Mishnah Commentary: Mishnah 3. mBetsah 1:8

@Manuscript Evidence

@General observations

When preparing pulses, the pods have to be separated. According to the rule of Beth Shammai, one should select and use the edible parts and put the separated ones aside for use after the festival. Beth Hillel, in contrast, maintain that one may select them in the conventional way. Yet, they limited the amount of food that could be prepared, so that there would not be more than was needed for consumption on the festival day itself. Likewise, they maintain that whatever food was prepared should be used only on the festival day. This principle is expressed via the custom of “not using a board, sifter or sieve,” which means the preparation of larger quantities. Rabban Gamli’el’s statement, “s/he also rinses and separates (the husks),” can be clarified by comparing the Mishnah with the Tosefta parallel. In contrast to the Mishnah, the Tosefta describes the whole action and states that, in order to separate the kernels from the pods, the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el would fill a bucket with lentils and pour water on them.

@Feminist observations

The Mishnah here speaks about the בורר ("the one who sorts out”) and uses the masculine singular term. It is interesting that in this quote women are not directly mentioned, yet obviously implied, because it was mainly women who picked the pulses. When the issue is addressed by the gemara in bBets 13b, women are explicitly mentioned and the Bavli adduces proof of how to do this from their action. For a feminist discussion of this mishnah, see therefore the commentary on Bavli 1/4. bBetsah 12b-14b below.

At this point I would like to discuss the expression “The […] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el,” who, as I will argue, are in this case mostly women. From a grammatical point of view a word is missing in this sentence, for the Mishnah states that “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” are involved in certain activities. This is usually translated as the “members” of the House of Rabban Gamli’el, although it is not clear who in fact these “members” were. The answer to this question would shed light on the above-mentioned mishnaic text as well as on following texts.

The expression של בית רבן גמליאל (the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el[1]) is used only twice in the Mishnah (mSheq 3:3; 6:1) and the expression בית רבן גמליאל (the House of Rabban Gamli’el) also only twice. All four passages show up in connection with exclusively “male” working spaces and spheres of action like hunting (mShab 13:5), the courtyard (mRhSh 2:9), sacrifices and terumah (mSheq 3:3) or the Temple (mSheq 6:1).

In comparison to the Mishnah it is worthy of note that the Tosefta describes more and different spheres of action in connection with the House of Rabban Gamli’el: “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” are mentioned three times in tShabbat and five times in tYom Tov. These passages concern the following spheres of work: laundering, healing, use of spices, food preparation as well as other household activities. I will analyse the texts and at the same time ask the question, who is performing the actions described:

1. Laundry

The first toseftan halakhah (tShab 1:22) is cited in the Mishnah (mShab 1:9) in the name of Rabban Gamli’el, who states that in his father’s house they gave the laundry to the launderer three days before the Shabbat. The passage “The [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” is missing.

The second Tosefta text (tShab 12:17) appears in mShab 15:3. The Mishnah states that everyone is allowed to fold his or her cloth four or five times. Rabban Gamli’el and “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” are not mentioned at all.

For the rabbis, laundering is a sign of happiness. For example, bTaan 29b lists refraining from laundering as part of the preparation for mourning on the ninth of Av and during fasts and personal mourning periods. Equally, laundering is one obligation the rabbis ascribe to women. According to the mKet 5:5, wealthy women, like the women of the House of Rabban Gamli’el, could be relieved of laundering by handing their work over to a slave, a handmaid or a professional launderer. Although from this halakhah one may observe that not just women, but also slaves and launderers did the laundry, women were the ones clearly associated with this function. Thus, the Yerushalmi determines that a joint owner of a courtyard may not object to someone else doing laundry there “so as to preserve the dignity of Israelite women” (yNed 5:1, 39a). yShab 3:2, 5d tells us that Rabbi Mana was lenient towards women who spread out their laundry in his courtyard, and bMak 24a forbids staring at women carrying laundry. Many more such examples are found in rabbinic literature.

Thus, the two above-cited passages of the Tosefta manifestly deal with an activity that is closely associated with women, and the expression “the […] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” also refers, if not exclusively, at least to a great extent to women. One observes, too, that whoever is doing the laundry here firmly adheres to halakhic rules by insuring that the laundry is finished before Shabbat.

2. Healing

The expression “the ways of the Amorites” is “a halakhic category in which most kinds of forbidden foreign customs were included.”[1] Giuseppe Veltri has discussed at length the practices associated with the ways of the Amorites,[2] so that here I wish to highlight only the connection between these “ways of the Amorites” and women.

According to the Yerushalmi, healing and “the ways of the Amorites” are antithetic principles (yShab 8c, 37-39).[3] Nevertheless, in rabbinic literature, the ways of the Amorites were connected to healing as well. Although healing and being healed, as reflected in the magical papyri, “indicate that these practices were, in principle, completely gender-egalitarian,”[4] women were associated with healing practices because of their knowledge of plants, recipes, and food preparation.[5] According to the book of Enoch (1 Enoch 7:1) women learned from the fallen angels the various benevolent and malevolent properties of plants. Having demonstrated the central importance of women in the field of healing, Ilan has therefore concluded that the association of women with healing in rabbinic literature is “much more extensive” than usually seen.[6] Moreover, women were sometimes even “more prone to follow the ways of the Amorites than men.”[7] Ilan has adduced proof from several texts in rabbinic literature that mention women in connection with healing: For example, the descriptions of Abbaye’s associate (Em) and of Timtinis,[8] mentioned twice in the Yerushalmi (yAZ 2:2, 40d; yShab 14:4, 14d). Another example is found in ySot 16d, 1-4, where Rabbi Me’ir asks the following question: “Is there a woman here who knows how to whisper over an eye?”[9]

Here again, one can observe that the activity (or abstention from activity) of “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” in the above-cited Tosefta passage (tShab 7:5) is closely associated with women or, at least, with actions that were performed by men and women alike. And here, too, “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” are described as acting in the halakhically correct way.

3. Spices

The term for the spices used here is מוגמר.[1] The root גמר appears in the Hebrew Bible with the meaning: “to complete, finish, end” (Ps 12:2; 138:8). In rabbinic literature גומרא means “live coal” and the related verb, “to burn spices on coal.” mBer 6:6 maintains that after a meal people would bring the מוגמר to perfume the house. The word מוגמר derives from the Aramaic translation of the word for incense (קטורת) in Song 3:6. There the word קטורת (incense) was translated as מתגמרא. The Hebrew word קטורת derives from the root קטר, meaning “to cause to smoke” and was used in the Hebrew Bible to designate the smoke from a sacrifice burned on the altar (I Sam 2:15).

Incense was used in connection with priestly offerings. For example, the High Priest burned incense on live coals on Yom Kippur when he entered the Holy of Holies (Lev 16:12-13). In the Hebrew Bible, only priests were permitted to offer incense (Num 17:5). Jer 41:5 mentions men who came from Samaria after the destruction of the Temple, bearing a meal offering and incense. Apart from this, incense was used in private homes and burned in honor of guests (Ezek 23:41; Dan 2:46). Moreover, the name of Abraham’s second wife, Keturah, derives from the Hebrew root קטר) Gen 25:1).[2]

Throughout rabbinic literature the use of spices and incense at home is associated with women. Spices were the ingredients women used for producing perfume.[3] In bYev 63a spices are sold to women. mShab 5:3 states that a woman should not go out on Shabbat with a spice-box, or with a perfume-flask.[4] Also, in the New Testament women are described as preparing spices before Shabbat (Luke 23:56).

Already in ancient Mesopotamia women played a major role in the manufacture of perfumes. In fact, a woman is listed as the author of a series of recipes for making perfumes. Aromatic substances were used for medicine, magic, ritual, and cosmetics, so that “the manufacture of perfumes represented an important economic and cultural role for women.”[5]

Therefore, the above-cited passages about “the […] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” and spices are once again associated with labor performed by women. Three more traditions were passed down in the tYom Tov as actions of “the […] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” (tYT 1:22; 2:12; 2:13): The first (the halakhah under discussion here) deals with the preparation of lentils; the second with assembling candlesticks; and the third with sweeping between beds.

4. Food preparation and household activities

Household activities in general are closely associated with women. The above-mentioned activities of “the […] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el,” the preparation of food and the candlesticks, sweeping and changing sheets, are all recorded as women’s duties in the Mishnah (mKet 5:5; mShab 2:6). Although the cited activities are clearly assigned to women, the texts here do not explicitly mention them. It is quite obvious, though, that the missing subjects in all the above-cited traditions are “the [women] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el.”

I will argue this position in the following lines. First of all, one may observe that traditions handed down by the Tosefta in the name of “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” appear in the Mishnah – if mentioned at all – only as traditions in the name of Rabban Gamli’el or as anonymous rulings. The Tosefta mentions “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” in connection with female spheres of activity, whereas the expression “the House of Rabban Gamli’el” without “the [...] of” refers throughout tannaitic literature to “male” domains, like in tSot 16:4 (teaching Greek) and in tAZ 3:5 (closeness of the House of Rabban Gamli’el to the malkhut, i.e. the Roman government).

Thus, in the Tosefta the traditions mentioned above strongly connect women to the House of Rabban Gamli’el. In contrast to the Tosefta, no tradition is transmitted in the Mishnah that could connect women with the House of Rabban Gamli’el. In the Mishnah the House of Rabban Gamli’el is associated exclusively with male spaces, whereas the Tosefta includes material that associates women with the House of Rabban Gamli’el. Additionally, in all the above-cited sources “the [...] of the House of Rabban Gamli’el” were described as adhering to strict halakhic rules.

It is thus of some interest that the women associated with Rabban Gamli’el in the Bavli are referred to as learned women. In bNid 6b, for instance, the story of Rabban Gamli’el’s maidservant is told. She is depicted as acting in accordance with the halakhah (and cf. yNid 2:1, 49d where she even has a name – Tabitha). Moreover, Rabban Gamli’el trusted his maidservant even with regard to halakhic decisions. Relying exclusively on his maidservant’s statement, Rabban Gamli’el declared priestly gifts to be ritually pure.

bSan 39a records another story of a learned woman of the House of Rabban Gamli’el:

Even if this story is not based on any historical event,[1] the daughter of Rabban Gamli’el is described here as a learned woman, intelligent and quick at repartee. The same is true for the other women associated with the House of Rabban Gamli’el, like his “sister,” Imma Shalom, and his female slave, Tabitha, both referred to as learned women, who were well versed in halakhah (yNid 1:5, 49b; 2:1, 49d; LevR 19:4). Although from a historical point of view it may be that the family relationships are fictitious,[2] it is obvious that especially the Bavli associated learned women with the House of Rabban Gamli’el.[3]

In this context an example of a decision made by Rabban Gamli’el in favor of women’s rights should be mentioned. Elizabeth Alexander has offered a convincing reading of tEruv 8:15:[4] The Tosefta to this passage states: “S/he who brings tefillin in [on Shabbat] wears them one pair at a time. Rabban Gamli’el says: Two pairs at a time. It is the same for men and for women.” Alexander has argued that there are two ways of understanding this toseftan text. The first one is that all agree that the rule of bringing in tefillin applies to men and women alike, whereas the second option is that the last sentence is a continuation of Rabban Gamli’els dictum and that only Rabban Gamli’el holds that “the law does treat men as it treats women.”[5] Whereas the Yerushalmi supports the latter option (that Rabban Gamli’el decided in favor of women), the Bavli contrastingly attributes the line in the baraita to the anonymous sages rather than to Rabban Gamli’el and hereby “releases” him from a “woman-friendly” position.

To summarize, the female members of the House of Rabban Gamli’el were reported as learned women, well versed in halakhic rules. These women knew the halakhic prohibitions regarding festivals and Shabbat. On the basis of their actions Rabban Gamli’el decided the halakhah in favor of women. It is obvious that in most of the toseftan sources the expression mentioning unknown members of the House of Rabban Gamli’el refers to the women of the House. Yet the Mishnah erased them from its texts and reported all the actions performed by them only in a gender-neutral language or in the name of a male authority.