SINCE THE SAGES DID NOT ENACT THE
LAW IN ORDER TO ADD RESTRICTIONS BUT IN ORDER TO RELAX THEM.
However, there is a counter text – a beritah – a text
from the Mishnaic era which did not make it into the final text. None-the-less,
it carries weight:
But was it not taught: “The Sages
did not enact the law in order to relax restrictions but in order to impose
them?”
Well, that’s not easy to reconcile! Oh, don’t give up so
easily:
Rabina replied. The meaning is: Not
to relax restrictions in connection with Pentateuchal laws but to add
restrictions to them; the laws of the Sabbath limits, however, are only
Rabbinical.
Fascinating distinction – Torah laws are to be maintained
strictly, Rabbinic laws are subject to more “liberal” interpretation.
This is similar to a discussion in the Mishanah found on
Nidah 58b. But here it is Torah law interpreted rabbinicly. The discussion is
of a woman who finds a bloodstain but there is doubt as to whether it is menstrual
blood or not. If menstrual, she would be “unclean” which carries several
restrictions. How do we deal with the doubt? Assume the more restrictive to be
safe, or the less restrictive to give her more flexibility?
MISHNAH. [A WOMAN] MAY ATTRIBUTE [A
BLOODSTAIN] TO ANY [EXTERNAL] CAUSE TO WHICH SHE CAN POSSIBLY ATTRIBUTE IT. IF
[FOR INSTANCE] SHE HAD SLAIN A DOMESTIC BEAST, A WILD ANIMAL OR A BIRD, IF SHE
WAS HANDLING BLOODSTAINS OR SAT BESIDE THOSE WHO HANDLED THEM. OR IF SHE KILLED
A LOUSE. SHE MAY ATTRIBUTE THE BLOODSTAIN TO IT. . .
A WOMAN ONCE CAME TO R. AKIBA AND
SAID TO HIM: I HAVE OBSERVED A BLOODSTAIN’. ‘HAD YOU PERHAPS’, HE SAID TO HER.
‘A WOUND?’ YES’. SHE REPLIED, ‘BUT IT HAS HEALED’. IS IT POSSIBLE HE AGAIN
ASKED HER, THAT IT COULD OPEN AGAIN AND BLEED?’ ‘YES’, SHE REPLIED; AND R.
AKIBA DECLARED HER CLEAN.
OBSERVING THAT HIS DISCIPLES LOOKED AT EACH OTHER IN
ASTONISHMENT. HE SAID TO THEM, ‘ WHY DO YOU FIND THIS DIFFICULT, SEEING THAT
THE SAGES DID NOT LAY DOWN THE RULE IN ORDER TO IMPOSE RESTRICTIONS BUT RATHER
TO RELAX THEM, FOR IT IS SAID IN SCRIPTURE, AND IF A WOMAN HAVE AN ISSUE,
AND HER ISSUE IN HER FLESH BE BLOOD.(Lev. 15:19) ONLY “BLOOD” BUT NOT A “BLOODSTAIN.”
No comments:
Post a Comment