The midrash for this service
involves a discussion of jealousy, adultery and punishment. It is
not a very easy topic for a modern woman and a feminist to write about
and keep in perspective . It did give me lots of thought about
where we came from and how we got to "now". (National
Organization of Women)
The writings are about the implications and punishments relating
to the following statement and the repercussions involved. The
statement is:
IF ANY MAN'S WIFE SHOULD GO ASIDE FROM THE RIGHT PATH AND BECOME
SUSPECT IN THE EYES OF HER HUSBAND, OR IF ANY MAN'S WIFE SHOULD COMMIT
FOLLY'". The crime of infidelity threatened the social order of
the society and the priests felt it was necessary to remove even the
suspicion of marital unfaithfulness, that is marital unfaithfulness
on the part of the wife. There is not any discussion of adultery
by
men and how there could be unfaithfulness of women without men is a
mystery. The story goes something like this.
When a spirit of jealousy comes on a man then he shall set the woman
before the Lord and the priest shall apply law to her. If the
husband produced a witness, the wife was tried on the evidence and
found guilty. If there was no witness, the wife was tried by a
procedure called "Ordeal". Interestingly, this is the only instance in
Scripture of trial by ordeal. She could of course admit her guilt
at any time. If she didn't, the following would be the procedure.
The priest would take some dust from the floor and add some holy
water into the vessel. He then disheveled the woman's hair and
placed
a grain offering of jealousy into her hands. In his own hand he
places the water of bitterness that would bring the curse upon
her. Then she takes an oath. If she is not lying, then she
will be immune to the water of bitterness. But if she has gone
astray while under her husband's authority, then the Lord makes
her uterus to drop, her womb to discharge and this water to enter her
bowels. This meant miscarriage, sterility or possibility death.
And the woman is to say "Amen" The priest put the curses in
writing and made the woman drink the water of bitterness.
The man shall be free from iniquity but the woman shall bear her
iniquity. Oy vey
>From the beginning, the association between sexuality and the study
of Torah was more than just an arbitrary analogy. Rabbis banned women
from the study of Torah on the grounds that it would teach them
lasciviousness. In this culture, as in all others, the way sexuality is
constructed is a map for the hierarchies of the society as a whole. For
the rabbis, the dominant male role in sexuality and study of Torah were
intimately and in separately linked.
The interesting problem involved here is how they attempted to deal
with the problem of sexual temptation which needless to say existed
then as now and threatened marriage then as now,. As years
went on they became more and more exacting in their attempt
of delineate what they considered one of the greatest
transgressions. For example, looking at women was less dangerous
than talking to women. The penalty of having sex with a Jewish
woman was greater than having sex with a gentile woman and the penalty
of sex with a gentile servant was even lesser, given that she
probably represented a lesser threat. Only one place did I come
across any description of a penalty accorded a man. When a man is
found guilty and If the man is ready to repent, he should sit in an icy
river for as long as it had taken to consummate the affair. If it
is summer, he is to sit on an anthill. You could hope it was a
quickie. Note some justifications. Samson had relations
with a gentile woman but the reasoning states that he had
permission because he was trying to convert her.
Men had used all kinds of ruses to rid themselves of wives they no
longer wanted. There are many writings of men accusing wives of
terrible and not so terrible misconduct. One husband heard his
wife breathing very hard behind a curtain and accused her. The
abuses to be rid
of wives were so great that finally, there started to be stricter
rules of evidence applied for the asking and for the granting of
divorce. The major reason was to preserve the family but I
believe there was also a recognition of the great iniquity being
perpetrated on women and changes started to occur.
Our teachings have given us some incredibly wonderful legacies
but we also inherited archaic, obsolete and painful attitudes. So the
questions all this brings up is "have we progressed today" What
are our attitudes now. From the beginning man had difficulty
controlling his behavior and put the responsibly on women. Even
now, in modern times, the orthodox sections of religions
have women covering themselves so that men won't be tempted.
In modern day, both men and women are learning to be responsible
for what they do. When attitudes changes, there are always
extremes
that take place. In an attempt to equalize the playing field, woman
have adopted some attitudes that are just as detrimental as they were
to men and are having to learn how to balance their attitudes. I
believe our society struggles all the time with these questions.
Yes, major changes have occurred. And yes, more needs to
happen.
The rock bottom issue is that someplace inside us we know what
acceptable behavior is. We need to do no harm to ourselves or
others. When we commit a wrong, we break our faith not only
with our laws and our mates and families, and we break our faith with
Adonai. But the greatest sin is that we break faith with
ourselves.
Lorraine Highkin
Forman, May 25,2002