Q&A: Words of the Scribes
Words of the Scribes
Question
The Rabbi wrote in Ruach HaMishpat and in other places about the concept of “Words of the Scribes” in Maimonides. According to the Rabbi, “Words of the Scribes” refers to the source but not the force. In Maimonides, Laws of Testimony 3:4, it seems that “Words of the Scribes” refers to the force, for he wrote: “By Torah law, testimony is accepted neither in monetary cases nor in capital cases except directly from the witnesses, as it says, ‘By the mouth of two witnesses’—from their mouths and not from their written document. But by the Words of the Scribes, monetary cases are decided on the basis of documentary testimony, even though the witnesses are no longer available, so that the door not be locked before borrowers. And documentary testimony is not used to judge penalty cases, and needless to say lashes and exile; rather, only from their mouths and not from their written document.”
So he explains the rule that we rely on testimony in a document as being by the Words of the Scribes, and he also adds the reason of “locking the door” before borrowers—so it is apparently not referring only to the source from the verse “and write it in a book and seal it” (Gittin 36a).
How can this source be reconciled? Thank you.
Answer
I didn’t write that anywhere about the concept of “Words of the Scribes.” In general, in translation from Arabic it is used in the same sense as rabbinic. Some have argued, in the context of the hermeneutical principles, that Maimonides uses this term—or the term rabbinic—in the sense of source and not force. That is not always its meaning. I disagree with that as well. I explained there that, in my view, there is no difference between the question of source and the question of force.