[MUSIC] Welcome back. One of the unique features of Israel as a modern democracy is the lack of separation between church and state. In fact since its earliest days, Israel has defined itself as a Jewish democracy. And has struggled over the exact meaning of this notion. As we learned from Professor in our first lesson. When Herzl imagined the future Israeli state, what he had in mind was a secular state for the Jewish people. Rabbis and spiritual leaders were to maintain their leadership positions outside of the state apparatuses. However, since the earliest days of the Zionist settlement in Palestine, clashes have constantly emerged between the principle associated with modern democratic philosophy and those associated with Jewish philosophy and religious commandments. Constant tensions have always existed between some Israeli religious groups who try to make Israel's public sphere more religious and secular groups who seek to define religiosity as a private matter. As already mentioned, these constant tensions have often shaped Israel's coalition government, and has a bearing on the everyday life of every Israeli, whether the person is Jewish or not. Professor Dan Avnon teaches at the Hebrew University's Department of Political Science. He specializes in Jewish and general political philosophy, democratic civic education, and Israeli political society. Avnon is deeply involved in Israel civic education debates and controversies. He's written course curriculum and trained teachers to teach pluralistic Israeli civics. In all streams of Israeli education, Jewish and Arab, religious and non-religious. In 2001, he founded the Hebrew University's Gilo Center for citizenship, democracy, and civic education. One of the most prominent aspects of the clash between democracy and Judaism in its institutionalized religious form concerns the status of women in our society. Many religious authorities believe that gender segregation and a clear cut division of labor are the Jewish way. From this point of view, they call for segregated schools for boys and girls. Segregated colleges and the exclusion of women from public spheres, in politics, in art, and so on. The most fundamentalist among them also call for gender segregation on public buses where women are asked to sit in the back. In some neighborhoods, men and women are asked to walk on different sidewalks to prevent random touching or unwelcome communication. At the same time, even among the ultra Orthodox communities, new trends of feminism have emerged in recent years, allowing women to gain religious and secular education, and to reshape their place in their communities and in Israeli society at large. After Dan Avnon's general introduction, [INAUDIBLE] will talk to us about religious women in Israel and their struggles to really find their identities and jurisdiction in the contested space, constructed through the encounter of religiosity and democracy. >> Hi, my name is Dan Avon and I want to talk to you today about the question, can a state be both Jewish and Democratic? The question arises because when most people hear a word like Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, one wonders, what is the relationship between a religious tradition and the modern democratic state? So I would like to, first of all, give three possible answers. Which are either yes, depends, or no. Well, the answer yes is self evident because Israel is a state that is self defined constitutionally as a Jewish and democratic state. That being the answer, one wonders what we'll be doing in the next 30 minutes. Well, we're going to focus on the depends. It really depends on what we mean when we say Jewish as a Jewish state. And also a little bit about what we mean when we say democratic. We will not address the issue of no because empirically such a state exists. And theoretically there are a lot of justifications, but there are issues. Let's go ahead and see what they may be. So of course as I said it depends on what we mean by Jewish and what we mean by democratic. When we speak about Jewish states, we could think about four different aspects of what Jewish means. Jewish could mean a people, could mean a nation, could mean a religion, and could mean a culture. Now we're talking in English. The Jewish tradition comes from a different language, it comes from Hebrew. In the Hebrew language, the word people has lot of depth to it. It's kind of the people of Israel, the people of the Bible. The word people is not only as some people in modern states here in democratic context, people is a loaded term with a lot of traditional overtures. So let's see what Judaism as a people, or Jewish, as a people, may mean. Now when we're talking about Jewish as a people, we are talking about a very deep heritage, thousands of years, over 2,000 years, that touches or touches and comes from the heart of Judaism. Judaism is a tradition that believes in the unity of the world, believes that Jews have access to that unity through the deep faith in God and the worship of God. And when Jews practice their tradition in the pure sense, they are in ongoing process of redemption. Redemption of self, redemption of Jewish people, and redemption of the world. Now, belief that such redemption is possible is part of the deep tradition of Judaism. And that tradition is linked to a belief in the end gathering of the Jewish communities dispersed throughout the planet. Back in the land where they were promised to be the people of God. That is how the people as Jewish work. And this event is determined, or would be determined, by a lot of divine providence, a lot of faith. It is not only due to human constructs such as politics and democracy. Let's take a look at the words of the prophets so we'll be really clear about this. For example, in Ezekiel we read, therefore say: Thus saith the Lord GOD: I will even gather you from the peoples, and assemble you out of the countries where ye have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel. Well let's take a look at Jeremiah. And I will be found of you, saith the Lord. And I will turn your captivity, and gather you from all the nations and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the Lord And I will bring you back unto the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive. So, when we're looking at the Jewish people, we're looking at tradition that believes that there is a larger mission to fulfill than simply establishing a political community or adhering to a certain regime type. And this is where the question's really profound. Can it be Jewish and democratic? Depends. We know that there is another way of understanding what it means to be Jewish and that is as a nation. Now the concept of nation is modern, it's European, and it emerged in non-Jewish political, social, cultural, and religious settings. So when we think about Jewish as a nation, we're thinking about the modern political reality, just like any other nation that was granted a state. So to be Jewish and democratic in terms of Jewish nation and state, sure. Nations, some nations have created states that are democratic, others not. There's no principled question here. It's more a matter of political tradition. In the case of the state of Israel, the nation state of Israel was recognized by international law according to United Nations Resolution 181 that was passed in November 29, 1947. And this is really simple. Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem shall come into existence in Palestine. Palestine was the land under British mandate granted by the League of Nations and in any case, no later than 1948. Let's listen for a minute the moment where this declaration was set forth in the United Nations in Lake Success in 1947. >> Of the [INAUDIBLE] Committee for Palestine was adopted by 33 votes, 13 against [INAUDIBLE]. >> [APPLAUSE] [MUSIC] >> As the result was made public, a wave of ecstasy swept over the Jews of Palestine, and I experienced what generations of Jews before them could only imagine in their dreams. All Jewish history seemed to have been directed toward this moment. [MUSIC] On that same day, Jews gathered beneath the Arch of Titus in Rome. This triumphal arch honoring the Roman Caesar who had destroyed Jerusalem symbolized the beginnings of the Jewish problem. Here they offered prayers of thanksgiving declaring that the land which had fallen captive 2000 years ago had now risen to life once again. >> So this mixture of people and nation, separate but mingled, brings us back to the third element of what it means to be Jewish. And that is, of course, Jewish as a religion or Jewish as a religious form of life. It is more significant for us here to think about Judaism as a form of life because democracy is also a kind of form of life. So would living as a Jew necessarily entail some kind of conflict with democracy? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. In principle, also in practice, a Jewish state would be committed to Orthodox ways of organizing public life. If Jewish was only religious, there would be strict adherence to the basic scriptures of the Jewish tradition. For example, on Saturday, our Sabbath is on Saturday, everything would be shut down. All restaurants would be committed to Jewish dietary regulations known as Kashrut. We would find separation of children, boys and girls, in their education. Women would be restricted in their learning and in their advancement. And a whole host of additional set of structures developed by Orthodox Jewish communities organizing their separate form of life. Separate from what? Separated from their surrounding culture, societies and politics. When we are looking at Israel, there are aspects of that. Israel is a very plural society. Orthodox communities in Israel, Jewish Orthodox communities in Israel, do develop their own inner communal rules and flaws. You'll hear about some of that later on in this session for professional or we will focus on the issue of women orthodox and how they address issues of maternity within an orthodox framework. So, we would think that a religious form of life is something that would shape the publics' fear. And indeed we do find an empirical reality in the state of Israel that some of the norms and some of the symbolic structures surrounding the state come from that tradition. For example, in many cities in Israel, you have roads that are closed on Saturday out of the respect for the majority of Orthodox Jews to inhabit those roads. In many places, restaurants, or closed down, are closed on Saturday, offer only kosher food etc. This is part of Israeli public sphere side by side to that there are areas in Israel where Saturday is not respected in that way and dietary laws go according to other traditions, vegetarian, vegan and what not. The final way of looking at Jewish would be looking at in terms of Jewish culture. Now the question of Jewish culture is separate, but it's also related to nationalism because nationalism developed in modern context in terms of shared heritage, language, history, traditions, customs, rituals. And of course, we have a Jewish culture that is very rich, it has many different aspects. And what happened in Israel was that the Jewish culture developed around the revival of the language of the Bible, called Hebrew. So the Hebrew language has become a modern language in one respect that defines the Jewishness of the state through the language. But one must add that in Israel, formally, officially, there are two languages. The language of Hebrew, the language of the majority which is prevalent and which grants access to all major sites of power, resources, etc. But Arabic, which is the language of the large minority in Israel, over 20% of Israelis are native Arab speakers. And the language including in the public sphere is also Arabic although it is spoken by the Arab speaking minority, and not necessarily by the Hebrew majority. So we have here a background regarding Jewish in Jewish and democratic that considers being Jewish in terms of the people, in terms of the nation, in terms of a religion and in terms of a culture. I may add that the cultural aspect In the political sense is a mixture. A rich mixture of heritage and tradition and of renewal and ongoing development of an Israeli culture that draws on the Jewish tradition but is utterly and thoroughly modern. The further away you are from Orthodox social spheres, the greater the modern Israeli version of a Jewish culture. All of this may sound analytically clear. In real life, you may sense that there's a lot of potential conflict here. What happens if I live in a city, where the majority are Orthodox Jews, but I want to travel on Saturday? What happens if I'm an Orthodox Jew and I would like peace and quiet on Saturday, but most of my neighbors are seculars and are disrespectful of that need? These are just small examples of the difficulty to translate these many different traditions into everyday practices. In that respect, Israel, as a Jewish and democratic state, is an ongoing process of revealing what it means to be Jewish and democratic. Now, when Israelis, or I'm a political theorist, so when political scientists want to look at these questions, and so do constitutional scholars, they go to the Declaration of Independence. The Israeli Declaration of Independence was pronounced on May 14th, 1948. So think, the Jewish origin is in the Bible, thousands of years ago. The state and democratic origin, 1948. We are recording this lecture in 2016, not that long ago. That is the basis for the state and democratic nature of Israel. In a minute we will hear the first prime minister of Israel reading out the parts of declaration, not all of it, parts of it. There are English subtitles, not to worry. In that, we will hear two different elements. One, very strong emphasis on Jewish history, Jewish heritage, and there is no mention of the word democracy anywhere in that document. From top to bottom, democracy or its derivatives are not mentioned in the Israeli declaration of independence. However, the declaration does allude to institutions and values that are associated with democracy, so we can interpret the democratic foundations of Israel through attribution of things said to be democratic. So let's work with for a bit and let's start now by hearing David or in Hebrew we say David, Ben Gurion, the first prime minister of Israel, reading part of the declaration. And read the subtitles, and we'll talk about them in a minute. >> [FOREIGN] >> [APPLAUSE] >> [FOREIGN] >> So what we heard now in Israeli law, this is a very famous moment, the prime minister declaring the establishment of the state. What I would like us to note is what were the first things on his agenda. The setting up of institutions, the transition from one form of governance to another, from one assembly to another, declaration of a constituent assembly that will create a constitution. And all of this comes after declaring the legitimacy of the state, and its roots in Jewish heritage and Jewish tradition. So when we were speaking earlier about the people and the nation and the culture and the religion, they are the background for creating state institutions that in due course would have to create the kind of institutional process that we would call democracy. And why democracy? Simple, the institutions are the institutions of parliamentary democracy. The assembly referred to is an elected assembly that's elected by all of the Jewish community transferred into the State. It would be the parliament, we call it Knesset in Israel, of all Israeli citizens. So the trend, we deduce a state from the institutions. We deduce a preliminary formed democracy from the fact that it is elected assembly. And of course, one of the basic tenets of democracy is the one citizen, one vote law, and also, or principle and of course we also have allusion to the constitution. One word about the constitution, the declaration of independence mandated that Israel would have a constitution. To this day, 2016, we have an evolving constitution. We have laws that we call basic laws. That are chapters of a one as yet to be declared constitution. We do not have a full bodied constitution for reasons that are beyond this lecture. But one that must be mentioned Is that constitution made by humans doesn't sound that well in Orthodox Jewish ears, who think that constitution is created by God and we are all under God's constitution. Indeed, as this week, as I talk to you, In Israeli and Jewish synagogues all over the world, the weekly reading of the Torah is called in my constitutions, the word taken from the Bible >> To connote constitution Hebrew. Orthodox Jews here, the Hebrew words for constitution. They hear God and it is not something that humans should entertain that easy. There are additional reasons I will talk about in a minute. Now the declaration of independence is not only about institution and formalization of the state, not yet Democratic. There are also elements that make it more Democratic. I would say, more liberal Democratic and those are the allusions to individual and group rights. Let's take listen for less than a minute to that part of the declaration. Again, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. >> [FOREIGN] >> Did you notice that here again, the preamble to the issue of rights is an illusion to the prophets and to the tradition? This is the mingling of the Jewish and the state, the Jewish and the Democratic. At David Ben-Gurion was not an orthodox Jew, he was a secular socialist. But in this kind of in-gathering or return or migration or coming of Jews as individuals and as groups to the land of Israel, there is a very strong and deep sense of commitment to and connection to the culture and this is what makes the nation and this is what makes the people and this is what is involved in the background of our institutions and our Democratic form of governments. So we heard in the declaration that Israel, as a state would be committed to the fundamental rights that are the characteristics and signs of modern democracies. I would say, modern liberal democracies. So, let's make a quick summary of where we are now. We saw that the United Nations Resolution 181 declared a Jewish State. So, there is such a thing as a Jewish State. We saw that the Israeli Declaration of Independence spoke about the Jewish State. There is a Jewish State from within the relevant people. We also heard in the Declaration of Independence an intention to create a constitution, which is fundamental for modern Democratic states. And indeed, Israel went one step significant on the way by legislating 9 basic laws over a period of 30 years that were oriented to institutionalizing the state, which means justifying the institutions. Legitimizing centralized power. Justifying the fact that you give up a bit of your liberty in order to get a lot of protection and perhaps welfare and examples are basic law, Knesset, which is our parliament. Basic law, executive branch. Basic law, judiciary and so forth. However, it took only 1992. Did the Israeli parliament sitting under a kind of metaphorical cap as constituent assembly decide to legislate in basic law protection of individual rights, which is the sign of a liberal Democratic political order to protect minority and individual rights is a significant step forward in terms of seeing this political order as a democracy. Now I'm talking formality, clearly during these years, the everyday practice was Democratic. Elections, parties, free media, highly critical public opinion. The scene in Israel looks like a very verbal and vocal democracy. But again, when we're looking formally intentions, we see through the institutionalization how it works. First, Judaism, then a state, then democracy, then liberal democracy. That's 1992. So, we have what looks like and is a Democratic state. Parliamentary democracy, it has the branches and it looks fine. Where do tensions between democracy and Jewishness emerge? They emerge as they did in Europe and as they do in various areas in the world today around issues of authority. Issues of authority means who calls the shots when there is trouble? Who determines ethical or value laden conflict? Well, in ordinary political science, we say, there's a rule of law. But if the rule of law is in the judiciary in the state, but I personally prefer going to my rabbi or to my tradition, nor to result my conflicts. How does that work out? This is an age old issue in modern European states. It is still an issue in Israel where rabbinic authority is very strong in many diverse forms of Jewish community. Orthodox, modern orthodox, national religious, other religious, strong moral voices often conflict with strong state led voices. Rabbis and judges do not always go together. Rabbis in the army don't always go with officers in the army and these conflicts are there. They are contained. They are debated, but they are present and they are in that gap between Jewish and Democratic. The big issue, the big unresolved issue between Jewish and Democratic is in civic equality. The sign of citizenship in a Democratic politic is equality. That's how it is in the United States, in France, in Great Britain, in Canada, in Australia. The formal sign of citizenship is equality. One of the reasons we do not have a constitution is because the Israeli legislature, the Jewish majority found it difficult to find a way to legislate equality as a constitutional civic right. When we have a Jewish nation state with a very significant non-Jewish Arab, Palestinian Israeli minority. Civic equality would mean, perhaps access to the symbolic and material universe. Public sphere created by the Jewish majority of the Jewish state. That does not fit easily with the principle of democracy and equality for all citizens. So civic equality, although on most power makers exist equally. It is not legislated constitutionally, because that is where Jewishness comes into tension with Democratic principles. So, let's wrap up and see how Jewish and Democratic what it looks like. For most >> Aspects, whether you're orthodox, traditional, secular, atheist Jew, male or female. There are deep disagreements about the rationale now and ultimate purpose of a Jewish state of or for the Jewish people. Is it just to save Jewish lives to enable a place of this planet for this generations of Jews? Or is the state secondary to the primary original mission of redemption, personal, communal, people and world? If we are embroiled in that controversy, is it legitimate as a Jew to found a secular Jewish state when we should perhaps have founded a religious believing form of political community? This leads to disagreements about the nature and shape of Israels, the Jewish state's public spheres. Democratic conventions. Maximum freedoms and liberties. Orthodox conventions. Maximum adherence to strictures of orthodoxy. And indeed, many Jewish orthodox communities reject secular, modern and liberal values and ways of life. And if you ever visit a Jewish in Democratic state, there is one. We are recording there. Then you will see that within a kilometer here or there, you will have closed orthodox communities where you are requested, actually demanded to wear modest clothing. And a kilometer from there, people walking around half naked. Same people, same state, same nation, different customs. So, is Israel Jewish and Democratic? It is Jewish and so far that the many aspects of its public spheres originate in, are grounded in, justified by, are in opposition to forms of Jewish community and forms of Jewish life. The Jewishness of Israel is paramount in the political symbolism of this state. In its flag, in its emblems, in its anthem and in a host of other symbolic expressions. It is Democratic and so far as the state functions according to Democratic institutions, and processes, and society, and individuals do enjoy all roles of Democratic freedoms. However, both elements, Jewish and Democratic are challenged, repeatedly challenged by ongoing security concerns. And more recently, by regional turmoil. When I say, regional turmoil, I look up north to Syria, to Lebanon, to Iraq, looking south. The regional turmoil is a kind of context that creates a lot of fear, anxieties and tension, apprehension and conflict between Jews and non-Jews and between Jews and among themselves and non-Jews among themselves regarding the extent of freedoms that are appropriate when you're living under such severe security conditions. And the concerns about the state, we're talking a lot about Jewish and Democratic, but let's say a word about the state. If you want a state to exist just as a kind of physical survival mechanism, then I would say that existence of the state is very often trumps both Jewish and Democratic with goal, the survival embedded in the state and institutions as a protection would override Jewish, values, traditions would override Democratic values and traditions. This is something that is within the question with which we came out and the final question I'd like to ask derives from the initial worry and it is, will the state of Israel, that we have determined is Jewish and Democratic, will it remain Jewish and Democratic? I'm talking about will it remain. I sincerely hope that the state will remain, but what kind of state will it be? At this point in time, there are dialectics working in many directions. The liberal foundations of Israeli democracy are under persistent pressure. They're under pressure, because they exist, because there is a very strong liberal strain within Israeli society and politics. Strong national sectors of Israeli society and politics are hacking away at the legitimacy of individuals and volunteer associations committed to the liberal foundations of Israeli democracy, usually in the name of a strong nation state unless a strong liberal democratic state. Religious sectors of the Jewish society doesn't necessarily overlap national, we saw that. Our pushing for changes in Israel's judiciary, we saw that the rule of law is dependent on who you adhere to. Many sectors in Israeli society think that Israel Supreme Court is overly interventionist in creating the norms of this very society. How do you change that? Change the judiciary. Put in those official officers people who are more accepting of Jewish orthodoxy. This goes against the liberal underpinnings of Israeli society. So what we may see in terms of current processes, a strong Jewish state with a bit more formal and a bit less substantial liberal democracy. And some would call the overall mix of people nation, religion and culture Jewish. The basis for an ethnic majority ruled Jewish democracy. Still a democracy, but an ethnic more formalistic form of that way of life. So, thank you and now I'm signing off for this broadcast from Israel, a Jewish and Democratic state. Thank you. >> Tamar Elor is a Professor of Anthropology here at the Hebrew University. Her academic interest lay in the intersection of gender, culture and knowledge. Her books in this field include educated and ignorant, which is about the ultra-orthodox women. Next year, I will know more identity and literacy among young orthodox women and reserved seats, gender and ethnicity and religion in contemporary Israel. They have shed light on the surprising ways in which gender and religiosity intersect. >> Hi, I'm happy to share with you my limited knowledge on Israeli state and society. And when we analyze as social scientists, this specific society as we usually do on other societies, we build on common binaries. And in Israel, it's usually tensions between the orthodox people and the non-orthodox between Ashkenazim and Sephardim, which is an ethnic category. We build on classes, on middle class, upper class and the lower classes and we build about veterans. Those who came to Israel during the early years of its existence and opposed to the newcomers. And of course, a common binarism stretches between, builds on gender. When we talk about gender We usually differentiate between the different sexes or different genders, mainly between males and females, but not only. So my short talk with you today is built on three ethnographies that I did in the ultra-orthodox society in Israel. I started my ethnographic research in the mid-80s, and I've been following this segment of the Israeli society for the last over 20 years. So, actually, we're going to look backward, in a little bit, we're going to look back in history and frame the main problems that I've been paying my attention to and follow those problems as they evolve, as they roll in time, and as they change, if they change, and the direction of this change. And as I said in the beginning of my talk, the interest that I had in the ultra-orthodox and orthodox societies was in the life of the women. As an anthropologist, I need to spend my time with the people that I research and try to experience their life. And of course, I couldn't do it with men. Or I could do very limited things with the male society, and it was easier to share and to understand and to describe and to experience the life of the women. And within this major, it's a total life, it's the whole range of life that people have, I was interested in the intellectual life of the women. And why this came as the major question, because anthropologists try to let the field itself tell them what is the important issue at hand. And when I spend the time with a certain family in a certain neighborhood near Tel Aviv, from the Hasidic sect of gule during the mid-80s until the beginning of the 90s, I kept coming and going for around four or five years. And I'm still in good relations with some of my informants. Actually, this morning, I was just talking on my way here with my main informant. And so I was spending time with them, doing the home errands, taking care of the kids. And when I asked where do the women meet as a community, where do you see each other as adults, the answer was, when we study, when we go to study. Now, these were women in their 20s. And they were all married and young mothers. And they found a time to leave the homes and leave the kids either with their partners or other babysitters and to go once or twice a week to study Torah. Now they grew up in the ultra-orthodox community, they were studying in ultra-orthodox schools. Why do they have to go and study again Torah, while it is known that the women are exempt from the study of the Torah? And this is the men or a male mitzvah, a man or a male deed. In order to answer this question and to follow it as I follow it from the ultra-orthodox community to the modern orthodox community to the Sparti orthodox community and to those who are returnees or [FOREIGN], we have to go back to maybe the macro framework that this course is all about and put in democracy. The community that I work with is many times seen as a secluded, sacked, that lives outside of time, outside of history. They continue a sort of a 18 or 17 century eastern or central European way of life, and their habituth is frozen. Well, this is not the case, this is a modern society. This is a society that was framed, was answering or conducting a dialogue with zynazim, with modernism, with nationalism. And the way ultra-orthodoxy is acting as a political and as a cultural group, it has to do mainly with the fact that they need to be relevant in the modern context. And in the modern context, these people live in a democratic society, where at least, supposedly, old people, old citizens have the same rights. And that therefore, everyone should be exposed to the same education, same knowledges, enjoy the same rights, and serve the same duties. But we know that this is not totally the case. Yet, it has a lot of influence on the way that people see themselves and on the way that the gender relations are slowly and gently changing. When the orthodox community had to rebuild itself after the Holocaust, and in the presence of the enthusiasm of the new state of Israel, which was Zionist, and I wouldn't say anti-religious, but the ultra-orthodoxy wasn't its elite or hegemonic group. In any way, they had to reorganize themselves, and one of the tools was to frame the society of scholars. To send all men to the [FOREIGN] unlike the situation in Europe or in North Africa, but we are talking now about Askenazim, to send them all to school. To send all the girls to school, and re-teach them and reeducate them so that they will see themselves in the future, all of them, not some of them, but all of them, as the wives of scholars. So they will go out and work, so they will support the families. So they will be those who will come and go and negotiate with the state. And with the outer world, allowing their man to stay in the [FOREIGN] and study and rebuild the society that was broken and extinguished in the mid-20th century. And amazingly, the plan, this cultural political plan, with the support of the state of Israel that they exempt the men from the army service and that they paid stipends for the man, succeeded. And the women, in a very short time, fantasized and built a romance of being the wife of a scholar. But alongside with a society of men scholars grew a society of women, of knowledgeable women. They went to school, to regular school, and studied 12 or 13 years. And they did not study Talmud. And this is what I was curious about. What do you do in the afternoon or in the early evenings that you go to study the Talmud? This is what they told me in the neighborhood, you know what you need to know to be a good wife and a good mother, so what is it that you are studying there? And I cannot go into the details, which are all laid out in my book, which is titled, Educated and Ignorant. But what I finally came to understand is that the women needed to build a parallel and experience What does it mean to be a Torah scholar? So they had to do it in a female legitimate way and they gather once, twice, sometimes three times a week for an hour to read together and interpret together texts that are not Talmudic but texts that are allowed to women. It could be the portion of the Torah that week. It could be ethic texts that have to do with moral and ethics. It could be [FOREIGN], all kinds of laws about how to do the Sabbat and how to do the meal. Nothing is new, but old schoolers of Judaism always come back and repeat known texts and ever again and ever again find new things. So I followed a parallel society of women scholars who came to a sort of paradox that I describe in which they are not touching the the forbidden text, but they manage to create a habit, a way of life of women that see themselves as intellectuals. That see themselves as fit women to live alongside with Torah scholars, their husbands. And are curious enough to continue their education even when their mothers and when their wives and they grow older. And the phenomena of ultra Orthodox women leaving their homes at night, and there's always work to do at home. There's always something that you need to be at home. And there's always someone who tells you, in a sort of, I could call it paradoxical or mean way, that this is where you should be. So it's always telling you stay at home but come to study at the same time. They do go out and they do continue their education. And since I told you that I'm being following the society from mid 80's till today, I can tell you even when I relate to the ultra orthodox community alone, that by now there are little groups, they made sort of guerilla groups. They don't go public but they do start to study in little groups Talmud. They start to study texts that were not allowed for women. They not only studied, they write their own commentary. This is very, very, very small phenomena, but for me as an anthropologist that sort of thought that it's coming. It's reassuring my assumptions that it's impossible to live in a democratic society, and with blocking the people as free citizens, even in a sectorial group like a Hasidic group, from exploring the possibilities of a citizen in this community. So this is what I have to say in regard to the ultra orthodox community. Now when we follow and when we take those same questions of what am I allowed to know, what kind of text can I read, what am I going to do with my knowledge once I have it. How is it going to influence my status as a female, as a wife, as a mother, as a friend, as a daughter, as a sister? Within all the gender relation system we see that those questions were really burning questions. In the modern orthodox society which was my second research. And I started doing my ethnographic research in the beginning of 1990s, previous century. And I followed a revolution and I was lucky to be on site in real time, to follow an intellectual revolution, which is also a religious and a revolution led by gender relations. Led by females who were operating and relying on good. Teachers, male teachers that supported them that said that it doesn't make any sense that women from the modern orthodox society go out to the University to study law, medicine, physics, psychology, whatever. And this is totally okay that they will not be able to study Talmud. And this revolution that started in the mid 70's and of course it has its roots before. But the last phase of it started in the mid 70's, came to a peak in the early 90's and from then on it is rolling and rolling. And more and more women have a full approach to the Talmudic text not yet in high school. Some do have it in high schools. None of them start like the boys, you know, at the age of 10 or 11. Some or maybe very few may do it at home privately, but the public systems start in the high school and the establishment of of colleges Torah colleges for women to spend a year or two in between their army or national service and their academic studies, or along with their academic studies, to study a. And more so, to move to the second phase, not only the intellectual phase but also to take it into the synagogue life, into the worship level of how do I serve God, where is my place in the synagogue. Can I conduct a pray, can I say Torah commentary in front of the public in the place where I pray? What is the meaning of the [FOREIGN] separation of men and women in the synagogue, etc, etc. So it moved from the woman lift their eyes from the books, looked out to their community and said, where is my place in this community? Why do I, what can I do? How can I participate not only as a scholar, but also as a worshipper, as a member of my community. And moreover, when we take it further, can I start to be a female Rabbi? And that too is another venue that I don't have the time to talk about it, but it's been developing and it's still developing. And we see here a lot of change. Also, another place where this beginning of intellectual revolution that I witnessed, took the women was to their sexual management, to the management of their body as a holy body, as a Jewish holy body that has to follow the Hallahic Law of purity. And here too which is a very, very loaded. It's a very, very touchy subject. The women are trying to conduct a change. Who's going to tell me how to manage my body? Who's going to tell me how to manage my sexuality? So I could see within sociologically. I mean, this is a short time. I started my ethnography in mid-80s. By the end of the 90's there were already many such colleges. I started there were six. I assume that the end of the 90's I know that there were 25 and I assume now that there are more and more. They are very legitimate and almost all the young women from the modern Orthodox, from the religious Orthodox community, spent some time in their early adulthood as full or part-time Torah scholars, and this is a revolution. And also, the synagogues don't look the same. Many of them do not look the same. Now in order to conclude or to sort of span through the major three Orthodox societies in Israel, which is the [FOREIGN], the National Orthodoxy, and the [FOREIGN]. I started in the early 2000 a research among a [FOREIGN] community, also near Tel Aviv. All my research was not in Jerusalem and in [FOREIGN]. Not even in [FOREIGN] although, yes, the lost one was in which is a neighborhood of. But it's a very different neighborhood of which is mostly. And there I tried to ask or I asked the same questions about what can a woman read, and what can she know, and what can she do with her knowledge as a Ulta-Orthodox Sephardi woman and maybe as someone who is enhancing, it's called [FOREIGN]. Women who come from traditional families and decided to go full or fuller, as a fuller participant in the halachic Jewish life, and we know that the Sephardic communities are way more heterogeneous. You can find in the same neighborhood people that range from traditional, to just starting to check out whether I want to be Orthodox, to very Orthodox Sephardi, and then maybe ultra Orthodox Ashkenazi manner in a way, because there was a lot of influence from the Ashkenazi Hal nazim on. And I joined a group of women who studied in the community center in the. They studied not orthodox, the studies, they studied to be medical secretaries. But that gave me the way into the community, and what kind of knowledges they seek to achieve to be professional, to study English, to study computers, and I assume that, by first holding some knowledge that they lack. Because here, we need to say, also, that these communities are from the middle and lower economical classes. So these women, not only that they are orthodox, female, Sephardi, they are also poor. Or some of them are from the lower middle classes, so they seek in their personal journey to better their lives, not only to find meaning to their lives as needs to the religion as belief and moral answers, but also economical answers. And the cynicals say that by returning to Judaism, they find the economical solution, because people are going to pay them for that. Well this is a very, very limited and cynical comment, although it might be true that you have support because you are part of a community and your schooling might be easier. But they still suffer from the same economical problem, sometimes maybe even more. So, then I follow the women and I follow them into other venues also where they study to. And what I found there is that the women are coming to this groups in the hope, as I said, to better all their lives. Not only their lives as believers, but to better their position in the Israeli society because, as sociologists, we can say it, they do not phrase it this way. They have been excluded or they have been, discriminated on several layers, as I mentioned, on the ethnic layer, on the periphery, and center layer, on the economical level, and also on the gender level. So the women that I met there, which is the last ethnography that I wrote, were seeking, actually, to reposition themselves in the public sphere, in the Israeli society. And their movement is, therefore, very complicated and it's not either to be in this camp or in other. They try to remain Zionist to care about the general society because many people from their family are not where they are. And still, to push forward their religious knowledge but also their civil knowledge. If I have to conclude the relations between gender or to situate gender in the religious orthodoxy and put it vis-a-vis the non-orthodox communities, we see that, many times, a lot of things are more similar to what is happening in other communities than different. That is that the women and the men see themselves as modern citizens. They want to be equal citizens or more equal citizens. And they do accept the fact that education is a platform to move forward. And, therefore, they are trying to sort of work, I wouldn't say to break but to lean on the gate that closes other knowledges from them and to try and open more and more doors on more and more gates in order to come across and be able to approach more knowledges that will change their lives. >> Thank you Dan and Tamar for illuminating some of the aspects of the paradox of Jewish democracy. In both of these talks, we have learned, first and foremost, about the consequences of Israel's being a Jewish democracy for the state itself and for the Jews living in it. However, defining the state as a Jewish democracy, has a bearing on the non-Jewish citizens of the state. What does it mean for them? Can they be equal citizens in a state that define itself as Jewish? In our next lesson, we will look at the relationship between the Jewish majority and the Arab minority in Israel and ask how the history of the conflict with the surrounding Arab countries and the construction of Israel as a Jewish state have affected these complex relationships.
