This summer, I worked with Professor Chumie Juni on her book project: “Halakhic Women: Ritual and Gender Conflict in American Orthodox Judaism.” The book explores the relationship between ultra-orthodox Jewish women’s ritual practice and their gender formation as religious subjects. This summer, we focused primarily on women’s engagement with the ritual of Torah study. We investigated how and why gender-traditional women study Torah, a practice that has been historically associated with men. I analyzed interviews and guide books written by and for ultra-orthodox Jews to chart the discourse around women’s Torah study in this community. My analysis was guided by the questions: How do women study Torah? Why do women study Torah? How does women’s Torah study differ from men’s Torah study? What is the discourse around women’s Torah study in this community? I used the data I compiled to help Chumie develop a thesis for her chapter on Torah study and create a chapter outline. Throughout the process, we met regularly to discuss the findings. In addition to trying to develop a framework for understanding women’s Torah study, we used our observations to draw insights regarding religion and gender theory more broadly as part of the project’s larger goal of working towards new ways to theorize how individual subjects form their identities under larger systems of power.
One of my main tasks this summer was to conduct a comparative analysis of the two books pictured below, Chovas HaTalmidim and Chovas HaTalmidos. Chovas HaTalmidim means “the student’s obligation,” and the books are intended to guide students in their service of G-d. Chovas HaTalmidim was published for the male student, and Chovas HaTalmidos was adapted nearly 100 years later for the female student. I reviewed the two books with an eye towards understanding how the guidance differs along gender lines. I matched up the parts of the books that overlap, taking note of how the language and examples diverged. For example, in the books’ respective sections on productivity and avoiding laziness, both books suggest that the student consider how long each task will take before starting. In Chovas HaTalmidim, the section continues: “For example, you may say to yourself, ‘This page of Gemara should take me an hour to learn’… In Chovas HaTalmidos, however, the instructions are followed by “For example, take the task of cleaning the kitchen…” In this way, the examples of Torah study offered in Chovas HaTalmidim are consistently swapped out for more “womanly” activities in Chovas HaTalmidos. After I compiled a full list of similar examples, Chumie and I concluded that while Chovas HaTalmidim suggests that Torah study is one of the most important ways for a male student to connect with and serve G-d, Chovas HaTalmidos diverts the message of Chovas HaTalmidim such that girls are told to pursue more womanly traits – modesty, homemaking, heartfelt prayer, obedience to trusted authority figures – implying that Torah study is not a worthwhile use of a woman’s time.
Throughout this project, I strengthened my textual analysis and claim-building skills and honed my ability to communicate my ideas effectively both orally and in writing. I also further developed my ability to analyze interviews with study participants. In the course of the research, I navigated the challenges of learning from research participants about their real life experiences in an academic context, without imposing personal biases and ivory tower assumptions. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, I learned how to strike a balance between taking ownership and responsibility and deferring to leadership in a setting where I was not the project lead.