Jewish books on childhood education from the Middle Ages and the early modern era are rare. ʾOrekh yamim (Length of days) by Rabbi Samuel Benveniste is such a work, and it constitutes a valuable contribution to the study of childhood and the education of children in Jewish communities in the Ottoman Empire, particularly among exiles from the Iberian Peninsula. It provides an account of the attitudes that informed education in Benveniste's generation, as well as concrete descriptions of the surrounding society. The first part of this article will discuss Benveniste's view of educational issues, set in the context of the cultural forces and prevailing views in Jewish society in the first half of the sixteenth century. The second part will address the book's remarks regarding parents, their image and role, and the need for ethical improvement of adult society, stressing women's behavior and modesty.
Benveniste's book is divided into three chapters. The first chapter concerns childhood education; the author addresses parents, without distinction between fathers and mothers, encouraging them to educate their children, pay careful attention to issues of ethics, and instill in them fear of Heaven.Footnote 1 The two additional chapters focus on the qualities of pride and humility, while also dealing with education and the desire to improve youth ethically and spiritually. In the second chapter the author exhorts his readers to avoid pride, to which he attributes most of society's troubles. The third chapter deals with the great virtue of humility, by which a person erases himself and directs all of his existence toward fulfilling God's will and loving Him.
This short book of 2,600 words includes descriptions of the educational and social reality in the author's place and time. Its declared objective is to teach parents how to educate their children, and the author's harsh criticism of the prevailing educational attitudes reflects his motivation to correct his community's errors. Benveniste opens the work with the following words:
Samuel the writer said: Here I have decided to speak because I have seen in this generation many sons going arbitrarily, “children with no loyalty in them” [Deut 32:20], raised without cultured behavior or civilized manners. In fact, sons should not be blamed for that since the crime is on the part of the father and mother, who do not suspect the results, and refrain from instilling morality and fear in the minors. Even after they grow up, they do not receive moral education. Therefore, in order to remove an obstacle from the way of our people, I have taken to heart to arrange a little book regarding education and ethics for youth … to remind the elders how to behave toward the youth.Footnote 2
Complaints about “the decline of the generations,” and young people's insolence and refusal to accept authority indeed recur throughout the course of history. Hardly a book of ethics or a chastising sermon can be found that does not bemoan the situation of the present generation compared with days of old. It seems that the nature of children, their mischievousness and inclination to reject authority and castigation, as well as the nature of adults who forget their childhood days, has not changed over time.
We have virtually no information about the author of ʾOrekh yamim, his identity, his life, and activity. We know that his name was Samuel b. Jacob Benveniste, and that he was the great-grandson of Joseph Benveniste. The identity of these individuals has not yet been determined clearly, but his family name indicates that the family originated in Spain.Footnote 3 According to the title page of the first edition, the book was printed in Constantinople, but without a publication date; bibliographers presume that it was printed circa 1560.Footnote 4 R. Samuel Benveniste quotes from the book Shevet Yehudah, which was not written before 1524 and was first printed, to the best of our knowledge, only in Adrianople in 1554.Footnote 5 Thus, it may be presumed that Benveniste wrote his work shortly after the publication of Shevet Yehudah. The author refers twice to Muslim society, in one place writing: “Every daughter of Israel can learn from the modesty of Ishmaelite women,”Footnote 6 and also, “It is appropriate to infer from a lenient law to a strict one [kal va-ḥomer] from the Ishmaelites or other peoples, how they stand in fear and trembling to pray.”Footnote 7 Even though the remarks are general the impression is that the book was written in a Muslim environment. The preface to the Venice edition (1599) says that the book was written by “a famous rabbi from ’Ereẓ Yisra'el.”Footnote 8 In light of the proximity in the dates of publication and lacking additional sources that indicate otherwise, this testimony should be accepted. Consequently, we should presume, on the basis of the available data, that the book was written by a rabbinical authority from the Iberian dispersion who lived in a Muslim sphere, perhaps in ’Ereẓ Yisra'el, and that the work was written shortly before 1560, when it was most likely published for the first time.
Children and Their Education
The duty to educate children has been regarded as a religious obligation in Jewish society, rooted in Scripture and detailed in halakhic rulings.Footnote 9 This tradition created a broad common denominator among various Jewish communities, with only minor differences in different locations and eras. It was obligatory both for the parents and the community to appoint a teacher for small children (particularly in the case of orphans and children of the poor) to teach the children to read and instruct them in the Written Law. However, other factors varied from place to place and time to time: the precise age a child starts to learn, how he is taught to read, the extent to which the community succeeds in directing the educational system, the age at which compulsory schooling ends, and whether and for how long children continue studying Talmud in their teens.
Sources regarding education do not yield important information on the educational aspirations of the community; only in a few cases do we encounter revolutionary or innovative educational approaches.Footnote 10 Generally speaking, what may be derived from the sources is a description of the reality in practice, the attitudes, challenges, changes, and social processes in a particular society, and the nuances that characterize them. Jewish education in the Ottoman sphere in the first half of the sixteenth century conformed to traditional Jewish approaches to education. Nevertheless, some unique elements distinguish that region from others, and we also find internal distinctions among different communities within the Ottoman Empire.Footnote 11 For example, large and influential communities differed from small, remote ones; Jewish centers where intercultural encounters provided mutual influence differed from isolated communities that maintained a conservative and insular tradition for generations; sources written at times of distress differed from sources written during times of calm or prosperity.
Rabbi Samuel Benveniste's book addresses parents with one central message: they must take care to supervise the behavior and education of their children. The model of education he proposes is to instill fear, and discipline children with ethical teaching and even corporal punishment (“educational beating”) when they are small. This approach is common in the writings of Iberian scholars; evidently beating children in an educational context was widespread,Footnote 12 based on biblical verses such as “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him early” (Prov 13:24), and on talmudic sources that were incorporated in halakhic rulings.Footnote 13
Benveniste stresses that there is a relatively brief window of opportunity for educating a child. From the moment that an infant “has the sense to understand a rebuke, his father and mother must scold him if he does something wrong,”Footnote 14 until the point at which there is a danger that the child will rebel. He describes the results that will ensue if parents do not fulfill their duty: “And this love and pity turn into hate and cruelty because they deprived the little one of fear and discipline, now that he has grown he casts fear on them and they have no longer the right to discipline him, since they are afraid that he will exclude himself from society [klal].”Footnote 15 The meaning of “exclude himself from society” is not entirely clear. It may mean conversion (there is evidence of such cases),Footnote 16 but could also refer simply to leaving the community or becoming an evildoer.Footnote 17
Amid its educational advice, the book reflects a sense of parental fear and even anxiety about infant mortality and the damage that could result from harsh discipline. Five times in the course of this short work, Benveniste mentions the fear of plagues as a factor that influences parental considerations in educating their children. His recommendations also refer to infant mortality and explain how strictness in education and discipline can even save children.
Why does child mortality have such pride of place in a guide to educating children? In order to answer this question we need to understand the socioreligious and emotional reality that characterized Jewish society in general and the exiles from the Iberian Peninsula in particular in the sixteenth century.Footnote 18 Joseph Hacker maintains that Iberian Jews and their descendants in the Ottoman Empire shared a polarized mentality that pivoted between “pride” and self-esteem for belonging to the Iberian Diaspora (which they regarded as a social, intellectual, and religious elite of unquestionable authority), and “depression” derived from existential fear, despondency, and a feeling of helplessness—all in response to the disasters they experienced. Hacker's study, replete with comprehensive sources and analysis, outlines clearly the extent of mortality and its influence on the emotional, psychological, and religious state of Jews in the sixteenth century in general and the exiles from the Iberian Peninsula in particular.
The tribulations of the exiles expelled from the Iberian Peninsula included the loss of many family members, especially children. These losses could be due to forced conversion (for those remaining in Iberia) or death due to the difficulties of their journeys or harsh conditions in places of refuge (should they have reached them). The enormity of the catastrophe that struck the largest Jewish community in the late Middle Ages left a powerful impression on the exiles and catalyzed a variety of reactions. There were those who felt despondent because of their inability to renew their lives and continue their line and were left feeling that God had “hidden his face” from His people in their distress, wondering how He conducted His world.Footnote 19 Others saw signs of redemption in these events that awakened messianic hope—presuming that they were part of a divine plan in the grand program of redemption. As Hacker suggests, the events of the expulsion magnified the emotional impact of later experiences and their influence on the exiles. Thus, even if we presume that child mortality in epidemics would strike all strata of society indiscriminately, with every parent feeling deep sorrow over a child's death regardless of social status, the exiles from the Iberian Peninsula came to regard these disasters as additional catastrophes in the cumulative series of dark events threatening their present and future existence. For example, here is how R. Joseph Garçon describes the series of disasters, including the death of children, as part of an overall crisis of Iberian Jewry undergoing destruction:
Since due to our many sins, from the time of the expulsions and forced conversion that we have undergone, we remain a few from many, each one alone without family and without any relation. [The observer] sees that some of them were killed whether at sea or on land. And some died of starvation. And some were eaten by lions and wild animals, and some converted in our sins until we remain each and every one alone. And now we have come to these kingdoms to save our souls and those of our children after us, and [the observer] will see that the curse of loneliness “does not depart from us” [Exodus 25:15] and we see our children dying and not reaching maturity, as happened to me for my sins and to many like me.Footnote 20
This bipolar mentality of pride and depression is reflected in various sources from this period, including personal diaries, autobiographical writings, and the description of dreams and visions by the exiles and their descendants. These sources reveal information both from the conscious and subconscious experience of the writers, as, for example, one writer's touching descriptions of his dreaming of communing with his dead children or with those he prays will be born.Footnote 21 Viewed against the background of the trauma of expulsion and its ramifications, the mass death of children in frequent epidemics triggered the Iberian exiles’ emotional turmoil and confusion about their survival prospects—both personal and collective.Footnote 22
A degree of indifference about infant mortality has been attributed to parents in Western Europe in the Middle Ages and early modern period. By contrast, high infant mortalityFootnote 23 led to the development in the Muslim world of a literature of comfort for bereaved parents. This literature describes parents’ emotional state as well as the intimate relations and close feelings between children and parents.Footnote 24 Infant mortality was a common premodern demographic reality, certainly in the Ottoman Empire, where plagues spread in major cities nearly every year.Footnote 25 Sources describing the various and multiple plagues that occurred throughout the empire include many expressions of parental sorrow and concern. Parents often sought to save their children by various means, including magic, prayers, and medications. Even within this context, Benveniste's emphasis on this subject and the anxiety it reveals stands out as exceptional and even extreme.
Rabbi Moses of Trani (1500–1580), who was active in the period when ʾOrekh yamim was printed, describes the epidemics of his time as affecting mainly children, unlike the epidemics of the past: “Most of the deaths in the plagues among us are of innocent children, the infants of the house of learning, boys and girls, unlike the case in those plagues in which were dying only sinners deserving of punishment by the heavenly court, twenty years of age and older.”Footnote 26 Bearing in mind Moses of Trani's reference to the frequent deaths of “children of the house of learning,” it is easier to understand Benveniste's representations of parents’ arguments for not disciplining their children for education and morality:
And if a person should ask [parents] why do you deprive the child of discipline? Then they answer: The plague is rampant and we are afraid to discipline the child. And see and know that the answer is false. The Torah said, “Honor your father and mother, that you may long endure,” and the father and mother exempt the child from fear, and that is the reason that he does not fulfill the commandment of honoring his father and mother. And not only that, but they cause their children to come into danger of death, because one who curses or strikes his father and mother will be put to death.Footnote 27 And how could one think that the child would be punished because they guide him to follow the paths of Torah? God forbid to think such wicked thoughts about the laws of God, may he be blessed. And also see the folly and foolishness of this answer. The children who were “brought up in scarlet” [Lam 4:5] and whose feet never touched the ground, and whose every wish was fulfilled, die in a plague or in other illnesses. May God who is blessed save us and rescue us from all evil. If so, discipline does not cause death, only sin causes death. Conversely thanks to good discipline he will be saved from death.Footnote 28
Benveniste's remarks reveal how parental anxiety for their children's welfare in view of the high infant mortality resulting from epidemics influenced the educational narrative. Parents refrained from disciplining their children, offering a rational argument for why beating children could be particularly dangerous in a time of plague: as children's bodies are already being challenged by widespread illnesses, they should not be subjected to physical harm through beatings or psychological or emotional harm through scolding and rebuke. Benveniste chides parents for being focused on their children's physical survival to the exclusion of any other goals beyond their wish to raise them and see them survive beyond childhood.
Instead, Benveniste seeks to direct parents’ yearning to preserve the life of their children in a direction more in keeping with the broader goals of his book. In his view, greater strictness will in fact bring children long life. He argues that a child who is not educated to respect his parents will in the end come to strike and insult them—both mortal sins for which the punishment is death from Heaven.Footnote 29 On the other hand, the Torah promises that a person who honors his father and mother will gain length of days.Footnote 30 It is therefore impossible that an education geared toward respecting parents would lead to a child's death. This logic leads him to conclude that “discipline does not cause death, only sin causes death,” a paraphrase of the talmudic expression “the snake does not kill, but sin kills” (B. Berakhot 33a).
Benveniste's “dialogue” with these worried parents hints at a wider contemporaneous dialogue between religious logic and the chaotic reality of lived experience, notably the widespread deaths of children and a pervasive lack of parental security as to their own most basic aspirations for continuity.Footnote 31 The search for a religious justification for the deaths of children is based on the principle of “reward and punishment”: divine justice is to be unquestioned and anyone who dies, dies for his sins. Other writings from this period explain death as resulting from a lack of religious observance in general or from some specific sin, typically neglect of Torah study or of charity, the latter being known as a way to be rescued from death.Footnote 32 Another example contemporary to ʾOrekh yamim is the observation of R. Judah Heliwa (from Safed): “And thus for our sins there have occurred in the Land of Israel plague after plague, famine after famine, earthquake after earthquake,Footnote 33 from the year 5300 and 5301 and 2 and 3 until today 5305 A.M. [1540–1545 CE] and disasters one following the other.”Footnote 34 And indeed there were some who pursued ascetic lives of religious devotion in order to improve their fate.Footnote 35 Others, perhaps less inclined toward deep religious devotion, were drawn to remedies, amulets, and practices they believed would protect those children already born and ensure the future births of surviving children. Alongside writings that attempt to justify God's management of the world and to accept His decrees with love, other writings express questions regarding how God treats His people. For example, R. Solomon ibn Verga, in his book Shevet Yehudah, attributes to “elderly people who left Spain” the story of a man who lost his wife in the tribulations of the expulsion. When the man's two sons later died of starvation, he raised his eyes to heaven before burying them and said, “Lord of the universe, you have done much to make me abandon my religion; know well that despite the heavenly forces, I am a Jew and I will remain a Jew and nothing that you have done to me or will do to me will change that.”Footnote 36 On one hand, this story expresses the social ethos of the Iberian exiles that religious devotion is integrated with fear of Heaven. Nevertheless, it expresses astonishment, even defiance, regarding how God acts toward His people, who have suffered catastrophe after catastrophe. We find similar descriptions from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in writings from both the European and the Asian parts of the Ottoman Empire, from large concentrations of population in Istanbul or Salonika, as well as from smaller communities. The sense of ever-present death that hovered over society was expressed by the phrase ʾorekh yamim (length of days). The author repeats over and over in the course of this book that he who listens to his counsel will achieve length of days, and that is why he so entitled his book.Footnote 37 He is aware of parents’ fear of child mortality, and he therefore stresses that his method—which (perhaps paradoxically) includes instilling fear in the child and even beating him—will ensure the child's survival. Nevertheless, he follows the HalakhahFootnote 38 in stressing that one should act with composure and not in anger in instilling fear and striking the child: “However fear and discipline require sense and composure and not wrath and anger. Our sages said, ‘A man should never cast too much fear on the members of his household.’ And know in fact that wherever there is fury and anger there the demons are ready to attack, may God save us from all evil and especially at a time of plague, when many demons are present, and a strike that comes from anger increases the power of the plague with that strike, and ‘And my eyes saw, and not another's.’”Footnote 39 The author testifies that he saw with his own eyes how beatings performed inappropriately at a time of plague cause severe harm. Benveniste, who certainly knew the halakhic prohibition according to which one may not strike children at a time of danger, which is a time when demons abound,Footnote 40 did not entirely forbid beating or instilling fear. Rather: “Therefore every man should control his temper and refrain entirely from anger. And if it is necessary to instill fear on the members of his household for the benefit of the home, he should make motions as if he were angry, but should retain his composure. And he should take care not to curse his wife or members of his household.”Footnote 41
Cursing is another vice mentioned a number of times in the book. The writer points out, to his dismay, that cursing is widespread, especially among women and children. In his opinion this phenomenon has not been sufficiently criticized, and he is dismayed that some parents even find a child's cursing to be amusing. As he writes toward the beginning of his book: “The child from the moment that he can understand rebuke, his father and mother must rebuke him if he does something inappropriate. But today not only do they not rebuke him, but they rejoice and celebrate their child's cleverness to do wrong. And they teach him to curse.”Footnote 42 Benveniste condemns these phenomena, but he goes beyond the sphere of Halakhah or even propriety to warn of his fear that these carelessly uttered curses may lead to great danger. He describes a common custom of women cursing the members of their household to be struck by plague. These are not empty curses, but will be fulfilled when the cursed person is otherwise liable for punishment for his sins: “The women curse the members of their household to be struck by plague and all sorts of curses. Every man should warn his wife and children not to utter curses at all because the devil accuses and the curse will compound the damage. May the blessed God save us from curses and evil hours!”Footnote 43
Benveniste's sternness regarding “utterances that come from the mouth” is also reflected in his admonitions about taking oaths and particularly swearing by the name of God. Here, too, he points out that the phenomenon is widespread among women who swear by the lives of their children, and thus put them in danger:
A proud person does not admit the truth, and moreover insists on the truth of his lie, violating “You shall not bear [false witness]” [Ex 20:16]. And if Israel had only this sin, it would be sufficient to lengthen the exile. And in all humility I say: Every person should fear this bad practice and everyone who is used to commit this sin should take it upon himself to give a penny for the study of Torah every time that he uses the name of Heaven in vain. … And thereby little by little everyone will distance himself from this evil practice and from great punishment. … Women are accustomed to swear by the lives of their children even on matters of no importance. This too is a very bad custom because it is impossible not to swear falsely sometimes. Therefore, every woman who loves her children will refrain from this bad habit.Footnote 44
Benveniste seeks to do more than correct what he sees as excessively rampant cursing and swearing. Poor table manners are another way that he points out how far “the wickedness of a youth” can reach. Even though table manners are mentioned in other books of ethics by Iberian exiles,Footnote 45 it is remarkable how central they are for Benveniste:
A child sits with his father and mother and reaches for the food before others and in this way the youth grows to act willfully without fear, without cultured behavior and civilized manners, until he reaches the age of eight or nine … then his father and mother want to correct what they have done wrong before, but they cannot because if the boy is accustomed to receiving whatever he asks for and if they do not give it to him, he comes to curse his father and mother. And who is responsible for all of this? His father and mother—and their mercy is not for Heaven's sake.Footnote 46
Thus, improving a child's table manners is another way of improving his overall education. When Benveniste seeks to instruct parents how to educate a child with respect and discipline, he maintains that the child should have his place made clear to him specifically when he eats:
In short the best advice is that the father and mother should accustom the child to good respect and discipline and they should feed him alone on a small table and that way the boy will grow up with cultured behavior and civilized manners and even after he grows old he will behave with fear and respect toward his heavenly father and also toward his father and mother and in this way he will achieve length of days and will find favor in the eyes of God and man and everyone will say “blessed is he who begat him and blessed is he who reared him.”Footnote 47
Benveniste maintains that the teacher of small children should play a significant role in the education of a child, far beyond matters of curriculum and classroom study. In his opinion the teacher should be allowed to beat the child when necessary, and he objects to parents who warn the teacher not to do so in the children's presence. He writes:
And there is another bad custom that when they bring their small child to the school, they tell the teacher in front of the child not to hit him,Footnote 48 and the child hears that his teacher has no permission to hit him, thus he increases his wickedness. … It is fitting that the teacher examine the child to see if he listens to his father and mother and if he is careful to perform ritual washing of the hands and reciting the blessing over bread and grace after meals and if he is content with what he is given to eat, and likewise he should order the boy to go to the synagogue to pray and answer Amen, and not to talk during the time of prayer and all the like, he should be strict with the boys and educate them in the commandments, in cultured behavior and civilized manners. And for this the teacher is entitled to receive payment from the children and not for teaching them.Footnote 49
Benveniste's educational philosophy is that the teacher should take an interest in the health and welfare of the child even outside the scope of formal instruction, and should do his part to ensure that overall, the child observes the commandments and behaves with respect. Benveniste thus expands the role of the teacher, explaining that this larger role justifies the teacher's receiving payment for his work, since a teacher may not be paid for teaching the Oral Law.Footnote 50
Benveniste asks whether one can influence a child's nature or not. He represents that this question was on the educational agenda of his time:
Some say that this bad nature is predominant and discipline does not help. This too is vain and false. And regarding this King Solomon said “If folly settles in the heart of a lad, the rod of discipline will remove it” [Proverbs 22:15]. That is to say, even though the bad nature is intrinsic in the heart of a lad, nevertheless little by little the rod of discipline will remove the folly. … If so, habit dominates and not nature, and if he is not accustomed to fear and discipline from a young age, even after he grows up, he will not maintain fear and respect for his heavenly father nor for his father and mother and how will he achieve length of days?Footnote 51
Whether or not a child's nature can be influenced or changed has been a perennial part of Western discourse on determinism and free will. Aristotle wrote that habit becomes like nature,Footnote 52 and this statement in various iterations recurs in the writings of Cicero, Galen, and others. Scholars of the Iberian diaspora also engaged with this philosophical discourse. In Shevet Yehudah, completed in the early sixteenth century in the Ottoman sphere, Solomon ibn Verga describes the following dialogue between King Alfonso and the wise Thomas regarding “what he commanded the teacher about how to teach and guide his son”: “The king said to Thomas: I have taken great care, and I think that virtues stem from the time of birth. Thomas said: The Pythagoreans did not think so, but said: If a man knows the moment of conception—he will know everything that will happen to him as an embryo, and if he knows the time of birth—he will know everything that will happen to him until his death, but virtues they said are a product of habit, even though they stem from the constellation [of the stars] and nature.”Footnote 53 R. Isaac Aboab (the first), in his book Menorat ha-maʾor, also discussed the power of habit and wrote: “‘Train a lad in the way he ought to go …,’ that is, when he has study, education, the commandments and the habit of good virtues in his youth, even more so in his old age, he will not depart from this virtue since habit becomes natural for him.”Footnote 54 The nature or nurture question continued to inform educational discourse in the literature of the Sephardic diaspora, as scholars advocated the power of habit. R. Moses ibn Makhir wrote, “A person should keep an eye on his son or student to supervise him at all times and every moment to guide him in the straight path and to teach him time after time until he will be strengthened in everything and accustomed to it so that it becomes natural to him, as it is written, ‘habit is second nature,’ and that is a great matter that a spiritual man should be attentive to because the building follows its foundation and if the foundation is shaky, it will fall down quickly.”Footnote 55 In his admonition to parents Benveniste also stresses the force of habit and urges them to inculcate good habits in their children in order to overcome the force of nature.
On Women and Men: Parents and Their Image
Studies on Jewish society in the Ottoman Empire in the early modern period describe it as highly patriarchal (like most societies in the Mediterranean Basin),Footnote 56 with the status of women ranked lower than that of men and regulated by standards and rules formulated by men.Footnote 57 Historical changes that occurred in Jewish communities toward the end of the Middle Ages led to various communities’ encountering cultures that had different standards regarding women's dress and modesty. Jews from Spain met Arabic-speaking (mustaʿarabi) Jews in the Muslim East, along with Muslim culture, as well as Greek-speaking (Romaniote) Jews. The resulting awareness of cultural gaps and different standards raised questions and criticism, not only regarding dress, but also in matters of leisure culture and the role of women in social and economic life.
Female sexuality plays a central role in discourse about women. From the male perspective the female is always responsible for sexual tension, and the male is perceived as drawn toward sin against his will.Footnote 58 Consequently, the responsibility to reduce sexual tension falls on women, who are expected to stay away from encounters with the opposite sex, to refrain from going out of the house unnecessarily, and to cover their bodies appropriately. Yet despite the attribution to women of negative qualities, they were also appreciated for their contribution to raising children and fulfilling the needs of the home.
Benveniste offers several admonitions about the behavior of women in his time. Although these are of insufficient length and development to enable us to compare them thoroughly with the fuller, more expansively expressed thought of other scholars of the Iberian diaspora,Footnote 59 it appears that his views were relatively moderate in comparison. A representative example may be found in the words of R. Joseph Alzayag (from Safed), who described the ideal woman in the eulogy he gave for his mother. Even in the midst of Alzayag's praise, his negative views about the nature of women in general are reflected: “First, they should be clever, unlike most women, who are foolish. Second, they should be generous, unlike most women, who are mean. … Third, they should be thrifty, unlike most women, who want their husbands to give endlessly, without a thought for the consequences. … Fourth, they should be of a gentle disposition, unlike most women, who are argumentative and quarrelsome.”Footnote 60
Benveniste's admonitions regarding women are his subjective description of the concrete reality he observes in the society around him. Here is how he describes a problem in the area of sexual modesty that in his opinion is related to the pride that is rampant among women:
Women are proud. And they are unaware of the punishment and harm that comes from this pride. Therefore I saw fit to inform them how it makes them fail in order to distance themselves from the sin. There is a woman who wears the clothing of a maidservant at home, but wears regal clothing when she goes out in order to show off her beauty. And it is not right to do so. A modest woman, who fears God in her heart, it is fitting that she adorns herself in her home so that her husband pay no attention to another woman.Footnote 61
From Benveniste's rebuke we may conclude that it was common practice for women to go out wearing their jewelry. Criticism of women who go out adorned with jewelry is of long standing; it is found in classical rabbinic literature and is widespread later, in the literature of the Ottoman period.Footnote 62 Benveniste's severe criticism is echoed in the ethical literature of Iberian exiles and their descendants,Footnote 63 for instance, in the popular story that placed the blame for the expulsion from Spain on the wife of R. Isaac Abrabanel, who did not take care to limit her display of her expensive jewelry and fine clothes:
And how much evil do the women cause, who desire to wear magnificent and expensive clothing which make the gentiles jealous. And as happened in our Diaspora, the Diaspora of Spain, as cited in the book Shevet Yehudah, regarding the wife of our master R. Isaac Abrabanel, who went to the bathhouse. On the same day the wife of the king alsoFootnote 64 went and was jealous of her because of the multitude of jewelry and clothing she wore, and her great wealth and honor. … And it came to pass that the wife of the aforementioned rabbi made herself a fine and selected ring that was worth more than all the silver and gold ornaments that she had before. And it came to pass that the rabbi's wife went to the bath house, and the queen also went and she saw the splendor of the ring and was very astonished and said: bravo anillo [bravo ring] and was jealous of her, and she was angry and argued with the king. And the king expelled all of the Jews.Footnote 65
Halakhic literature written up until the sixteenth century did not prohibit a woman from going out to the public sphere in her jewelry. R. Joseph Karo discussed in the Shulḥan ‘arukh whether a woman may go out on the Sabbath wearing jewelry, because she might be tempted to carry it in the public domain and remove it to show to her friends. It is clear from this scenario that it was common practice for women to go out on weekdays wearing their jewelry, and the halakhic discussion of the matter is confined to issues of Sabbath observance: “And today, our women go out with all their jewelry. And some say that according to the law [of the Sabbath] that is forbidden, but since they will not listen, better they should [do so] in error and not with intention.”Footnote 66 Much like the prevalent approach in rabbinic literature (both philosophical and exegetical), the writer ascribes to women the sins of carnal desire between the sexes, and therefore he admonishes them.Footnote 67 A woman's beauty was intended to provide for her husband's sexual need, and therefore a woman who only adorns herself when she goes out but not at home causes both her husband and other men to sin: her husband by causing him to pay attention to other women, and other men by causing them to pay attention to a married woman.
A woman who goes out adorned—sins and causes others to sin because she may encounter an ignoramus and he will violate “You shall not covet your neighbor's wife.” And not only that, but when the ignoramus has intercourse with his wife, he will think of the beauty of the woman he saw during the day. And the children born from that thought are called bnei temurah. Footnote 68 And it is impossible that these children will be good because they stem from sinful thought. So the woman who goes out adorned creates an obstacle of sin and failure for that man.Footnote 69
Benveniste criticizes women's lack of modesty in public and in private life on the grounds that it leads to ethical-religious problems in society, which conforms to the opinions found in other sources of the period.Footnote 70
Benveniste also blames the taxation of the Jewish community on women's pride. When women wear their jewelry out in the street they advertise the Jews’ great wealth,Footnote 71 which in turn causes the authorities to raise taxes unfairly: “And the harm that stems from this pride—we are in exile because of our sins and our enemies see gold and silver jewelry and libel us falsely. May the blessed God save us from them and from all evil! No benefit is derived from pride.”Footnote 72
Benveniste also sees women's immodest behavior in adorning themselves as creating social pressure within the community. He describes the great financial pressure on husbands who are expected to satisfy their wives’ desire to wear jewelry, until some are brought to the point of acquiring that coveted jewelry by illegal means. This sheds interesting light on the social dynamic that was current in the communities of the exiles of the second generation after the expulsion. The representation of a turn to hedonism and public display of wealth, and the indications of social pressures around material possessions, illustrates that the exiles achieved a certain level of material comfort and even a degree of normality in their new lands of refuge. “And now at this time even a woman whose husband cannot afford it, wants to be seen in her pride and does not suspect that her husband might encounter danger of [engaging in] theft or stealing. Indeed a man with good sense should foresee the consequences, and also notice the past when some harsh decrees occurred thanks to pride, as mentioned in the book Shevet Yehudah.”Footnote 73 A similar description of the embourgeoisement of the exilic community and criticism of the social pressure created by luxury-seeking women are implicit in R. Joseph Alzayag's eulogy for his mother, cited above. R. Solomon le-Beit Halevy (1581–1633), who lived and was active in the communities of Iberian exiles in Salonika one or two generations after Benveniste, also sharply criticized this phenomenon, citing explicitly the wives of scholars:
I also say that even a man who has no daughter and no need to give dowries … must earn in order to satisfy the needs of his wife who is consumed with jealousy and a passion for her appearance. … In this generation to which I belong, women and daughters dress in scarlet and bedeck themselves with luxuries like crimson [2 Samuel 1:24] to sail in ships and to walk in the wilderness,Footnote 74 and they appear in public adorned with jewels and garments like those of the princesses and daughter of the viziers and governors set above us … and I say to the talmidei ḥakhamim and their wives, woe to the husbands of such women. For if one of the wives of these “sons of prophets,” the talmidei ḥakhamim,Footnote 75 who study Torah … were to go out … and see sights [ha-ẓovʾot]Footnote 76 that would kindle their jealousy of other men's wives who glitter with gold, their raiment like bronze [Ezek 1:7], their husbands would appear to them as a shame and a disgrace. And when they return home in the evening there would be terror and darkness and distress and wretched gloom. … They say to their husbands: “Why are you like a man astonished [Jer 14:9] and slumbering? … Arise and ‘go out into the field and take me venison’ [Gen 27:3], for why should I not be like other women of this land who wear gold jewelry upon their garments” [2 Sam 1:24]? … So what can he do? He will cast about, seeking prey with the sweat of his brow, and he will risk his life to try and earn what he can to satisfy his wife.Footnote 77
Indeed, in a later period, regulations were promulgated in various Mediterranean communities regarding women's jewelry.Footnote 78
Benveniste goes on to cite additional examples of lack of modesty in Jewish society. “Sometimes a woman sits at the entrance of her home nursing an infant and a passerby sees her exposed. Sometimes a woman exposes the hair on her head. These are not modest forms of behavior.”Footnote 79 Benveniste (somewhat manipulatively) reminds women of their anxiety over the high mortality rate of women and children in childbirth,Footnote 80 warning women that they may either suffer punishment or be saved from death in accordance with their observance of the rules of modesty: “Any daughter with good sense will take to heart: how greatly does she need mercy at the time of giving birth. May the blessed God have mercy on all of Israel. Every daughter of Israel should follow the example of the modesty of the Ishmaelite women and choose to follow the path that is right in the eyes of God and man in order to merit length of days and to see children and grandchildren engaged in Torah and in the commandments.”Footnote 81 Another reflection of the high mortality rate of women at childbirth may be found in a question addressed to R. Yom Tov Ẓahalon (1559–1638). It appears that during a birth the laboring woman, the midwives, and any other women present would shout God's name several times in order to protect both mother and child, despite the immodesty of the situation.
May our teacher explain the law regarding those who mention the name of Heaven for naught out loud, and especially women who are giving birth and call “Hashem, Hashem” several times—is it appropriate to object to them? And if you say that a person is not called to task in a moment of distress, the other women who are attending her, who allows them to call “Hashem, Hashem,” and especially the midwife, whose hands are bloody and she is not purified, and before the birth shouts “Hashem, Hashem” …? And is it right to object and if after warning them to ostracize them?Footnote 82
The difficulties of pregnancy and childbirth, the pain involved in raising children, and the burdens of housekeeping led Benveniste to warn husbands not to hurt their wives or cause them grief. His warning echoes other such warnings found in halakhic literature.Footnote 83 Here he relies on the words of the sages who warned that a man should take great care not to cause pain to his wife “because she can weep easily”:Footnote 84
And he should be very careful not to curse his wife or the members of his household, and likewise it is forbidden for a man to beat his wife, since it is enough that a wife suffers the pain of pregnancy and childbirth and the pain of raising children, and she bears the burden of all the household chores, and it is unfit to cause her more pain than she already has, and if she does something that seems wrong to him, her husband should correct her with many words that speak to the heart and not beat her or curse her. A man must honor his wife more than his own body because there is no home but a wife.Footnote 85
Benveniste's remarks about women combine religious and halakhic sources with widespread, stereotypical views. His remarks open a window through which we may observe social normsFootnote 86 and see realistic descriptions of the society of which he was a part. He depicts women's custom of swearing by the lives of their children, cursing others to be afflicted with plague, their prideful desire to adorn themselves with expensive jewelry, and the difficulties of their daily lives. Benveniste's focus on matters relating to women may create the impression that he regards them as the principal source of the problems of his day. Granted, he also criticizes men, but his critique of men—unlike that of women—is of discrete actions that require correction, not of their nature as men. For example, he criticizes men for their attitude toward Sabbath prayers. He urges them to learn from Muslim society or other religions how to behave and pray in awe of the sacred.
Many [men] of Israel do not trouble themselves to pray with the congregation on weekdays, and on the Sabbath they come for one moment. During that moment they do not concentrate on listening to the prayer of the cantor or responding Amen. But they turn to talk with one another in matters of no consequence. And in fact the sin of anyone who talks during prayer is greater than can be borne. And why does he not realize that if he comes to speak with a common man, he intends to hear his comrade's words in order to answer him, but before the King, King of Kings, who has the lives of all in his hand, he turns his back to speak to his friend, could there be a greater sin than that? It is appropriate to infer from a lenient law to a strict one from the Ishmaelites or other peoples, how they stand in fear and trembling to pray, and no one raises his eyes to look around, or all the more so to speak with someone.Footnote 87
* * * * *
R. Samuel Benveniste's educational program, like the additional issues concerning family and community discussed in the book, may be characterized as unsystematic and conservative. He preaches religious devotion and traditional morality to both the individual and society. His critique testifies to the gap between the educational and ethical approach that he advocated and the lived reality as he described it and as it appears from other contemporaneous sources. His is not a lone voice among the religious leadership of his time; his ideas are echoed in sermons and ethical books that preceded and followed him. Like other preachers, he describes the low state to which society has fallen and urges readers to step up their supervision of children's education and control licentiousness and other social ills. At the same time as it lacks novelty in its educational approach and words of rebuke, Benveniste's ʾOrekh yamim includes some important descriptions of Sephardic diaspora communities in the sixteenth century. These descriptions fit well into the social mosaic we see described in other primary sources, as well as scholarly studies on the influence of the expulsions from the Iberian Peninsula on the exilic communities’ way of life. These show, on the one hand, how the way of life of the Sephardic Jews was based on the religious heritage of the past, but also eventually became acculturated to new surroundings, even to the extent of embourgeoisement and a perceptive loosening of those traditional religio-ethical restraints. But the posttraumatic experience of the exiles and their descendants in the sixteenth century following the expulsion, tragedies, and suffering, to which were added the severe hardships of recurrent plagues, natural disasters, and high infant mortality, is also clearly discernible in this mosaic. The anxiety of the society of Iberian émigrés takes a central place in the socio-educational discourse of ʾOrekh yamim, expressed in longing for “length of days,” as indicated in the title of the work. The book thus outlines the image of the Sephardic diaspora and its aspirations at the beginning of the new period after the expulsion.
