Is the Law immutable? (Purim Sermon 5758)

For the first 20 or 30 years of the Reform Movement, in the early 19th century, most of the movement’s reforms were relatively minor, from a halakhic perspective. They included; a sermon in the vernacular, a mixed male and female choir accompanied by an organ, and a combination of Hebrew and German prayers. From the point of view of Jewish law, these reforms were relatively small in scale.
Yet one rabbi, Rabbi Moshe Sofer (commonly knows as the Chatam Sofer) fought these reforms with all of his energy. His most famous anti-reform slogan was “Chadash Assur Min Hatorah” – which means anything new, any innovation whatsoever (even one that was a minor halakhic change) is 100% forbidden. To put it another way, for the Chatam Sofer, Change = Transgression and Jewish Law never changed and never should change.

The Chatam Sofer had his reasons for using this slogan and employing this strategy in combating reform. But it is interesting to ask whether or not the slogan is true from an historical perspective. Is it the case that from the moment that the Jews received the Torah at Mount Sinai, Jewish Law has never changed?

Since today is Shushan Purim, I would like to analyze this question in light of Megilat Esther.

There is a tiny word, just 2 letters that is the most common and most important word in Megillat Esther. The word is Dat (דת). It is a word that is used in Israel today to distinguish between the religious and the secular. The word for one who is secular is חלוני and the word for one who is religious is דתי. But דתי and דת means more than just religious. It means a religious law. Under the Chupah, the chatan says to the kallah, הרי את מקודשת לי בטבעת זו – With this ring, you are betrothed to me, כדת משה וישראל according to the religious Law of Moshe and Israel.

The megilah depicts an Ancient Persia that is obsessed with דת ודין. – with laws
There is a law for everything: There is a law telling you what happens to Vashti when she refuses to show up upon the king’s request. There is a law concerning how much makeup and perfume a woman must wear before she appears before the king. There is even a law telling you how much alcohol you must drink at the King’s party.

But ancient Persia is not unique because it had many laws. It is unique because these laws were immutable. In the language of the Megilah, these laws were לא יעבר – they could not change.

Much of the Megillah is satire. It is satire in the sense that it makes fun of many of the practices of Ahasuerus’ royal court; the drinking, the corruption, the rash way that decisions are made.

I would argue that the aspect of Ahasuerus’ court that is most ridiculed by the Megilah is the idea that laws cannot be revoked, they are immutable.

This theme runs through the Megilah. In the beginning of the story, Ahasuerus gets upset at his wife Vashti and he makes a decree that she shall never again appear before him. Of course after he calms down and sobers up he realizes that he loves and misses her and he wants her back. This shouldn’t be a problem. He should have been able to simply change his mind and forgive her. The problem was that his decree was לא יעבר. It could not be revoked; it was immutable. He therefore tragically loses his wife forever.

The story continues. Haman convinces Ahasuerus to allow him to issue a genocidal decree against the Jews. On the 13 of the month of Adar, the non-jews were to get up and kill all of the Jews; men, women and children.

We all know what happens. Esther invited Ahasuerus and Haman to a party and “outs” Haman as the one who is trying to kill her people. Ahasuerus orders that Haman be killed and then Esther asks Ahasuerus to revoke the decree of Genocide against her people. And here Ahasuerus does something very strange. Instead of revoking the original decree of genocide, he issues a second decree which allows the Jews to get up and defend themselves. And why doesn’t Ahasuerus just revoke the first decree? Because he cannot כי כתב אשר נכתב בשם המלך...אין להשיב – a decree issued by the King cannot be revoked. The law is immutable. And therefore a second decree permitting the Jews to defend themselves must be issued. And what is the result of this silly provision which doesn’t allow the king to revoke his own decree after he changes his mind? In the process of defending themselves, the Jews had to kill 75,000 people. 75,000 people are killed because a law cannot be changed. This is satire but I have to say, it isn’t funny. When laws are immutable, tragedy occurs.

So if Megillat Esther makes fun of Ahasuerus and Ancient Persia for having immutable laws, why is the common perception that Halakha, or the Jewish Legal system is immutable?

So here is the controversial statement that is the crux of my talk: It is a mistake to say that Halakah has never changed. The History of Halakha is a history of innovation and change. It is true that there is a body of law that is immutable. That goes back to Mount Sinai. These laws are known as Halakha L”Moshe M’Sina. Laws of Moshe which go back To Sinai. But the Rambam, in his introduction to his Legal Work, the Mishna Torah teaches us that besides for those laws which goes back to Sinai there is an even larger body of laws that “were not received from Moses but rather were innovated in every generation using the 13 principles of Biblical Exegesis.

For the Rambam, it is very important for us to believe that a core group of laws go all the way back to Sinai. This gives us stability, authenticity and it anchors us in a direct line going all the way back to Moses and the giving of the Torah. But that is not sufficient. Because if the law remains immutable then it is not a Torat Chayim, a Living Breathing Torah which is relevant to people in every generation regardless of changes that are taking place in the world. Therefore, again using the term of the Rambam, the rabbis of each generation are מחדש – they innovate laws for their time.

How does the law change? When can it change? Who can make it change? These are all important questions and I hope to teach on this topic in the future. But for this morning, I think that the following statement is sufficient. One of our obligations on Purim is to recognize the major difference between Ancient Persian culture and Judaism. Both cultures are centered on law. But for the Persians, Law is immutable and for the Jews, the Law is a Torat Chayim; an expanding, adapting, living, breathing organism.

I would like to conclude with a rather famous passage from the Talmud which I now understand in a new light. The Talmud teaches us that when the Jewish people originally received the Torah, G-d picked up Mount Sinai like an inverted barrel and said to us, “if you accept the Torah fine but if not your burial will be there.” In other words, the Torah was coerced upon us. It was an immutable Law forced upon us that will never change. And there is this tremendous moment of tension in the Talmud. For if the Torah was forced upon us then we never willingly accepted it and the deal is off.

But then Rava, the great Talmudic Sage saves the day. He quotes a verse from Megilat Esther that says קימו וקבלו. The Jews reaccept the Torah at the time of Ahasuerus and this time they do it willingly, out of love. Because the Torah the Jews accept on Purim is contrasted with the Law of Persia. It is a living Torah; One that adapts, lives and breathes and is accepted by all of Israel willingly as a guide for life.
I hope that on this Purim we can all reaccept the Torah as a Torat Chayim; a torah which is meaningful and relevant to every aspect of our lives.
Shabbat Shalom and Shushan Purim Sameach!