Save "מגדר ומשפחה - הורות"
מגדר ומשפחה - הורות

ויקרא האדם שם אשתו חוה. בראשונ' כשראה אותה עצם מעצמיו ובשר מבשרו גזר עליה האפשרות להשתתף בשלמות האנושי כאחד האדם וקרא אותה אשה. ח אמנם אחר שראה מה שנמשך לו בחברתה מהרע והקללה חזר ונקבה בשם אחר המור' על הנקביות לבד והיא חוה כמו שפירש ואמר כי היא הית' אם כל חי כלומר שאין עקר כוונתה באשר היא אשתו רק להשאיר המין כשאר הב"ח אבל בעניני השלמתם הכל מוטל עליו לבדו. והנה בשני השמות האלה נתבאר שכבר יש לאשה שני תכליות. האחד מה שיור' עליו שם אשה כי מאיש לוקחה זאת וכמוהו תוכל להבין ולהשכיל בדברי שכל וחסידות כמו שעשו האמהות וכמה צדקניות ונביאות וכאשר יור' פשט פרשת אשת חיל מי ימצא כמו שיבא שער כ"ב ב"ה. והשני ענין ההולדה והיות' כלי אליה ומוטבעת אל הלידה וגדול הבנים כאשר יורה עליה שם חוה כאשר היא הית' אם כל חי. והנה תהי' האשה כאשר לא תלד לסבה מהסבות מנועה מהתכלית הקטן ההיא אל מציאותה ותשאר להרע או להיטיב כמו האיש אשר לא יוליד כי בהשלים עצמו באותו התכלית המיניי המשותף להם נאמר ואל יאמר הסריס הן אני עץ יבש ונאמר ונתתי להם בביתי ובחומותי יד ושם טוב מבנים ומבנות (ישעי' נ"ו) כי ודאי עקר תולדותיהם של צדיקים מעשים טובים ע"כ חרה אף יעקב ברחל כשאמר' הבה לי בנים כו' (בראשית ל') לגעור בה ולהשכיל' בזה הענין הנכבד והיא שהיא אינה מתה לפי התכלית המשותף באשר מנע ממנה פרי בטן כמו שיהי' בו הענין גם כן אם לא יוליד.

So, "SHE TOOK FROM THE TREE AND ATE." The Torah describes two considerations as having won out. 1) The external appearance of the tree was made the yardstick of what is good and what is evil. 2) The prospect of immediate pleasure outweighed the fear of the eventual harm. "Their eyes were opened and they were naked." This does not describe their embarrassment, which would not have been objectionable, and would have been the result of their having enjoyed the fruit of that tree. The awareness was a form of knowledge that they needed to maintain their image. In order to do this, expensive trimmings for one's exterior are required. They therefore quickly attempted to cover themselves so that they could prove themselves superior to the animals. (9) The Torah therefore does not state that they did this in order to cover their nakedness. This is also why no mention is made of their feeling ashamed when they heard the voice of G-d, only that they hid themselves out of fear, seeing that they had transgressed G-d’s commandment. Adam said "I heard Your voice and was afraid." To this G-d replied "who told you that you are naked?" (6) Had Adam and Eve eaten only from the trees whose fruit had been permitted, the feeling of shame would have necessitated covering only their private parts, would not have induced in them the feeling that they needed fancy clothing to prove their superior status. Only eating from the tree of knowledge could have accounted for that feeling. (7) Adam (man) added to his sin by blaming his wife, suggesting that because she had given him of the fruit, he had been bound to eat it. That is why G-d blamed him doubly now, saying 1) "Because you listened to your wife;" 2) "Because you ate." When our sages explain Psalms 69,32, "And this will please the Lord better than a bullock tossing its horns and showing its hooves," they say that this refers to the offering brought by Adam. The ox Adam offered had its horns protruding beyond his hooves. Split hooves are a sign of "purity" in an animal, and reconciliation with one's Maker is to be achieved by means of the sacrifice of a "pure animal" (or by words as described in Hoseah 14, who describes the bull as equivalent to lips). When such a reconciliation is attended by the claim that others are responsible for one's shortcomings, one distorts the concept of sacrifice. Adam did this by blaming his sin on his wife. Therefore, the Psalmist describes the signs of purity of his sacrificial bullock as having been obscured by its horns. Originally, the bull had only one horn, a sign of superior strength. It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah that a horned animal is more likely to gore, to cause damage. Therefore, it would have been most fitting symbolically to serve as the sin offering for Adam. Eve fell into the same trap as Adam by blaming the serpent for her sin. The serpent, being the last party involved in the episode, did not need to be asked by G-d. It was cursed by having its former superior height reduced till it became the lowliest creature, condemned to crawling on the ground. Since the serpent had tricked Eve into eating what held allure for the eye, it would henceforth subsist on a diet of things that looked like earth, i.e. held no allure for the eye. The ongoing enmity between man and the snake, with man seeking to smash the head of the snake, is another part of the curse decreed on the latter. Woman was cursed in matters specific to her function. When she fails to become pregnant right after marriage, both parties worry about her being barren. Her pain will be greater than that of man, since even when she bears children she is not certain of her husband's love. There is the discomfort of pregnancy and the pain of giving birth. Despite all this, man dominates her when it comes to marital relations. Since man was created first, and since the survival of the species depends on him (he is commanded to procreate, not she), she who was created later was clearly created for his benefit, and not vice versa. Woman's sex urge is therefore usually weaker than man's. As the Talmud says (Kidushin 2), "It is the way of a man to try and recover what he has lost (i.e. looking for a wife), it is not the way of the lost object (woman) to go looking for its owner." For this reason, man displays less embarrassment in matters relating to sex. Granted that the urge for physical contact is rooted in the animalistic within us, man nevertheless has the redeeming excuse that he needs to reproduce the species. Woman does not share this redeeming aspect of the sex urge. The comparison is similar to what Solomon has stated in Proverbs 6,31-32 when he compares people who steal because of need with people who steal because of greed. The curse upon man was greater, since as a direct product of G-d’s creative activity (He personally had equipped him with the soul of life), his conduct should have been on a far higher plane than even that of his wife. He was cursed in all "directions" of motion corresponding to the status of being a "living creature" par excellence which had been his prior to his sin. The four aspects of motion can be subsumed as defined by the answers to the questions 1) where to? 2) how? 3) how much? 4) motion itself. Scriptural references for the above are "Go for yourself from your country," i.e. "where to;" (Genesis 12,1). "He will keep going and cry" equals the "how"? (Psalms 126,6). "Continuing to grow in intensity," equals the "how much?" (Exodus 19,19). "Here I am going to die," equals the "motion itself," an example of when the very nature of the motion transforms the essence of the one who is in motion (Genesis 25,32). G-d said, "Because you listened to your wife" 1) "The earth is cursed," will not yield its fruit easily. Man is condemned to eat vegetables he has to grow and plant, since he had been too anxious to eat from the fruit of the tree for which he did not have to toil. 2) Only after having "sweated and toiled" will man be able to feed himself from now on. 3) "Until you die," i.e. until your travels take you from above the ground to your grave below. 4) "To dust you will return," you will dissolve into a multiplicity of particles (reference to how much, quantity). Instead of being a single integrated unit, you will disintegrate. 8) Originally, Adam had called Eve “ishah ", emphasizing her parity with man, i.e. ish. After the episode with the tree of knowledge, he called her chavah, emphasizing the female element within her, and the fact that she was the mother of all subsequent human beings. Between these two names, the two functions of woman are defined. On the one hand, as the eyshet chayil, woman of valor, she possesses all the ingredients that can raise her to the status of prophetess; on the other hand her function is to become a mother. A woman who fails to give birth, just like a man who is sterile, has not forfeited her major function in life, as is proven from Isaiah 56,3-5, "Let not the barren proclaim I am but a dried-out tree." We hold the view that man's major function is the performance of good deeds, something quite independent of procreation. If Jacob had been angry at Rachel for demanding children, else her life would not be worth living (Genesis 30,1-2), it was precisely for this reason. When the Talmud in Nedarim 64 states that of the four categories of people who are considered as dead, one is the group that have no children, the reference is only to their perpetuating their name on this earth. When woman conducts herself true to her purpose as helpmate to man, she also retains the name ishah. When, however, she acts as a hindrance, her function is reduced to that of the female part within her, i.e. she remains only chavah, mother. (9) G-d, in His kindness, covered their entire bodies with clothing, fulfilling a wish Adam had expressed already before that. G-d had waited for this request for clothing just as He had waited for the request of a suitable mate.

יצחק בן משה עראמה היה ראש ישיבה, פרשן תלמוד, דרשן ופרשן בעל נטייה לדרש, שחי בספרד. כיהן כראש ישיבה בזמורה ובעקבות זאת כיהן כרב הראשי של טרגונה. מאוחר יותר, שימש כרב הראשי בערים אחרות. כשהיהודים גורשו מספרד ב-1492, עבר עם בנו, מאיר, לפורטוגל, ומשם לדרום איטליה.

ללמדו תורה: מנלן דכתיב (דברים יא, יט) ולמדתם אותם את בניכם והיכא דלא אגמריה אבוה מיחייב איהו למיגמר נפשיה דכתיב ולמדתם
§ The baraita teaches that a father is obligated to teach his son Torah. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this requirement? As it is written: “And you shall teach them [velimadtem] to your sons” (Deuteronomy 11:19). And in a case where his father did not teach him he is obligated to teach himself, as it is written, i.e., the verse can be read with a different vocalization: And you shall study [ulmadtem].

למדו תורה: מנלן דכתיב (דברים יא, יט) ולמדתם אותם את בניכם והיכא דלא אגמריה אבוה מיחייב איהו למיגמר נפשיה דכתיב ולמדתם איהי מנלן דלא מיחייבא דכתיב ולימדתם ולמדתם כל שמצווה ללמוד מצווה ללמד וכל שאינו מצווה ללמוד אינו מצווה ללמד ואיהי מנלן דלא מיחייבה למילף נפשה דכתיב ולימדתם ולמדתם כל שאחרים מצווין ללמדו מצווה ללמד את עצמו וכל שאין אחרים מצווין ללמדו אין מצווה ללמד את עצמו ומנין שאין אחרים מצווין ללמדה דאמר קרא ולמדתם אותם את בניכם ולא בנותיכם ת"ר הוא ללמוד ובנו ללמוד הוא קודם לבנו ר' יהודה אומר אם בנו זריז וממולח ותלמודו מתקיים בידו בנו קודמו כי הא דרב יעקב בריה דרב אחא בר יעקב שדריה אבוה לקמיה דאביי כי אתא חזייה דלא הוה מיחדדין שמעתיה א"ל אנא עדיפא מינך תוב את דאיזיל אנא

§ The baraita teaches that a father is obligated to teach his son Torah. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this requirement? As it is written: “And you shall teach them [velimadtem] to your sons” (Deuteronomy 11:19). And in a case where his father did not teach him he is obligated to teach himself, as it is written, i.e., the verse can be read with a different vocalization: And you shall study [ulmadtem]. From where do we derive that a woman is not obligated to teach her son Torah? As it is written: “And you shall teach [velimadtem],” which can be read as: And you shall study [ulmadtem]. This indicates that whoever is commanded to study Torah is commanded to teach, and whoever is not commanded to study is not commanded to teach. Since a woman is not obligated to learn Torah, she is likewise not obligated to teach it. The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that she is not obligated to teach herself? The Gemara answers: As it is written: “And you shall teach [velimadtem],” which can be read as: And you shall study [ulmadtem], which indicates that whoever others are commanded to teach is commanded to teach himself, and whoever others are not commanded to teach is not commanded to teach himself. And from where is it derived that others are not commanded to teach a woman? As the verse states: “And you shall teach them to your sons” (Deuteronomy 11:19), which emphasizes: Your sons and not your daughters. The Sages taught: If one wishes to study Torah himself and his son also wants to study, he takes precedence over his son. Rabbi Yehuda says: If his son is diligent and sharp, and his study will endure, his son takes precedence over him. This is like that anecdote which is told about Rav Ya’akov, son of Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov, whose father sent him to Abaye to study Torah. When the son came home, his father saw that his studies were not sharp, as he was insufficiently bright. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said to his son: I am preferable to you, and it is better that I go and study. Therefore, you sit and handle the affairs of the house so that I can go and study.

תנו רבנן [שנו חכמים]: הוא האב צריך ללמוד ובנו צריך ללמוד ואין בידם כדי זה וזה — הוא קודם לבנו. ר' יהודה אומר: אם בנו זריז (מהיר הבנה) וממולח (חריף) ותלמודו מתקיים בידו (יש לו כושר זכרון) — בנו קודמו. וכך מסופר: כי הא [כמו מעשה זה] שרב יעקב בריה [בנו] של רב אחא בר יעקב שדריה אבוה לקמיה [שלח אותו אביו לפני] אביי ללמוד. כי אתא חזייה [כאשר בא הבן לביתו ראה אותו] אביו שלא הוה מיחדדין שמעתיה [היו שמועותיו מחודדות], שלא היה חריף ובקי מספיק. אמר ליה [לו]: אנא עדיפא מינך [אני עדיף ממך] ללכת ללמוד, משום כך תוב את, דאיזיל אנא [שב אתה ותטפל בצרכי הבית כדי שאלך אני ללמוד].

(ה) אֵלּוּ מְלָאכוֹת שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה עוֹשָׂה לְבַעְלָהּ, טוֹחֶנֶת, וְאוֹפָה, וּמְכַבֶּסֶת, מְבַשֶּׁלֶת, וּמֵנִיקָה אֶת בְּנָהּ, מַצַּעַת לוֹ הַמִּטָּה, וְעוֹשָׂה בַצֶּמֶר. הִכְנִיסָה לוֹ שִׁפְחָה אַחַת, לֹא טוֹחֶנֶת, וְלֹא אוֹפָה וְלֹא מְכַבֶּסֶת. שְׁתַּיִם, אֵינָהּ מְבַשֶּׁלֶת וְאֵינָהּ מֵנִיקָה אֶת בְּנָהּ. שָׁלֹשׁ, אֵינָהּ מַצַּעַת לוֹ הַמִּטָּה וְאֵינָהּ עוֹשָׂה בַצֶּמֶר. אַרְבָּעָה, יוֹשֶׁבֶת בַּקַּתֶּדְרָא. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ הִכְנִיסָה לוֹ מֵאָה שְׁפָחוֹת, כּוֹפָהּ לַעֲשׂוֹת בַּצֶּמֶר, שֶׁהַבַּטָּלָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי זִמָּה. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אַף הַמַּדִּיר אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת מְלָאכָה, יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, שֶׁהַבַּטָּלָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי שִׁעֲמוּם:

(5) These are the [kinds of] work which the woman [is obligated to] do for her husband. She grinds, and bakes, and washes [clothes]. She cooks, and nurses her child. She makes his bed, and work with wool. If she brought in one maidservant [from her father's home], she does not [need to] grind, bake, or wash. [If she brought him] two [maidservants], she does not [need to] cook nor nurse her child. Three, she does not [need to] make his bed nor work with wool. Four, she may sit in an easy chair. Rabbi Eliezer says, "Even if she brought him a hundred maidservants, he may force her to work with wool, as idleness leads to licentiousness." Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says, "Similarly, one who, by vow, interdicts his wife from doing work, he must divorce her and pay [the amount of] her ketubah [monetary settlement payable to a woman upon divorce or the death of her husband], because idleness leads to dull-mindedness."

מלאכות שהאשה עושה לבעלה שבעה גופי מלאכה מנו ושאר לא הוצרכו לימנות. כופה לעשות לבנו ולבתה לאחיו ולאחיה ולהטיל לפני בהמתו מקום שלא נהגו א' מכל אלו אינו יכול לכופה ר' יהודה אומר אף אין כופה לעשות פשתן מפני שמסריח את הפה ומשרביט את השפתים