Chaim Walder, Sexual Abuse & Dina: Such Things Are Not Done in Israel
This week, noted Jewish author and community leader Chaim Walder was accused of serious sexual crimes. The piece, published in Haaretz, appeared in Hebrew and was written by Aharon Rabinowitz and Shira Elek. Immediately, I thought of an article I had read in Tradition Magazine by Dr. Dan Jacobson, clinical psychologist & coordinator of The Eden Center’s hatan [groom] training program. The article is entitled '“The Sexual Abuse of Dina.”
Jacobson notes that many of us are familiar with the story of Dina and Shechem. When we read it, we read of Dina’s rape and we picture her as unwilling, forcibly kidnapped and taken away by a stranger. And indeed, that is one rendition of what happened. But it is not the only rendition.
Jacobson explains
Dina is the youngest of the seven children of Leah, and the only daughter after six sons. She is also the only daughter in a household with twelve boys. In this situation, one of two family dynamics is likely. The family may dote upon the little girl who is the “little princess,” or she can be lost in the shuffle of a busy household. What happened in Jacob’s home? It is possible that in a household with much maternal competition in the building of the family and the nation, the other three mothers might not necessarily fall in love with the sole daughter in the family. And what about Jacob and sons? Although they love her, they are busily occupied with bigger issues than a little girl, who will most likely not take part in the leadership of the great project of inheriting the Land of Canaan.
[...]
Jacob camped near the city of Shekhem, which was also Abraham’s first stop in the Promised Land, and purchased his first plot of land in Canaan. The excitement among the sons surged, while young Dina was alone. She was around the same age as Joseph, who was already interested in spending time with his older brothers. Perhaps, after becoming bored with babysitting Benjamin, Dina sought some female companionship: "And Dina, the daughter of Leah, went out to see the daughters of the land.”
[...]
Dina had a natural yearning for company. We may also note the choice of the phrase “and Dina went out,” rather than “and Dina went.” The words communicate that Dina felt “imprisoned” inside, and sought exposure to the outside world.
-pages 147-150
(One small side note- Benjamin is not officially born until later in the parsha, so my father pointed out to me it does not make sense that Dina was babysitting him. But leave that aside.)
Here’s what happened next.
(ב) וַיַּ֨רְא אֹתָ֜הּ שְׁכֶ֧ם בֶּן־חֲמ֛וֹר הַֽחִוִּ֖י נְשִׂ֣יא הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּקַּ֥ח אֹתָ֛הּ וַיִּשְׁכַּ֥ב אֹתָ֖הּ וַיְעַנֶּֽהָ׃ (ג) וַתִּדְבַּ֣ק נַפְשׁ֔וֹ בְּדִינָ֖ה בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֑ב וַיֶּֽאֱהַב֙ אֶת־הַֽנַּעֲרָ֔ וַיְדַבֵּ֖ר עַל־לֵ֥ב הַֽנַּעֲרָֽ׃ (ד) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר שְׁכֶ֔ם אֶל־חֲמ֥וֹר אָבִ֖יו לֵאמֹ֑ר קַֽח־לִ֛י אֶת־הַיַּלְדָּ֥ה הַזֹּ֖את לְאִשָּֽׁה׃
(2) Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country, saw her, and took her and lay with her and afflicted her. (3) And his soul clung to Dina daughter of Jacob and he loved the maiden, so he spoke to the maiden tenderly [literally: he spoke to her heart]. (4) So Shechem said to his father Hamor, “Get me this girl as a wife.”
The question Jacobson asks is: what kind of taking was this? Was it forcible? Was it kidnapping?
Well, it becomes clear that actually, there are numerous times in Tanakh where someone takes another person through their words. Below are a few examples.
ויקרא ח׳:ב׳
(ב) קַ֤ח אֶֽת־אַהֲרֹן֙ וְאֶת־בָּנָ֣יו אִתּ֔וֹ וְאֵת֙ הַבְּגָדִ֔ים וְאֵ֖ת שֶׁ֣מֶן הַמִּשְׁחָ֑ה וְאֵ֣ת ׀ פַּ֣ר הַֽחַטָּ֗את וְאֵת֙ שְׁנֵ֣י הָֽאֵילִ֔ים וְאֵ֖ת סַ֥ל הַמַּצּֽוֹת׃
Leviticus 8:2
(2) Take Aaron along with his sons, and the vestments, the anointing oil, the bull of sin offering, the two rams, and the basket of unleavened bread;
Rashi understands this as follows:
(ב) קח את אהרן. קָחֶנּוּ בִדְבָרִים וּמָשְׁכֵהוּ:
Rashi on Leviticus 8:2:2
(2) קח את אהרן means win him over with fine words and draw him on (cf. Rashi on Exodus 14:6) (Sifra, Tzav, Mechilta d'Miluim 1 2)).
Here’s another:
במדבר ט״ז:א׳
(א) וַיִּקַּ֣ח קֹ֔רַח בֶּן־יִצְהָ֥ר בֶּן־קְהָ֖ת בֶּן־לֵוִ֑י וְדָתָ֨ן וַאֲבִירָ֜ם בְּנֵ֧י אֱלִיאָ֛ב וְא֥וֹן בֶּן־פֶּ֖לֶת בְּנֵ֥י רְאוּבֵֽן׃
Numbers 16:1
(1) Now Korah, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, took, along with Dathan and Abiram sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth—descendants of Reuben—
And Rashi explains:
(ב) . דָּ"אַ: ויקח קרח, מָשַׁךְ רָאשֵׁי סַנְהֶדְרָאוֹת שֶׁבָּהֶם בִּדְבָרִים, כְּמוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר "קַח אֶת אַהֲרֹן" (ויקרא ח'), "קְחוּ עִמָּכֶם דְּבָרִים" (הושע י"ד):
(2) ויקח קרח lit., AND KORAH TOOK — [...] Another explanation of ויקח קרח is: he attracted (won over) the chiefs of the Sanhedrin amongst them (the people) by fine words. The word is used here in a figurative sense just as in. (Leviticus 8:2) “Take (קח) Aaron”; (Hosea 14:3) “Take (קחו) words with you” (Midrash Tanchuma, Korach 1).
Due to this Jacobson interprets the taking that Shechem did of Dina in a different light.
In order to understand the interaction between Shekhem and Dina that ensues during Dina’s excursion, we must better understand the nature of different forms of sexual aggression. I propose that the assault against Dina is not one of violent coercion, but rather one of emotional manipulation. Shekhem is not a rapist, but rather a sexual predator. Dina is not raped, in the conventional sense, but rather sexually abused.
Unlike rape, in sexual abuse the process is generally not violent but rather manipulative. The abuser chooses a child whom he sees as vulnerable, gentle, desiring attention, and poorly protected. He seeks a victim he thinks he can control, and who will not share the abuse with others.
In most cases, the abuser is known to the victim beforehand, and is even someone in whom the victim trusts. This facilitates the engineering of the abuse process.
The psychological devastation of sexual abuse is different from rape, but can be just as traumatic and sometimes even more so. Even when the victim does not enjoy the actual sexual intercourse, often the attention and touch that surrounds it is pleasant. On this basis, the abuser deludes the victim, and sometimes himself, that a relationship exists rather than victimization. This confusing dynamic will almost inevitably cause serious psychological damage. Victims can suffer from shame, guilt, depression, anxiety, and sometimes suicidality.
-Pages 150-151
Jacobson then offers proof that the words וידבר אל לב הנערה can be understood as persuasive to her, such that she stayed with Shechem and did not immediately run away or choose to leave him. Jacobson further explains:
This opens the possibility that Shekhem’s taking of Dina was also done through persuasion rather than coercion. A comparison of the Dina story to the story of Tamar’s rape by her half-brother Amnon is instructive. Despite the great similarities, there are also a number of critical differences in the description of the events: “And she approached him to eat. And he grabbed her and said to her, come lie with me my sister” (II Samuel 13:11)
The description of the taking of Tamar is more aggressive. Amnon does not “take” Tamar, but rather “grabs her.”
In addition, unlike the story of Dina, here we see clear resistance on the part of Tamar: “And she said to him, no my brother do not rape me—because this is not done in Israel. Do not do this abominable act” (13:12). Tamar verbally resists in order to protect her body because she is not strong enough to defend herself physically.
The difference between the stories is more striking in the description of the aftermath of the sexual violation. Shekhem continues to desire Dina.
[...]
These descriptions do not exonerate Shekhem from responsibility; rather, they recast his crime as that of sexual predation instead of rape. While the psychology of the abuser is beyond the scope of this essay, there are several possible explanations of Shekhem’s stance. Some abusers are sociopaths without a sense of empathy. The victim is simply an object to be utilized. Alternatively, the abuser can be a person who exercises intense rationalization, convincing himself that he is the object of the victim’s desire.
Whatever the psychological basis of Shekhem’s evil, he desired Dina, and failed to recognize the psychological damage he had wrought upon her. Unlike Amnon, he did not carry guilt that caused him to project disgust onto his victim.
-Pages 152-154
This also explains why Dina does not appear to struggle or leave, and her brothers are the ones who carry her away- possibly even against her will.
Now we come to Walder. In the breaking investigation published by Haaretz, the description of the situation by his victims demonstrates a similar kind of grooming/ verbal seduction process. Here are some of the examples provided.
Talia (a pseudonym) met Walder when she was 12 and 1/2 years old. Referred to him for treatment (he was an unlicensed therapist that many Haredi rabbis referred children to), he claimed that he would help her. He seduced her slowly, telling her that she was very mature and that he liked the way she looked. He then asked her to touch him in sexual ways, but he only consummated the relationship after she got her period.
Talia disconnected from her body when Walder had sex with her. So why, you might ask, did she stay? Here’s the answer, as it appears in the Haaretz article.
הקשר עם הדמות הנערצת השאיר את טליה בסביבתו של ולדר, לדבריה, למרות הדחייה ממנו. "אהבתי בעיקר את השיחות איתו, רציתי להרגיש גדולה והוא דיבר איתי על דברים של גדולים בגובה העיניים", היא מסבירה. היא נזכרת איך היה מספר לה על יחסיו עם אשתו, או איך היה מקיים מפגשים מיניים עם מורה חרדית. טליה סיפרה כי אמר לה שכשהמורה היתה תולה בגד מסוים בחבל התלייה שבחלון ביתה, היה זה סימן מוסכם לכך שהוא יכול לעלות אליה
Or in translation
The connection with the revered character left Talia in Walder's environment, she said, despite his rejection. "I especially liked the conversations with him, I wanted to feel like an adult and he talked to me about adult things at eye level," she explains. She recalls how he would tell her about his relationship with his wife, or how he would have sexual encounters with a Harredi teacher. Talia said he told her that when the teacher hung a certain garment on the clothesline in the window of her house, it was an agreed sign that he [Walder] could go up to her.
This is exactly what Jacobson is describing. Here is a man in a position of authority preying on the vulnerability of a child- a child referred to him for treatment- and her yearning to be treated like an adult, like someone important, someone who mattered. Here was an adult giving her attention, taking her seriously, and flattering her- of course she stayed.
In the case of Moriah (also a pseudonym),
מוריה היתה כבת 15 וראתה בקרבתו של ולדר אליה הישג
Or in translation, “Moriah was about 15 years old and saw Walder’s proximity to her as an achievement.” Here, a young 15 year old was able to interest the great, renowned and respected Chaim Walder- what a catch! And how similarly Dina might have felt, to have caught the eye of the prince of the land.
The last victim is named Dina, a pseudonym as well - and I wonder whether the reporters were alluding to the individual in this week’s parsha when they chose her name. Dina was referred to Walder for therapy at the age of 20. The first time he was intimate with her, he touched her against her will, which she experienced as a traumatic event- שם נגע בה בניגוד לרצונה. "היא סיפרה לי את זה כאירוע טראומתי. אני לא חושבת שהיא ידעה שוולדר יעז להרחיק לכת".
The second time, in contrast, he sweet talked her. He purchased a luxury car with leather seats and told her
'לבחורה יפה כמוך מגיע את ה-'The best'".
Or in translation- “A beautiful girl like you deserves the best.”
This is exactly like the Dina we read about in this week’s parsha. The first time, Shechem took her and afflicted her- it was only later that he spoke to her tenderly.
Jacob’s sons were horrified by Shechem’s actions, as seen in Genesis 34:7.
וּבְנֵ֨י יַעֲקֹ֜ב בָּ֤אוּ מִן־הַשָּׂדֶה֙ כְּשׇׁמְעָ֔ם וַיִּֽתְעַצְּבוּ֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים וַיִּ֥חַר לָהֶ֖ם מְאֹ֑ד כִּֽי־נְבָלָ֞ה עָשָׂ֣ה בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל לִשְׁכַּב֙ אֶת־בַּֽת־יַעֲקֹ֔ב וְכֵ֖ן לֹ֥א יֵעָשֶֽׂה׃ Meanwhile Jacob’s sons, having heard the news, came in from the field. The men were distressed and very angry, because he had committed an outrage in Israel by lying with Jacob’s daughter—a thing not to be done.
The question became: what was the appropriate response? Simeon and Levi had one answer. Jacob had a different one.
This question is one that has been asked in the Haredi community many times. Usually, the survivors are not believed- look at the case of Nechemyah Weberman as an example. But this time is different. Take a look at this Twitter thread to see how different it is- the hue and cry, the rabbinic support, the decisions by people like Mordy Getz, who is the head of the Boro Park branch of Eichler’s, to pull all of Walder’s books off the shelves and refuse to stock them.
This time, everyone is standing up and saying “Such things are not done in Israel.”
This time, Simeon and Levi are not the outliers.
This time, we all join together to ask הַכְזוֹנָ֕ה יַעֲשֶׂ֖ה אֶת־אֲחוֹתֵֽנוּ?
And together, we answer: no. We will not stand for this.
Because we agree this is not - and will not be- done in Israel.
~
Note: If you are interested in reading all the sources I used in a shiur that referenced this topic, feel free to check out my Sefaria sheet entitled ‘Broken Trust: The Aftermath of Trauma (An Exploration of the Lives of Dina, Michal and Tamar.’) If you prefer, you can listen to a recording of me giving the shiur at this link.