Políticas públicas de la mujer en el ámbito nacional

Joel S. Kaminsky

Introduction

As noted in the introduction to this volume, while the fruits of recent Jewish-Christian dialogue have been many, vastly more critical attention has been focused on Christianity than on Judaism. This can be seen in the multitude of publications, public lectures, and panel discussions devoted to Christian portrayals of Judaism, which attempt to assess and critique Christian triumphalism and supersessionism.2 _{On the other hand, compar-}

atively little ink has been spilled on potentially analogous issues within Judaism. This imbalance is quite understandable in the light of the long his- tory of Christian anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism and the disturbing ways in which certain Christian theological ideas appear to have contributed to the events culminating in the Shoah. Nevertheless, now that discussions have progressed well beyond their initial stages, Jewish scholars, heeding the canons of critical scholarship and intellectual fairness, are beginning to cri- tique widespread Jewish stereotypes of Christianity, as well as their own tradition’s idealized self-images.

One much-needed area of attention is the rather common tendency of many Jewish people to assume that Judaism is quite closely associated with the theology of the Hebrew Bible, while viewing Christianity as a tradition that reads the Hebrew Bible through a lens that is totally alien to it.3_Thus 1 _{The initial research for this paper was done with the help of the National} Endowment for the Humanities (Summer Seminar: “Adam and Eve in Jewish and Christian Tradition,” Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1996). I am indebted to Gary Anderson, Michael Stone, and other members of the seminar for their support and their many helpful contributions to this project. I also wish to thank Professors Jon D. Levenson, John J. Collins, and Gregory Spinner for reading various drafts of this paper, making many helpful suggestions and providing much encouragement along the way.

2_{One can see this concern in the contributions to this volume by Brueggemann,} Levenson, Rendtorff, Schramm, and Sweeney.

3_{This attitude can even be found among certain Christian thinkers who wish to} counter the Christian tendency toward supersessionism. Thus Rolf Rendtorff, in his

Judaism is portrayed as the mother religion and Christianity as a head- strong daughter who went off in a new direction. While it is true that Christianity grew out of some form of preexisting Judaism, this portrait ignores the fact that rabbinic Judaism, the religion we know today as Judaism, and Christianity “were born at the same time and nurtured in the same environment.”4_{Thus there is a growing scholarly consensus that the}

relationship between Judaism and Christianity is better described as a sib- ling rivalry. While this brotherly competition has led each tradition to claim to be the true heir of the religious worldview found in the Hebrew Bible and to discount or dismiss totally the other sibling’s claims to the same effect, recent scholarship has demonstrated that both traditions frequently read parts of the Hebrew Bible in ways that creatively subvert the plain meaning of the text.5

This new understanding of early Jewish-Christian relations begs for contemporary Jewish scholars to reappraise the persistent and relatively pervasive tendency to (mis)represent early Christianity as an illegitimate religion and consequently to exaggerate the differences between Christianity and rabbinic Judaism. Such reevaluation is urgent not only because it might create greater harmony between these two religions, but also because it will facilitate the recovery of important pieces of the Jewish theological tradition that such stereotyping regularly ignores or dismisses.

A clear example of the propensity to draw a simplistic set of distinctions between Jewish and Christian interpretations of the Hebrew Bible can be found in the way that certain popularly read Jewish authors contrast Jewish versus Christian treatments of Gen 2–3. While it may be true that Judaism gives less theological weight to the story of Adam and Eve than does Christianity, statements like the following, versions of which I have heard repeated countless times, seriously misrepresent the classical Jewish tradition.

contribution to this very volume, states that “Christian theologians often forget that Christianity grew out of Judaism and that therefore Christian interpretation of the common Hebrew Holy Scriptures is always the second in order. Judaism has its own interpretation, which is in some senses much closer to the Hebrew text, while Christian interpretation is mediated through another collection of writings, the New Testament” (“A Christian Approach to the Theology of Hebrew Scriptures,” 144–45).

4_{Alan Segal, Rebecca’s Children (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986), 1.} 5_{I am in agreement with the following quote from S. David Sperling’s contribu-} tion to this anthology: “The result is that even sections of Scripture that were reasonably clear to their original target audiences have become overlaid with meanings inconceivable to their authors. Contemporary Christians and Jews must reckon with the theologically significant fact that their religious beliefs and prac- tices are hardly based on plain-sense interpretations of Scripture” (“The Law and the Prophet,” 135).

In the Haggadah of the Rabbis the scenes and characters of the Genesis paradise saga appear not infrequently. . . . However, no doctrinal conse- quences were ever drawn from the Garden of Eden legend for Judaism as was the case for Christianity. . . . Primal Myths have nothing to do with the history of the Jewish people. . . . The Genesis myths were in no way deci- sive for the theology of Judaism.6

The most likely explanation for the popularity of this sentiment is that it manages to paint Judaism as a rational religion that is in accord with a variety of modern religious assumptions. Such an apologetic approach downplays Jewish sources that speak of otherworldly redemption or any type of immortality or resurrection and overemphasizes those sources that see humans as fundamentally good creatures who have the ability to freely choose their own destiny. Another widely read book not only proclaims that “Judaism has no room for anything resembling the Christian doctrine of ‘original sin’ ” but that “there is virtually nothing in authoritative Jewish belief (of course, there are popular superstitions) that is contrary to reason and the laws of nature.”7 _{While the intent of these authors to help Jews}

understand their distinctive religious heritage is to be commended, their relegation of vast portions of the rabbinic corpus to the category of “pop- ular superstitions” that are “in no way decisive for the theology of Judaism” misrepresents Judaism and leaves the reader with an oversimplified por- trait of the similarities and differences between Judaism and Christianity.

The purpose of this article is to begin to provide a more nuanced read- ing of the theological importance of the Adam and Eve material within rab- binic Judaism and thus argue that, contrary to popular belief, Judaism does indeed contain something akin to the Christian notion of the “fall.” While the rabbis do not affirm the full complement of theological ideas that the early church derived from the notion of humanity’s fall, some of their read- ings of the Adam and Eve story have a stronger resemblance to early Christian readings of Gen 2–3 than is commonly acknowledged. In any case, both early Jewish and early Christian readings of these materials share more features with each other than either one shares with a plain- sense reading of the biblical text. Because these Jewish materials are not

6_{Abba Hillel Silver, Where Judaism Differed: An Inquiry into the Distinctiveness}

of Judaism (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1957), 165–66. It

is clear that this book has been popular since it was first written in 1956 and has gone through numerous reprintings, with a recent reprint currently available in hardback by Aronson.

7_{Trude Weiss-Rosmarin, Judaism and Christianity: The Differences (1943; repr.,} New York: Jonathan David, 1972), 48, 39 [emphasis is Weiss-Rosmarin’s]. The copy I quoted from is a seventh printing, but this book has once again been reprinted by the same publisher in 1997 as a hardback.

widely known, the bulk of this paper will be devoted to analyzing a vari- ety of rabbinic texts that touch upon this mythic complex. Toward the end of the paper I will briefly compare these Jewish texts to a few early Christian texts and conclude by exploring the relevance of these rabbinic texts to the ongoing task of Jewish-Christian understanding.

The Rabbinic Evidence

One might assume that if Judaism does contain some type of fall myth, it would be located in the midrashic sources on Gen 2–3. But one of the greatest difficulties with the rabbinic materials on any subject is that they are rarely presented in a systematic or easily accessible manner. Thus it is helpful to find a motif or series of motifs and begin to collect the texts in which these motifs recur. As will be seen shortly, the majority of the mate- rials that will be examined in this paper are generated by the rabbinic attempt to link the Adam and Eve narrative (Gen 2–3) to the story of Israel at Mount Sinai before and after the sin of the golden calf (Exod 19–34). Unfortunately, any attempt to discuss all the relevant texts on even this more limited subject would require at least a book-length monograph. Still, it can be useful to investigate one particular locus in rabbinic literature that explores the relationship between Gen 2–3 and Exod 19–34.

The easiest way to narrow the field of potential passages is to find a proof-text that frequently occurs in close relationship to the motifs under discussion and use that prooftext as a method to collect and analyze a par- ticular theological complex. This investigation will focus upon a selection of seven rabbinic texts that make use of Ps 82:6–7 (“I said: You are gods, all of you the sons of the Most High; nevertheless you will die as mortals, you will fall like one of the princes”), a passage that the rabbis read as an epitome of Israel’s Sinai experience, and the ways in which this experience resembled Adam and Eve’s in Eden.8

Israel Is Granted Temporary Immunity from Death

The first text I will examine is from the Mekilta of Rabbi Ishmael, a col- lection of legal, as well as some haggadic (narrative) midrashim9 _{on the}

book of Exodus. This collection is commonly dated to a second-century

8_{Inasmuch as it would be impossible to discuss every rabbinic passage that cites} Ps 82:6–7 within the confines of a single paper, I carefully chose passages that com- plement each other and mutually illuminate certain often-neglected aspects of rab- binic thinking. Furthermore, because there is no single rabbinic approach to the Bible, an additional criterion in the selection process was that the rabbinic texts come from a wide range of locales and historical periods.

C.E. Palestinian context, although it is likely that certain pieces may be

older and others quite a bit younger. The Mekilta records the following tra- dition on Exod 20:19, a verse in which the Israelites who are overwhelmed by the Sinai theophany say to Moses, “speak to us and we will listen; but do not let God speak to us, or we will die.”

This tells us that they did not have the strength to receive more than the Ten Commandments, as it is said: If we hear the voice of the Lord our God

any more, then we shall die (Deut 5:22 [Eng. Deut 5:25]). . . . R. Jose says:

It was upon this condition that the Israelites stood up before mount Sinai, on condition that the Angel of Death should not have power over them. For it is said: I said you are like godlike beings, etc. (Ps 82:6). But you cor- rupted your conduct. Surely you shall die like men (ibid., v. 7).10

This midrash contains only a few hints at the larger complex of mate- rials that other midrashim, cited further below, address in much greater detail. But it is a useful place to begin both because its brevity will make it easier to unpack and because its undeveloped form may reveal that this

mythos grew in complexity over time. On the surface this passage only

appears to link Exod 19–20 to Ps 82:6–7, and even this connection is quite cryptic. The corruption mentioned toward the end of the passage surely refers to Exod 32, but its exact meaning is far from clear to the uninitiated reader. Genesis 2–3 appears nowhere in plain sight. The text implies that under normal circumstances Israel would not have been able to endure receiving the Ten Commandments and therefore they received at least a temporary grant of immunity from the Angel of Death.11 _{The proof-text}

that Rabbi Yose uses to substantiate his exegetical point is Ps 82:6–7.

10_{Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael (trans. J. Z. Lauterbach; 3 vols.; Philadelphia: Jewish} Publication Society of America, 1949), 2:270–72 (j vdwxb). In general, I have opted

to use the standard English translations of the midrashic texts under discussion so as to allow the reader to access the complete text with ease. The reader should be aware that many of the collections of midrashim have not yet been published in critical editions. For more background on these texts and translations, see Hermann L. Strack and Günter Stemberger, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992). I have left all translations of biblical verses that occur within midrashic translations as is; however, I have opted to standardize how they are marked off from the surrounding midrashic expansions by italicizing all such quotes. Translations of biblical verses from the Hebrew Bible elsewhere in the paper are my own, while those from the New Testament are from the NRSV.

11_{A similar motif, in which Israel dies each time God speaks a word and is then} resurrected after each spoken word, is found in b. Rabb. 88b. In some sense the

biblical text itself hints at Israel attaining at least a temporary suspension from death inasmuch as all the Israelite firstborn are spared from the tenth plague.

To grasp Rabbi Yose’s point, one must understand why he thought Ps 82:6–7 contained a cryptic hint of Israel’s experience at Mount Sinai. Before entering into a fuller discussion of this rabbinic interpretation of Ps 82:6–7, however, it is important to note that Ps 82 as a whole was bound to catch the eye of the ancient interpreter. A straightforward read- ing of Ps 82 indicates that the psalmist openly accepts the notion that God is the ruler over a pantheon of other deities.12_{It may be true, as has}

been argued cogently by M. Tsevat, that Ps 82 signals a change from a polytheistic toward a more monotheistic understanding of religion in ancient Israel.13 _{Nevertheless, the psalm clearly speaks of God’s taking}

“his place in the divine assembly” and giving judgment “in the midst of the gods” (Ps 82:1).

Obviously this is not the way the rabbis read the psalm. In fact, the rabbis tended to be troubled by all references to other gods and thus they developed readings, sometimes a bit forced, to fit these texts into their monotheistic worldview. For example, the rabbis creatively re-read the word “gods” in the commandment, “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exod 20:3), in a variety of ways, including “those which others call gods” and gods “who act like strangers towards those who worship them.”14_{Similarly, they interpret the divine assembly language found in Ps}

82:1 as referring to judges and do the same for Exod 22:8. “Hence the verse ‘He is a Judge among Elohim’ [Ps 82:1] is to be read ‘He is a Judge among judges,’ as in the verse ‘The cause of both shall come before the judges (Elohim)’ (Exod 22:8).”15 _{So when this psalm uses language that implies}

the existence of many gods, the rabbis interpret it as referring to humans in an exalted state.

When readers turn from the psalm as a whole to verses 6–7 in partic- ular, initially they may be mystified as to how the rabbis could think that the statement, “I said: ‘You are gods, all of you the sons of the Most High; nevertheless you will die as mortals, you will fall like one of the princes,’ ” had anything to do with the Israelites at Mount Sinai. However, on closer inspection several textual links can be discerned between Ps 82:6–7 and the Sinai materials, as well as a rather cryptic connection to Gen 2–3.

12_{Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60–150: A Commentary (trans. Hilton C. Oswald;} Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), 153–57.

13_{Matitiahu Tsevat, “God and the Gods in Assembly: An Interpretation of Psalm} 82,” in The Meaning of the Book of Job and Other Biblical Studies: Essays on the

Literature and Religion of the Hebrew Bible (New York: Ktav, 1980), 131–47.

14_{Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, 2:239 (}w vdwxb_).

15_{The Midrash on Psalms, vol. 2 (trans. William G. Braude; Yale Judaica Series} 13; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), 59. Also see the Mek. on Exod 22:8 and b. Sanh. 6.

To begin with, the rabbis, as noted above, were not inclined to read the reference in verse 6 to “gods, children of the Most High” as referring to other heavenly beings but assumed it referred to a group of earthly beings who had been in an exalted state. Additionally, the mention of the sons of the Most High may have called to mind Deut 14:1, in which Moses, reporting for God, tells Israel, “you are sons of the Lord your God.” And even more to the point, the reference to Ps 82:7 describes the rather quick loss of this exalted state by using the phrase, “you [plural] will die

~dak

—

like humans” (or reading with the rabbis “like Adam”).

The use of the word

~da

, which can be translated generically as

humans or specifically as referring to Adam the first human, creates an excellent exegetical link between the fate of Adam and these other exalted beings mentioned in Ps 82:6–7. The rabbis had already decided these exalted beings were humans who experienced a closeness to God similar to Adam’s and like Adam quickly fell from grace. It is thus possible to see one reason why they thought that Ps 82:6 speaks of Israel in her exalted state after having just received the law,16 _{while verse 7 speaks of her fall}

after the sin of the golden calf. As will be seen further below, many other verbal, thematic, and mythic associations led the rabbis to homologize the Adam and Eve story to the Sinai–golden calf narrative.

Before proceeding to the next midrash, a quick summary of this midrash is in order. Its major point is that God granted Israel temporary immunity from death in order to help her survive the danger posed by encountering God and receiving the Ten Commandments.17_{However, this midrash’s reference}

to Ps 82:7 hints at an idea that is a central concern of this paper: Israel’s expe- rience at Sinai directly parallels Adam’s in the garden of Eden, as each had a chance at permanent immortality but lost it through committing a sin.18

God Intended Israel, Like Adam, to Have Immortality

The next midrash, Exod. Rab. 32:1 on Exod 23:20, “I am going to send an angel in front of you… ,” explicitly draws a variety of close correspon- dences between Exod 19–34 and Gen 2–3.

16_{The tendency to link Ps 82 to the giving of the law at Sinai also appears to be}

In document PREVENCIÓN CONTRA LA VIOLENCIA DE LA MUJER: EFICACIA EN EL MUNICIPIO DE RICAURTE - CUNDINAMARCA EN EL CUATRIENIO AUTOR (página 70-76)