Re: Sublimation?

[Robert Cohen <rlcm17...>]

[re "Eishes Chayil"]

>
>As a title it's not bad; but although your programing idea is a noble one, 
>and your understanding of Eyshet Chayil sincere, I personally find the text 
>of this poem to be somewhat patronizing to [live] women.
. You can be sure that
>the original purpose of including this poem in the Friday night ritual was 
>not to honor the woman of the house, but as an allegory to the Shechina and 
>the soul. It fits into the kabbalistic scheme of reciting Shir Hashirim 
>before Mincha on Friday [as Chassidim still do], singing to the Sabbath 
>Bride before Ma'ariv, and bidding farewell to the Sabbath Queen after 
>Havdalah. (They had an interesting way of sublimating their sexual urges.)


Oh, really?  Well, maybe they did--maybe much or all spiritual or creative 
activity reflects some such sublimation--but, in terms of the connotations 
that may or may not have meant here--and have certainly been made explicit 
in other postings--for highly sublimating folk, they sure had, and have, 
zillions of children--far *more* than more religiously liberal Jews.  This 
feeds into the same stereotype that had one ignorant poster a while back 
refer to Talmudic rabbis as sexually repressed because of the mention of kol 
isha--though Talmudic discussions of sexuality are actually far more 
explicit than in most religious discourse, so far as I know.

And again, I'd rather go by the feelings of Jewish *women* as to whether 
they feel patronized.  I certainly know, and know of, many, many beautiful 
Jewish women--I mean, of course, beautiful in spirit and on the inside; who 
finds or doesn't find them beautiful on the outside is irrelevant--who 
*don't* find it so--but who do feel patronized and dishonored by having men 
tell them they *should* feel so.

--Robert Cohen
>---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org 
>---------------------+ 
>