Gleanings
Feminism and
Jewish Prayer
A variety of views on changing masculine bias in Jewish liturgy.
Jewish feminists agree
that Jewish liturgy and liturgical practice have slighted women, and most, if
not all, seek redress in liturgical change. They disagree, however, about the
advisability of various changes intended to include women's perspectives in the
Jewish worship experience.
Including Women, Transforming Prayer
This story was told by Rabbi Laura Geller:
"One day when I sat in a class in my rabbinical
seminary…we studied the tradition of berakhot--blessings,
blessings of enjoyment, blessings relating to the performance of mitzvot
(commandments) and blessings of praise and thanksgiving. My teacher
explained…'There is no important moment in the lifetime of a Jew for which
there is no blessing.' Suddenly I realized that it was not true. There had been
important moments in my life for which there was no blessing. One such moment
was when I…first got my period."
Geller's story depicts a paradoxical situation. She appears
to be a full participant in an egalitarian Judaism. She is even a rabbinical
student. But her internal experience is of exclusion: vital components of her
personhood have been ignored. What is more, her invisibility is invisible. Her
teacher and her male classmates do not know that they do not see her.
What would have to happen for liturgies to become fully
inclusive of women as well as men? First of all, we would have to acknowledge
women as well as men as members of the praying community. Classical Judaism,
along with counting only men in the community of worshippers, based its
liturgies exclusively on stories about male ancestors and described the people
Israel as if all of them were male. Women's inclusion would necessitate
supplying the missing ancestral memories, the missing language about the people
Israel, and the missing human experiences about which prayer speaks.
Second, we would have to involve women along with men in the
creation and transformation of the prayers and in the compilation of the
liturgies that all of us will recite together.
Third, in order to begin to create truly inclusive worship,
we would have to acknowledge the extent to which our current services reflect
masculine sensibilities, styles, and gestures and androcentric language and
theologies. We would have to admit that the exclusively masculine language with
which we currently refer to God is a metaphoric language that has been totalized. That is, selected metaphors
have been taken to represent the totality of the God toward whom they point.
Such an understanding is, at the least, inadequate and distortive.
To correct this situation, would have to enrich and
diversify the language in our present prayer books with feminine forms and
imagery. But substituting words is not enough. We would have to make room for
new genres, new gestures, new styles of prayer. This third task is complicated
by so many considerations--theological, anthropological, psychological, and
aesthetic--that it is really incommensurate with the other two.
--Rachel Adler, a
feminist theologian, earned a Ph.D. in Religion and Social Ethics from the
University of Southern California conjointly with Hebrew Union College, Los
Angeles, where she now teaches. Excerpted with permission from Engendering
Judaism: An Inclusive Theology and Ethics. © Rachel Adler, 1998,
Jewish Publication Society.
Masculine-Biased Language about Humans and the Divine
Until now, the prayer book has expressed the spiritual
yearnings of half the Jewish people, the men who were the writers, editors, and
translators of a liturgy that was designed for use by men. Still, many of the
prayers reflect human experience such as prayers for health, wisdom,
forgiveness, and justice as well as praise and thanksgiving. Feminine imagery
appears, for example, in the Hallel [Psalms 113-118], which speaks of
barren women becoming mothers. It is difficult to determine whether the prayer
reflects female yearnings or male priorities--the desire for progeny--which
women internalize.
No matter how sensitive, these prayers, written from a male
perspective, assume that women's only priority is to fulfill her biological
function--to bear children. These prayers are highly selective, reflecting a
biblical perspective (male) that features the Matriarchs as revered female role
models. The editors of our prayer books traditionally excluded prayers by other
biblical women, such as Miriam and Deborah, which offer alternative role
models.
Through the centuries, male editors of the prayer book
stereotyped the role of women in the eyes of those at worship. The language of
liturgy is also unrelievedly masculine, creating the overriding impression that
worship is a male prerogative. Since services were traditionally conducted in
Hebrew, which has no neuter gender, it was only natural that prayers, written
and selected by men, would appear only in masculine form, further excluding
women-whether or not intentionally. Translations in the vernacular such as
English, which does have a neuter gender, were nevertheless couched in solely masculine
terms, compounding the problem.
As Jews, who have suffered for centuries because of the
stereotyped images that were used to exclude us from the mainstream of society,
we are particularly sensitive to the way language is used to foster and perpetuate
prejudice. Yet, when the question of masculine-biased language in liturgy is
raised, the subject is often trivialized, the hostility hidden under the guise
of humor. Women, themselves, sometimes object to suggested changes. They may be
going through a process of denial, for the price of recognition may be too
painful, or they may simply be unaware that change in language and liturgy is
in good Jewish tradition.
In biblical days, even the names of revered Patriarchs and
Matriarchs were changed when a radical change in character took place. Abram
became Abraham when he received God's blessing (Genesis 17:5). Sarai became
Sarah as she became the mother of the Jewish people (Genesis 17:15). Jacob's
name was changed to Israel as a result of his transformation of character
(Genesis 32:29). Religious equality for women signifies a similar change in
status, necessitating inclusion in the language of liturgy and, thus, the
elimination of sexist language.
The problem of masculine-biased language has been addressed
on two levels. It has been relatively easy to reach a consensus on the need to
change language referring to humanity. Resistance to the elimination of
masculine imagery about God is much more pervasive, indicating the profound
emotional impact of the language of prayer.
--Annette Daum was
Director of the Department of Inter-religious Affairs of the Union of American
Hebrew Congregations and Associate Director of the Commission on Social Action
of Reform Judaism. Reprinted with permission from Daughters of
the King: Women and the Synagogue, edited by Susan Grossman and
Rivka Haut. © Annette Daum, 1992, Jewish Publication Society.
Feminine Language for God Stresses Gender—But God is Genderless
Some feminists view the traditional Hebrew liturgy--and
English translations such as Rabbi [Jules] Harlow's [in the book from which
this article is taken]--as sexist. For them, the image of God as a male King,
who sits on a throne and judges humanity, is alienating. Some of these
feminists feel that adding feminine language--God as Queen, God as
Mother--makes the concept of the divine inclusive, and this allows them to
embrace Jewish prayer.
Other feminists, myself included, object to changing the
Hebrew language that refers to God. The traditional Hebrew of the siddur
[prayerbook] unites Jews everywhere. Although I, and other Jewish feminists,
welcome changes in the English translations and though I welcome original
prayers and new feminist rituals (alongside new understandings of Jewish
women's roles), I believe that public, communal Hebrew prayer should remain
largely fixed.
As Rabbi Harlow argues, traditional Hebrew prayer, even
today, is shared by Jews in all countries of the world. I pray with greatest
intensity when the words are familiar and link me to earlier generations and to
Jews in Israel and elsewhere.
I believe, too, that traditional conceptions of God include
attributes that are neither masculine nor feminine; both women and men are
wise, strong, merciful. For me, God transcends gender. I am uncomfortable with
feminist rewriting of Hebrew language that addresses or refers to God. While
changing references to the Jewish people, both to our ancestors and to Jews
today, is--for me--a necessary change, changing the way we refer to God is, in
my mind, not authentically Jewish. The Bible describes God using physical terms
with masculine gender: Melekh or King, Adon or Lord. Yet, as
Rabbi Harlow points out, the Bible also uses feminine imagery in referring to
God.
None of these descriptions or images of God in the Bible
imply God is either masculine or feminine. Some people would assign specific
attributes to masculine or feminine aspects of God, but such narrow definitions
tend to create and reinforce stereotypes that are misleading because of God's
unique and genderless nature. Tampering with the original Hebrew eliminates the
nuances of the multi-dimensional meaning of God.
--Carol Diament is
director of the National Department of Jewish Education at Hadassah: The Women's
Zionist Organization of America, in New York. Excerpted from Pray Tell: A
Hadassah Guide to Jewish Prayer (c) 2003 Hadassah (Woodstock, VT: Jewish Lights Publishing). $29.95+$3.75 s/h. Order by
mail or call 800-962-4544 or on-line at www.jewishlights.com. Permission granted
by Jewish Lights
Publishing, P.O. Box
237, Woodstock, VT 05091.
