The Talmud was reduced to writing in the 6th Century of the Common Era. For historical context, the Talmud pre-dates the countries of France, Italy and Germany and the separation of the Orthodox and Roman churches. Indeed, Europe had only a vague notion of itself as somehow different than Asia and Africa at this time. Charlemagne had not united the Frankish tribes. The Talmud is ancient and therefore reflects ancient society. As a modern reader we become painfully aware of the different time when we read about the role of women in the Talmud. We have to ask ourselves, how much of the subservience of women in the Talmud reflects the society of the time and how much reflects a theological belief about women. Of course, how we answer that question reveals a lot about the role we think women play in society today. If women are inherently created by God with different obligations and different public roles, than we probably believe in a very circumscribed public life for women. If however, the Talmud merely reflects the status of women at the time, than the role of women should evolve as our own ideas about individuality and biology vs. gender evolve.

The role of women in Jewish religious practice arises in the obligation to recite the Bircas HaMazon after eating bread. All of Chapter 7 (Dafs 45- 51) concerns the Bircas HaMazon, so let’s take a step back and refresh ourselves on this set of blessings. We are required to bless food before and after we eat it. Bread is a special category and the blessing over bread in almost all cases serves to bless other food eaten at the same meal. If we eat bread, we say a special set of blessings after the meal. There are three biblically required blessings: (i) blessings for nourishment; (ii) blessings for the Land of Israel; and (iii) blessings for Jerusalem. The Rabbis added a fourth blessing for the one who confers good. If three people share a meal, an additional call and response blessing called the Zimun is added to begining of the Bircas HaMazon. If ten or more people eat together, than a special version of the Zimun blessing is used. We will explore the intricacies of these rules in Chapter 7.

We begin Chapter 7 by learning that when determining whether three or more people ate bread together, women, slaves, gentiles and minors do not count. We later learn that if three or more women eat together, then they do recite the Zimun. Same for slaves and minors. However, we do not mix groups. In other words, two men and one woman would not be required to recite Zimun. Same for two women and a slave (the gender of the slave is not specified, so I am not sure how this relates to the calculation). The Talmud specifically warns that if women and slaves eat together, the meal will lead to promiscuity and therefore does not warrant a collective blessing.

Back to my original question – Is this separation the result of the Rabbis analyzing their own social circumstances or is this separation a divinely mandated difference between men and women? I clearly believe that the Rabbis were talking about their own social circumstances, but many observant Jews disagree with me. The argue that God ordained different roles for women, but that they are equal to men (just different). To many modern Americans this smacks of “separate but equal” and we certainly have seen the pernicious effects when women are given a different role in society.

Of course, there are many twists and turns in today’s Daf. I want to point out two tidbits before I close. First, apparently the Rabbis in ancient Babylonia enjoyed tacos. We learned that Yehudah bar Mereimar, Mar bar Rav Ashi and Rav Acha of Difti once “wrapped bread together”. The commentators clarify that this means they wrapped the bread around other foods and ate them as a meal – that is fajitas! The second tidbit concerns the word “ignoramus”. The Talmud discusses who is obligated to recite the Bircas Hamazon and who is obligated to listen to the Bircas HaMazon. If one is an “ignoramus”, then that person should just listen to the scholar recite the blessings. The Aramaic word that is translated as “ignoramus” is “boor”. My research shows that the English word “boor” originates from Dutch and was first used in the Sixteenth century. Is this merely a coincidence that an ancient language uses a cognate to mean the same thing?