The
Fasts which are outside of Yom HaKippurim are observed widely across
Rabbinic Orthodoxy and Karaite Orthodoxy.
Nevertheless,
these are not prescribed in the Torah, and do not have status of a
Torah commandment.
Furthermore,
there is some discussion in the Book of Zechariah regarding the
nature and status of these fasts.
Let
us start with the problem – there are 4 fasts, plus the additional
fast of Esther (which is not addressed by Zechariah, presumably
because it had not been instituted in his day).
Ch.7
of Zechariah describes a Judaism that is unfamiliar to any
practicing Jew of today, especially Rabbinic Orthodoxy.
2
When Bethel-sarezer, and Regem-melech and his men, had sent to
entreat the favour of the LORD,
3
and to speak unto the priests of the house of the LORD of hosts, and
to the prophets, saying: 'Should I weep in the fifth month,
separating myself, as I have done these so many years?'
Contrary
to the Rabbinic myth of the Sanhedrin, there is no Sanhedrin or
collection of Rabbinic sages who are asked a legal / practical
halachic question. The question is asked of the Kohanim הַכֹּהֲנִים
and the Prophets. There are no Rabbis or Sanhedrin
Sages. This is because the Sanhedrin is a Greco-Roman institution,
and not part of the TaNaKh. There was no Oral Law, but Divine
inspiration, the Kohanim and the prophets would consult to receive
Divine inspiration -
4
Then came the word of the LORD of hosts unto me, saying:
5
'Speak unto all the people of the land, and to the priests, saying:
When ye fasted and mourned in the fifth and in the seventh month,
even these seventy years, did ye at all fast unto Me, even to Me?
This
flies in the face of the Rabbinic myth, which is most widely
distributed in the famous story of the Oven of Akhnai. In that myth,
the rabbis attack Rabbi Eliezer for getting Divine answers to legal
questions, and they propel the new concept of “Not in heaven”
regarding the Torah. The rabbinic concept of majority is introduced
as the means of achieving legal truth. There is no evidence for it
in the TaNaKh, and is refuted by our very own chapter 7 of Zechariah.
In
any case, the Prophet answers Bethel-Sarezer and Regem-melech, asking
whether in fact they fasted for God? This was the 70 years without
the Temple. That is an important distinction, since
some
would argue that in post 2nd temple times, the fasts would
still apply. However, this is clearly questioned by Zechariah, and
is in fact refuted. These fasts have not record of being instituted
by Prophets. It is important to reiterate that it was the prophets
and the Kohanim who were arbiters of the Law and not a Rabbinic
Sanhedrin type institution.
Contrary
to the false practice of Bethel-Sarezer et al, Zechariah says:
7
Should ye not hearken to the words which the LORD hath proclaimed by
the former prophets, when Jerusalem was inhabited and in prosperity,
and the cities thereof round about her, and the South and the Lowland
were inhabited?'
This
is because the response to the destruction of the temple was
incorrect – instead of listening to the prophets of the previous
generation, e.g. Jeremiah, they instituted fasts and
self-mortification, which was not part of the Torah. Indeed, one of
the greatest Rabbinical commentators , Ibn Ezra, remarks on v.5 “
did ye at all fast unto Me” , “I did not command”, i.e.
God did not command these man made fasts.
So,
according to this interpretation of Zechariah, the fasts were never
valid, and are not valid today.
The
response to the temple's destruction is to see where the underlying
error was. Fasting will rectify nothing.
The
question of why the Temple was destroyed, remains the topic of
further discussion.
