We end Perek I with more examples of which positive mitzvot might be like a mountain suspended by a hair. The rabbis consider a number of different options - which halachot are directly Torah based and which are only alluded to in the Torah. One of our learnings is that Mishnaot were created in good part to fill in some of the 'gaps' in Torah instruction.
Moving into Perek II the rabbis consider a new Mishna, this time something that seems quite detached from Chagiga. We are told about topics that should not be discussed with students in different groupings. Specifically, the rabbis refer to the laws of forbidden sexual relations, the laws of Creation (notes suggest that this could mean the natural world; it could mean the six days of creation), and the laws of the Divine Chariot (notes tell us that this refers to the metaphysical). A good deal of amud (b) is devoted to why only one or two or three students should be 'dangerous learners' of each of these topics.
What is more interesting to me is the idea that these topics are somehow risky at all. Steinsaltz explains in a note that this Mishna is placed here to help us understand the complex, profound considerations undertaken when approaching G-d and when discussing other halachot. We should be careful how we think about teaching; students can make assumptions and decide on their own that their interpretation of Torah is more appropriate than the teachings of the rabbis.
Our tradition continues to focus on continuity over innovation. Perhaps this is the key to Judaism's longevity: we have built into religious practice the necessity of 'following the leader' rather than studying and interpreting on our own. Yes, we are encouraged to ask questions, but we are assured that there are greater thinkers who have struggled with the same questions. We feel connected to a chain of scholars and our questions - if not our answers - are validated. Thus our tradition changes culturally, but in very limited ways.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment