Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
<jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Some scholars allege a stringent ideology behind the severe Qumranic halakhot in contrast to putative leniencies in parallel rabbinic rulings. Vered Noam contends that the rabbinic propensity for leniency and innovativeness, versus the opposite Qumranic approach are the source of their disputes. Thus, Qumranic strictness is not “objective” but relative to the lenient rabbinic law. This paper critically scrutinizes Noam’s thesis, and will posit that the halakhot of Qumran are founded on a literal adherence to Scripture versus rabbinic pragmatism. The study discusses Noam’s cited examples, offering contrasting explanations. It deliberates about the difference between disputes concerning interpretations and physical facts, the rationales behind the various classifications, and the relationship between the degrees of holiness and the degrees of impurity.</jats:p> </jats:sec>
Journal for the Study of Judaism – Brill
Published: Jan 1, 2011
Keywords: banishment; rabbinic; stringency; leniency; visual repulsiveness; Qumran
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.