Chapter 1                  Mishna 1                  Essay 4

 

And Make a Boundary Around the Torah

 

 

THEY (the men of the Great Assembly) SAID THREE THINGS:

 

A.                                                        BE DELIBERATE IN JUDGEMENT

B.                                                        ESTABLISH MANY STUDENTS

C.                                                        AND MAKE A BOUNDARY AROUND THE TORAH

 

 

On what source did our Teachers base the concept of "a fence" around the Torah?  What was its purpose?  How far could the Rabbis extend that fence?

 

 

1.                  The authority was given to the Torah scholars to erect boundaries or fences around the Torah and is derived from Vayikra 18:30 (Leviticus) ...Ushmartem es mishmarti.

 

"And you [plural form] shall observe my observances, so that you not do any of the abominable practices that were done before you, so that you do not become defiled by them.  I am the Lord your G-d"

 

Rashi quickly references that directive to the Beis Din; that is, it is the duty, and power is granted to it to create a 'mishmeres', an 'observance' to guard My (G-d's) 'observances' (the Torah).  The rationale is this:  The command of G-d in his mitzvos is supreme and abrogation of them carries with it severe penalties.  The Beis Din then is empowered to create legislation that will prevent  situations conducive to transgressing the laws of the Torah.

 

While the Torah issues the directive to the Beis Din, it also cites examples within the Torah law itself.

 

2.                  Vayikra 18:19 - the Torah states: “To a woman in her unclean state of Niddah, do not approach...”   It's intent is not to engage in sexual relations. Would he then be permitted to embrace her or kiss her, asks the Sifra? –  to which it responds... No!

 

The use of the word in the text... “Sikrav” equivalent to “approach” broadens the restriction even to touching and kissing to avoid a person being put into a situation where he can easily fall victim to loss of control.  That's where the Torah itself indicates the use of a fence.

 

3.                  Acts on the part of our patriarchs as related in the Torah also served as models for the use of “fences.”  As Israel approached Sinai at the beginning of the month of Nissan, G-d instructed Moses to direct the nation to prepare for “today and tomorrow” for the historical event.  Moses directed them to prepare and to purify themselves for three days, allowing one extra day to become “Tahor” clean, lest they still be  Tamay (defiled), before the granting of the Torahs at Sinai.

 

4.                  Genesis 2:17  -  G-d commands Adam not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge.  However, Eve replies to the Serpent (Genesis 3:3) that Hashem commanded us “don't eat from it and do not touch it.”  It is the Mei'ri's contention that Adam conveyed that message to Eve in order to construct a “fence” around G-d's command.

 

The Avos d'rav Nassan cites a plethora of examples illustrating this very concept.

 

5.                  Vayikra 18:19, quoted in paragraph #1, is also the source for “fences” constructed by our Rabbis.  A new category of “shnee'os l'araayos,” derivative prohibited sexual contacts, was added by our Torah scholars, as “gezayros,”  fences.  When the term “sexual contact” is used here, we mean thru proper marriage.

 

As an example of a “fence” is, one's paternal grandfather's wife.  The Torah prohibited the wife of one's father, but not the wife of the grandfather.  By engaging in the permitted sexual contact with the latter, one might learn to infer that sexual contact with one's father's wife is also permitted.  This the Rabbis sought to disabuse, and they constructed this list of “snee'os l'arayos.”

 

 

HOW FAR COULD THE RABBIS EXTEND THAT FENCE?

 

 

1.                  This question is a sore spot with many who are unfamiliar with the Torah system, and is used as a wedge against Rabbinical authority.  Our Torah scholars did not create arbitrary gezayros and takanos.  Every enactment of theirs had to have a rhyme and reason, and they were constrained by the command of the Torah in the verse quoted in Paragraph 1: “...and you shall observe My observances...” which empowers the authorities to enact laws “observances”  to protect G-d's laws (observances).

 

The Torah directs that he power of the Rabbis is limited to only one derived observance....no more than that. Anything beyond that is invalid and void.  It is patently false that the rabbis have added 'fence upon fence' over the millenia to make the law more stringent.  This has been the false argument of those who desired to detract from the Torah.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

2.                  The Talmud is replete with instances of challenging a law made by rabbinical decision with the statement... “How can you do this? It is a second fence around a first fence... and we have a principle that you cannot erect a fence around a fence!  Refer to Mesecches Baytza 2:2 and Rashi on loci.

 

It is important to recognize, that this was not an exercise in ego; it had its foundation in halacha.  Torah scholarship required that we know whether a law was of Divine origin or rabbinic origin because the observance of a law of Torah and its respective penalties for transgression were more stringent than that of a rabbinic law.  If it were a rabbinic law, there may be certain conditions that the law may be breached or not applied. Torah is a way of life, not a course of study, and Jewish conduct is guided by what the halacha is.

 

 

MAKE A FENCE... To whom was this directed?

 

 

1.                  Avos R'rav Nosson states that just as G-d made a "fence," guarded his Words, (as in Par. #2) so should every person guard their words.  Whatever he utters should not be a burden upon his listeners.  It should be said in a timely and in a measured fashion, in the right place and under the right conditions.  Otherwise it will not be accepted.

 

2.                  This applies to one’s conduct, too.  The Rambam in Hilchos Dayos advises that if an individual finds a blemish in his character or actions he should strive to correct it in this fashion.  He should go to the opposite extreme and, knowing that this may not be in his nature, he will eventually work towards the middle.

 

For example, if he is hot tempered, he should consciously refrain from any reaction, even to the point of pain, when he is angered.  He will eventually habituate himself to a modicum of self control which, will then become second nature to him.  Life is filled with many examples of this.