In his essay, David Ellenson enlists the phenomenon of Jewish feminism and its growing impact on halakhic development as support for Simon Rawidowicz's debate with a dichotomous view of Jewish history that relegates Jewish creativity exclusively to the biblical era, and regards all diaspora culture beginning with the Second Temple as mere commentary. Such a view, according to Rawidowicz and Ellenson, naively ignores the multifarious opportunities for innovation that can slip under the radar of what purports to be simple explication of earlier First Temple originality, thereby ensuring Judaism its continued vibrancy. While heartily endorsing this proposition, I would like to address some concerns that heightened awareness of interpretive creativity raises.
Truth be told, the blurring of binary distinctions in general is regarded as a feminine proclivity. Conceiving reality in terms of opposing couplets, so the argument goes, tends to the creation of hierarchies, inevitably prioritizing one pole over the...
