. Finkelstein, p. 277. 31.BTYevamotl6b. 38. SifreNumbers2, 4, 39, 70, 107 (twice),112 (twice),115,116,117,124.The two thatareexclusiveare 116 and thesecondexamplein 112. 39. Ed. Horovitz, p. 43 40. Ed. Horovitz, p. 118. 41. Ed. Horovitz, p. 67. dissidentin rabbinic 42. Ed. Finkelstein,p. 253. Rabbi Eliezer,a well-known women are also hanged, that literature,disputesthis statementand claims theprecedentofthewomenin Ashkelon.See myarticle,"A Witch-Hunt bringing A Cityon theSeashore(Tel Aviv,2000) in Ashkelon,"in A Sasson et al.,Ashkelon: 57-68 pp. (Hebrew). derabbi 43. Mekhilta p. 269. Ishmael,ed. Horovitz-Rabin, to a NewEditionofthe 44. Ed. Horovitz,p. 124. On thisM. Kahana {Prolegomena 1982] 201 [Hebrew])states:"SometimestheSifreon [Jerusalem Sifreon Numbers Numbers has preservedopinions reflectingthe ancient halakhah, which in theparallels."In footnoten. 1 thelaterhalakhahwhichis reflected contradicts fromthe commandments of women the he adds: "Thisindicatesthat exemption is onlytheopinionof Rabbi Shimeon... in oppositionto the thatare time-bound opinionof the othersages who do not acceptthisprinciple.On the otherhand, 1:7 one learnsthatthisprinciplewas alreadyacceptableto all" frommQiddushin translation TI). (my 45. Ed. Horovitz, p. 288. 46. SifreNum. 117,ed. Horovitz, p. 137. 47.. Ed. Horovitz, p. 295. 48. Ed. Finkelstein, p. 249. ed. 49. SifreDeut. 190, Finkelstein, p. 230. Furtherdownin thesamepassage,Sifre likemen,they makesclearthatalthoughwomensuffer punishment Deuteronomy cannot,unlikemen,serveas witnesses. trueforthe mostfamousexampleof theirdiscussion,on 50. This is particularly 33 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TalIlan the fateof a priest'smarrieddaughterwho is accused of fornication (bSanhedrin the betrothed 51b). Rabbi Akivasays she shouldbe burnt,like her counterpart, because theversestates"anda priest'sdaughterwho beginsto priest'sdaughter, In his opinionthe "and" at the beginningof the verserefersto both fornicate." betrothedand marrieddaughters.Rabbi Ishmael answershim: "because you expound'and' we shouldburnthisone?"This could be used as a perfecttextfor RabbiIshmaePsmorehumaneapproachto women.RabbiIshmael,however, does notthinkthata marriedpriest'sdaughtershouldgetoffscot-free. A close reading of the talmudictextrevealsthathe believesthatthisdaughtershouldbe stoned, likeotherfornicators (ibid.,51a). 51. Kahana, "Citations,"p. 30 (my translation). The dominanceof the Akivan midrashim is demonstrated in manyways.For example,thesagesoftheschoolof Rabbi Akiva,who play a majorrole in the Akivanmidrashim, are the foremost exponentsof the Mishnah,whilethe sages of the schoolof Rabbi Ishmael,who are the main exponentsof the Ishmael midrashim, hardlyever featurein the Mishnah.This has led one scholarto claimthattheMekhiltaderabbiIshmaelis a medievalpseudoepigraphic composition;see B.-Z. Wacholder,"The Date of the Mekiltade-RabbiIshmael,"HUCA,39 (1968), pp. 117-144; on the sages' names see particularly pp. 126-134.For theresponseof MenahemKahana see "Critical Editions"(above,note25), pp. 515-520. 52. Tal lian, Integrating WomenintoSecondTempleHistory (Tubingen,1999),pp. 11-42. 53. JudithHauptman,"MishnahGittin as a PietistDocument,"Proceedings ofthe TenthWorldCongress ofJewish Studies, C/l (Jerusalem, 1990),pp. 23-30 (Hebrew); in theMishnah,"Tikkun, eadem,"MaternalDissent:Womenand Procreation 6/6 (1991), pp. 80-81, 94-95; eadem, "Women's VoluntaryPerformanceof Commandments fromWhichTheyare Exempt,"Proceedings World oftheEleventh Jewish Congress of Studies,C/l (Jerusalem,1994) pp. 161-168 (Hebrew);eadem, "Womenin TractatePesahim,"in Daniel Boyarínet al.,Ataralehaim:Studiesinthe TalmudandMedievalRabbinicLiterature (Jerusalem 2000),pp. 63-78 (Hebrew). 54. See Shaye Cohen, "The Significanceof Yavneh: Pharisees,Rabbis,and the End of JewishSectarianism," HUCA,55 (1984), pp. 27-53. Cohen uses different to describethe move, but essentiallyhe means the same thing: terminology disputesweretoleratedinsidethemovement. Theywerecitedbutnotupheld,and halakhicdecisionsweretaken. 55. Ilan,Integratine Women (above,note51), dd. 43-81. 56. Which theyprobablydid not; see the main thesis in JudithHauptman, theRabbis:A Woman'sVoice(Boulder,CO, 1997). Rereading 34 This content downloaded from 192.114.7.2 on Mon, 9 Sep 2013 04:46:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions