108 Richard Rosenthal
perspective gives us a view and language that allows to do what
others have done in every generation, to interpret by restatement.
I have chosen to treat the fate of a mitzvah. It is not at the vital center of halakhic debate. Precisely for this reason it is easier to study as successive generations reshape its meaning, guided not only by halakhah, but also by minhag, the customs of communities shaped by local practices that in turn were influenced by time and place.
The mitzvah is stated Deuteronomy 22:5: lo yiyeh khli gever al ishah velo yilbash gever simlat ishah ki to-avat adonai eloheikha kol oseh eleh(“A woman must not put on man’s apparel, nor shall a man wear woman's clothing; for whoever does these things is abhorrent to the Lord your God .”). It is an interesting statement in its form: two parallel clauses are completed by a third clause explaining the consequence of disobedience. The word translated as“apparel” in the first clause, kli, is more commonly translated in the Tanakh as“object,”“vessel,” or“implement.” The Targum translates it as“weapon.” In rabbinic Hebrew it means“apparel,” although“weapon” and“armed” also occur in rabbinic I lebrew.
What is the meaning of the biblical rule? A negative command, it limits. Clearly, men and women are to avoid certain things belonging to the opposite gender. In the case of women we are not sure what“apparel” is. Commentators and translators have speculated. Professor Tigay in the Jewish Publication Society Torah commentary sums up the opinion of both traditional and modern commentators on the verse in three categories:(1) one should not disguise oneself as a member of the opposite sex because this would permit indiscriminate mingling and lead to fornication:(2) transvestism is inherently abhorrent because it obscures the sexual differences God created,“male and female created He them.”(3) Transvestism is abhorrent because it was part of pagan rites or magical practices.”
Among traditional commentators Rashi explains that men and women exchange garments in order to blend in with members of the opposite sex. Their only purpose must be fornication. Ibn Ezra translating k’li as in the Targum, military apparel, remarks that women were not created to fight in war but to perpetuate the seed, clearly defining the social role of men and women. He, too, sees this confusion leading to fornification. A