Gender Trouble, 178
Mary Douglas's Purity and Danger suggests that the very contours of "the body" are established through markings that seek to establish specific codes of cultural coherence.
There are 4 mekorot (sources) for tefillin in Tanakh: Shemot 13:9, 13:16, Dvarim 6:8, 11:18. Each tefillin box contains four texts (in the head they are written on four separate scrolls in four separate chambers; in the arm they are all written on one scroll): Shemot 13:1-10, 13:11-16, Dvarim 6:4-9, 11:13-21. The 2 paragraphs from Dvarim are the first 2 paragraphs of the Shema.
The mitzvot of tefillin (and tzitzit) are discussed in chapter 4 of Menachot (38a-44b):
תפילין תיובתיה והרי תפילין דפסולות בעובד כוכבים דתני רב חיננא בריה דרבא מפשרניא ספר תורה תפילין ומזוזות שכתבן צדוקי כותי עובד כוכבים עבד אשה וקטן מומר פסולין שנאמר וקשרתם וכתבתם כל שישנו בקשירה ישנו בכתיבה כל שאינו בקשירה אינו בכתיבה
By contrast, the halakha with regard to phylacteries is a conclusive refutation of Rav Ḥisda’s opinion. Phylacteries are unfit when written by a gentile, as it is taught by Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rava, of Pashronya: A Torah scroll, phylacteries, or mezuzot that were written by a heretic, a Samaritan, a gentile, a Canaanite slave, a woman, a minor, or a Jewish apostate [meshummad] are unfit, as it is stated: “And you shall bind them for a sign on your arm…and you shall write them on the doorposts of your house” (Deuteronomy 6:8–9). From this juxtaposition, one can derive the following: Anyone who is included in the mitzva of binding the phylacteries, i.e., one who is both obligated and performs the mitzva, is included in the class of people who may write Torah scrolls, phylacteries, and mezuzot; and anyone who is not included in the mitzva of binding is not included in the class of people who may write sacred texts.
> Gender Trouble, 175
Is "the body" or "the sexed body" the firm foundation on which gender and systems of compulsory sexuality operate? Or is "the body" itself shaped by political forces with strategic interests in keeping that body bounded and constituted by the markers of sex?
> Gender Trouble, 191-2
In what senses, then, is gender an act? As in other ritual social dramas, the action of gender requires a performance that is repeated. ...Gender ought not to be construed as a stable identity or locus of agency from which various acts follow; rather, gender is an identity tenuously constituted in time, instituted in an exterior space through a stylized repetition of acts. The effect of gender is produced through the stylization [or inscription] of the body...
...the ground of gender identity is the stylized repetition of acts through time...
כהנים איצטריכא ליה ס"ד אמינא הואיל וכתיב (דברים כב, יא) לא תלבש שעטנז צמר ופשתים יחדיו גדילים תעשה לך מאן דלא אישתרי כלאים לגביה בלבישה הוא דמיחייב בציצית הני כהנים הואיל ואישתרי כלאים לגבייהו לא ליחייבו. קמ"ל נהי דאישתרי בעידן עבודה בלא עידן עבודה לא אישתרי
The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the baraita to mention that priests are obligated to fulfill the mitzva, as it may enter your mind to say as follows: Since it is written: “You shall not wear diverse kinds, wool and linen together. You shall prepare yourself twisted cords upon the four corners of your covering” (Deuteronomy 22:11–12), only one who is not permitted to wear diverse kinds is obligated in the mitzva of ritual fringes. With regard to these priests, since diverse kinds are permitted for them when they perform the Temple service, as the belt of the priestly vestments contains diverse kinds, they should not be obligated in the mitzva of ritual fringes. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that although the prohibition of diverse kinds is permitted for them at the time when they perform the Temple service, when it is not the time of the Temple service it is not permitted, and therefore priests are obligated in the mitzva of ritual fringes.
> Gender Trouble, 192
Gender is also a norm that can never be fully internalized; "the internal" is a surface signification, and gender norms are finally phantasmatic, impossible to embody.
> Gender Trouble, 186
If the "cause" of desire, gesture, and act can be localized within the "self" of the actor, then the political regulations and disciplinary practices which produce that ostensibly coherent gender are effectively displaced from view. The displacement of a political and discursive origin of gender identity onto a psychological "core" precludes an analysis of the political constitution of the gendered subject and its fabricated notions about the ineffable interiority of its sex or of its true identity. [Meaning that the social construct that identifies the source of gender as an internal, complete identity actually has the effect of preventing a political analysis of gender. Systems of oppression use "true self" as a strategy to hide themselves by identifying us as the source of the problem.]
And Reish Lakish says: Anyone who dons phylacteries lives a long life, as it is stated: “The Lord is upon them, they will live, and altogether therein is the life of my spirit; and have me recover, and make me to live” (Isaiah 38:16).
What does the "sign" of tefillin mean?
Sefer ha-Mitzvot, Positive Commandments 13
(Editor's note) Three Commandments in the Torah are designated by the term אות - 'a sign' - between the Creator and Israel: Circumcision (Bereshit 17:11), the Sabbath (Shemot 31:13), and the Tefillin (Shemot 13:9). Tefillin are not to be worn on the Sabbath or on holy days, those days constituting such 'a sign' in themselves.
> (11) You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and that shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.
> (13) Speak to the Israelite people and say: Nevertheless, you must keep My sabbaths, for this is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, to know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you.
>> Studies in Shemot by Nehama Leibowitz, Ki Tissa 1
In this passage who is the subject of the verb "to know"? Who will know, through the observance of the Sabbath that the Lord sanctifies Israel? Various interpretations of this passage have been suggested. [...] Saadiya Gaon assumes that the subject of the infinitive "to know" is the nations of the world. [Rashi agrees....] Ibn Ezra otherwise explained the text. The Sabbath was not designed as a demonstration to the world, but to implant something into the consciousness of its observers, that we ourselves should know and be made aware of our election, the mission and aim of our existence "that I am the Lord who sanctifies you." ...
We may note yet another difference between the respective approaches of Saadiya Gaon and Ibn Ezra. According to Saadiya, the Sabbath becomes a sign as a result of our resting.... On the other hand, Ibn Ezra observes that the Sabbath will become a sign to us, making us aware through it that "I am the Lord who sanctifies you" not by the non-performance of work alone, but by another form of activity different from that filling the six weekdays, by the diversion of all our energies to the study of Torah, to spiritual advancement, for which purpose the Sabbath rest was given - an island of holiness in a turbulent sea of wordliness.
> Gender Trouble, 186
If the inner truth of gender is a fabrication and if a true gender is a fantasy instituted and inscribed on the surface of bodies, then it seems that genders can be neither true nor false, but are only produced as the truth effects of a discourse of primary and stable identity.
(ה) יכוין בהנחתם שצונו הקב"ה להניח ארבע פרשיות אלו שיש בהם יחוד שמו ויציאת מצרים על הזרוע כנגד הלב ועל הראש כנגד המוח כדי שנזכור ניסים ונפלאות שעש' עמנו שהם מורים על יחודו ואשר לו הכח והממשלה בעליונים ובתחתונים לעשות בהם כרצונו וישעבד להקב"ה הנשמה שהיא במוח וגם הלב שהוא עיקר התאות והמחשבות ובזה יזכור הבור' וימעיט הנאותיו ויניח של יד תחלה ויברך להניח תפילין ואח"כ יניח של ראש ולא יברך כי אם ברכה אחת לשתיהם: הגה וי"א לברך על של ראש על מצות תפילין אפי' לא הפסיק בנתים [הרא"ש הל' תפילין] [וכן פשט המנהג בבני אשכנז שמברכין ב' ברכות] וטוב לומר תמיד אחר הברכה השניה ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד [מהר"י בן חביב אגור סי' ל"ח]:
(5) When putting them on, have in mind that God commanded us to "put these four passages which contain [the principle of] monotheism and the Exodus on the arm opposite the heart and the head opposite the brain so that we may remember the miracles and wonders that He did for us which indicate His Unity and that He is omnipotent in heaven and on earth." And to submit to God his soul, which resides in the brain as well as his heart which represents physical desire. Through this he will remember the Creator and moderate is pleasure[-seeking]. He should put on the arm-tefillin first and say the blessing "... to place the tefillin" and afterwards put on the head tefillin without a second blessing. Note: Some say to make a second blessing on the head tefillin "...on the mitzvah of teffillin" and this is the Ashkenazic custom.
> Sefer ha-Mitzvot, Positive Commandments 12
(Editor's note) The position of the tefillin against the heart, symbolizing the seat of the passions and emotions, and against the brain, symbolizing the diverse faculties and senses of the soul, indicates the worshipper's desire for complete self-subjugation to the service of the Lord.
> Gender Trouble, 198-200
...it is only within the practices of repetitive signifying that a subversion of identity becomes possible. ...There is no self that is prior to the convergence [of gender-signifying acts] or who maintains "integrity" prior to its entrance into this conflicted cultural field. There is only a taking up of the tools where they lie, where the very "taking up" is enabled by the tool lying there.
What constitutes a subversive repetition within signifying practices of gender? I have argued...that, for instance, within the sex/gender distinction, sex poses as "the real"...the material or corporeal ground upon which gender operates as an act of cultural inscription [meaning the idea that your gender expression, which may be socially constructed, is dependent on your anatomical sex, which is an absolute fact/ordained by God - that idea is a sham]. And yet gender is not written on the body as the torturing instrument of writing in Kafka's "In the Penal Colony" inscribes itself unintelligibly on the flesh of the accused. The question is not: what meaning does that inscription carry within it, but what cultural apparatus arranges this meeting between instrument [gender] and body, what interventions into this ritualistic repetition are possible?
Sefer ha-Mitzvot, Positive Commandments 13
(Editor's note) Seven rings, symbolizing the seven branches of the Menorah, are coiled in a descending spiral around the forearm, and three rings, symbolic of Israel's spiritual betrothal to Hashem, are wound around the middle finger, the ensuing ring formations around the back and palm of the hand culminating once again the Name Shaddai (שדי) [just like the ש on the head-tefillin box, the ד at the end of the head-tefillin loop, and the י at the end of the hand-tefillin loop also together form that Name].
(כה) קְדֻשַּׁת תְּפִלִּין קְדֻשָּׁתָן גְּדוֹלָה הִיא. שֶׁכָּל זְמַן שֶׁהַתְּפִלִּין בְּרֹאשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם וְעַל זְרוֹעוֹ הוּא עָנָו וִירֵא שָׁמַיִם וְאֵינוֹ נִמְשָׁךְ בִּשְׂחוֹק וּבְשִׂיחָה בְּטֵלָה וְאֵינוֹ מְהַרְהֵר מַחֲשָׁבוֹת רָעוֹת אֶלָּא מְפַנֶּה לִבּוֹ בְּדִבְרֵי הָאֱמֶת וְהַצֶּדֶק. לְפִיכָךְ צָרִיךְ אָדָם לְהִשְׁתַּדֵּל לִהְיוֹתָן עָלָיו כָּל הַיּוֹם שֶׁמִּצְוָתָן כָּךְ הִיא. אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל רַב תַּלְמִידוֹ שֶׁל רַבֵּנוּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ שֶׁכָּל יָמָיו לֹא רָאוּהוּ שֶׁהָלַךְ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת בְּלֹא תּוֹרָה אוֹ בְּלֹא צִיצִית אוֹ בְּלֹא תְּפִלִּין:
(25) The sanctity of phylacteries is a high degree of sanctity. As long as phylacteries are on a man's head and arm, he is humble and God-fearing, is not drawn into frivolity and idle talk, does not dwell on evil thoughts but occupies his mind with thoughts of truth and righteousness. A man should therefore endeavour to wear phylacteries the whole day, this being the right way of fulfilling the precept. It is said of Rav, the disciple of our Sainted Teacher (R. Judah, the Prince), that throughout his life no one saw him, without Torah, Tzitzis (fringes on his garments) or phylacteries.
> Sefer ha-Mitzvot, Positive Commandments 13
(Editor's note) 'Great is the sanctity of the tefillin!' exclaims Rambam. 'For as long as the tefillin are upon your head and your arm, you are meek and in fear of Heaven, being drawn neither into laughter nor into idle talk - shunning all thoughts of evil, and rather directing your heart to words of truth and righteousness.'
Gender Trouble, 182-183
For inner and outer worlds to remain utterly distinct, the entire surface of the body would have to achieve an impossible impermeability....Hence, "inner" and "outer" constitute a binary distinction that stabilizes and consolidates the coherent subject....[but] if the "inner world" no longer designates a [real place], then the internal fixity of the self, and indeed, the internal locale of gender identity, become similarly suspect. The critical question is not how did that identity become internalized? [because there is no "internal" distinct from the "external"]... Rather, the question is: From what strategic position in public discourse and for what reasons has the trope of interiority and the disjunctive [i.e. 100% separate, either/or] binary of inner/outer taken hold?...How does a body figure on its surface the very invisibility of its hidden depth?
> Blessed are You, Hashem, our God, ruler of the universe, who formed humankind in wisdom and created in them many holes and many spaces. It is obvious in the presence of Your glorious throne that if one of them were opened, or if one of them were closed, it would be impossible to continue existing and to stand in Your presence. Blessed are You, Hashem, who heals all flesh and works wonders in doing.