Interrogating the Text: Doing Midrash in Introductory Religion Courses
Karla R. Suomala
Context
All students at
Introductory Courses: What are the objectives?
Before taking the first course in Bible, many students have in common the following: 1) a reluctance to take a class in Bible?they enroll because they ?have to?; 2) many strong, but unarticulated, presuppositions about the Bible and religion in general; and 3) inexperience with college-level work. In order to address some of these issues from the very outset, I often begin the semester asking students to define the term ?Bible.? Most of the students, when asked to define the term ?Bible,? are at first surprised that there would be a need to define it, but many will say that it is a ?sacred? text. I then ask them to define the term ?sacred?: What exactly does it mean? How does something become sacred? If something is sacred for me, is it also sacred for you? For many students, being sacred entails being one or more of the following: being true, written by God, unchangeable, perfect. While each of these phrases also requires discussion, students articulate in one way or another their assumption that the Bible is somehow different than other books and as such, should not be interrogated. It is rather a text that should, according to one student, ?be read and accepted just as it is.?
By the time they enroll in their second religion course, usually during their junior or senior year, students are more familiar with the academic expectations required of a college student. They still, however, have had little-to-no exposure to other aspects of an academic study of religion, making the second course ?introductory? as well. Since the students will only spend 45 hours in the classroom during the semester, they will not be able to say that they ?know? the Bible or ?understand? Buddhism or have ?become conversant? in the history of Christian thought by the time of the final exam. So, what are we trying to teach in these introductory courses, the only courses in religion that these students are likely to take?
According to scholar J. Z. Smith, the term ?Introduction? in the title of the course is just as important as the term ?Bible? or ?Judaism? or ?Buddhism? in the context of a liberal arts education. He argues that since the students aren?t going to ?know? the Bible at the end of the term, an introductory course should focus on introducing students to college-level work?developing their capacities to read, write, and speak?with the ultimate goal of helping them learn not only that ?the world is more complex than it appears, but also that ? interpretive decisions must be made, decisions of judgment which entail real consequences for which one must take responsibility??[1] In a liberal arts curriculum with these types of objectives, the ?read-and-accept? type of view toward the biblical text, or any text, is problematic. By dealing with a text as a pristine artifact, it is impossible to engage the text, to enter into it, and to make it one?s own. This is just as much the case for students who identify with a particular faith tradition as it is for students who have no strong religious leanings or affiliation.
In 1881, in an introductory lecture to
everything depends upon turning narrative into problems? Break the drowsy spell of narrative, ask yourself questions, set yourself problems, you will become an investigator, you cease to be solemn and begin to be serious.[2]
However, according to Smith, in teaching text we as teachers tend to stand in the way of the process of turning narrative into problems by screening
from our students the hard work that results in the editorial production of exemplary texts. Despite what we know, we treat them as ?found objects,? reading them with our students as if each word were directory revelatory. We display our texts as if they were self-evidently meaningful and significant and allow our students to feel guilty or dumb if they do not immediately share this perception.[3]
This approach only encourages the ?read-and-accept? mentality in students, rather than helping them to identify and analyze problems, make informed judgments, and anticipate consequences.
Midrash: Turning Narrative into Problems
How do we help students ?turn narrative into problems?? I?ve found the literature and methodology of rabbinic midrash to be an invaluable resource in that process in both Bible and Judaism courses. The term midrash refers to two different, but related ideas. On one hand, deriving from the Hebrew root ?to search out,? midrash is the process of interpreting the Bible,[4] identifying gaps and rough spots in the text (problems), and working to solve them. On the other hand, midrash is the corpus of work that has collected these interpretations.[5] In creating midrash, the ancient rabbis never intended to replace the biblical text, but rather through the identification of the gaps, to explain the text, illustrate difficult concepts, correct misreadings, derive moral lessons, conduct ethical discussions, clarify legal points, and explore the text?s deeper meanings and interconnections. The rabbis identified rough spots or gaps in the text by paying close attention to minute details. As sacred text, not only every sentence, phrase and word was important, but even every letter, down to its shape! They saw meaning in things that we ordinarily overlook, such as grammatical inconsistency, spelling, repetition, etc., they saw their task as one of identifying these gaps and exploring solutions. For rabbis, ?to read he story and not see the gaps [was], quite frankly, not to read the story.?[6]
Introductory Bible course
One of the biggest obstacles students face when encountering text, especially biblical text, is learning how to identify a gap or problem; therefore I introduce them to midrash in a gradual and playful way. I begin with examples of popular midrash that students will recognize?grocery store tabloids. I have to admit that I have a lot of fun with tabloids in my classes due to their frequent ?exploration? of biblical themes. I?ve gotten to the point where I?m no longer embarrassed by picking one up while waiting in line at the grocery store! I bring in an example with a great headline, i.e., ?Bones of Jonah?s Whale Discovered? or ?11 New Commandments Discovered in Desert,? to set the tone. After putting the students in small groups and asking them to pretend they are writers for a popular tabloid, I then give them their assignment: report on the Noah incident??Old man building huge boat??and think about how it would appear in a tabloid. They need to come up with a headline, as well as a basic outline, for the story they would write. The main source of information for this story needs to be the Bible, and the reporters may ?add? characters and details, but not change what is already there.
By juxtaposing a familiar biblical story with an unexpected type of written media such as the tabloid, the students find themselves somewhat at a loss for the first few minutes. I visit groups with suggestions and questions to help them get beyond their initial hesitation. Gradually, then, from around the room I start to hear students laughing as they try out headlines and attempt story lines. This exercise, since it involves humor and creativity, allows students to leave their comfort zones to begin to play with the biblical narratives. In order to come up with interesting stories, they need to mine the text for details they might previously have glossed over or missed. Through rewriting the story in tabloid-form, students find themselves inadvertently re-evaluating the story, noticing the absurdity that early hearers and readers of the story would likely have experienced (students often assume that huge floods, big boats with thousands of animals, and conversations with the deity were typical in the ancient context), as well as seeing some of the problems?both textual (interwoven sources) and ethical (issues of God?s justice)?that the text presents.
Genesis is a particularly fruitful book for doing midrash, so we spend quite a bit of time exploring the stories found in this first book of the Torah. When we get to Gen. 22, the Akedah (The Binding of Isaac), I introduce the students to another level of doing midrash, employing more of the methodology that the rabbis actually developed in their interrogation of biblical texts. I begin class by reading the text of Gen. 22 aloud, and then asking if anything is missing from the narrative?whether there is information that they would like to have but don?t. Students rarely respond, only noting that the story seems pretty clear and straightforward. So, I ask the students to open their biblical texts to Gen. 22:1, ?After these things God tested Abraham. He said to him, ?Abraham!? And he said, ?Here I am.?? I then tell the students to underline the phrases, ?these things,? ?God tested,? and ?Here I am,? and following the rabbis, I start to ask questions such as
· ?Which things??
· ?Why did God test Abraham? Wouldn?t God already know the answer??
· ?Why did Abraham respond by saying ?Here I am?? Wouldn?t God know where he was? How would you respond in this situation??
Moving on to Gen. 22:2, ?He said, ?Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you,?? I tell them to underline the following phrases: ?your son, your only son Isaac,? ?whom you love,? ?Moriah,? ?offer him ? as a burnt offering.? I follow with another round of questions:
· ?Didn?t Abraham have more than one son??
· ?Why Isaac and not Ishmael??
· ?Isn?t it possible that he loved both sons??
· ?Where is Moriah? Why is it significant? Why couldn?t he stay where he was??
· ?Isn?t child sacrifice wrong? Why would God ask for the sacrifice of a child??
By this point, students are starting to get the hang of this approach. I have them work together to see if they are able to provide answers to any of the questions I have asked, looking at the notes in their biblical texts, their textbooks, earlier stories, and through developing their own theories based on context.
It takes much of a class period, but we work systematically through most of the chapter. As we move along, students take over the responsibility for framing the questions, effectively moving them to the heart of close reading. The questions that students have generated in the many times I have used this exercise touch upon theological, philosophical, textual, and personal issues. Some of the most frequently asked questions include:
· ?Where was Sarah in all of this??
· ?How old was Isaac??
· ?Why doesn?t Isaac protest, or at least ask more questions??
· ?What kinds of feelings or emotions were Abraham and Isaac experiencing??
· ?Why is the phrase, ?Here I am,? repeated so many times??
· ?Does Abraham know what will happen in the end??
· ?What happens to Isaac at the end of the story (the story says that Abraham returns with his two young men)??
At this point I introduce the students to an actual piece of midrash to demonstrate that the students are engaging in a conversation with the text that people in communities of faith?Jewish and Christian?have been participating in for nearly two thousand years. The Akedah held a special appeal for the rabbis, thus providing ample materials from which to choose. Looking at some of the rabbinic examples gives us the opportunity to talk about both the similarity and the difference in the questions we ask in contrast to those of the rabbis and to think about the whole problem of context, an issue that we pursue throughout the semester, especially by reading contemporary global perspectives on assigned biblical texts. Questions that I pose include:
· What is it about our own context that attracts us to some issues more than others?
· What do our answers to these questions say about us?
· What do the rabbis? answers say about them and their context?
Students are quick to see differences in issues such us their understandings of gender, often pointing out the rabbis? treatment of Sarah and what her reactions to God?s command to sacrifice Isaac might have been. The rabbis, in their discussion about why Abraham did not tell Sarah about God?s command, frame Abraham?s thoughts in the form of an interior monologue:
Abraham had asked himself: ?What shall I do? If I tell Sarah all about it, consider what may happen. After all, a woman?s mind becomes distraught over insignificant matters; how much more disturbed she would become if she heard something as shocking as this! However, if I tell her nothing at all, and simply steal him away from her when she is not looking, she will kill herself.? [So] what did [Abraham] do? He said to Sarah: ?Prepare some food and drink that we may eat and rejoice.? ?But why is this day different from other days?? she asked. ?What are you celebrating?? He replied: ?When a couple our age has a son, it is fitting, indeed, that they should eat, drink, and rejoice.? [7]
From this portion, we talk about the view of gender that many of the rabbis and their contemporaries likely held, and we can then go back even further to the biblical writers, and ask why they didn?t even include a discussion of Sarah. In this way students begin to develop an understanding of the contours of context from its historical and geographical aspects to its gendered and economic aspects.
In addition, through this encounter with midrash?as process and text?I have the opportunity to introduce my students to a significant interpretive framework from outside of their lived experience and worldview. Most of the students in my classes have had little or no exposure to either Jews or Judaism as a lived tradition, and working with midrash in this way is probably their first exposure to post-biblical Judaism. In this engagement they see firsthand how dynamic ancient Jewish biblical interpretation was and still is through this type of approach.
Judaism course
In my Judaism course, building upon exercises similar to those above, I am able to devote more time to the place midrash in its larger religious and historical context. The students in this course each write their own midrashim [pl. of midrash] providing them with the opportunity to engage traditional Jewish biblical interpretation on both experientially and intellectually. In effect, each student must select a short passage from the Torah, and then produce his or her own midrash on that text. In order to set the stage for this type of assignment, we talk in more detail about some of the rabbinic assumptions regarding the nature of scripture as well as the rules the rabbis developed for writing midrash, i.e., what textual elements signaled problems or gaps in need of interpretation.[8] For example, in reading selections from ?The Seven Rules of Hillel,? ?The 13 Principles of Rabbi Ishmael,? and ?The 32 Rules of Rabbi Eliezer b. Jose Ha-Galili? students begin to realize that many of the rules are entirely dependent on reading the text in the original Hebrew, and that some of them are quite complicated. I encourage them to focus on the rules that survive translation and can be identified with relatively little training, the repetition of words, the etymology of names of people and places, and word plays, along with the simpler rules of logic, i.e. kal-va-homer or arguing that what applies in a lesser case will most certainly apply to a more important one.[9]
In addition, using a broad definition of midrash, we read a range of midrashic materials, including re-written Bible and targum, so that the students can develop a sense for the flavor and style of midrash by working backward from the midrashic text to the biblical text in order to figure out which gaps or problems the rabbis deemed important. This type of sleuth-work also reinforces the type of critical thinking that Jonathan Z. Smith talks about when he challenges instructors to allow students to beyond the pristine text to discover the layers that exist beneath it.
I then ask the students to read a short article by Alicia Ostriker that was originally published in the magazine, Reform Judaism, as part of one issue?s focus on midrash at the congregational level. In this piece, Ostriker puts forward a number of different midrashic formats that are conducive to turning ?the gaps in the story into midrash,? including: 1) monologue?the student selects and becomes one of the characters in the story and records the story from this individual?s perspective; 2) memory?the student, still in character, tries to imagine that time has passed since the story took place and she must now tell her version of the story to someone else?a grandchild, a niece, or even God; 3) dialogue?the student selects two characters and either extends the recorded conversation between these two characters or creates one that might have taken place, furnishing details which can be serious or humorous that fill in the gaps; 4) interview?the student uses a media figure (real or imaginary) and has this figure conduct an interview with a biblical character, i.e., Barbara Walters: ?So Pharaoh, what really happened? Why wouldn?t you let the Israelites go? You say your ?heart was hardened??? and 5) third-person narrative?a story that is told by a non-participant who may be an unidentified narrator or perhaps a minor character in the story who witnesses the action.[10]
At this phase of the assignment, I ask the students to brainstorm on the passages they have selected, writing down questions, any questions that they see emerging from the passage. At this point, once they have started to identify some of the gaps, the students are usually ready to think about the type of midrash, based on Ostriker?s suggested formats, they would like to write. The guidelines for the final product are fairly straightforward: students can add characters but they can?t eliminate them and their final product should have the feel of a short story.
In order to assist students through examples, I include a couple of samples of modern midrash?both by students and ?professionals??that will help them see the range of possibilities. Woody Allen?s rendition of the Akedah is a lot of fun, and demonstrates one way that a contemporary midrash might sound when gaps are identified and then transformed into a new narrative:
And Abraham awoke in the middle of the night and said to his only son, Isaac, ?I have had an dream where the voice of the Lord sayeth that I must sacrifice my only son, so put your pants on.? And Isaac trembled and said, ?So what did you say? I mean when He brought this whole thing up? ?did He say why he wants me sacrificed?? But Abraham said, ?the faithful do not question. Now let?s go because I have a heavy day tomorrow.? And Sarah who heard Abraham?s plan grew vexed and said, ?How doth thou know it was the Lord and not, say, thy friend who loveth practical jokes??? And Abraham answered, ?Because I know it was the Lord. It was a deep, resonant voice, well modulated, and nobody in the desert can get a rumble in it like that.? And Sarah said, ?And thou art willing to carry out this senseless act?? ?And so he took Isaac to a certain place and prepared to sacrifice him but at the last minute the Lord stayed Abraham?s hand and said, ?How could thou doest such a thing?? And Abraham said, ?But thou said?? ?Never mind what I said,? the Lord spake. ?Doth thou listen to every crazy idea that comes thy way??[11]
While Allen?s rendition is humorous, it also takes into account some of the issues that the text presents?should Abraham have listened to God? What kind of God would make such a request? In class I emphasize that just as there are nearly endless possibilities when it comes to identifying problems there are also countless solutions to those problems. A careful reading doesn?t result in one solution or one truth, but multiple solutions or truths always exist.
One student, who opted for a third-person narrative approach to the Akedah, framed his story as a newspaper article with the headline, ?Local Man Attempts to Kill Son, Claims ?God Told Me to Do It.?? His midrash is interesting because it draws out unheard voices from the text, including those of Sarah, the servants, and Isaac. The student began his midrash:
NEAR
The student author goes on to describe how Isaac devises a plan by which he and the servants sneak away on the last night of the three-day journey to hide the ram in the bushes at the top of mountain, assuming that this is where the sacrifice would take place. Such a rendition identifies the problem of Isaac?s seeming passivity in the biblical text, and instead makes Isaac?s role much more active?a pattern which is often found in rabbinic midrash. In Tanhuma Yelammedenu, however, the rabbis depict Isaac actively participating in his own sacrifice?the heroic martyr rather than the passive victim?saying at the moment of slaughter,
Father, bind my hands and feet, for the will to live is strong within me, and when I see the knife descending, I may tremble and the offering may become defective (as a result of the knife slipping).[12]
In selecting texts upon which to write, many students choose passages with which they are unfamiliar, especially those that have to do with women. The story of Dinah?s rape in Gen. 34 is one texts that has appeared over and over again; other women who are frequently studied included: Hagar in either Gen. 16 or 21; Zipporah in Ex. 4:24-26 where she circumcises the son she has had with Moses because he has failed to do so; Tamar, who in Gen. 38 tricks her father-in-law into fathering a child with her; the wife-swapping stories of both Sarah and Rebekah in Gen. 12, 20, and 26; and the betrothals of Rebekah, Leah, and Rachel. Many students are intrigued by these figures and are curious about the identity of these women were and the roles they play within the text. These types of texts give us a good opportunity to ask whether the quantity of text devoted to an individual determines his or her significance or value to the story. The biblical references to these women and the midrash that emerges from them demonstrates that quantity and significance are, in fact, not connected. Where there is silence, there are gaps, and these gaps provide us entry into the hearts of the stories.
Some of the midrash that students produce is quite remarkable. One student employed the monologue and memory forms to explore in more depth the figure of Hagar in Gen. 21. She begins her midrash:
My name is Hagar, which means ?splendid? where I come from, but in the land where I now live I am only called ?wanderer.? I have wandered. I wandered to many distant lands, sometimes by myself, sometimes with my people, but I was always alone. I was a female slave. I occupied the place closest to the dirt. I have been raped by men, and abused by women. As a girl I was taken from my home, splendid
The student author goes on to describe how the relationship deteriorates over time as Abraham and Sarah age, and especially after Sarah encourages Hagar to have Abraham?s child. The student author adds a twist to her midrash, suggesting that Hagar had not one, but two children, while part of Abraham?s household:
When my son was about 13, I ? found out that I was about to have a child again. By custom, I was still married to the old man. But Sarah encouraged me to go into the tent of the shepherds because she wanted to disgrace me? When I became pregnant with Kenan?s child, Sarah went to Abraham and asked him to stone me because of my affair.
Due to this second pregnancy and birth of a daughter, Hagar briefly returns to Sarah?s favor because she is able to nurse the child, Isaac, that Sarah has in her old age. The story takes further twists and turns, with Abraham appearing more as a bumbling old man in a household where Sarah calls the shots. In her version of Hagar, this student has identified a number of problems in the text?the challenges of bearing a child so late in life, Abraham?s obliviousness to his own household system, and Hagar?s precarious but crucial position. This particular student did a significant amount of research into the biblical context, consulting commentaries and other resources to determine the meanings of names, the geographical setting, and ancient customs, particularly those dealing with slavery and marriage. ?Doing? midrash gave her the opportunity to interrogate the text more profoundly, pursue her own particular interests, and engage secondary materials.
Conclusion
As I reflect on using midrash in my introductory courses?both as a textual resource and an approach?I see that it has been successful on at least two fronts, both pedagogically and intellectually. First, and particularly in my introductory Bible courses, midrash as an approach has enabled and even empowered students to engage text in a more complex and sophisticated way, in effect helping them to ?turn the narrative into problems.? Students begin to learn to engage the text by asking questions, realizing that such interrogation is a way to develop relationship with text and is a sign of respect rather than disrespect or cynicism. Along the way they expand their knowledge of biblical story through more fully exploring the characters and their settings, and begin to identify ethical problems in the text that are relevant today. I think these results have a lot to do with the playful and creative aspects of midrash. It is a method that students enjoy, and which allows them to develop their own sense of drama, passion or humor as they encounter different texts, some of which challenge their assumptions about the Bible.
Second, for the majority of students who have had very little exposure to religious traditions outside of Christianity, midrash as literature and method provides an entry point into the study of Judaism. Studying midrash opens the door to further dialogue between Christianity and Judaism in that students who see the value in midrashic technique and learn to appreciate midrash in the history of Jewish literature are motivated to learn more about Judaism, and to see it less as a threat and more as an opportunity. Using midrash, in effect, initiates dialogue through powerful and positive ideas.
[1] Smith, Jonathan Z., ?The Introductory Course: Less is Better,? in Teaching the Introductory Course in Religious Studies: A Sourcebook, ed. by Mark Juergensmeyer (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 188.
[2] Smith , Jonathan Z., ??Narratives into Problems?: The College Introductory Course and the Study of Religion,? Journal of the American Academy of Religion 56/4 (2001), 729, citing John Robert Seeley.
[3] Ibid., 736.
[4] Holtz, Barry, ?Midrash,? in Back to the Sources: Reading the Classic Jewish Texts, ed. B. Holtz (New York: Summit Books, 1984), 178.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Katz, Claire E., ?Teaching Our Children Well: Pedagogy, Religion, and the Future of Philosophy,? Crosscurrents 53/4 (Winter 2004), <http://www.crosscurrents.org/katzwinter2004.htm> (July 3, 2007).
[7] Midrash Tanhuma-Yelammedenu: An English Translation of Genesis and Exodus from the Printed Version of Tanhuma-Yelammedenu with An Introduction, Notes, and Indexes, ed. by Samuel A Berman (Hoboken, NJ : KTAV Pub., 1995), 143.
[8] Alexander, P., Textual Sources for the Study of Judaism (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago, 1984), 3.
[9] Ibid., 3-4.
[10] Ostriker, Alicia, ?White Fire: The Art of Writing Midrash,? Reform Judaism (Winter, 1999), http://reformjudaismmag.net/1100ao.html> (July 2, 2007).
[11] Allen, Woody, Without Feathers (Canada: Ballantine Books, 1983), 23-24.
[12] Tanhuma Yelammedenu, 147.