This article reads Levinas’s “And God Created Woman” in light of its socio-political context, Mai soixante-huit. It explores themes from his “Judaism and Revolution,” in which he reframed concepts of revolution, exegesis, the revolutionary, and human alienation. Following these themes, which run subtly through his Talmudic remarks on women and indirectly on feminism, I examine his arguments about a “signification beyond universality” and the fraught relationship between formal equity in gender relations and the practice of justice, as embodied by the (...) Antigone-like Rizpah bath Aiah and analyzed in Levinas’s Talmudic reading “Toward the Other.” I summarize the Rabbinic debate about the meaning of an extra yod in the term often translated as “to create” in Genesis, turning to the significance of dissymmetry between the Hebrew names of “man” and “woman,” Ish and Isha. In light of this, Biblicist and psychoanalyst Daniel Sibony opens further insights into gender, naming, and identity. (shrink)

The article is a close reading of a Talmudic commentary by Levinas. Its purpose is to deconstruct the concept of creation in order to demonstrate the radical passivity preceding human freedom. In ‘And God Created Woman’ Levinas points to the orthographic issue of the duplication of the yod in ‘vayyitzer’. This issue is radicalized to distinguish two moments in creation. In the first creation out of nothing, humanity is at stake. Creation is the condition in which man appears as totally (...) visible in the eyes of God. This passivity, without refuge, makes ethics possible. This is called the mystery of the human psyche. In the second act of creation, the relation between man and woman is established as the concrete shape of the first creation. Here Levinas deepens responsibility to unconditional responsibility. Being created means being made responsible. The two concepts of creation are sharpened starting from the thinking of Derrida and Nancy. The relation with the alterity of the son is the incarnation of the created responsibility. This aspect is elaborated in dialogue with Kierkegaard’s and Cathérine Chalier’s commentary of the Abraham story. The son teaches by asking the question about the reality of the covenant that registers itself in being created. From the reality of the covenant, the question of creation appears in its ultimate passivity. (shrink)

Tradução de: Ciucu, C. (2010). Les penseurs du néant: Heidegger et la mystique juive du Moyen Âge. Yod, 5, 215-233, por Lucas de Lima Cavalcanti DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/YOD.676.