Parashat Ki Tetze: From Barbieland to the beautiful captive woman

As I sat down to reflect on this week’s Torah portion, Ki Tetze, which is filled with laws about women in family and society, I could not help but think of the summer blockbuster movie Barbie, which, in a seemingly light but very deliberate way, asks questions about female agency and empowerment.

Ki Tetze could not be farther from Barbieland, where women are running the world but not juggling husbands, children, households, and professional accomplishments. Instead, it presents multiple scenarios in which women are daughters, wives, and mothers, yet are vulnerable to abuse from within society.

Barbie, Judaism, and relationship power imbalance

One example of this power imbalance is found in the text around the yefat toar (beautiful captive woman):

“When you [an Israelite warrior] take the field against your enemies, and your God delivers them into your power and you take some of them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her and would take her [into your household] as your wife, you shall bring her into your household, and she shall trim her hair, pare her nails, and discard her captive’s garb. She shall spend a month’s time in your household lamenting her father and mother; after that, you may come to her and thus become her husband, and she shall be your wife. 

“Then, should you no longer want her, you must release her outright. You must not sell her for money. Since you had your will of her, you must not enslave her” (Deuteronomy 21:10-14).

The yefat toar appears once in the Torah at an interesting intersection between laws of war (when the warrior goes out) and a series of family laws (a man having two wives, the rebellious son, and more). Ki Tetze revolves around a series of rituals that result in an Israelite’s ability to bring a foreign captive woman into his home. Should he choose in the end to send her away, she is set free. 

Most biblical scholars interpret the yefat toar as a humane text that is intended to obligate the Israelite to behave with forbearance and to take into consideration the feelings of the woman. 

In the words of Robert Alter: “Throughout the ancient Mediterranean world, captive women of vanquished peoples were assumed to be the due sexual prerogative of the victors. This law exceptionally seeks to provide for the human rights of the [non-Israelite] woman who falls into this predicament.”

In general, Bible scholars mandated the desired conduct in a situation where there is concern for immoral and despicable behavior. The rituals – cutting of hair and nails, removal of clothing, and a 30-day period marked for crying – allow the woman time to express mourning for her past, as well as begin the adjustment to her new status in life. The early textual interpretations found in the commentaries of Philo and Josephus closely reflect this humane understanding. 

Philo states the purpose of the parsha is one of kindness toward the woman, alleviating her distress and protecting her from the unbridled desire of the Israelite captor. Only after 30 days can he then coolly decide if he wants to wed her or set her free, having allowed his desire to be tempered by the waiting period. Josephus takes a similar position, interpreting the rituals as being connected to her need for mourning. 

In contrast, rabbinic interpretation shows a curious lack of compassion, seeing the captive woman only as a threat to the religious integrity of the nation. Throughout the parsha, the Midrashei Halakha, known as Sifre and Midrash Tannaim, reflect the ideology that permission to take a yefat toar is a deviation from the normative boundaries regulating the behavior of the Israelite, written only because of the circumstances regarding the hour of war.

From this perspective, the purpose of the rituals is to humiliate her, expose her as an idolator, and thus prevent the Israelite from creating an actual bond of marriage – with an act of intercourse turning her into his wife. While the Midrashei Halacha reflect a negative attitude toward the integration of foreign women into Israel without the process of conversion, their interpretations maintain fidelity to the order in which the rituals will be carried out. Notably, sexual forbearance is an essential part of the process. Once he has relations with her, she becomes a wife, fully entitled to the rights that all wives share.

This changes in Kiddushin 21b-22a, where there is an argument between Rav and Shmuel relating to the permissibility of a priest taking a yefat toar. In the analysis of this argument, the Talmud brings up a concept that heretofore has not been mentioned in rabbinic literature – the first act of intercourse, or biah rishonah, between the soldier and his captive. According to most of the commentaries, biah rishonah allows the Israelite to have relations with the woman adjacent to the battlefield before bringing her home and carrying out the rituals. This interpretation assumes that the Torah understood that a soldier had no control over his yetzer  and therefore, biah rishonah had to be permitted as a concession. This reading, which deviates from all of the earlier rabbinic and pre-rabbinic interpretations, was adopted by most of the Rishonim. Nonetheless, it is important to recognize earlier understandings of the text and how it sought to protect both the moral and/or religious integrity of the soldier and the human rights of the captive woman.

Circling back to Barbie, the movie shows two extremes of a world in which men are completely marginalized (Barbieland), followed by a world in which women are marginalized (Kenland, Century City), exposing the fact that neither is healthy. Ideally, men and women must respect one another and work together to create a balance. Barbie in the end leaves the seeming utopia of Barbieland for the real world, where she can claim ownership of her body, and presumably begin to form real relationships with others. The Torah, in contrast to the cinema, is very much about the real world and the complexity of real relationships. 

Ki Tetze presents many extreme scenarios in which vulnerable members of society (captive women, slaves, falsely accused virgins) could have been potentially marginalized, yet the Torah demands moral culpability and consequence for those who violate the established boundaries meant to impose moral and religious order. ■

The writer teaches contemporary Halacha at the Matan Advanced Talmud Institute. She also teaches Talmud at Pardes along with courses on Sexuality and Sanctity in the Jewish tradition.