Unraveling the Controversy of Healing on Shabbat in the Gospels
Some of Jesus's more contentious conflicts stem from his healing on this Holy day. But if healing on Shabbat is generally permitted in Jewish law, what is the real point of the story?
The Pharisees. We've spoken about them often. They're usually portrayed as rigid enforcers of the law, unyielding in their commitment to preserving the sanctity of the Torah, but with little regard for the human element.
Perhaps the strongest proof-texts for this reputation come from the Gospels, through their oppositional stance toward healing on Shabbat. Many are left asking, How could they be so heartless?
In fact, some of Jesus's more contentious conflicts stem from his healing someone on this Holy day. The impression we're left with seems straightforward that the Pharisees have lost perspective.
These conflicts are often used as a launching pad for numerous problematic conclusions, abrogation of Torah, and, of course, Replacement Theology. As evidenced, the popular evangelical website, GotQuestions cites the following reason with certainty:
Jesus healed on the Sabbath in order to reveal the hypocrisy of the Pharisees’ religion.
But, here's the thing – Jewish law's stance on healing, particularly on Shabbat, is far more nuanced than most readers are aware. What if we were to learn that healing on Shabbat was (and still is) permitted? What if we were to learn that saving a life is actually a mitzvah itself?
Further, the Talmud includes many statements that are in alignment with Jesus that Shabbat was made for mankind.
We will find that this knowledge will refocus a different moral in these stories, one that readers familiar with halacha (Jewish law) might recognize.
Setup
In various articles, we've laid the foundation for understanding these [often] highly technical halachic disputes between Jesus and the different Pharisaic¹ parties. We've also explained the context of first-century Rabbinic discussions², recalling that these disputes took place before the codification of law into the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Talmud(s).
Incorporating these dynamics, we've reframed another commonly misconstrued encounter - the Handwashing discussion in the Gospel of Mark³. As always, we find there is more to the story than we see at first glance.
With a lack of knowledge, the popular reductionist interpretations resort to polemics against the Pharisees, and in doing so, distract from the main point of the story.
Jewish Law and Oral Tradition
Before we look at the complexities of healing on Shabbat, let's first briefly understand the concept of healing according to Jewish law.
The 10 commandments were given at Mt Sinai. This event included a few written commands and an oral tradition, which served as a robust framework to help navigate the myriad of problems the nation would face through time. This framework is known as the Oral Torah⁵.
When counting the various commands that appear in the text of the Hebrew Bible, one will arrive at a total of 613 [commandments]. These are not additional commands, rather, they all cascade from the 10 commandments. In this, we should recognize the "10 Commandments" as categories of which many sub-commands must be observed.
One prime example is how exactly to observe Shabbat. Even Moses and Aaron were unclear on how to solve the problem when Tzelophud gathered sticks on Shabbat, as recorded in Numbers 15.
To prevent such an event from happening again, the Sages scanned the texts for insight into the activities Jews must avoid on Shabbat. In total, they organized a list of 39 known as Melachot⁷. These too are more or less categories, as we will see.
What is interesting is that the activity one might associate with one of these categories does not always align with our modern logic. For example, healing is prohibited under the category of Grinding (Tochen). This may seem strange at first, but it is because healing often requires medicines, salves, and other remedies that one must grind to prepare.
"Due to the concern, all types of healing were prohibited, even those that do not involve grinding."
- Steinsalz commentary, Talmud Sanhedrin 101a
This sheds light on which part of the healing process is a potential violation, and it is not the saving of a life that is a problem.
Pikuach Nefesh
Jewish law holds that saving a life takes precedence over virtually every mitzvah except for three. Therefore, if saving someone's life involves, sexual immorality, murder, or idol worship - it is not permitted. This principle is known as Pikuach Nefesh. Pikuach itself is a mitzvah as it upholds the importance of human life above all else.
Other than those three stipulations, it is a mitzvah to desecrate Shabbat - including mitzvah the holy days like Yom Kippur - to save a life. This has been the case since ancient times.
The Sages made many statements to this effect, striking a close parallel to Jesus' own words. For instance;
"Sabbath is given to you [mankind] and not [mankind] given to the Sabbath.
... Desecrate one Sabbath in order to keep many Sabbaths." - Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael 31:13
Nearly all types of healing are permissible on Shabbat when a life is in danger, under Pikuach Nefesh. If there is even a chance of someone losing their life or a limb - the expectation is to save them or address the ailments to alleviate their pain and suffering.
So, if this is the case, why the drama in the Gospels? What is the author trying to say here?
