Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Contesting Religious Authoriality: The Immanuel “Beis-Yaakov” School Segregation Case

  • Published:
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper will focus on two textual articulations that emerged in the Immanuel “Beis-Yaakov” school segregation case. The first is a declaration of the Admor from Slonim that was published when the ultra-Orthodox fathers who refused to send their daughters to an integrated school were imprisoned. The second is a letter to the Supreme Court that was written by an Ashkenazi mother whose daughter attended the “Beis Yaakov” school. A semiotic reading of the articulations reveals several opposing characteristics. The Admor’s audience is determined by his choices of medium and rhetoric, which guarantee hegemonic reading, corresponding with the textual code of his interpretive community. The letter, on the other hand, represents an attempt to break through communal borders, and therefore its writer cannot expect hegemonic reading. Yet, she makes a considerable effort to employ signifiers denoting her ultra-Orthodox affiliation. In light of the hindrances that usually prevent ultra-Orthodox women from contesting the authority of the community, the letter presents a rare feminine voice, which is vigorous enough to attempt subverting under the authoriality of the Admor, and might have a long run affect on the quest for equality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. “Admor” is a Hebrew acronym for “our master, our teacher, and our rabbi”. Admor is a leader of a Hasidic court. He is accepted as such by dint of his descent from a dynasty of previous Admors. Hasidism has never been a movement in the modern sense of having a centralized organization. It is essentially a collective term for a great variety of groups and subgroups that took shape over the centuries. Since the nineteenth century, Hasidic groups have been identified with the dynasties to which their leaders belong, and are generally designated by the names of the East European towns where the courts of those dynasties were established or first became known. The leadership of the dynastic Admor is still the salient characteristic of all Hasidic groups and communities (with the exception of Bratslav Hasidism). See: Assaf [4]. See further: Rabinowicz [44].

  2. The term derives from the Hebrew word “Gado” which means big. It denotes prominent figures in the ultra-Orthodox world.

  3. Some ultra-Orthodox sects have “Chastity Guards”, which confront ultra-Orthodox people who are suspected as too promiscuous. See: CC 226/08 [12]. In this case the defandent was convicted of offenses involving violent behaviour and blackmailing during his activity in the “Chastity Guards” organization. The verdict notes as follows:

    Among the goals of the organization is to fight phenomena of indiscency, according to the view of its members … In order to fulfill its goals, the “Chastity Guards” organization also uses threats and violence

    [id., para. 2, our translation S.A. and L.PH]. See also Sella [47]; Liss [35].

  4. See further: Kehat [31, pp. 26–30].

  5. See further: Mautner [38].

  6. See further: Greenfield [18].

  7. For a comprehensive research of the Shas movement, which represents the Israeli Sephardic ultra-Orthodox people, see: Lehmann and Siebzehner [32, p. 142].

  8. Other manifestations are matchmakings and appointments to important religious positions [52, p. 16].

  9. See, e.g.: AP (Jerusalem) 241/06 [3]; The State Comptroller and Ombudsmen, Israel [51, pp. 931–986].

  10. On these hindrances, see: Hacohen [19].

  11. Laloum established a non-profit organization named “Noa'r Kahalacha” (Youth followers of Torah) in order to fight ethnic discrimination in ultra-Orthodox schools [42]. Most of the religious leaders of the ultra-Orthodox Sephardic group, whose members were segregated, do not support Laloum’s association. They did not condemn the compliance of the Ashkenazi parents to their leader’s dictate, and some of them publicly criticized the petitioners for turning to a secular court. Even the Sephardic Rabbi who gave Laloum his blessing changed his approach during the legal proceedings [40].

  12. An approximate translation of the initials is “the son of the Tsadik [A synonym of ‘Admor’] Rabbi, Our teacher the Rabbi Shalom Noah [the first and middle name of the father of the Admor], the memory of the Tsadik will be blessed in the after world”.

  13. An approximate translation of the initials is ‘God will safeguard it [the community] and save it’.

  14. ‘Sitra Hachra’ is an Aramaic phrase which means ‘the other side of the evi’, or the ‘evil inclination’.

  15. Though the name appears on the deposition, we decided to refrain from revealing it here, since the deposition was not published online.

  16. ‘Siata Deshmaya’ is an Aramaic phrase which is literally translated as ‘with the assistance of the heaven’ and means ‘with the help of God’.

  17. On the different mediums of public communication within the ultra-Orthodox community, see: Lerner [33].

  18. Cited in Chandler [13, pp. 194–195].

  19. Initials are commonly used within ultra-Orthodox society. They have three roles: to maintain religious perceptions and communal unity, and to indicate honor or genealogy [1].

  20. “Sitra Hachra” is an Aramaic phrase which means “the other side of the evi”, or the “evil inclination”.

  21. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, 61b, translated by Boyarin [7, p. 106].

  22. See e.g.: News 2 [41]; Bardugo [5]; Reshef [45].

  23. The dominant social model at the Israeli ultra-Orthodox community is of a woman that holds a job in order to support a husband that studies Torah and does not work for his living. This model requires the ultra-Orthodox schools to supply the girls with wide general education, which enables them to find employment outside the boundaries of the community [2]. Education facilitated significant changes in ultra-Orthodox women lives. For instance, some of them are employed outside their community [28]. There are also ultra-Orthodox women who took up writing or lecturing to women—areas that ultra-Orthodox society considers to be in the dominance of men [10, pp. 263–264]. See also: El-Or [16]; Shenkar [49]; Sheleg [48]. However, ultra-Orthodox women continue to accept the gender inequality. They do not defy the ultra-Orthodox interpretation of the Halacha (Jewish religious law), which excludes women from the public domain and shapes their subordination, and do not stand for their rights within their families, their workplaces and their community. See: Almog & Perry-Hazan [2].

  24. The ultra-Orthodox society lacks honorary titles for women. Women are not expected to study Torah and therefore they are not eligible to titles that indicate their intellectual achievements [1].

  25. One manifestation of the social changes within ultra-Orthodox society is the growing use of the Internet. There are several ultra-Orthodox websites that flourish despite the unequivocal denouncements of the Gdoilim. The website “Bhol”, in which the letter of the mother was published, is one of these websites.

References

  1. Almog, Oz. 2010. Initials and honorary titles in ultra-Orthodox society. Anashim Israel. Available at http://www.peopleil.org/details.aspx?itemID=30026 (retrieved May 15th 2011) [Hebrew].

  2. Almog, Shulamit, and Lotem Perry-Hazan. 2011. The ability to claim and the opportunity to imagine: Rights consciousness and the education of ultra-Orthodox girls. Journal of Law and Education 40(2): 273–303.

  3. AP (Jerusalem) 241/06. 2006. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel v. The Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sports [Hebrew].

  4. Assaf, David. 2008. Hasidism: Historical overview. In The Yivo encyclopedia of Jews in Eastern Europe, 659–660. New Haven: Yale University Press. Available at http://www.yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Hasidism/Historical_Overview (retrieved May 15th 2011).

  5. Bardugo, Meir. 2010. HCJ: most of the mothers will not go to prison: others will go to prison after their husbands will be released. Nana10. Available at http://news.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleID=727083&TypeID=1&sid=126 (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  6. Bhol, Forums. 2010. To read and be shocked: An honest letter of an Ashkenazi mother from Immanuel, http://bhol-forums.co.il/topic.asp?topic_id=2777114&forum_id=771 (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  7. Boyarin, Daniel. 1999. Dying for god: Martyrdom and the making of Christianity and Judaism. California: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brown, Benjamin. 2007. And nothing is left except this Torah. Eretz Acheret 41: 56–65 [Hebrew].

    Google Scholar 

  9. Caplan, Kimmy. 2003. The study of Israeli Haredi society: characteristics, achievements and chllenges. In Israeli Haredim: Integration without assimilation?, eds. Kimmy Caplan and Emmanuel Sivan, 224–278. Jerusalem: The Van Leer Jerusalem Institute [Hebrew].

  10. Caplan, Kimmy. 2007. Internal popular discourse in Haredi society. Jerusalem: The Zalman Shazar Center for the History of Israel [Hebrew].

  11. Caplan, Kimmy, and Nurit Stadler eds. 2009. Leadership and authority in Israeli Haredi society: Challenges and alternatives. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuhad [Hebrew].

  12. CC 226/08 (District Court—Jerusalem) The State of Israel v. Busaglo (2009) [Hebrew].

  13. Chandler, Daniel. 2007. The basics of semiotics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Channel 2. 2011. 360, Show 9. Available at http://reshet.ynet.co.il/Shows/360/videomarklist,182371/ (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  15. Dahan Caleb, Henriette. 1999. Ethnicity in Israel: a post-modern view. In Modernism, postmodernism and education, ed. Ilan Gur-Ze’ev, 197–231. Tel-Aviv: Ramot [Hebrew].

  16. El-Or, Tamar. 2009. “All the rights reserved to Anat”: big female Rabbis and little female Rabbis in the religion and penitence industry, In Leadership and authority in Israeli Haredi society: challenges and alternatives, eds. Kimmy Caplan and Nurit Stadler eds., 129–163. Tel-Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuhad [Hebrew].

  17. Fish, Stanley. 1980. Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Greenfield, Tzvia. 2007. Is it really so benign? gender separation in Ultra Orthodox bus lines, Law and Ethics of Human Rights 1(1) Article 8. Available at: http://www.bepress.com/lehr/vol1/iss1/art8 (retrieved May 16th 2011).

  19. Hacohen, Aviad. 2010. “Nicht von Unsere” (“Not One of Ours”): ethnic discrimination in Haredi society and the legal representation of disadvantaged population groups from within it. Ma’asei Mishpat C: 123–143 [Hebrew].

  20. Hall, Stuart. 1980. Encoding/decoding. In Culture, media, language: Working papers in cultural studies 1972–79, ed. Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, 128–138. London: Hutchinson.

  21. HCJ 1067/08 Noa’r Kahalacha Association v. The Ministry of Education (August 6th 2009) [Hebrew].

  22. HCJ 1067/08 Noa’r Kahalacha Association v. The Ministry of Education (May 17th 2010) [Hebrew].

  23. HCJ 1067/08 Noa’r Kahalacha Association v. The Ministry of Education (June 17th 2010) [Hebrew].

  24. HCJ 1067/08 Noa’r Kahalacha Association v. The Ministry of Education (June 18th 2010) [Hebrew].

  25. HCJ 1067/08 Noa’r Kahalacha Association v. The Ministry of Education (June 27th 2010) [Hebrew].

  26. HCJ 1067/08 Noa’r Kahalacha Association v. The Ministry of Education (September 14th 2010) [Hebrew].

  27. Hanna Herzog, 2000. Any year can be taken as the beginning - periodization and identity in the debate of the 1950s’. Theory and Criticism 17: 209–216 [Hebrew].

  28. Kalekin-Fishman, Devorah, and Karlheinz Schneider. 2007. Radicals in spite of themselves: Ultra-Orthodox women working outside the Haredi community. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Katz, Menachem. June 23rd 2011. The Admor from Slonim: even in front of a firing squad—we will not give up. Kikar Hashabat. Available at http://www.kikarhashabat.co.il/%D7%94%D7%90%D7%93%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A8-%D7%9E%D7%A1%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%A0%D7%92%D7%93-%D7%91%D7%92%D7%A6.html (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  30. Kershner, Isabel. June 17th 2010. Israel’s ultra-Orthodox protest schools ruling. New York Times. Available at www.nytimes.com/2010/06/18/world/middleeast/18israel.html?scp=1&sq=israeli%20supreme%20court&st=cse (retrieved May 16th 2011).

  31. Kehat, Hanna. 2008. Feminism and Judaism: From contradiction to revival. Tel-Aviv: The Ministry of Defense [Hebrew].

  32. Lehmann, David, and Batia Siebzehner. 2006. Remaking Israeli Judaism: The challenge of Shas. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lerner, Heidi. 2008. Researching Orthodox Judaism online. AJS Perspectives 36–38. Available at http://www.ajsnet.org/ajsp08sp.pdf (retrieved May 16th 2011).

  34. Levinson, Haim. Where are the children of Shas? In the Ashkenazi yeshivas. Yedioth Achronot. Available at: www.frenkim.co.il/katavayediot.htm (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  35. Liss, Yonatan. October 21st 2007. An ultra-Orthodox woman and a soldier were attacked for sitting next to each other in a bus. Haa’retz. Available at http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/spages/1016435.html (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  36. Lupu, Jacob. 2004. Can Shas restore past glory?. Jerusalem: The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Margalit, Avishai, and Moshe Halbertal. 2004. Liberalism and the right to culture. Social Research 71(3): 529–548.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mautner, Menachem, 2010. A dialogue between a liberal and an ultra-Orthodox on the exclusion of women from Torah study (unpublished paper).

  39. My Ynet. 2010. http://my.ynet.co.il/pic/judisem/1.PDF (retrieved May 19th 2011) [Hebrew].

  40. Nachshony, Koby. June 20th 2010. Rabbi Yaakov Yosef: I wash my hand of the Immanuel affair. Ynet. Available at http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3907528,00.html (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  41. News 2. June 22nd 2010. The HCJ is changing its decision: The mothers will not be imprisoned. Mako. Available at http://www.mako.co.il/news-law/legal/Article-88e3d5e605f5921004.htm (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  42. “Noa’r Kahalacha” association: Promoting fundamental rights in the ultra-Orthodox sector, http://www.frenkim.co.il/ (retrieved May 16th 2011).

  43. Perry-Hazan, Lotem. 2011. On the right to education and the right to educate: The autonomy of the Ultra-Orthodox education in Israel. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Haifa, Faculty of Law [Hebrew].

  44. Rabinowicz, Tzvi. 2000. Hasidism in Israel: A history of the Hasidic movement and its masters in the Holy Land. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Reshef, Raffi. June 22nd 2010. A mother from Immanuel: “my child will be modest and will be educated in a school that I will choose”. Nana10. Available at http://news.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleID=727148&TypeID=1&sid=126 (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  46. Schiffman, Eitan. 2005. The Shas school system in Israel. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 11(1): 89–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sella, Neta. August 21st 2008. Jerusalem police versus the Chastity Guard. Ynet. Available at http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3585941,00.html (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  48. Sheleg, Yair. 2007. The adjustment of Israeli religious society to modernization. Available at http://www.idi.org.il/BreakingNews/Pages/opinions_m.aspx (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  49. Shenkar, Yael. 2009. In the light of introductions and forwards: on female writing and male authority in Haredi Society. In Leadership and authority in Israeli Haredi society: challenges and alternatives, eds. Kimmy Caplan and Nurit Stadler, 78–98. Tel-Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuhad [Hebrew].

  50. The Ministry of Industry, Trade and Labor. 2009. Structure of planned research 2009–2010: The Israeli Haredi sector. Available at http://www.israel-industry-trade.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/E7C4C2C8-31D9-443B-819A-23FC863A7641/0/haredim1109.pdf (retrieved May 16th 2011) [Hebrew].

  51. The State Comptroller and Ombudsmen, Israel. 2011. Annual report 61b for the year 2010. Available at http://www.mevaker.gov.il/serve/contentTree.asp?bookid=595&id=57&contentid=&parentcid=undefined&sw=1024&hw=698 (retrieved May 19th 2011) [Hebrew].

  52. Zohar, Tzvi. 1996–1997. Torah sages and modernity: On orthodoxy, sephardic sages and the Shas Party. Gilayon 8–22 [Hebrew].

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to Yoav Laloum, Aviad Hacohen, Aviva Orenstein, Yehiel Kaplan, and Guy Seidman for their significant help and insights.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 31905, Haifa, Israel

    Shulamit Almog

  2. Department of Leadership and Policy in Education, Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 31905, Haifa, Israel

    Lotem Perry-Hazan

Authors
  1. Shulamit Almog
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lotem Perry-Hazan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lotem Perry-Hazan.

Additional information

Shulamit Almog and Lotem Perry-Hazan contributed equally.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Almog, S., Perry-Hazan, L. Contesting Religious Authoriality: The Immanuel “Beis-Yaakov” School Segregation Case. Int J Semiot Law 26, 211–225 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-012-9264-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-012-9264-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation