Chasidut for Maasrot 3:5

In the middle ages there were scholars whose far-fetched interpretations were tantamount to building altars to their own intellects. They reversed to intention of the writings, giving false interpretations of words and combining verses in ways not following their meanings. It became easy for such scholars to build their ideas into structures according to the winds of their fantasies. So too did they find it easy to coin terms and values based on loose associations and similarities. Of this it said in the [Talmud] Yerushalmi (Ma’asrot, ch. 3 Mishnah 4) that Rabbi Zeira lambasted those who incorrectly explained the aggadot (legends of the Talmud), calling them tellers of fairy tales. Concerning these medieval scholars, it reached such an extent that they were making the sacred profane and the profane sacred, turning the pure into impure and the reverse. Even concerning holy names, they mixed up the sacred and the profane, and did not even refrain from offering interpretations contrary to the halacha. It is true that the Torah is given to interpretation, and even for one who is not intending to reach the depth of the Torah’s mysteries. Yet with one ventures into the hints and hermeneutic interpretations, it is crucial that he not miss the target whether in secrets or in halacha. And if he does not err, all is given to interpretation and the innovator is worthy of reward. This is as it is said in the Yerushalmi (end of Berachot), “all talk is idle, and the words of Torah are good.”¹⁶³Meaning the only meaningful words are the words of Torah. Why? As it is said in the Midrash and the Zohar numerous times, “there are seventy faces to the Torah.” Yet still, each face, each interpretation, must coincide with halacha, and not, God forbid, contradict halacha.