DOCSLIB.ORG

Teaching Midrash Explicitly in the Primary School Deena Sigel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Teaching Midrash Explicitly in the Primary School Deena Sigel Teaching Midrash Explicitly in the Primary School Deena Sigel The Institute ofEducation, London Educational Doctorate Dissertation 2 Abstract Midrash (classic rabbinic interpretation ofHebrew Scripture) is taught alongside Scripture in Bible classes throughout the Jewish world in the primary school. Because Jewish tradition holds that rabbinic interpretation ofScripture should always be taught together with Scripture the teaching ofmidrash is viewed as part ofthe initiation ofthe student into Jewish sacred texts and into Jewish literacy. Traditionally children encounter midrash commentary when it is quoted or paraphrased by Rashi, Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac ofthe eleventh century, whose commentary on the Pentateuch is the most widely read. But since midrash is based on the theology ofthe ancient rabbis and was the rabbis' medium for conveying their understandings ofScripture, ofGod, ofrighteousness and man's place in this world to their followers, these texts are naturally complex and their content is often abstract. Current pedagogical practice does not address midrash as a discrete subject and does not, therefore, address these underlying characteristics ofmidrash. It has been my professional experience, as well as that ofother Bible teachers, that a lack ofexplicit pedagogy for midrash can cause problems ofunderstanding for the young student which may negatively influence her view ofScripture. This paper describes an educational innovation (for year six students) that was developed and tested by the author in the format ofa design experiment. The strategy for teaching midrash explicitly builds upon academic scholarship on midrash content; on scholarship on the way that children form religious understandings and on scholarship that relates to the way that children make sense oftexts. The research was conducted on an international scale, in one school each in Israel, England and the U.S. The findings reflect the challenges faced and the successes that were achieved in teaching midrash explicitly in the primary school. 3 Acknowledgement My sincere appreciation to my mentor in midrash, Prof. David Stem ofthe University ofPennsylvania, whose unofficial guidance throughout my research has proven invaluable to me. My thanks, too, for his most helpful comments on the midrash content ofthis dissertation. Dedication To my husband, Gary, and our children. Your unfailing support has enabled me to see my work through to completion. Word Length I hereby declare that, except where explicit attribution is made, the work presented in this thesis is entirely my own. Word count (exclusive ofappendices and list ofreferences but including footnotes, tables and figures): 49,909 words 4 Supporting Statement I have found my participation in the international EdD programme at the Institute of Education to be an educational experience. The process, from attending the seminars through the research for - and the writing of- my dissertation has been one of personal and professional growth. During the foundations ofprofessionalism module I was given the chance to reflect on my view ofthe teacher as a professional. This was particularly meaningful for me as my field, Bible education in Jewish schools, is one that has been around for centuries but has not necessarily changed with advances in pedagogical approaches. Thus while it enjoys the esteem ofa well established teaching subject, its practitioners in many cases rely on traditional folk pedagogies such as rote teaching. Thus during this module I began to reflect on notions ofprofessionalism; and whether we as teachers should consider ourselves professionals, in the modem sense ofthe word, when we engage in traditional pedagogies. I began to realise that we should be considering notions ofmeaning making and textual understanding. Indeed it was this kind ofreflection that shed light for me on the problems that I had experienced (and the problems that my colleagues had shared with me) relating to the teaching ofclassical rabbinic interpretation ofHebrew Scripture known as midrash. These ancient Hebrew texts are taught in Jewish primary schools alongside Scripture. They are difficult to understand for several reasons including, their ancient Hebrew language; their abstract content; their basis in an ancient rabbinic mindset that is unfamiliar to the uninitiated student; their complex interpretive nature and their use of symbolism. Thus it occurred to me that the traditional rote pedagogy that has been used in Bible classes does not enable the young student to make meaning ofthese difficult interpretive texts. This led to my decision to explore the possibility of designing a new pedagogy for midrash. During the first methods ofenquiry module I thought about what might be an appropriate research methodology for me to use in designing and testing a new pedagogy for midrash. The module included discussions surrounding the theoretical underpinnings for different ways ofdoing research. We were introduced to 5 conceptions ofqualitative and quantitative research together with their respective benefits and drawbacks. I reasoned that ifI were to be able to make a contribution to the teaching ofBible through the introduction ofa modem pedagogy for midrash, I would need to find out whether this oedagogy could provide quantifiable results. I would also need to set up my research in such a way that other Bible teachers would be able to replicate what I'd done. Therefore the concept ofgeneralisability was important. This seemed to fit with the objectives ofquantitative research, and led me to consider the pre-test, post-test experimental paradigm. On the other hand later, as I prepared for the IFS (Institution Focused Study), I realised that my need to explore the understandings ofthe children called for qualitative data gathering as well. This was especially important since this would be a first attempt to explore the way in which children make meaning ofmidrash texts. This 'first time' notion was borne ofthe fact that traditional (rote) Bible pedagogy does not explore the way in which Jewish children make sense - or create meaning- ofHebrew Scripture. Accordingly I reasoned that I would need to gather data in the form ofthe children's own words describing how they were making meaning ofmidrash. These considerations led me to think about including open-ended student responses through student pre-test and post-test interviews and through daily pop-quizzes (on the teaching days) into the research format for my IFS. The research that I conducted as part ofthe second methods unit became the preliminary work for my IFS. It made use ofthe focus group paradigm for gathering preliminary data: children's base line knowledge ofmidrash. It aimed to find out what the major difficulties were that children faced when encountering midrash texts. It also aimed to gather qualitative data, from the descriptions ofthe children, relating to children's conceptions ofmidrash and their understandings ofthis geme. Accordingly transcripts were made ofthe meetings ofthe three focus groups that participated in this research. The data that was gathered was used in the design ofthe main measuring element ofthe IFS, the questionnaire. This questionnaire was, in tum, piloted on primary school children to determine whether children would understand what was being ofasked ofthem. 6 The module on international education was particularly fascinating for me. Having been educated on two continents, spending my primary school years in the -post­ Independence but still- British colonial system of South Africa and my secondary school and initial university years in the United States, I had experienced first-hand applications ofdifferent educational philosophies. Moreover, since my husband and I have lived in the United States, in England and in Israel, I have experienced these educational systems as a parent ofschool-age children. To add to this I had taught Bible in the United States in England and in Israel so I had some experience ofthese systems as a teacher. Ofcourse my participation in an international doctoral programme added to my excitement about this module. Indeed since I was least familiar with the Israeli system I researched the educational underpinnings ofthis system for my module paper. This proved valuable for the data analysis portion ofthe practical work ofmy IFS, and later, ofmy doctoral thesis. The research framework that I used for the IFS and thesis was a development from the initial thinking ofusing an experimental model. It used the format ofthe design experiment. The design experiment paradigm was well suited to my research in the sense that it is used for the design and improvement ofeducational innovations. It modifies the experimental paradigm so that it can be used in a classroom which is a dynamic research setting. Additionally it makes use ofqualitative data gathering methods, as was mentioned above. It does not make use ofa control group which made it a good fit for me as I was working with one class only and introducing explicit pedagogy for midrash. Since no other pedagogy for midrash was in place, it did not make sense to look for a control group. This lack ofmidrash pedagogy was because midrash is ofancillary interest in the Bible class, taking a back seat to the Scriptural text that is taught. The IFS consisted ofa midrash innovation, conducted in a school in Israel, that became the pilot study for the rest ofthe project. The thesis consisted ofsimilar midrash interventions that were undertaken in another school in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4 / Midrash and History: a Key to the Babelesque Imagination
    4 / Midrash and History: A Key to the Babelesque Imagination Myth as History Myth in Babelʹ’s fiction gives an illusion of the epic while mocking it, and reads unorthodox interpretations and essential truths into history. For Babelʹ, the myths of history and religion were a subtle medium for allegorical parallels, as well as ironic allusions to a moral message. This is an essentially midrashic approach to history, fol- lowing the ancient Jewish storytelling tradition that imaginatively elaborates on biblical and historical narrative, usually for exegetic or homiletic purposes, and playfully draws on intertextual, ver- bal, and semantic associations. Often new, contemporary meaning is introduced into the reading of familiar stories, or biblical ver- ses are given unexpected levels of meaning that dramatizes bib- lical figures as human. As Daniel Boyarin has demonstrated, midrash, the biblical metacommentary that forms part of Tal- mudic lore, is fundamentally intertextual and sets up a coded dua- lity between the exegetical text and the quoted or referenced pas- sage. When a textual moment is felt to be awkward, what Michel Rifattere terms “ungrammaticality” points to gaps that provide the key to decoding through another text.1 The midrashic mode informs the Jewish imagination at times of cultural repression (such as under the Romans or the Tsars), and characterizes the way the canon of Jewish literature has developed and renewed itself. There is something we might call midrashic in Babelʹ’s view of history. 129 4 / Midrash and History We may find a key to Babelʹ’s midrashic view of history in the art of the Polish painter in Red Cavalry.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    INTRODUCTION Hanne Trautner-Kromann n this introduction I want to give the necessary background information for understanding the nine articles in this volume. II start with some comments on the Hebrew or Jewish Bible and the literature of the rabbis, based on the Bible, and then present the articles and the background information for these articles. In Jewish tradition the Bible consists of three main parts: 1. Torah – Teaching: The Five Books of Moses: Genesis (Bereshit in Hebrew), Exodus (Shemot), Leviticus (Vajikra), Numbers (Bemidbar), Deuteronomy (Devarim); 2. Nevi’im – Prophets: (The Former Prophets:) Joshua, Judges, Samuel I–II, Kings I–II; (The Latter Prophets:) Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezek- iel; (The Twelve Small Prophets:) Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephania, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; 3. Khetuvim – Writings: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, The Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Chronicles I–II1. The Hebrew Bible is often called Tanakh after these three main parts: Torah, Nevi’im and Khetuvim. The Hebrew Bible has been interpreted and reinterpreted by rab- bis and scholars up through the ages – and still is2. Already in the Bible itself there are examples of interpretation (midrash). The books of Chronicles, for example, can be seen as a kind of midrash on the 10 | From Bible to Midrash books of Samuel and Kings, repeating but also changing many tradi- tions found in these books. In talmudic times,3 dating from the 1st to the 6th century C.E.(Common Era), the rabbis developed and refined the systems of interpretation which can be found in their literature, often referred to as The Writings of the Sages.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anti-Samaritan Attitude As Reflected in Rabbinic Midrashim
    religions Article The Anti‑Samaritan Attitude as Reflected in Rabbinic Midrashim Andreas Lehnardt Faculty of Protestant Theology, Johannes Gutenberg‑University Mainz, 55122 Mainz, Germany; lehnardt@uni‑mainz.de Abstract: Samaritans, as a group within the ranges of ancient ‘Judaisms’, are often mentioned in Talmud and Midrash. As comparable social–religious entities, they are regarded ambivalently by the rabbis. First, they were viewed as Jews, but from the end of the Tannaitic times, and especially after the Bar Kokhba revolt, they were perceived as non‑Jews, not reliable about different fields of Halakhic concern. Rabbinic writings reflect on this change in attitude and describe a long ongoing conflict and a growing anti‑Samaritan attitude. This article analyzes several dialogues betweenrab‑ bis and Samaritans transmitted in the Midrash on the book of Genesis, Bereshit Rabbah. In four larger sections, the famous Rabbi Me’ir is depicted as the counterpart of certain Samaritans. The analyses of these discussions try to show how rabbinic texts avoid any direct exegetical dispute over particular verses of the Torah, but point to other hermeneutical levels of discourse and the rejection of Samari‑ tan claims. These texts thus reflect a remarkable understanding of some Samaritan convictions, and they demonstrate how rabbis denounced Samaritanism and refuted their counterparts. The Rabbi Me’ir dialogues thus are an impressive literary witness to the final stages of the parting of ways of these diverging religious streams. Keywords: Samaritans; ancient Judaism; rabbinic literature; Talmud; Midrash Citation: Lehnardt, Andreas. 2021. The Anti‑Samaritan Attitude as 1 Reflected in Rabbinic Midrashim. The attitudes towards the Samaritans (or Kutim ) documented in rabbinical literature 2 Religions 12: 584.
    [Show full text]
  • Shavuot in Talmud and Midrash (Mostly Soncino Translation and Commentary; Emphasis Mine; Some Language Tweaks)
    22 May 2007 [Shavuot 5767] Dr Maurice M. Mizrahi Congregation Adat Reyim Tikkun Lel Shavuot Shavuot in Talmud and Midrash (Mostly Soncino translation and commentary; emphasis mine; some language tweaks) Only Israel accepted the Torah Mechilta de Rabbi Ishmael, Exodus 20:2 It was for the following reason that the ancient nations of the world were asked to accept the Torah, in order that they should have no excuse for saying, 'Had we been asked we would have accepted it'. For, behold, they were asked and they refused to accept it, for it is said, "He said, the Lord came from Sinai...) (Deut. 33:2). He appeared to the children of Esau, the wicked, and said to them, "Will you accept the Torah?" They said to Him, "What is written in it?" He said to them, "You shall not murder" (Deut. 5:17) They then said to Him, "The very heritage which our father left us was 'By the sword you shall live' (Gen. 27:40). He then appeared to the children of Ammon and Moab. He said to them, "Will you accept the Torah?" They said to Him, "What is written in it?" He said to them, "You shall not commit adultery" (Deut. 5:17) They, however, said to Him that they were, all of them, the children of adulterers, as it is said, "Thus the two daughters of Lot came to be with child by their father" (Gen. 19:36) He then appeared to the children of Ishmael. He said to them, "Will you accept the Torah?" They said to Him, "What is written in it?" He said to them, "You shall not steal" (Deut.
    [Show full text]
  • Jews and Mormons: Two Houses of Israel Frank J. Johnson and Rabbi William J
    BYU Studies Quarterly Volume 41 Issue 4 Article 4 10-1-2002 Jews and Mormons: Two Houses of Israel Frank J. Johnson and Rabbi William J. Leffler David E. Bokovoy Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq Recommended Citation Bokovoy, David E. (2002) "Jews and Mormons: Two Houses of Israel Frank J. Johnson and Rabbi William J. Leffler," BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 41 : Iss. 4 , Article 4. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol41/iss4/4 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Studies Quarterly by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Bokovoy: <em>Jews and Mormons: Two Houses of Israel</em> Frank J. Johnson frank J johnson and rabbi william J leffler ca 0 jews and Morcormonsmormonsmons two houses of israel 0 hoboken new york ktavkeav publishing 2000 X M M by E bokovoy reviewed david M C n addition to everything else they do words can be ambassadors of iingoodwill spreading the messages ofa culture 1 this statement by joseph lowin the director of cultural services at the national foundation for jewish culture coincides with the thesis of jews and Morcormonsmormonsmons two houses of israel jews need to know more about mormonism and cormonsmormons about judaism 131 the authors frank J johnson a mormon high priest and william J leffler a jewish rabbi undertake to explain the differences and similarities
    [Show full text]
  • Sources of Authority
    Sources of Authority Torah: ("teaching" or "instruction") = The Pentateuch or "Five Books" (of Moses). The collection of these text may have begun as early as 1020 BCE, but it was not completed until around 400 BCE. Contains-- Bereshit ("in the beginning") = Genesis: The genealogy (family tree) of mankind from Adam via Noah and his descendants after the Flood; God's covenant with Abraham to bring the people out of Egypt and give them the land of Canaan. Shemot ("names") = Exodus: The period of bondage in Egypt and the Exodus ("coming out"); the giving of the Torah ("instruction") including the Decalogue or Ten Commandments given to Moses. Vayiqra' ("and he called") = Leviticus: Called "the Torah of the Priests" (Levite = Priest) this book includes the laws of worship, sacrifice, ritual purity ("kosher"), sexual relations, and of festivals and times sacred to the Jews. Bemidbar ("in the wilderness") = Numbers: The history of the wanderings in the desert after the flight from Egypt; some legal and ritual regulations. Devarim ("words") = Deuteronomy: Contains speeches attributed to Moses shortly before his death which summarize the history of Israel and give ethical teachings. The emphasis is on the concentration of worship in one place, the Temple in Jerusalem. Tanach: The Old Testament containing the five books of Torah and: Nevi’im = The Prophets: Contains materials relating to the entry into Canaan (i.e. relating to events as early as c. 1200 BCE). The collection of the texts of the Nevi'im was not completed until around 200 BCE. Contains
    [Show full text]
  • Narratology, Hermeneutics, and Midrash
    Poetik, Exegese und Narrative Studien zur jüdischen Literatur und Kunst Poetics, Exegesis and Narrative Studies in Jewish Literature and Art Band 2 / Volume 2 Herausgegeben von / edited by Gerhard Langer, Carol Bakhos, Klaus Davidowicz, Constanza Cordoni Constanza Cordoni / Gerhard Langer (eds.) Narratology, Hermeneutics, and Midrash Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Narratives from the Late Antique Period through to Modern Times With one figure V&R unipress Vienna University Press Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar. ISBN 978-3-8471-0308-0 ISBN 978-3-8470-0308-3 (E-Book) Veröffentlichungen der Vienna University Press erscheineN im Verlag V&R unipress GmbH. Gedruckt mit freundlicher Unterstützung des Rektorats der Universität Wien. © 2014, V&R unipress in Göttingen / www.vr-unipress.de Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Das Werk und seine Teile sind urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung in anderen als den gesetzlich zugelassenen Fällen bedarf der vorherigen schriftlichen Einwilligung des Verlages. Printed in Germany. Titelbild: „splatch yellow“ © Hazel Karr, Tochter der Malerin Lola Fuchs-Carr und des Journalisten und Schriftstellers Maurice Carr (Pseudonym von Maurice Kreitman); Enkelin der bekannten jiddischen Schriftstellerin Hinde-Esther Singer-Kreitman (Schwester von Israel Joshua Singer und Nobelpreisträger Isaac Bashevis Singer) und Abraham Mosche Fuchs. Druck und Bindung: CPI Buch Bücher.de GmbH, Birkach Gedruckt auf alterungsbeständigem Papier. Contents Constanza Cordoni / Gerhard Langer Introduction .................................. 7 Irmtraud Fischer Reception of Biblical texts within the Bible: A starting point of midrash? . 15 Ilse Muellner Celebration and Narration. Metaleptic features in Ex 12:1 – 13,16 .
    [Show full text]
  • Revelation Rabbi Darren Kleinberg 1
    The Movements – Revelation Rabbi Darren Kleinberg 1. Orthodox Judaism Maimonides (1135‐1204). The Thirteen Principles of Faith. 8. I believe with complete faith that the entire Torah that we now find in our hands is the same one that was given to Moses, out teacher, peace be upon him. Excerpt taken from: The Artscroll Siddur Maimonides. Commentary to the Mishnah. The eighth fundamental principle is that the Torah came from God. We are to believe that the whole Torah was given us through Moses our Teacher entirely from God. When we call the Torah “God’s Word” we speak metaphorically. We do not know exactly how it reached us, but only that it came through Moses who acted like a secretary taking dictation. He wrote down the events of the time and the commandments, for which reason he is called “Lawgiver.” There is no distinction between a verse of scripture like “The sons of Ham were Cush and Mizraim” (Gen. 10:6), or “His wife’s name was Mehetabel and his concubine was Timna” (Gen. 36:39, 12), and one like “I am the Lord your God” (Ex. 20:2), or “Hear, O Israel” (Deut. 6:4). All came from God, and all are the Torah of God, perfect, pure, holy and true. Anyone who says Moses wrote some passages on his own is regarded by our sages as an atheist or the worst kind of heretic, because he tries to distinguish essence from accident in Torah. Such a heretic claims that some historical passages or stories are trivial inventions of Moses and not Divine Revelation.
    [Show full text]
  • Christianity in Talmud and Midrash
    chapter three Christianity in Talmud and Midrash Parallelomania or Parallelophobia? Israel Jacob Yuval One of the best-known statements about identity from ancient times is doubtless that made by Paul in the Epistle to the Galatians 3:28 regarding the equality and cooperation among all those who believe in Jesus. Paul says: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”1 This universal declaration is in striking contrast to an opposite Jewish expression. In the Morning Blessings, it states: “Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the Universe, who has not made me a Gentile . who has not made me a slave . who has not made me a woman.” I would like to begin with these two positions regarding the question of identity as a way of introducing the issue of polemics. Is Jewish self-identity, which seems here to be for- mulated in a manner diametrically opposed to that of Paul, expressed in deliberate polemics with it, or was the Jewish formula already known to Paul, and was it he who turned it topsy-turvy? The picture becomes more complex upon examining the history of the Jewish formula. Its present form is relatively late, its source being the Baby- 50 Christianity in Talmud and Midrash 51 lonian Talmud.2 In the tannaitic literature,3 we find a somewhat different wording: instead of “who has not made me a slave,” there is the phrase “who has not made me an ignoramus.” Thus, that formula which precisely in- verts Paul’s words only appears in the later textual witnesses, strengthening the possibility that there alone was the blessing formulated in opposition to the Pauline formulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Significant Texts and Writings
    Significant Texts and Writings Language The Jewish nation has spoken many different languages during its long history. Biblical and Modern Hebrew belong to the Semitic family of languages. There is evidence of Semitic languages being used as far back as 2500 BCE. The most widely spoken Semitic languages today are Arabic and Hebrew, but there are other Semitic languages in use. These include Maltese; African languages such as Amharic, Tigrinya, and Tigre; a number of other languages and dialects used in the Middle East in countries such as Syria and Turkey; and other languages in the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa. Historically, Semitic languages have played an important role in religious expression. These include Arabic in Islam, Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic in Judaism, Ge’ez in Ethiopian Christianity, as well as Syriac and Chaledean in Nestorian Christianity. Biblical Hebrew was the language spoken by the ancient Jews during biblical times. Throughout history, Jewish people learned this biblical language in order to read the scriptures and pray. As for their daily lives, Yiddish (Ashkenazi Jews) and Ladino (Sephardic Jews) became the most prominent. The establishment of the State of Israel and the destruction of East European Jewry essentially tipped the scales in favour of modern Hebrew. The Hebrew language underwent a process of revival: from a “dead language” of scriptures and prayer books, Hebrew was transformed into a dynamic, modern language. In the contemporary Jewish world, Hebrew is unchallenged in its claim to being the Jewish language, although it is mostly Israeli Jews who can actually use it. Outside of Israel, most Jews speak the language of the country that they reside in; however, Hebrew is the language used by most Jews for prayer and other religious observances and rites.
    [Show full text]
  • Beginners Guide for the Major Jewish Texts: Torah, Mishnah, Talmud
    August 2001, Av 5761 The World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS) 9 Alkalai St., POB 4498 Jerusalem, 91045, Israel Tel: +972 2 561 0133 Fax: +972 2 561 0741 E-mail: [email protected] Web-site: www.wujs.org.il Originally produced by AJ6 (UK) ©1998 This edition ©2001 WUJS – All Rights Reserved The Guide To Texts Published and produced by WUJS, the World Union of Jewish Students. From the Chairperson Dear Reader Welcome to the Guide to Texts. This introductory guide to Jewish texts is written for students who want to know the difference between the Midrash and Mishna, Shulchan Aruch and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch. By taking a systematic approach to the obvious questions that students might ask, the Guide to Texts hopes to quickly and clearly give students the information they are after. Unfortunately, many Jewish students feel alienated from traditional texts due to unfamiliarity and a feeling that Jewish sources don’t ‘belong’ to them. We feel that Jewish texts ought to be accessible to all of us. We ought to be able to talk about them, to grapple with them, and to engage with them. Jewish texts are our heritage, and we can’t afford to give it up. Jewish leaders ought to have certain skills, and ethical values, but they also need a certain commitment to obtaining the knowledge necessary to ensure that they aren’t just leaders, but Jewish leaders. This Guide will ensure that this is the case. Learning, and then leading, are the keys to Jewish student leadership. Lead on! Peleg Reshef WUJS Chairperson How to Use The Guide to Jewish Texts Many Jewish students, and even Jewish student leaders, don’t know the basics of Judaism and Jewish texts.
    [Show full text]
  • Women and Torah Ancient and Modern Midrashim Janelle Glick
    Consensus Volume 40 Article 5 Issue 1 Student Paper Showcase 5-25-2019 Women and Torah Ancient and Modern Midrashim Janelle Glick Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus Part of the Biblical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Glick, Janelle (2019) "Women and Torah Ancient and Modern Midrashim," Consensus: Vol. 40 : Iss. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol40/iss1/5 This Articles is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Glick: Women and Torah Women and Torah Ancient and Modern Midrashim Janelle Glick1 he study of Torah, though written by men in an ancient patriarchal society, is now a dialogue involving both males and females, and as such provides a table at which T women add their voices to the record from which their ancient Israelite sisters were kept in silence. The door of feminist biblical scholarship opens wider all the time, making room for even the author of this paper, a conservative Mennonite wife, mother, and scholar to enter and consider new ways of reading scriptures. Naomi Mara Hyman writes of the following task of feminist interpretation of scripture tradition: When we learn to see the world through the eyes of tradition and when tradition takes into itself women’s views of the world, both will grow…This will not be an easy task. There are many obstacles for women, not least of which is learning the language of our tradition so that we can create our place in it… One can only acquire this knowledge through direct study of the traditional texts themselves, and accessing those sources can be challenging.2 Though challenging indeed, digging out early midrash sources pertaining to the biblical stories of Israelite women is a delight-filled process deepening both the reader’s love of and interest in original biblical texts.
    [Show full text]