Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
The Truth of Channukah
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: Sephirath Ben Baruch on January 08, 2012, 12:44:09 AM --- G-d does not leave the matters of morality in the hands of man. You say “Are you greater than our Rabbis?”
The question is “Are your Rabbis greater than Hashem?” If not, why contradict him!?
--- End quote ---
I don't see that muman contradicted God anywhere here. The rabbis were given power and authority by God's Torah to adjudicate on matters of Jewish law. Read Devarim.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: edu on January 08, 2012, 03:28:24 AM ---The rabbis of the Talmud held that the sources quoted by Sephirath ben Baruch are unreliable and according to the simple understanding of their words even held that it was forbidden to study them.
I heard a lenient view, but I can not recall in whose name it was said, that if it is learned as a flawed historical source and not as a biblical book, it is not outright forbidden.
Just as today, besides legitimate Judaism, you have new sects that distort it, such as, reform, conservative and reconstructionist, so too during second temple times you had heretical sects, such as the Sadducees, as well as a few more, which I will not mention here. Who knows what was the religious affiliation and/or bias of the book of Maccabees.
point 2, the menora of the Torah had seven branches not six. Six outer branches together with one central branch
point 3, there is actually a prohibition to make a seven branch menora for non-temple purposes (see for example, Talmud tractate Rosh Hashana page 24)
point 4, The book of Esther which is part of the Tanakh/Bible does call for the addition of the celebration of a holiday that is not mentioned in the Torah. For whatever, reason you wish to give, why that holiday with all its activities is permitted, so too this applies for lighting Hanuka candles (or wicks in oil).
point 5, According to Rashi the prohibition of adding to the Torah is not to add extra details to a mitzva written in the Torah. For example, not to add words to the bircat cohanim {priestly blessing} mentioned in Bamidbar/Numbers 6 verses 24 to 26. According to Rambam, the prohibition of adding to the Torah is that one is not allowed to identify a rabbinic commandment as if it a Torah commandment. But if you clearly identify that the source of a practice is rabbinic it is not a violation.
--- End quote ---
The first book of Maccabees is likely reliable historically. It is a first hand account written only a short period after the events. It seems the author is a partisan of the Hashmonaim and could even have been a soldier in the army himself when those wars were fought, telling his own story there, or the story of the maccabean fighers (from their perspective). Book of Maccabbees 2 is more of a secondary source, written later and written in the galuth, but it is also pretty reliable and gives some interesting details. Scholars suggest that Macc. 1 may have been written by a sadducee, and macc 2 written by a Pharisee, but in my humble opinion, this is largely baseless speculation because neither work is a polemic in any sense. And the scholars only say this because the first book glosses over all the controversy surrounding the high priest and the corrupt kohanim (usually the saducees were the ones in control of the temple service and were the corrupt ones getting positions through bribery, etc and sometimes not even real kohens), while Maccabees 2 details some of those events within the kahuna which led up to the revolt. IMO neither of that proves the allegiance of the author and in both cases, no real position is taken aside from reporting on facts deemed relevant by the author. So the scholars say the author of book one has "something to hide" but IMO he is simply giving the military and cultural/religious history and doesn't much care about the temple service controversies.
Books 3 and 4 written much later and are barely even worthy of a mention. Probably not even worth reading because almost completely unreliable historically except for whatever they happen to repeat from the other 2 texts..
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: edu on January 08, 2012, 03:57:59 AM ---Another false point of Sephirath Ben Baruch that I have not previously addressed is his connection of Chanuka with the pagan Solstice ceremony
He is ignorant of the fact that the Jewish calendar is not solar. It is lunar based. Therefore Chanuka will not always fall on the days of the Soltice ceremony. Especially since during the 2nd Temple, the calendar was not fixed as it is today. Every year, it was up to the Sanhedrin to decide, if the year would contain 12 lunar months or 13 lunar months. Also the start of each month was determined by the Sanhedrin.
Furthermore, Sephirath Ben Baruch contradicts himself. He starts off clearly acknowledging that there was some celebration on the 25th of Kislev concerning the rededication of the Temple, a point clearly acknowledged by Orthodox Judaism and then he changes his mind and claims Chanuka is a Solstice ceremony, which is an outright lie and slander.
--- End quote ---
True.
muman613:
--- Quote from: Kahane-Was-Right BT on January 09, 2012, 10:29:52 PM ---True.
--- End quote ---
Yes the obvious failure to mention that Chanukah is based on the Hebrew calender, which is a lunar cycle, doesn't always fall out on the Winter Solstice... Must not have been written by a scholar...
edu:
quote by Kahane-Was-Right BT
--- Quote ---The first book of Maccabees is likely reliable historically. It is a first hand account written only a short period after the events. It seems the author is a partisan of the Hashmonaim and could even have been a soldier in the army himself when those wars were fought, telling his own story there, or the story of the maccabean fighers (from their perspective). Book of Maccabbees 2 is more of a secondary source, written later and written in the galuth, but it is also pretty reliable and gives some interesting details. Scholars suggest that Macc. 1 may have been written by a sadducee, and macc 2 written by a Pharisee, but in my humble opinion, this is largely baseless speculation because neither work is a polemic in any sense.
--- End quote ---
If Maccabees 1 for example, was written by a Sadducee and I have no idea (having not even read the book, being somewhat afraid of the stringent view that there is a Talmudic prohibition to learn the book, although I have not thrown it out of my house when I was sent a free copy) then it is obvious he would want to keep silent about oil miracles, because the Sadduccees were against Rabbinic commandments and interpretations.
Today, for example, the leftists media doesn't always have to lie. Usually, their main weapon is to ignore facts they don't like and magnify facts that fit in with their agenda. The same could theoretically be said for a Sadduccee author, talking about Chanuka.
Furthermore, the Jewish legal system always relies on 2 or more valid witnesses, to establish facts, even for the sake of giving the death penalty or determining marital status. If the Sages tell us there was an oil miracle and instituted a ceremony to recall the oil miracle, this at the very least has the strength of two witnesses.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version