“The notion that the seven blood-free days are an undue stringency imposed by the Rabbis is a commonplace of contemporary halakhic discussion among liberal Orthodox and non-Orthodox feminist Jews who discuss the laws of nidah…”

The notion that the seven blood-free days are an undue stringency imposed by the Rabbis is a commonplace of contemporary halakhic discussion among liberal Orthodox and non-Orthodox feminist Jews who discuss the laws of nidah, and both Zimmerman and Knohl are undoubtedly concerned that, if the truth came out that this is not even an actual rabbinic enactment, but only a self-imposed stringency, it would lead to a relaxation of practice on an issue hitherto considered sacrosanct. Zimmerman’s strategy is to take the actual rabbinic enactment, Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi’s legislation concerning the women of the countryside, and casually omit the reference to “the countryside,” imbuing a custom with the force of rabbinic legislation. Knohl correctly describes the historical development, acknowledging that the universal practice originally was imposed by women upon themselves, but then he slides into the language of takanah, “enactment,” attributing to Rabbi Zeira a practice which, according to the Talmud, he merely reported, and imbuing it with the status of legislation. Knohl presumably felt justified in doing this because the Talmud elsewhere refers to the ultimate status of the practice as halakhah pesukah, implying that the self-imposed custom, when reported, was given the status of legislation.

Moshe Benovitz, “A Lifetime Companion to the Laws of Jewish Family Life and Man and Woman: Guidance for Newlyweds (review),” Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women’s Studies & Gender Issues, vol. 12, no. 1 (2006), 317.