1) His first premise is that the “feminine” wherever she be found, whether as male in relation to female, woman in relation to man, creation in relation to HaShem…the feminine is always in motion. She is always pushing her envelope. That means that statements that seemed obviously true at one stage of her development will simply not apply and might even be false at other stages of her development. The feminine, by definition, at least by the Ari’s definition, is always changing growing, evolving. There is no escaping that fact and, according to the Ari, this is a good thing. It is how things are supposed to be. So while in some things (perhaps even most things) it might be possible to understand what it means to be a good Jewish woman by looking at the previous generations, in other respects that simply doesn’t work. They lived in one stage of the feminine life cycle while this generation embodies another. Just like what is healthy and appropriate for a child is not necessarily appropriate for a teen or an adult.
2) The second amazing implication of his teachings, actually explicitly stated by him, is that woman’s perfected ideal, her messianic achievement, is to stand equal and opposite to man, in the Ari’s own words: פנים לפנים שווה לגמרי (face to face, and completely equal). This is an astounding statement. One might expect to find it in a feminist manifesto, but to read it in a sixteenth century kabbalistic tome by Judaism’s master kabbalistic, is quite another matter. The Ari’s vision of woman’s ideal is quite unconventional by even today’s traditional norms.
3) And yet, though equality is the goal, woman’s path from here to there is not at all direct. This is by design, and not by accident. Her true and consummate equality can only be achieved by a previous act of diminishment. The moon must wane before it waxes. Like a spring compressed and released, the feminine’s diminishment sets in motion a chain of events that culminates in her joyful, shared, equality.
4) The fourth extremely relevant aspect of the Ari’s teaching is that in woman’s later stages of growth (which would likely translate into the current era) she comes into her מוחין, a kabbalistic term meaning brains and intellectual maturity. Thus, in the Ari’s model, part of what is supposed to happen as one stage in the evolving relationship of man and woman is that their disparities of intellect begin to diminish and eventually disappear altogether. Not that they come to think exactly alike, this may or may not be so (though it seems unlikely), but that their strength and sophistication of intellect begin to equalize.
An example of how this can be seen is the fact that today in the United States, as well as in many countries around the world, there are more women entering undergraduate and graduate university programs than men,[6] and in certain fields such as medicine and law, the numbers of women are beginning to dominate. In addition, women are often extremely successful because they bring a different type of intellect to the job. Women lawyers, for example, have an approach to legal questions that is often different, and at times more effective than the traditional “male” approach. It seems clear that within the Jewish world, the virtual revolution in women’s education and learning opportunities reflects this same trend.
The Ari’s teachings present a perspective on Women and Judaism that is not generally known because it draws from the most esoteric layer of the Jewish Tradition. His text provides an extremely authoritative frame that can hold the myriad teachings about women in Judaism, both the traditional and the radical, the status quo and its feminist critique. Just as his vision predicted all the shifting of gender roles that are observably occurring, so it predicted the more classic roles with their disparities of stature that characterize the other stages of woman’s developmental journey.
The question becomes: What are the roots of the Ari’s model, and how were his teachings developed through time by other rabbinic writings? The section of the Ari’s writings where this text appears is called מעוט הירח (Diminishment of the Moon), and this term becomes the code word for the whole body of teachings on woman and her evolving journey through time.
With this as a starting point, it is possible to find the earliest source if this idea in the Torah itself. Genesis 1:16 states: “G-d creates two great lights” (יעש אלקים את שני המאורות הגדולים).
And yet the same posuk goes on to describe an apparently contradictory state of affairs when it now states:
את המאור הגדול לממשלת היום ואת המאור הקטן לממשלת הלילה… (The great (or big) light to rule by day and the small light to rule by night).
First there are two great lights, then suddenly, only one remains great while the other has become small.
And yet the same verse goes on to describe an apparently contradictory state of affairs when it subsequently states: “The great (or big) light to rule by day and the small light to rule by night” (את המאור הגדול לממשלת היום ואת המאור הקטן לממשלת הלילה). First there are two great lights, then suddenly, only one remains great while the other has become small.
An explanation of this contradiction appears in Gemara (Chullin 60b), in an aggadah, a Midrashic story, brought by Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi. This parable becomes the channel for all the profound (and quite revolutionary) teachings about women that appear in chassidic and kabbalalistic texts. They all build from the Ari, who bases himself on this Aggadah. The entire 346 page volume called, Kabbalistic Writings on the Nature of Masculine and Feminine, (that is the basis of this presentation), is about one verse in the Torah, Bereshit 1:14, which R. Shimon ben Pazzi cracks open, and all the source-based discussion of gender in Jewish literature is built from that Talmudic passage.
Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi explains the contradiction in the verse from Genesis by describing a conversation between the moon and HaKadosh Boruch Hu, the Holy One, Blessed be He. Originally the sun (always equated with man) and the moon (always equated with woman) were created equal in size: שני המאורות הגדולים. The moon complains to the Holy One that it is not possible for two kings to rule under one crown. The Holy One agrees and directs her to diminish herself. The moon, protests, and a negotiation ensues. She is not convinced. G-d insists that she diminish, but the Midrash ends with a perplexing passage where G-d asks that a sin-offering be brought for Himself (for HaKadosh Boruch Hu) for His, so to speak, “wrongdoing” in forcing the moon to grow small.
There is much to say about this Midrash in light of the Ari’s teachings, but this paper will focus on one small point.[7]
The Midrash presents a two-stage process. First the sun and moon are equal. Then the moon diminishes in size. So where does the Ari base his idea about the moon’s reattained equality? He presents three phases: initial equality, the moon’s diminishment, and then her return to greatness where two kings really do indeed succeed in sharing a single crown.
