Questions about Judaism

[muman613]

Maybe this discussion will explain more...

http://www.beingjewish.com/mesorah/whynotwritten.html

Why Did Hashem Create an Oral Law?

Question: If there is an Oral Law, why didn't Hashem or Moses write it down? What benefit could there be in the details of the Law being Oral?

Answer: There are actually many reasons why the Torah needs an oral component. I will, Hashem willing, try to explain a few in this article.

The Rabbis make a very interesting statement in the Midrash Rabbah (sermons of the Rabbis taken from the Oral Tradition, and later collected and published by a student of Rabbi Judah the Prince, Rabbi Oshayah, circa 200 C.E.). The Midrash is discussing some of the deeper meanings of the sacrificial offerings brought by the leaders of the Tribes of Israel when the Holy Tabernacle was built and dedicated:

    "And for the peace sacrifice, two oxen..." Because Hashem gave Israel two Torahs: The Written Torah and the Oral Torah. He gave them the Written Torah that has the 613 Commandments, to fill them up with merits and to purify them, as it says "Hashem wants His righteous people, so He increased and strengthened the Torah."

    He gave them the Oral Torah so that they would, by the Oral Torah, be distinct from all other nations. For this reason it was not given in writing, so that the Gentiles could not forge it or claim it for their own, and then claim that they are the true Israel, as they did with the Written Torah.

    -- Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 14:10, s.v. "On the Eleventh Day"

The Oral Torah is our unique property, our special possession, our glory and source of joy. It is what makes us what we are, and enables us to fulfill Hashem's will.

The Torah is more vast than most people imagine. In the Book of Job, Tzofer Hana'amasi (one of Job's friends) tells us about the wisdom of Hashem, the Torah, that "Its measurement is longer than the land, and wider than the sea" (Job 11:9). But if you unroll a copy of every Book of the Torah and stretch them out end to end, starting from the Five Books of Moses until Malachi, the entire length is not likely to reach even one mile. Tzofer is not referring to the Books of the Written Torah, which have a specific limit, but to the wisdom of Hashem as manifest in the Oral Torah, and as alluded to in the Written Torah.

Similarly, we find in the Midrash as follows:

    May the Name of the King of all emperors be blessed, for having chosen Israel from all the seventy nations, as it says, "For Hashem's portion is His nation, Jacob is the essence of His inheritance" (Deut. 32:9). And He gave us the Written Torah that contains hidden and concealed allusions, and He explained them in the Oral Torah, and revealed them to Israel.

    Moreover, the Written Torah has the general rules, and the Oral Torah has the details. The Oral Torah is vast, and the Written Torah is small. Concerning the Oral Torah, it says, "Its measurement is longer than the land, and wider than the sea." ....

    For Hashem ratified His pledge with Israel only because of the Oral Torah, as it says: "Through these words I have set forth my pledge with you..." The actual words used by the Torah there mean, literally, "By the mouth of these words I have set forth my pledge with you...." (Exodus 34:27) [This is the literal translation]. The Torah means "through these words," but instead uses the phrase "By the mouth of these words...."

    The Torah could have said, "Because of these words...." or "For the sake of these words...." or "For these words..." or "through these words...", but instead the Torah used the phrase "By the mouth of these words...." This refers to the Oral Torah, hence the use of the phrase "by the mouth of these words..."

    Only those who love Hashem with all their hearts, all their souls, and all their might, study the Oral Torah.

    -- Midrash Tanchumah, Noach 3:3, s.v. These are the Chronicles

The Talmud is not the entire Oral Torah. The Talmud is the basic skeleton of the Oral Torah, as much as was absolutely necessary for the preservation of the Torah. But it is by far not the entire Oral Torah. That wouldn't be possible.

The Oral Torah is limitless. This is not hyperbole, or exaggeration, in any way. I mean this precisely and literally. The greatness of the Oral Torah is that no matter how much is taught, no matter how much is learned, there is always more true Torah to be discovered. Hashem created the Torah that way. The Talmud tells us, "Every Torah teaching that any conscientious Torah student is destined to extrapolate was already taught to Moses at Mount Sinai" (Midrash Rabbah: Leviticus 22:1; ibid. Eccl. 1:2 and 5:2). (This does not mean, by the way, that every interpretation anyone makes up is true. See my article on "The Oral Law and Our Own Opinions.")

And absolutely every single element of the Oral Torah is alluded to in the Written Torah. This adds yet another dimension to the study, and helps make the learning even more glorious and meaningful.

Incidentally, this is why the Written Torah had to be written in Hebrew, the language that Hashem created specifically for that purpose.

The Oral Torah contains the details of the general Laws found in the Written Torah. Without those details, we could never fulfill the Laws. For example, the Torah commands the Jewish Supreme Court to declare when a new month has begun, and the Oral Torah gives us all the necessary details. We find, therefore, that the Talmud (Rosh Hashonoh 25b) tells us that the time between each appearance of a new moon can be no less than 29.53059 days. This information, reported Rabbi Gamliel in the Talmud, is part of the Oral Torah.
.
.
.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Regarding the Talmud...

The Talmud is considered a part of the Torah according to Orthodox Judaism. There is no separating the two. We believe that there are two parts of the Torah, both of them given over to Moses and the Children of Israel at Mount Sinai. These two parts are referred to as:

Torah she'bichsav  - The Written Torah (Tanach = Torah Naviim Ketuvim)
Torah Baal Peh - The Oral Torah (Talmud, Midrash, Gemara, etc.)

Now You are being inaccurate at the least. The Talmud was sealed by the Jews for hundreds of years after the Tanakh had been sealed. The Torah and the Oral Torah were brought down by G-d in mount Sinai to Moses. But the Talmud was written by men, while not a single letter of the Torah was ever changed from the perfect version we were given by G-d. The oral Torah was eventually written down in the form of the Talmud but clearly it is just its essence and not the original transcript from Sinai.

I have been accurate according to Orthodox belief. We believe that the entire Torah, including both the Written and the Oral laws were given at Sinai. It is true that the Oral law was not written down till after the destruction of the Second Temple, but the belief is that the Talmud {including all the machlokes and details} was given at Sinai.

No, that's a belief, not the belief.

Some might claim that but it sounds like they are confused and misunderstand the actual argument.  Certainly if that even is an actual opinion in the way you formulated it (even though I doubt that), it's not the only one.

Btw, Rambam describes the halachic category "Torah l'Moshe M'Sinai" as defining any subject in which there is no machloketh among chazal in the Talmud.   So how can the instances of machloketh be from Sinai?  According to Rambam, a machloketh is precisely the indication that something is not from Sinai but derived later!

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

It makes zero sense to say "The Talmud" was given at Har Sinai.  It simply wasn't.   If it was, then there is no point to an Oral Torah.   It's just two written Torahs but one is memorized instead of jotted down.   That defeats the whole purpose of an oral law and oral Torah.   The whole point is that the system is flexible and evolving, while on the contrary, the written Torah is "set in stone" and all the Oral Torah discussions must adhere to the precepts and boundaries set forth in the written Torah.

"The Talmud" represents a compilation of Oral Torah over many centuries and then frozen in time (the time that the Talmud was sealed - most scholars seem to agree around the early 10th century) with a set corpus put into writing.   This was hundreds of years after Tanakh was written and sealed.

The whole point is that the Torah is the truth, it contains everything that happened, is happening, and will happen.

There is no reason to not believe that the Talmud machlokes would be known by Moses ahead of time, as told by Hashem when he was given the Oral law. 

Actually, I think there is plenty of reason to believe that. 

I don't believe that there is an argument about this. 

  You're mistaken.

I have never seen any Orthodox Rabbi say anything which contradicts this basic belief that both Torahs were given at the same time.

As Zelhar pointed out in a post before this, you are conflating Oral Torah with The Talmud.   Oral Torah is a much wider branch, while The Talmud is a precise genre (within Oral Torah) that came to be canonized.

There is even a pasuk in the Torah which alludes to the Oral law being given at the same time.

Again, no one is arguing against that.

[muman613]

Regarding the Talmud...

The Talmud is considered a part of the Torah according to Orthodox Judaism. There is no separating the two. We believe that there are two parts of the Torah, both of them given over to Moses and the Children of Israel at Mount Sinai. These two parts are referred to as:

Torah she'bichsav  - The Written Torah (Tanach = Torah Naviim Ketuvim)
Torah Baal Peh - The Oral Torah (Talmud, Midrash, Gemara, etc.)

Now You are being inaccurate at the least. The Talmud was sealed by the Jews for hundreds of years after the Tanakh had been sealed. The Torah and the Oral Torah were brought down by G-d in mount Sinai to Moses. But the Talmud was written by men, while not a single letter of the Torah was ever changed from the perfect version we were given by G-d. The oral Torah was eventually written down in the form of the Talmud but clearly it is just its essence and not the original transcript from Sinai.

I have been accurate according to Orthodox belief. We believe that the entire Torah, including both the Written and the Oral laws were given at Sinai. It is true that the Oral law was not written down till after the destruction of the Second Temple, but the belief is that the Talmud {including all the machlokes and details} was given at Sinai.

No, that's a belief, not the belief.

Some might claim that but it sounds like they are confused and misunderstand the actual argument.  Certainly if that even is an actual opinion in the way you formulated it (even though I doubt that), it's not the only one.

Btw, Rambam describes the halachic category "Torah l'Moshe M'Sinai" as defining any subject in which there is no machloketh among chazal in the Talmud.   So how can the instances of machloketh be from Sinai?  According to Rambam, a machloketh is precisely the indication that something is not from Sinai but derived later!

KWRBT,

Please refer to 'Midrash Rabbah : Leviticus 22:1

The Talmud tells us, "Every Torah teaching that any conscientious Torah student is destined to extrapolate was already taught to Moses at Mount Sinai" (Midrash Rabbah: Leviticus 22:1; ibid. Eccl. 1:2 and 5:2).

I never argued that there is only one understanding of Torah... But it seems that there is good reason to believe that the Oral Tradition was given at Sinai. Why do you not believe it?

[muman613]

http://www.jewishamerica.com/ja/features/Thunder.cfm

WHAT DID MOSHE DO ON SINAI FOR 40 DAYS AND NIGHTS ? ? ?

He received the Torah on Sinai. Now this can’t be the Written Torah, as we know it as the Five Books of Moses, since we know that some mitzvos, like Shabbos, were given prior to Sinai, and most were recorded after the event at Sinai. There is a debate in the Talmud as to whether the Torah was written all at one time by Moshe, or section by section throughout the 40 year trek through the desert.

But one thing is certain that the text of the Written Law was not given on Sinai, with the exception of the Ten Commandments, which were oral and which were then given to Moshe engraved by Hashem in stone. So, the question: What was given to Moshe on Sinai during those 40 days?

Moshe received the Oral Law on Sinai. The Oral Law is the basis for the Written Law. Without the Oral Law, the Written Law, that what we all see in the Hold Ark in the synagogue, is meaningless. The Written Law is merely a set of cryptic notes, symbols, shorthand abreviations for a more expansive, fundamental and complete sytem of a blueprint for the world and life.

Let me illustrate. The basis for our liberty in these United States is the Constitution. Can a short concise document like the Constitution contain all the laws that cover every facet of a nation’s life? It is absurd to think so. It is a compendium of all the values upon which our freedoms and rights are built. It abstracts the values of the Torah, the Magna Carta, and the vision of our founding Fathers. It is a blueprint which guides the designers and the builders of the nation in each generation.

In effect, then, the Written Torah is an abstract of a fuller expanded gift that Hashem gave Israel, the Torah sh’b’al Peh, the Oral Law. The Oral Law is the underpinnings of the Written Law and by its very nature of being a Weltanschaung, it could not be frozen in stone or parchment.

The Written Law can understood ONLY in conjunction with the Oral Law.

The Torah says:

    ‘V’za-vach-ta ka-ahser tsee-vee-see-cha’

    ‘You shall slaughter <the animal> as I commanded you’.

Nowhere in the Torah do we find G-d commanding Moshe about the laws of Schita (slaughter).

The Torah says:

    ‘Hachodesh Ha-zeh La-chem rosh cha-da-shim’

    ‘This month (Nissan) is the head of all the months’

When G-d uses the term ‘zeh’, this....which is a demonstrative word, what does he refer to? How did Moshe know the basis for the calculation of the month? What determined it? It is nowhere written in the Torah.

The Torah says:

    ‘Ayin ta-chas ayin. Shayne ta-chas shayne’

    ‘An eye for an eye. a tooth for a tooth’

Torah Law at ALL TIMES meant that as monetary compensation; _never_ literally. Where can see find that in the written Torah? It’s not there.

The Torah says:

    ‘Seven days shall you dwell in a succah’

Where is the source of how to build the succah, it’s height, its size, the acceptable materials that may be used and the definition of the essential parts of the succah? The Written Torah is silent on all this, and yet every Jew knows what a succah should look like.

The Torah says:

    ‘And you shall take for yourselves the fruit of a beautiful tree"

What fruit does the Torah mean? Where is there any reference in the Torah to the citron, the Esrog? There is none, and yet Jews the world over know what an esrog is!

It is the Torah sh’b’al Peh, the Oral Torah that supplies the details. These are but a few examples of why, without the Oral Law, the Written Torah has no meaning.

Moshe spent those 40 days and nights receiving the Oral Law, in its entirety, with all the details and nuances, so that in future generations, should there be an outstanding scholar who might extrapolate and infer from what he has received by the Messorah, (the transmission of the Torah), .....that, too, was what Moshe learned on Sinai from G-d.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Muman, I believe you are confused.   The sources say that the Oral Torah was given at Sinai.  And that's true.  But Oral Torah as a genre includes the ability to expand and derive further insights through interpretation of the verses in written Torah.   In the early days this was done via drashoth.  These drashoth increased in number and developed in complexity over time.   Complicated cases presented themselves (or were thought up) in time, that may not have been mentioned in written Torah.  The elders and sages had the job to explicate and examine such case studies to determine the law in every situation.   This body grew over time.    

In time, the rules for making drashoth became more and more formalized and clearly defined.  Many sugiyoth in Talmud refer to this process (foremost example is Hillel and the Bnay Beseira discussion of bringing korban pesah when it falls out on Shabbath).    After that point, soon the drashoth were "sealed" as it were, with the compilation of the mishnayoth.   The mishnayoth were teachings based on these drashoth of the verses.  From that point forward it was decided that further analysis of Jewish law and further derivations in terms of law would be made only by interpreting the corpus of Mishnayoth, rather than generating new mishnayoth through drasha, as was done previously.   It was Rebbe Yehuda Hanassi who instituted this as the process known as Gemara.    Now interpretation occurred through analysis of the mishnayoth.   And so the system evolved until finally there was a Talmud.    Eventually the Talmud added layers of discussion (gemara was fleshed out and elaborated) until an authoritative corpus was established that gave an 'official' interpretation of mishnayoth (although of course there are disagreements among the rabbis on how to interpret what exactly are the Talmud's conclusions!), and finally it was written down and sealed after additions by the Savoraim based on their discussions in the yeshivas (they worked out the svaras, hence their name), and the occasional addition here or there by the gaonim.     That is the Talmud.     Talmud was not given at Har Sinai, it was "given" by the Saboraim, but it is the formalization and crystallization of the Oral Torah process which evolved and developed over many generations but originated with Sinai where the elders and sages were instructed to teach the people.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Regarding the Talmud...

The Talmud is considered a part of the Torah according to Orthodox Judaism. There is no separating the two. We believe that there are two parts of the Torah, both of them given over to Moses and the Children of Israel at Mount Sinai. These two parts are referred to as:

Torah she'bichsav  - The Written Torah (Tanach = Torah Naviim Ketuvim)
Torah Baal Peh - The Oral Torah (Talmud, Midrash, Gemara, etc.)

Now You are being inaccurate at the least. The Talmud was sealed by the Jews for hundreds of years after the Tanakh had been sealed. The Torah and the Oral Torah were brought down by G-d in mount Sinai to Moses. But the Talmud was written by men, while not a single letter of the Torah was ever changed from the perfect version we were given by G-d. The oral Torah was eventually written down in the form of the Talmud but clearly it is just its essence and not the original transcript from Sinai.

I have been accurate according to Orthodox belief. We believe that the entire Torah, including both the Written and the Oral laws were given at Sinai. It is true that the Oral law was not written down till after the destruction of the Second Temple, but the belief is that the Talmud {including all the machlokes and details} was given at Sinai.

No, that's a belief, not the belief.

Some might claim that but it sounds like they are confused and misunderstand the actual argument.  Certainly if that even is an actual opinion in the way you formulated it (even though I doubt that), it's not the only one.

Btw, Rambam describes the halachic category "Torah l'Moshe M'Sinai" as defining any subject in which there is no machloketh among chazal in the Talmud.   So how can the instances of machloketh be from Sinai?  According to Rambam, a machloketh is precisely the indication that something is not from Sinai but derived later!

KWRBT,

Please refer to 'Midrash Rabbah : Leviticus 22:1 

I don't know why you are referring me to a midrash agadda.  But I am willing to bet that it is the source which says something along the lines that every single detail and every opinion was given to Moshe rabbenu on har sinai (but I still think you are misinterpreting that source with the way you summarize it and conclude from it nonetheless!)  You are confusing this agada concept with historical reality.   Furthermore, I assure you that Rambam read and understood that agada, and yet he said what I referred to above.   Do you wish to reckon with it?

The Talmud tells us, "Every Torah teaching that any conscientious Torah student is destined to extrapolate was already taught to Moses at Mount Sinai" (Midrash Rabbah: Leviticus 22:1; ibid. Eccl. 1:2 and 5:2).

Ok, so my bet was right.

First off, do you understand that this is a midrash?

Second, do you not see that there could be many ways to interpret this?  I think the way you are interpreting it is false.

I never argued that there is only one understanding of Torah... But it seems that there is good reason to believe that the Oral Tradition was given at Sinai. Why do you not believe it?

Good grief, you are frustrating.  I never argued against the idea of Oral Tradition given at Sinai.  I argued against the Talmud given at Sinai!

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

So will you consider the point I made citing the Rambam's explanation of "halacha le'moshe misinai?"

[muman613]

So will you consider the point I made citing the Rambam's explanation of "halacha le'moshe misinai?"

Yes, I am considering it..

Let me clearly say that my level of understanding is still relatively low... But I do have a good memory and I do study a lot..
.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

So, given the process I described above, which manifested itself in reality over many many years, the view presented in that midrash rabba agada is some type of mystical view to think that Moshe was presented with a vision of all this at sinai, but certainly it nowhere says that the Jewish people were told all of these things.  

Do you see any indication, even within that midrash, that Moshe SHARED every view and opinion, which this midrash claims he was shown, with the people at that time?   NO.   It's a mystical way of saying that there was an element of hashgacha pratit behind the historical development of Oral Torah.  THAT is what that midrash means.   It's all rooted in Sinai and all rooted in Moshe rabenu.  It's stamping the Talmud with authenticity.  It is not saying the Talmud was physically presented at Sinai.

Often times with agada, the sentiment behind it is more important than the detail which is not necessarily meant to be "factually correct" or "historically correct" but is speaking in parable/metaphor.

[Sox7]

Now, I am a Christian, so do not take this as offensive. It seems to me that it is absurd to say that the Oral Torah is the same kind of law as the Written Torah. If it were, it would have been written down back then. There's no point in leaving something to oral tradition and human memory when it can be written indelibly on parchment/papyrus/stone. There must be something different about it.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Now, I am a Christian, so do not take this as offensive. It seems to me that it is absurd to say that the Oral Torah is the same kind of law as the Written Torah. If it were, it would have been written down back then. There's no point in leaving something to oral tradition and human memory when it can be written indelibly on parchment/papyrus/stone. There must be something different about it.

True, there is something different.  That difference is the whole point of Oral Torah, as opposed to the concept of Written Torah.    It was meant to be flexible and allow the application of written Torah to new realities and situations that would present themselves and require adaptation.  Since the written Torah is not entirely explicit about every single matter, this allows a range of flexibility and is where the oral Torah comes in to ensure that a pragmatic approach is selected and implemented by the group of sages whose responsibility it is to collectively teach the people, judge the cases, and spread the Torah wisdom since they are the experts in wisdom and devote themselves to developing their Torah knowledge.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Btw, Sox7, you can see from all this that argument is a key part of Jewish culture.   

[muman613]

I found this discussion relevant to this thread:


http://www.pardes.org.il/online_learning/candy_questions/#oral

Oral Torah: Out of Whose mouth?
Was the Oral Law given to Moshe at Sinai?

This Essay was culled from and inspired by the Pardes 2001 "Philosophy of Halacha" class taught by Rabbi Levi Cooper..

Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam 1138-1204) highlights the importance of establishing the "entire" Torah as divinely transmitted in his "Thirteen Principles of Faith."

Principle number eight of the Rambam's list is paraphrased as follows: I believe with a complete faith that all of the Torah that we now have in our hands is that which was given to Moses, our teacher, peace be upon him. Establishing this principle does not answer but rather further emphasizes the importance of delving into the question of whether or not Moses received the Oral Torah as well as the written at Sinai. What does Rambam mean by the "entire" Torah?

There are many possibilities to explore in the realm of attempting to discern Rambam's definition of "entire." A few examples include:

   1.      The entire Oral Torah - as encountered by all future generations - was given at Sinai
   2.       Only a portion of the Oral Torah was given at Sinai, while a portion of Oral Toah was developed later in history.
   3.      Moses received all Oral Torah on Sinai, some of which was forgotten in ensuing generations, this lost transmission was later reconstructed.
   4.      Moses viewed all of the Oral Torah, but was not charged with transmitting its entirety.
   5.      Moses received all of Oral Torah and Written Torah; the Oral Torah was received in potential but not in actuality. The tools but not the text comprise the "entire" Torah received at Sinai (hence the potential for innovation was also possibly given at Sinai).

The First Chapter of Pirkei Avot (Ethics of Our Fathers, 1:1) says: "Moses received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Yehoshua, Yehoshua to the Elders, the Elders to the Prophets, the Prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly. They said three things: be deliberate in judgement, develop many students and make a fence around Torah."

Moses received the Torah at Sinai, Was it both the Written and the Oral Torah? How much of the Torah? In generalities or in detail? Moses to Yehoshua, How much of what Moses learned did he transmit and in what detail? Yehoshua to the Elders, How much did he transmit and how much did he possibly forget? The Elders to the Prophets, How much did they forget? How much did they re-reveal? The Prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly, How much did the Prophets forget? How much did the Prophets re-reveal? They said three things: be deliberate in judgement, develop many disciples and make a fence around Torah. Are these three sayings new teachings adding to knowledge transmitted or does this mean the Great Assembly was re-establishing three lost precepts?

The experience of exploring the question of what Moses did or did not receive at Sinai joins us, in the modern age, to the chain of transmission or "mesorah."