Geoffrey D. Miller, «Canonicity and Gender Roles: Tobit and Judith as Test Cases», Vol. 97 (2016) 199-221
Clues from rabbinic literature suggest that several factors were at play in establishing the early Jewish canon, including the dating, theology, and language of disputed texts. Another vital yet overlooked criterion is adherence to patriarchy, and a careful analysis of the Books of Judith and Tobit illustrates how these texts failed to meet rabbinic standards for gender roles. Most notably, the countercultural figures of Judith and Anna would have scandalized the rabbis by their encroachment on traditionally male spheres of activity, their freedom of movement inside and outside the home, and their ability to chastise male characters without repercussions.
208 GeoFFreY d. MILLer
the excluded and debated texts subvert patriarchal norms. As will be
discussed below, the indomitable figures of Anna and Judith present
the greatest hurdle for the inclusion of Judith and Tobit into the Jewish
canon. even though the rabbis never explicitly broach the subject
of gender in their discussions of sacred texts, it was foremost on their
minds, for strewn throughout the Talmud and other rabbinic works
are patriarchal statements designed to keep women in their place.
Many times and over numerous texts, the rabbis betray a deep an-
drocentric bias and a pervasive desire to uphold gender norms, and
their patriarchal agenda is so overt that they even devote one of the six
orders of the Talmud to regulating women’s affairs 26. Their remarks
vacillate between mildly patriarchal to unabashedly chauvinistic. one
of the most severe attacks appears in Šabb. 152a, which admonishes
its male readers: “A woman [is] a pitcher full of filth and her mouth
[is] full of blood”. The same tractate also warns that women are not
reliable (Šabb. 33b), and Genesis Rabbah denigrates women as
greedy, jealous, lazy, envious, eavesdroppers, and gadabouts (18,2;
45,5). For this reason, the birth of a son brings great joy to a man, but
the birth of a daughter causes only distress (Nid. 31b; Qidd. 82b).
other early Jewish literature from the rabbinic period is less stri-
dent in tone but nonetheless patriarchal. According to Josephus, “A
woman, [the Law] says, is inferior to a man in all respects. So, let her
obey [...] for God has given power to the man” 27. This patriarchal
prejudice applies especially to matters of governance and worship.
Commenting on deuteronomy’s description of the ideal king, Sifre
Deuteronomy 157 declares: “A male may be appointed leader of the
community but not a woman”, for deut 17,14-20 specifies that a king
act as sovereign, not a queen. other texts indicate the ways in which
male leaders sought to circumscribe women in both synagogue and
temple. Women and men were segregated by sex in both places,
and the former were not permitted to read publicly from the Torah, nor
did their presence at a synagogue count toward the quorum (minyan)
necessary to hold a Sabbath service 28.
To be sure, the Talmud contains some praiseworthy remarks about
women, but they laud women who properly conform. As Swindler
26
The third in the order of the Babylonian Talmud is Nashim (“Women”),
comprising the tractates Yevamot, Ketubbot, Nedarim, Nazir, Sotah, Gittin, and
Qiddushin.
27
Ag. Ap. II, 201.
28
’Abot R. Nat. 3,6.