From a Karaite perspective, Matthew 5:27–30—which expands the prohibition of adultery to include "lust in the heart"—is an example of a teacher attempting to create a "fence" around the Torah. While the sentiment appears noble, a critical examination reveals significant legal and philosophical issues when measured against the Peshat (literal meaning).
1. Criminalizing Thought vs. Action
The Seventh Commandment ("Thou shalt not commit adultery") is a legal statute concerning a physical act that violates a marriage covenant. By stating that a "look" is equivalent to the act itself, the passage moves from Law into Thought-Policing.
The Karaite View: In the Torah, God judges actions. While the Tenth Commandment forbids coveting, it is distinct from adultery. Merging the two muddled the "Source Code" of the Law. You cannot bring a "looker" before a court; therefore, this teaching moves the Covenant into a subjective, unverifiable realm that the Written Torah avoids.
2. The Extremism of Self-Mutilation
The instructions to "pluck out your eye" or "cut off your hand" are seen by Karaites as a dangerous departure from the Torah’s view of the body.
The "Very Good" Body: God created the eye and the hand. The Torah teaches mastery over the organs, not their destruction.
Hellenistic Influence: This hyperbolic "asceticism" (punishing the body to save the soul) is more common in Greek Stoicism than in Hebrew thought. If the eye causes one to sin, the problem is the will, not the anatomy. Removing the eye doesn't remove the desire; it only creates a "mutilated" servant, which the Torah actually forbids from certain types of service (Leviticus 21:18).
3. The "Unattainable" Standard
By making "lust" equal to "adultery," the passage creates a "System Failure" where every human becomes a "criminal." Karaites argue this is a strategic maneuver to make the Law seem impossible to keep, thereby forcing a dependence on "grace" or a "savior." The Torah, however, insists the Law is doable: "It is not too hard for you, nor is it far off" (Deuteronomy 30:11).
No comments:
Post a Comment