Woman, Eve and Being Seen Genesis 2-5

Tilda Finch, a middle-aged woman, is treated as if she is invisible and this gradually manifests physically ̶ she begins to disappear. This is the provocative premise of the book Tilda is Visible[i], based on the reality that older women are often not noticed in the way that men or younger women are. Consider the statistic that only 2-4 per cent of total global venture capital funding goes towards women-led businesses[ii].  Jewish people will read Eve’s story in Genesis (2 and 3) on this coming Saturday, 26 October 2025. Here are some thoughts about Eve and Torah’s guidance about how we might represent and see or not see women.

Eve as archetype?

It has been suggested that Eve “is an archetype of women in general”[iii]. I am not convinced. However, I agree with Dr Tamar Frankiel’s idea that “as we retell the stories of the beginnings of humanity, we shape our own lives anew”[iv]. Let us consider a retelling of Eve’s story that sees her as having intrinsic value, wisdom, imagination and playing a role in moving Adam to a more relational way of being. 

A negative story

One reading of Eve’s story has three parts. 1) Helper: Eve is created to solve man’s loneliness and need for a helper[v]. 2) Temptress: The woman falls short in her role as companion[vi]. In leading Adam to eat the forbidden fruit[vii], she is cast in the role of “arch-temptress”[viii]. 3) Mother: She is named Eve because she is the mother of all life and she gives birth to sons[ix].

Intrinsic value

An alternative interpretation of Genesis begins with the creation of Eve at the same time as Adam.  “God created the person, in his image … male and female he created them”[x]. They were attached to each other, back-to-back, one side being male and the other being female[xi]. Eve was not created from Adam’s rib, but from his side[xii], as the Hebrew word “tzela” can mean either rib or side. It is this double person whom “God called their name Adam”[xiii], and it is this double person who has intrinsic value, having been created in the image of God.

 

Imagination

Eve engages her imagination to “see” how delicious the forbidden fruit would be, she notices how it was desirable for the eye and how delightful it would be for knowledge[xiv].  The imagining and the eating result in a loss of innocence, as “their eyes were opened”[xv] and they experienced sexual lust[xvi]. Eating the forbidden fruit was certainly a sin, but its consequences were mixed. Before eating the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve could “distinguish between true and the false” as a way of navigating right and wrong, but they lacked a sense of beautiful or repulsive, or of subjective good and bad[xvii]. 

The significance of a personal name

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks[xviii] points out the way that Adam refers to Eve before eating the fruit. He calls her either “woman”[xix] or “the woman”[xx]. It was only after the eating and its aftermath that Adam “turned to her [Eve], and for the first time saw her as a person and gave her a personal name, Eve. The significance of this moment cannot be sufficiently emphasised. With the appearance of proper names, the concept of the individual person is born. A noun such as ‘woman’ designates a group of things and does not designate a specific individual. A name is different. It refers not to a class or group but to an individual”. Furthermore, it is only at this point in the story[xxi] that Adam gets the dignity of a name himself. Prior to this point, Adam is generally referred to as “the human”[xxii] – Ha’Adam[H1] , rather than Adam[xxiii].

Eve the communicator

The common translation of Eve is that she is the one who gives life. But another meaning of Eve is the one who speaks.[xxiv] In the Psalms we read, “The heavens declare the glory of God, the sky proclaims His handiwork. …night to night it speaks knowledge.”[xxv] The word for “speaks” is Yeh-Chaveh, which is etymologically linked to Chava, the Hebrew version of Eve. Eve was such a skilled communicator that she could even understand “the language of animals.”[xxvi] When animals made noises, Adam turned to Eve to translate and teach him how to understand the animals.[xxvii] It is this quality that Adam celebrates by using the name “Eve” when he sees her as a full human being.

Eve the mother

After Adam saw and named Eve, he “knew”[xxviii] her, that is, he was intimate with her. This resulted in the birth of Cain. Eve became a mother and exuberantly exclaimed, “I have acquired or created a man with God.”[xxix]

A Brief Biography of Eve

Instead of the three-part tale above we have a more complex story, as follows: 1) Eve was created in the image of God, attached to her future husband, Adam. 2) Eve and her future husband are called, Ha’Adam, the human. 3) God acknowledges the need of humans for companionship wherein they can see each other, “to receive light in light, face to face”[xxx] and separates the two sides into two distinct people. 4) Eve’s exceptional communication skills enable her to understand the animals. She acts as translator between the animals and Adam, eventually teaching him to understand them. 5) Eve communicates with a snake, which is attracted to her, a beautiful woman.[xxxi] 6) She eats of the forbidden fruit and gives some to her husband. 7) Eve and Adam’s senses are heightened and tuned in to the pleasant and the ugly and to feel shame about their nakedness. 8) Eve gets feedback from God about the negative consequences of eating the fruit. 9) Adam sees Eve as a person and names her. 10) Adam knows Eve intimately. 11) Eve becomes a glorious mother and names her first son Cain (to acquire or create) for this astonishing feat of giving birth.  

Mother Eve ̶ Chava ̶ all of us, your descendants, regardless of gender, see you, and we all will ensure that your daughters of whatever age are seen as well, as the full beings that they are.

---

[i] Tara, J. (2024) Tilda Is Visible: A novel about women, life and being seen, Hachette

[ii] https://www.missingperspectives.com/posts/whats-the-deal-behind-these-deals-only-2-4-per-cent-of-total-venture-capital-goes-to-women-led-companies-and-we-want-to-talk-about-it/, for an Australian perspective look at https://scaleinvestors.com.au/

[iii] Steinzaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Basic Books, p.3

[iv] Frankiel, T, (1990), The Voice of Sara, Feminine Spirituality & Traditional Judaism, Harper Collins, p. 128

[v] Genesis 2:18

[vi] Arama, Y, in Akedat Yitzchak, gate 9, p 95 and others

[vii] Genesis 3:1-6 and 16

[viii] Steinzaltz, A. (1984), Biblical Images, Basic Books, p.7

[ix] Genesis 3:20, 4:1

[x] Genesis 1:27

[xi] Talmud, Brachot 61a, based on Genesis 1:27 and referencing (Psalms 139:5); Bereshit Rabba 8, Midrash Aggada, cited in Rashi on Genesis 1:27

[xii] Rashi to Genesis 2:22c

[xiii] Genesis 5:2

[xiv] Genesis 3:7

[xv] Genesis 3:8

[xvi] Radak – Rabbi David Kimchi, on Genesis 3:7a

[xvii] Maimonides, Guide for the Perplexed, Part 1 2:5, Nachshoni, Y, Studies in the Weekly Parasha

[xviii] Sacks, J. https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/bereishit/the-garments-of-light/

[xix] Genesis 2:23 Eve, is named woman – Isha in Hebrew, reflecting her derivation from man, Ish

[xx] Genesis 3:12,

[xxi] Genesis 3:17

[xxii] See Genesis 2:15, 2:16, 2:18, 2:19, 2:20 (where he is referred to in both ways), 2:21, 2:22, 2:23, 3:8, 3:9, 3:12,

[xxiii] Sacks, J.

[xxiv] Abarbanel

[xxv] Psalms 19:2-3

[xxvi] Meam Loez, Ibn Ezra based on Genesis 3:1-5

[xxvii] Imre Noam, in Meam Loez,

[xxviii] Genesis 4:1

[xxix] Genesis 4:1

[xxx] Zohar part 3, 44b

[xxxi] Rashi on Genesis 3:1

---

 [H1]Should this not be ‘ha’adam’?

Women and men in Jewish marriage has anything changed

 On Wednesday, a group of Muslim students, a learned Muslim colleague and I discussed marriage. A question from one of the students was “how has Jewish marriage adapted to modern understandings of gender equality and LGBTQ+ rights while maintaining traditional marital practices? are there any contemporary interpretations or adaptations within Jewish communities?” The timing was great because I am currently reading “This Is How Your Marriage Ends” by Matthew Fray about how men fail to honour women’s perspectives and pull their weight in thinking about and doing housework.

While the positions of Orthodox and Progressive Judaism are clear regarding same sex marriage, other adaptations are more subtle.

The most interesting of these are two ways of interpreting a traditional phrase about marriage:

“Who is a Kosher woman? The one who does [whatever is] her husband’s will”. [i]

In 1962, a whole new way of reading this same verse was put forward by the Lubavitcher Rebbe. The new reading involves some word play made possible by the fact that the Hebrew word for “does” also means “makes”.  “Who is a Kosher woman? The one who makes [moulds and influences] her husband’s will” [ii].

In the Rebbe’s new interpretation, a wife is encouraged to influence her highly hassled husband who lacks the will to do what is appropriate. She is “obligated, in ways of pleasantness and peace” to “make and reveal” the husband’s will to do what God wants of him.

It can be argued that this is not a completely modern innovation. Abraham was instructed by God that everything Sara tells you, obey her voice [iii] . But there is a reasonable counter argument, in quoting God’s words to Eve. Your longing will be to your husband, and he shall rule over you [iv]. I would argue that the phrase that a man will rule over his wife is a curse and a prediction, rather than a prescription. As much as I don’t like it, it is hard to escape the sense that Judaism sees a man as having authority in the home. Consider this disturbing law written by Maimonides: “Whenever a woman refrains from performing any of the tasks that she is obligated to perform, she may be compelled to do so, even with a rod [v] ”.

I explained to the students that Jewish law responds to the context of when it is applied. I can’t imagine any Rabbi today would be ok with a man hitting his wife with a rod for failure to do the dishes.

Mathew Fray has much to say about dishes. Before his transformation into a reflective remorseful ex-husband, he was a bitter man who blamed his ex-wife for his problems in a blog post entitled, “my wife divorced me because l left dishes by the sink [vi] ”. He now realises that the dishes by the sink represented something more - a lack of consideration of her needs and perspective. He wrote, “I remember my wife saying how exhausting it was for her to have to tell me what to do all the time… She wanted me to figure out what needed to be done… without making her responsible for orchestrating everything”.

In 2024, for many women to feel respected and loved, a man needs to do more housework and more of the thinking and orchestrating than their parents or grandparents did. This is not a reform of Judaism, but the application of timeless principles to our time. The commandment to love others like ourselves [vii]  requires all of us taking other peoples’ wants, needs and points of view into account as much as we want ours taken into account. This applies to spouses as well.

Similarly, when couples disapprove of each other’s behaviour, rather than find a rod, it is appropriate to draw the spouse’s attention to whatever we are concerned about [viii] , but in a way that does not humiliate them [ix].  

Also on Wednesday, it was Rosh Chodesh, the beginning of a new month when Jewish custom dictates that women not do house work if possible. I won’t disclose too much personal, but I did pay extra attention to this custom this time. Hopefully, I will make a habit of it.

Another modern Rabbi pointed out that when the Torah described the role of women as helping men, it states that she would be “opposite him”. A marriage partner is not a geisha girl or guy who serves drinks and sets the table.  A life partner must be able to say no if necessary—the ‘kenegdo- opposite’ part—because if you marry a yes-sayer, you aren’t really being challenged by another. Moreover, the lips may be moving one way, but the heart may be saying ‘no’ silently until the heart breaks from the weight of ’nos.’ In the end, a "help-opposite" creates its own synthesis, and a new oneness is born. The couple must drink together but not always from the same cup, so that one can correct the other, complement the other, cheer and comfort the other, help and be helped by the other. Only then is the one not alone [x].

My scholarly Muslim colleague shared her perspective on all these matters as it relates to nuances and misunderstandings of Islamic traditions, but that is her story to tell.

The students were delightful.

 

---

[i] Tana Dbei Eliyahu Rabba 9

[ii] The Lubavitcher Rebbe, (1962), a talk on parshat Balak and Likutei Sichos vol 4. איזוהי אשה כשרה? כל שעושה רצון בעלה" (תדא"ר פ"ט). שני פירושים למאמר זה. א.   הבעל ברובו של היום אינו בבית, צריכה איפוא האשה "לעשות" את רצון בעלה - להוריד את הרצון לידי עשיה בפועל. לבעל יש רצונות טובים בעניני חינוך הילדים, הכנסת אורחים, נתינת צדקה וכדומה; אך ההוצאה לפועל של רצונות אלו תלויה באשה. ב.   לפעמים, צריכה האשה "לעשות" - ליצור - את רצון בעלה. כשהבעל טרוד מאד וחסר לו הרצון לעשות את הראוי, חייבת האשה, בדרכי נועם ובדרכי שלום, לעשות ולגלות את רצונו הפנימי של הבעל, שהרי כל יהודי רוצה לעשות רצון קונו...(משיחת ש"פ בלק תשכ"ב - לקו"ש ד עמ' 1069

[iii] Genesis 21:12

[iv] Gensis 3:16

[v] Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, laws of Marriage 21:10

[vi] Fray, M. (2022), This Is How Your Marriage Ends, Souvenir press, p. 50

[vii] Leviticus 19:18

[viii] Leviticus 19:17 see

[ix] Arakhin 16b

[x] Rabbi Shlomo Riskin – I believe. I have been unable to find the source. 

Speech at the wedding of my son, Aaron, and daughter- in-law, Tzippy

Wow! What joy for the bride and groom, for family and friends! It is the happiest day of my life. Today we witnessed an outstandingly significant spiritual event. Not only were two halves of a soul reunited, but a serious spiritual wrong has been corrected.

In the story of creation (1), God looked at his creation and repeatedly said it was good, except for one thing, about which he said the opposite: “it is not good for the human to be alone (2)”.

If man is alone he can be mistaken for a God, because he would be alone on earth like God, who is alone in the heavens (3). Thus, it is not proper for humans to be alone. It does not fit the essential spiritual role of humans to be alone (4). We were meant to be social beings, not alone.

So how was this problem solved? God created a woman and marriage. Half-jokingly, I proclaim that no husband would ever make the mistake again that he is God, once he is married!

Seriously though, why create woman? If men need companionship, God could have simply created more men. But it is precisely living with someone from the opposite gender that advances personal growth (5); that is, when men and women are challenged by difference, to accommodate and negotiate different norms from their families, different ways of processing emotions, for example.

I once met an old-fashioned man, who got annoyed with his wife shortly after they got married because she opened mail that was addressed to him. His wife explained that she grew up in a big family where it was normal, when the post was delivered, for someone to run, get and open everyone’s letters. However, she changed her customary behaviour to follow her husband’s norm. I asked this man how he reciprocated his wife’s sacrifice. ‘Oh, I don’t read her mail either’ he replied! He completely missed the point about self-transcendence achieved through accommodation.

Unlike this man, what is required from us is to rise to the challenge designed for us: to put aside our ego, make space for each other and in that way grow in the way God intended for us.

This begs the question: if God knows everything, why did He create man alone in the first place and then say it was not good? Why not simply create man with a mate like He did with all the animals?

The truth is that, although in one sense it is not good for man to be alone, in another sense, for humans to be alone and unique - the quality of oneness and independence - is appropriate. “It is fitting for man to have a little oneness” (6). To be a little God-like. As the psalmist states:

מאלוקים ותחסריהו מעט

 “You have made him [man] little less than divine” (7). Just as God has the ultimate free choice, it is appropriate for a human to march to your own drum, at least some of the time to dream your dreams, to retreat into a man-cave, a little. Then, to return to marriage, to the social contract and to dissolve your ego in awareness of the other. To be “very married” (8).

To illustrate the two modes humans are meant to operate in – the independent and wild on the one hand and, on the other hand, the domesticated, interdependent and responsible - I share the following poem by Zelda.

The flame says to the cypress:

“When I see how calm, how full of pride you are,

Something inside me goes wild –

How can one live this awesome life,

without a touch of madness,

of spirit,

of imagination,

of freedom,

with only a grim, ancient pride?

If I could, I would burn down the establishment that we call the seasons,

along with your cursed dependence

on earth and air and sun, on rain and dew.”

 

The cypress does not answer.

He knows there is madness in him,

and freedom,

and imagination,

and spirit.

But the flame will not understand,

the flame will not believe. (9)

The cypress looks "very married": the epitome of the ‘baalabus’ - domesticated! But lurking beneath is the solitary man, a little crazy and wild, alive with holy craziness (10).

So, I wish the groom and bride love and companionship, spiritual growth together and, as appropriate, also separately. May you lose your egos in care for each other and find just enough ego for some individual greatness.   

Notes                             

1)     Genesis 1

2)     Genesis 2:18

3)     Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer, cited in Rashi on Genesis 2:18

4)     Maharal of Prague in his commentary Gur Aryeh about Genesis 2:18

5)     Eisenblatt, D. (1988), Fulfilment in marriage, Feldheim Publishers, p. 18- 29

6)     Maharal, ibid

7)     Psalms 8:6

8)     The term very married comes from an anecdote I heard from Sholom Popper about a young Chabadnik in Russia with limited command of the Russian language. When someone asked to speak to the Rabbi, the young fellow mixed up the words for busy and married. He told the visitor that the Rabbi was “married”. The visitor insisted they only need a few minutes. The young Chabadnik tried to explain that the Rabbi was very busy, so he told the visitor the Rabbi was very married!

9)     Zelda, Translation: 2004, Marcia Lee Falk, From: The Spectacular Difference, Publisher: Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, 2004, https://www.poetryinternational.com/en/poets-poems/poems/poem/103-3281_TWO-ELEMENTS/

10)   שטות דקדושה discussed in the Maamar Baasi Lgani, by the 6^th Lubavitcher Rebbe. 

 

Equality, Desire and Being Known – Eve’s Perspective

I am Eve, known as Hawah to Muslims and Chavah in the Torah. My husband named me Chavah, because I am the Mother of all life (1). Thousands of years later, too many of my grandsons still behave chauvinistically, and many of my descendants also struggle with desire and intimacy.
 
Do not dismiss me as out of date. Yes, I was named by a man, but this does not imply ownership or superior/inferior status. On the contrary, it was an expression of respect (2). However, there was a journey that began with exploring questions of the status of the genders before Adam and I reached a level of respectful intimacy.
 
Before Adam and I met, Adam married another woman named, Lilith. Lilith was created from the earth just like Adam, so she thought she was equal to him and refused to be her husband’s “helper”. They fought, and she ran away (3).
 
In replacing Lilith, God declared that he would make Adam “a helper, opposite [or against] him” (4). This time the woman would be derived from Adam rather than the earth. This could change the power dynamic between the genders to favour men (5).  However, being a “helper-opposite” at least hints at the need to allow the spouse …”to occasionally stand opposite, to feel opposite, to think opposite… A life’s partner must be able to say no… [otherwise] the lips may be moving one way, but the heart may be saying no silently until the heart breaks from the weight of "nos" (6).  Perhaps "occasionally opposing" is not enough for equality, but it is a good start.
 
Well, the idea of me being constructed from Adam’s rib is not the only version of how I came to be. In another telling, Adam and I were both an individual and a pair at the same time. One side of the first human was male - Adam and the other female - me (7).  That explains the seemingly self-contradictory verse about us: “…in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (8). However, because we could not face each other God declared that “it was not good for the human to be alone” (9). Only once we were separated and could face each other would we [potentially] be able “to receive light in light, face in face”, and arise “satisfied as one” (10).
 
Great idea, but when Adam and I first met, he initially failed to fully appreciate me as a person despite us being ‘face to face’. Instead he thought of me as an extension of himself (11). Adam first called me woman, “Isha”, which is a variation of the Hebrew word for man, stating “this [not she, or you] will be called woman, because this was taken from man” (12). 
 
I was far from satisfied with this attitude. When I gave birth to my oldest son, I named him Cain and I declared “I have created (13) a man” (14). I rejected the argument that woman should be considered inferior on account of having come from a man, as I have demonstrated now that man has come from woman (15)! This naming speech was my rejection of male chauvinism (16).
 
My claims to equality were set back by our eating forbidden fruit, which Adam blamed on me (17). In response to that sin, God declared that women would desire their husbands, and husbands would rule their wives (18). This should not be taken as an instruction but as a prediction of an unfortunate problem, for humanity to address (19).
 
Despite the unfortunate aspect of that situation, it had a silver lining. Eating fruit from the tree of “knowledge of good and evil” introduced a new element of sexual desire between Adam and me (20). After “our eyes were opened” (21) and our innocence lost, Adam finally noticed me as a person in my own right and gave me an individual and personal name, Eve/Chavah (22).  To celebrate our arrival as a loving couple of equal and unique people who deeply respect each other, God clothed us in garments of light (23). For us, despite the difficulties, we found the possibility of true love and respect. I wish you the same.
 
 Love, Grandma Eve-Chavah-Hawah
 
Notes
1)       Genesis 3:20
2)       Sacks, J. (2009), Covenant and Conversation, Genesis, Magid Books and the Orthodox Union, Jerusalem, p. 33-37
3)       Alef Bet of Ben Sira, Zohar Bereshit, 34b and Vavyikra 19a, Torat Hachida Bereshit, 70, p. 23
4)       Genesis 2:27
5)       Torat Hachida Bereshit, 70, p. 23
6)       Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, in Lubotzky, Y. & Mark, R.  https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0272/7831/1512/files/brushes-all_03r.pdf?v=15699884950348939191,  p. 18
7)       Talmud, Brachot 61a
8)       Genesis 1:27, note the shift from singular to plural
9)       Genesis 2:27,
10)    Zohar, part 3, 44b.
11)    Sacks, J. (2009), Covenant and Conversation, Genesis, Magid Books and the Orthodox Union, Jerusalem, p. 35-36
12)    Genesis 2:23
13)    Translation follows Radak
14)    Genesis 4:1
15)    Abarbanel
16)    Casuto, in Pardes, Ilana. "Creation According to Eve: Beyond Genesis 3." Jewish Women: A Comprehensive Historical Encyclopedia. 27 February 2009. Jewish Women's Archive. (Viewed on October 5, 2020) <https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/creation-according-to-eve-beyond-genesis-3>.
17)    Genesis 3:12
18)    Genesis 3:16
19)    Bernbaum, T. https://www.chabad.org/theJewishWoman/article_cdo/aid/90765/jewish/The-Curse-of-Eve.htm
20)    Radak
21)    Genesis 3:7
22)    Sacks, J. (2009), Covenant and Conversation, Genesis, Magid Books and the Orthodox Union, Jerusalem, p. 36
23)    Bereshit Rabba 20:12 as explained in Sacks