Sotah 035

14:
The statement of Rabbi Eli'ezer against teaching women Torah draws in its wake two other statements. While these statements have no direct connection with the subject of the Sotah, they are connected with the subject of 'the nature of women' as seen by Rabbi Eli'ezer. These two statements are attributed to Rabbi Yehoshu'a, a contemporary and colleague of Rabbi Eli'ezer. Rabbi Yehoshu'a seemingly is speaking of a married woman (and this is implied in the Gemara [Sotah 21b]. A 'kav' is a measure of capacity, like a litre or a pint. So perhaps we could better render his 'truism' as: 'a woman prefers a pint of licentiousness to a gallon of asceticism.' The sages valued sexual asceticism. Rambam [De'ot 5:4] warns that a husband should not 'be with his wife like a rooster', all the time. It would seem that he is basing himself on the fact that the Gemara [Berakhot 22b] states that Ezra instituted bathing in a mikveh for men who had sexual relations in order to encourage this asceticism. (This regulation has fallen into wide disuse over the centuries and is no longer considered as binding.) Rabbi Yehoshu'a sees this as a difference between men and women: a woman would prefer an infrequent sexual relationship with her husband that is full of wild sexual abandon to a more regular visitation that is tinged with asceticism.

15:
Rabbi Yehoshu'a also condemns the following:

1. A foolish saint. This is someone who tries to follow the halakhah to an absurd extent while ignoring common sense. The example given by the Gemara is of an ultra pious man who sees a woman drowning in a river but refrains from rushing to save her because 'it is not meet that a man look upon a woman'.
2. A crafty sinner. The sages give as an example of the crafty sinner (or wicked man) a person who tries to discuss his case with the judge before the other party arrives: even if the judge makes a conscious effort to pay no attention the seeds have been sown.
3. The lashes of the Pharisees. This is a reference to pious people who wear their piety on their sleeve and try to demonstrate their presumed piety to all and sundry. They publicly submit themselves to a lashing in order that people might be impressed with their zeal for observance of the mitzvot.

Aviva Orensteinshares some thoughts about the disagreement between ben-Azzai and Rabbi Eli'ezer:

The beauty of this section is that it points out what a double-edged sword torah knowledge, or any knowledge for that matter, can be. If you teach your daughter torah, she will know modesty and marital fidelity, but she will also know the "loopholes" and ways of getting around the law. Seems to me that virtue is an odd loophole for this sort of suspicion – if she really is virtuous, would she be consorting with other men when her husband specifically warned her not to? Virtue is also not a legalistic loophole – the fine print as it were – but a lifestyle that needs teaching and reinforcing. The question arises whether daughters could know how to be virtuous without torah learning and whether avoiding the sneaky virtuous types is worth sacrificing important education in torah.

---

Hillary Liber writes concerning the subject of inks.

The dialogue on ink reminds me of what happened over the past few years at our synagogue. Our Holocaust Torah from Roudnice, Chechyslovakia (sic) – was looked at very closely after several Bar/Bat Mitzvah students complained about difficulty reading it. It was discovered that the ink on much of the scroll was missing – digested by a species of bacteria that survives on something in the vegetable dye of the ink. What we were all reading was the impression of the inscription, not the ink itself. Since then, the Torah has been treated to kill the voracious little bugs, and re-inked so that it is now, once again, a Kosher Torah. The Synagogue had a rededication – as many congregations have dedications of new scrolls. Just an interesting tale.

This topic is now closed.