I originally started teaching this sugya to high school students in the context of a class called "Judaism, Gender, and Sexuality." My students' responses to the text varied over the years, but the general impression was the bad taste it left in their mouths for the treatment of the woman in the first part, and the picture it painted of what it means to be a socially acceptable Jewish woman in general. I often found myself playing devil's advocate, defending the opinions of the Rabbis, pushing my students to think about the benefits of the positions espoused in this sugya in terms of family, societal, and relational dynamics. However, the more I honestly thought about this text, the harder it became to justify, or to apologize the Rabbis' opinions away.
When given the opportunity to revisit and relearn a challenging text within the context of the JTS Gender, Torah, and Tradition Fellowship, this sugya seemed like a good choice. With the wisdom and support of my wonderful chevruta, Sass Brown, Dov Kahane, Laynie Soloman, and Maya Zinkow, I approached this text through a more critical and honest lens, unafraid to preserve "the Rabbis'" sense of knowing what's best, especially for me as a woman.
That said, we approached our learning with a deep reverence for the wisdom that came before and fidelity to tradition, knowing that we are but a small link in the chain of generations of learners.
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מעשה באדם אחד שנתן עיניו באשה אחת והעלה לבו טינא ובאו ושאלו לרופאים ואמרו אין לו תקנה עד שתבעל אמרו חכמים ימות ואל תבעל לו תעמוד לפניו ערומה ימות ואל תעמוד לפניו ערומה תספר עמו מאחורי הגדר ימות ולא תספר עמו מאחורי הגדר
§ Apropos the discussion of the obligation to allow oneself to be killed rather than engage in forbidden sexual intercourse, the Gemara notes that Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: There was an incident involving a certain man who set his eyes upon a certain woman and passion rose in his heart, to the point that he became deathly ill. And they came and asked doctors what was to be done with him. And the doctors said: He will have no cure until she engages in sexual intercourse with him. The Sages said: Let him die, and she may not engage in sexual intercourse with him. The doctors said: She should at least stand naked before him. The Sages said: Let him die, and she may not stand naked before him. The doctors suggested: The woman should at least converse with him behind a fence in a secluded area, so that he should derive a small amount of pleasure from the encounter. The Sages insisted: Let him die, and she may not converse with him behind a fence.
1. Summarize the arguments made by the doctors and the Sages (Rabbis) in this section in your own words.
2. How do you read the argument being made here by the Rabbis to kill the lovesick man rather than let him do these acts to the woman? Is it to protect the woman? To protect their standards of conventional behavior? Something else?
3. How do you perceive the woman in this story?
4. How might your perception of the woman and her role in this story inform your perception of the Rabbis in this story (and possibly in general)?
1. The marital status of the woman is central to the disagreement between Rabbi Ya'akov bar Idi and Rabbi Shmuel bar Nahmani. What do you think is at the crux of that argument?
2. How might the marital status of a woman reflect greater values of how a society views women in general?
1. Harm to the family name, and that Jewish women might become sexually promiscuous are the two reasons given for why a lovesick man cannot have relations with this unmarried woman. What are your responses to these reasons? How does this sit with you, and why?
2. What are the modern versions/scenarios of the two reasons stated here that the man and woman should not engage in sexual relations?
3. Do these responses/reasonings set out to save the honor of the man or the woman? Both? Neither? Explain.
1. How do you interpret Rabbi Yitzhak's statement that from the time the Temple was destroyed sexual pleasure was taken away and given to sinners?
2. How does the proof text from Proverbs used to support R. Yitzhak's statement shape/impact its interpretation?
3. What is your reaction to R. Yitzhak's statement and interpretation?
4. How might his perspective of sexual pleasure impact one's view of sex? Of intimacy? Of relationships? Of power?
5. Is R. Yitzhak's perspective gendered? Explain.