Commandments that became rituals
Hello Rabbi!
A question that has been bothering me lately:
Because the Torah was given in a specific context and during a specific historical period, many commandments that in the past were well integrated into the way of life and were Judaism’s teaching on the correct way of life, today seem to have been torn from their original context and have become a type of ritual.
An example that I recently noticed is the commandment of the tzitzit. In the past, the azure dye extracted from snails was a prestigious dye and was used in royal robes and the like. In such a context, the commandment of the tzitzit probably took on a clear and logical meaning and was a natural part of the life of the Jew who observes it.
Today, of course, snail-derived azure is not used for dyeing, but there are more efficient and cheaper ways to dye blue, and blue is no longer considered royal or special. There is also the matter of a small tallit that is worn today to have a four-winged garment that requires a tzitzit, when in the past, apparently ordinary clothing had four wings.
In any case, my feeling is that the mitzvah no longer has its natural place in life, but has become a kind of ritual, and I don’t know if this is indeed God’s will for him. It doesn’t seem like that was the original intention…
This is just one example. It seems to me that the entire world of halakhic law is full of such mitzvot (say, Shabbat crafts that are adapted to an agricultural society…)
I actually connect with rituals and I am also able to sometimes find meaning in the tzitzit mitzvah when I observe it. But it still seems to me that the original purpose of these mitzvahs was as a part of life and not in such an artificial way.
I would love to hear your opinion on the matter. Thank you very much!
As a rule, I don’t really connect with rituals.
Your question depends on the assumption that this was indeed the original meaning of these commandments. I don’t know if that’s true. If that’s true, then only the question of authority remains. If that’s not true – the question is basically irrelevant.
Mitzvot must be kept no matter what the reason. The mitzvah stands. What difference does it make if the color of the tzitzit is of kings or not?
The meaning of the tzitzit is precisely to remember the mitzvot… that is the main thing.
And so with regard to Shabbat – Shabbat must be kept even if we say that Shabbat crafts are adapted to an agricultural society…, by the way – according to which crafts do you think Shabbat should be kept, say?
This is actually a requirement of the reason for the dekra. The Torah says to dye with the blue material. You assume that the reason is royal etiquette and try to deduce practical implications from this. But when it is ruled that the reason for the dekra is not required, they are essentially saying that there is always more to the mitzvah than the reason that is apparent to the eye.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer