sion. Shaye Cohen, a historian who accepts her reading of the evidence, has nevertheless argued (1980, 2728) that since the inscriptions come from the non-rabbinic communities of Crete, Thrace, Italy, and North Africa, they are not relevant for the history of that form of Judaism that achieved historical hegemonytalmudic Judaism. In contrast, Judith Plaskow contends that precisely the evidence for non-rabbinic forms of ancient Judaism "leads us to question rabbinic authority as the sole arbiter of authentic Judaism"; Plaskow argues that "texts may reflect the tensions within patriarchal culture, seeking to maintain a particular view of the world against social, political or religious change" (Plaskow 1990, 45). I do not intend to enter here into the theological questions involved, but it certainly seems relevant to me to emphasize that the readings done here bring those tensions home, as it were, locating them within the talmudic texts and thus the rabbinic discourse and power structure themselves. They certainly help to answer the questions that Brooten raises: "Could Jewish women actually have been scholars? Could they have had some say about the reading of the bible in the synagogue?" (Brooten 1982, 55).
|
The geographical irrelevance of the inscriptional data for rabbinic Judaism is disappointing, however, in another respect, as it does not help us evaluate the presented evidence for greater anxiety about learned women in the rabbinic community of Babylonia than Palestine. Does this represent more or less Torah-study by Babylonian women than their Palestinian sisters? But there is, perhaps, one piece of tantalizing evidence for the first possibility (i.e., that women studied more in Babylonia). In the very talmudic text that interprets the Mishna in Sota by claiming that the study of Torah does not give a woman any merit, the conclusion is that a woman's merit comes from "her taking her sons to study Torah and Mishna." But this passage could, as well, be translated "from teaching her sons Torah and Mishna"in fact, this is the literal, grammatical reading of the phrase. In order to teach, they obviously must have learned. 23 This would strongly suggest that the Babylonians' energetic denial of any merit for women in the study of Torah and, indeed, the erasure in the Babylonian Talmud of the Palestinian remarks on women studying are more a "wishful" prescriptive determination than a reflection of actual social conditions. We could then interpret the evident threat of the texts that
|
| | 23. That is, we have here causative forms of the verbs for "reading Bible" and "studying Mishna." This significant point was made to me by Milan Sprecher.
|
|
|