Many readers of this journal may have heard that their grandmother or great-grandmother fasted “alle Montag und Donnerstag” (every Monday and Thursday). This popular Yiddish saying actually reflects an ancient halakhic tradition, namely, the Talmudic “ta’aniyot bahab”—the fasts of bet–hey–bet (Yom bet is Monday and Yom hey is Thursday)—that were first associated with prayer for rain during the month of Heshvan (M. Ta’anit 2:9). For a variety of reasons, later generations expanded the “bahab” fasts in Heshvan to include non-obligatory fasts in other months as well. The fact that non-obligatory fasts were observed by Jews— both men and women—for nearly two thousand years seems to reflect an enduring desire on the part of at least some of the Jewish people to express their devotion to God ascetically. Those who fasted on these days were indeed considered especially pious.
Frequent fasting and other ascetic practices, however, were not necessarily viewed positively in Talmudic times. 1 Female asceticism was, in particular, singled out for special censure by R. Joshua in the Mishna. Thus, R. Joshua lists the “isha perusha” (ascetic woman, or literally, the “separatist” woman) as one of four types of people who actually bring destruction upon the world. The context of the Mishna suggests that her “separatism” is of a sexual nature, 2 which presumably involved refraining either from sexual relations with her husband or from marrying altogether.
Because ascetic behavior involves abstention from otherwise permitted physical pleasures in order to achieve a higher spiritual state, one would expect to see a connection between sexual abstinence, fasting, and praying. This connection is, in fact, made by parallel baraitot in the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmud explaining the term “isha perusha” as a “betula tzaymanit–a fasting virgin” (JT Sotah 3:4 [19a]), or a “betula tzalyanit–a praying virgin” (BT Sotah 22a). 3 Thus, in addition to the sexual abstinence already alluded to in the Mishna (and by the usage of the term “betulah” in the baraitot), the “isha perusha” manifests her ascetic lifestyle by devoting herself to continual fasting and/or praying.
Neither the Mishna nor the baraita in the Babylonian Talmud explains how the “isha perusha” destroys the world. Six possible explanations for this condemnation are suggested below. 4
1. R. Joshua seems to have objected to asceticism in general, for both men and women. After the destruction of the Temple, many Jews became ascetics, refusing to eat meat or drink wine, because meat and wine had formerly been used in Temple ritual. R. Joshua convinced them that according to their own logic, even bread and water, the very staples of life, should be avoided as well because they too had been used in Temple ritual. The ascetic position, carried to its logical conclusion, would then have led to massive starvation of the remaining Jewish people. R. Joshua therefore taught that, instead of adopting an ascetic lifestyle, Jews should mourn in a more moderate fashion, by simply leaving a section of their house unplastered, in memory of Jerusalem (Tosefta Sotah 15:11-12).
“Female asceticism was….singled out for special censure…”
2. Aside from objecting to asceticism in general, R. Joshua held that female asceticism was particularly intolerable, as we saw in the Mishna above. 5 One reason for this position may have been his belief that sexual abstinence was unnatural for women. Thus, earlier in the Mishna, he describes women’s “true nature,” stating, “A woman prefers one kab (a small amount of food) and tiflut (frequent sexual relations), to nine kab (a large amount of food) and perishut (separation from her husband).” Because women, by their very nature, prefer sexuality over food, then women who so denied their nature by abstaining from sex would eventually sin. Not being able to live up to their unnatural goals of sexual abstinence, they would be overcome by their true nature and find sinful outlets for their desires. According to this view, R. Joshua’s condemnation was motivated by a desire to prevent sinful behavior.
3. Sexually abstinent women would either have fewer children or none at all. Frequent fasting, causing physical weakness, would reduce women’s childbearing potential as well. Because children ensure the continuity of the world, female asceticism would, consequently, contribute to the world’s destruction. R. Joshua is indeed quoted elsewhere in the Talmud as emphasizing the importance of having many children: “If a man has children in his youth, he should continue to have children in his old age” (BT Yebamot 62b). R. Joshua’s condemnation, then, would have been motivated by fear that female asceticism would lower the Jewish birth rate.
4. The fasting virgin is condemned by the baraita because excessive fasting would literally cause her to lose her virginity (the continuation of the passage in JT Sotah cited above states, “Betula tzaymanit, metzayma ovedet betuleha– a fasting virgin loses her virginity.” In Talmudic times, extreme emaciation caused by excessive fasting was believed to cause the loss of the hymen. 6 The young girl’s virginity would then be suspect because there would be no bleeding on the wedding night. R. Joshua’s condemnation, as understood by this baraita, would have been motivated by a desire to protect young women with ascetic tendencies from false accusations of not being virgins.
5. We do not know whether the Talmudic condemnation of female asceticism was merely a theoretical, ideologically based condemnation or whether it was addressing a specific historical phenomenon. We do, however, know that in the times of the Tanna’im (first to second century CE) there were at least three groups of female ascetics: two Jewish and one early Christian. It is possible that the criticism of the “isha perusha” was an attempt to curb the extreme ascetic behavior that existed in this time and to protect normative Judaism from this type of behavior.
The first Jewish ascetic group was the Essenes. Although the Essenes, an ascetic sect, generally lived in communities of abstinent men, Josephus speaks of an order of “marrying Essenes” who married in order to have children. Because procreation was deemed the only legitimate justification for sexual relations, these Essene women would then have lived celibate lives as soon as they became pregnant, as well as once their childbearing years were over. Textual and archaeological findings indeed suggest that women lived at Qumram and, presumably, shared in the ascetic lifestyle of the sect living there.
The second Jewish group, comprised of both men and women, were Jewish ascetics known as the Therapeutaue who lived near Alexandria in the first century (Philo, De Vita Contemplativa). These Therapeutaue renounced their property and left their families (either before or after marriage) to devote themselves to study and spiritual contemplation. They lived in seclusion for six days a week and ate very little. On the seventh day they gathered together to study, pray, sing, and partake of a Sabbath feast, consisting only of bread, salt, and water. Philo, in describing this Sabbath feast, portrays the women of the sect: “The feast is shared by women also, most of them aged virgins, who have kept their chastity…of their own free will in their ardent yearning for wisdom. Eager to have . . . [wisdom] for their life mate, they have spurned the pleasures of the body.”7
The third group of female ascetics living in this time period were early Christians, who considered virginity and fasting to be great virtues. For early Syrian Christians, virginity was even considered “a prerequisite for the adoption of the Christian faith.” This explains why the term “virgin” (betula [male] and betulta [female]) is used synonymously with the term “Christian” in some early Christian sources.8 The usage of this term in these Christian sources as well as in the baraitot cited above (betula tzaymanit/ betula tzalyanit – fasting or praying virgin) suggests that the baraitot might actually have been referring to these early Christians, many of whom were in fact Jews. One such person may have been “the prophetess Anna,” described in Luke 2: 36-37 as an elderly widow who could be found, day and night, fasting and praying in the Temple.
Perhaps the extreme rabbinic condemnation of this type of behavior was then meant to distance normative Judaism from both extreme Jewish sectarian behavior and early Christian asceticism. Interestingly, both the Essenes and the Therapeutaue disappeared after the Temple’s destruction. Christian asceticism, in contrast, proliferated over the next few centuries. Female Christian ascetics, in particular, were encouraged to endure especially extreme fasts,9 and early Christian women were encouraged to become sexually abstinent, even if they were already married.10 Talmudic condemnation of this type of behavior, thus, may have been influential in allowing no place in Judaism for these extreme behaviors.
6. The Talmudic sugya in BT Sotah 22a limits the condemnation of the “isha perusha” to hypocritical women who used their ascetic behavior as a cover-up for witchcraft and/or promiscuous behavior. Only women like “Johani the daughter of Retibi,” who, according to Rashi, secretly practiced witchcraft (BT Sotah 22a) would destroy the world. Likewise, the “fasting virgin” was interpreted as a woman who fasted only as a pretense of piety, so that no one would suspect the promiscuous behavior that actually led to the loss of her virginity (Tosafot, Sotah 22a s.v. kol).
The association between fasting and hypocrisy is supported by a shocking aggadic passage, in which a woman called Miriam “berat alei betzalim”–Miriam of (or daughter of) the onion bulb” is seen hanging in Gehinom by the nipples of her breasts (or, alternatively, by the hinge of the gate of Gehinom that was set in her ear) for the crime of fasting and publicizing her fast, or fasting for one day and calculating it as a two-day fast (JT Hagigah 2:2 [77d]). Her crime, at first glance, seems to be one of insincere piety, because she was using her fasting to gain respect.11 Immediately after this passage, however, the Talmud continues with a discussion of the hanging of eighty witches in Ashkelon by Simeon b. Shetah. This juxtaposition suggests that perhaps Miriam “of the onion bulbs,” who was punished so severely, was not simply a “fasting hypocrite,” but, instead, was somehow associated with witchcraft. In any event, the condemnation of the “isha perusha,” according to this interpretation, was intended only for insincere women, whose ascetic behavior was at best hypocritical and at worst used to mask witchcraft or promiscuity.12
According to most of the reasons listed above, R. Joshua may not, in fact, have condemned our grandmothers who fasted “alle Montag und Donnerstag.” This is because these fasts did not generally involve sexual abstinence, nor were they connected to any separatist ascetic sect or Christianity. Likewise, their fasting did not appear to be hypocritical and certainly was not related to witchcraft or promiscuity. Ashkenazic women who fasted throughout the ages were (generally) married or widowed, devoted to raising their families and observing the commandments, and fasted and prayed as an expression of piety. If R. Joshua would have objected to these fasts, his objection might have been based only on the first and third reasons suggested above, namely, his objection to asceticism in general or to the concern that frequent fasting would lead to decreased childbearing potential.
One wonders how R. Joshua would have reacted to a remarkable woman who lived in seventeenth-century Poland: Beilah Falk, wife of R. Joshua Falk, author of Drishah uPerishah. She lived as an extreme ascetic both before her marriage, as well as during her seventeen years of widowhood. Her son writes that his mother’s life was devoted to daily fasting, praying, studying Torah, and acts of hesed, and he praises her as a role model of piety for all daughters of Israel. Ironically, though, he also attributes her death at the young age of 58 to extreme physical weakness caused by her continual fasting, “motivated by her intense desire to spurn this world, in order to attain the World to Come” (introduction to the Drishah, Tur Yoreh De’ah). Her early death did not in any way diminish his admiration for her. Would R. Joshua, though, have shared in this enthusiasm, or would he have objected to her asceticism, just as he objected to asceticism as a reaction to the destruction of the Temple? Would R. Joshua, perhaps, while recognizing her piety, have nevertheless considered her an “isha perusha”—who “destroyed” her own world—by hastening her own death?