On the connection between the Torah commandments, reasons, and validity. – On the prohibition of Nida
Hello Rabbi.
Is there a connection between the reason for the mitzvah and the validity of the mitzvah? That is, when the reason for the mitzvah is nullified, the commandment is nullified – is there a relationship between them?
A specific question regarding the prohibition of menstruation – following reading the book “Forbidden Sex, Permitted Sex” – the author suggested that the reason for prohibiting menstruation is anarchistic, it was created as a result of patriarchal thinking at that time in which the man was the sole source of sperm and procreation, and menstruation was a type of death. Death was attributed to menstruation and it is forbidden to mix procreation and death , and therefore the prohibition of entering into menstruation was created. Today, after science has cleared our minds of the magical beliefs about women’s menstruation and discovered that procreation is common to both sexes, menstruation is not attributed to death but to procreation , and therefore there is no point in prohibiting menstruation.
1. I am not claiming that she is right and that this is the reason for the prohibition, but if she is right – what is the relationship between the above reason and the validity of the prohibition on entering a Nida?
2. Is there any other logical and rational reason for prohibiting the entry of a Nida?
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
- It is impossible to separate the questions. If it is an explicit law in the Torah, then it is based on true assumptions (God knows reality, what and who causes procreation). If you have come to the conclusion that the assumptions are not true, the question is not about this specific law, but about the Torah in general.
- It is true that one could make an argument that there was no mistake on God’s part here, but that the prohibition was originally stated to people whose worldview it was, and for whom it was right to practice a prohibition. But today, when our perception is different, the prohibition is invalid. This perception seems problematic to me. It arises in clear moral contexts such as the woman of good looks (which claim that today it is invalid because of the new moral norms).
- I don’t know.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thank you very much for the answer.
1. I ask from the perspective of 2 in the answer you answered –
You wrote that ”this view seems problematic to me” – because of the eternity of the Torah? May I ask what the reason for the problem is? After all, just as the title of the title derives from a cultural norm, does it claim that the prohibition of niddah stemmed from a certain cultural belief about the woman?
PS. I also think it is problematic to say so but I don't know how to explain why.
2. What is your answer to the question – Why was niddah prohibited in the Biya? That is how the ’willed’?
2. Yes.
1. Indeed, the criterion of those who claim this is not clear, but I am not inclined to accept these claims. In other words, in my opinion, it is also incorrect to say so with respect to a woman of good standing. See column 15 on the website. My claim is that the Torah states that there is no halakhic prohibition, but the moral question remains and may depend on reality and the norms accepted therein.
Beyond that, the claim about the prohibition of niddah in itself seems to me very speculative (as is the custom of critics of this type).
I understand. Thank you very much for the response.
Here is a reference to the fact that the author's claim that Nida is associated with death is speculative. Yaakov Negan, for example, proves exactly the opposite:
http://otniel.org/lesson/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%AA%D7%96%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%A2-%D7%94%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%94-%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%94%D7%A0%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9D/
It is worth examining the words of Maimonides - I do not have the leisure to search - on the fact that the Torah greatly facilitated the practices of impurity and impurity prevalent in other nations during the period of its giving. From there he proves that it was precisely liberalism that gave rise to the laws of the Nida - which sought to leave only a little of the customary laws because it was impossible to abolish them completely.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
