Q&A: The Process of Midrashic Interpretation
The Process of Midrashic Interpretation
Question
Hello Rabbi,
The process of midrashic interpretation in the Talmud often seems like drawing the target around the arrow: the arrow is the a priori reasoning of a given sage, and the target circle is the way that reasoning is extracted from the verses. On the other hand, the Talmud always makes an effort to find a midrashic source in the verses for the sages’ reasoning (an extra word, a close reading, some interpretive rule). But if in any case this is just reasoning, why work so hard to find a source for it in a verse? They could simply say that a certain sage held this way, and that would be that.
Best regards,
Answer
Sometimes the interpretation is merely an asmachta, and then it really does arrive after the fact. But when the interpretation is the source of the law, then apparently this is not a matter of drawing the target around the arrow; rather, we simply do not always understand the methods of interpretation. That is at least my working assumption.
In my article on the status of reasoning, I explained that reasoning alone, without an interpretive derivation, would not truly be Torah-level law (at least when it innovates a novel law). In my article on conspiring witnesses and scriptural decree, I explained that even when there is reasoning, sometimes we do not apply it without the verse—either because it is not fully conclusive on its own, or because there is a halakhic rule that prevents its application. See my article there.