The Oral Torah

[alon]

I am reading "Everyman's Talmud" by Abraham Cohen, and I was surprised to learn this in the Introduction: The Oral Tradition, a.k.a. the Talmud, was not made just to codify a set of strict rules that every Jew has to follow forever. It was in fact given so that the written would remain flexible and relevant to time and place! HaShem knew that one strict set of instructions would never work. So tradition says He gave Moshe the Oral as well.

This is why our Rabonim can make rulings on halacha for us, when and where we are at. It's why Messianic halacha can and does look very different from the stricter sects of Judaism. So those who want to do just what is found in the written because they don't want to follow archaic rules set down by ancient Rabbis need not worry. We do not have to other than where our own Rabonim have ruled we do. We don't follow all the traditions of Judaism either. But we do follow many of them. Why? Because our Rabonim have almost universally ruled so on some of them (Tallitoth, Chanukkah, elements of the Pesach Seder, etc.).

Now there are some who will not come under the instruction of any Rabbi or Messianic sect because they want to do it their way. They are their own Rabbi. Frankly, all those I've met where I live that are like this are far from qualified to take that title or make those decisions. But it's their life; they can live it as they please. What I don't understand is there are more of these than there are people who attend shul in this area. And honestly, our halacha is not at all strict! But people are afraid someone is going to tell them what to do. Again, no one forces anyone to do anything. But if they ask they will be told they are wrong, and some people just can't handle that. Some have left this forum because they were told, and shown that they were wrong. Sorry, but if you put it up and it's wrong I am bound not by any authority here, but just by being Messianic and a believer to say so. And I've been found wrong here as well. I have a whole thread called "My I Found Out I Was Wrong Thread." It has more pages than I like to think about. But you know what? I am grateful for every time I did find out rather than remaining in blind ignorance.

Ah well, I am rambling. But I thought that was interesting enough to share that the Oral is meant to make the written flexible.

Dan (I do go on sometimes) C

[jimmie]

Now there are some who will not come under the instruction of any Rabbi or Messianic sect because they want to do it their way. They are their own Rabbi. Frankly, all those I've met where I live that are like this are far from qualified to take that title or make those decisions. But it's their life; they can live it as they please. What I don't understand is there are more of these than there are people who attend shul in this area.

Read more: #ixzz4pIr6RYQp" rel="norewrite" target="_blank">theloveofgod.proboards.com/thread/4281/oral-#ixzz4pIr6RYQp

What may be hard for those people to understand is, just because there are some Rabbis who act like the son's of Eli all do not. You know throw the baby out with the bath water.

[alon]

Jacob Neusner, “The Doctrine of ” page 198

“The framers of the Mishnah nowhere claim, implicitly or explicitly, that what they have written forms part of the , enjoys the status of revelation to Moses at Sinai, or even systematically carries forward secondary exposition and application of what Moses wrote down in the wilderness. Later on, I think two hundred years beyond the closure of the Mishnah, the need to explain the standing and origin of the Mishnah led some to posit two things. First, God’s revelation of the at Sinai encompassed the Mishnah as much as scripture. Second, the Mishnah was handed on through oral formulation and oral transmission from Sinai to the framers of the document as we have it. These two convictions, fully exposed in the ninth century letter of Sherira, in fact emerge from the references of both Talmuds to the dual . One part is in writing. The other was oral and now is in the Mishnah.”

“As for the Mishnah itself, it contains not a hint that anyone has heard any such tale. The earliest apologists for the Mishnah, represented in the tractate Abot, and the Tosefta alike, know nothing of the fully realized myth of the dual of Sinai. … Certainly they never refer to the Mishnah as something out there, nor speak of the document as autonomous and complete. Only the two Talmuds reveal that conception - alongside their mythic explanation of where the document came from and why it should be obeyed.”

Dr. Neusner goes on to explain that the syntax and morphology of the Hebrew of the Mishnah is “completely unlike that of the Mosaic writings.”

In the introduction to his book “Everyman’s Talmud” by Abraham Cohen the Mishnah is described as meant to be flexible, with teachings, explanations and Halachic rulings which keep relevant to everyone in different times, places and cultures. It was not meant to be the “Law.” is immutable; it cannot be changed either in content or in meaning. But Halacha can be changed, and can be explained in ways that men will understand.

I see Dr. Neusner’s comments here as a reflection on contemporary Judaism. That so many would give equal or even superior status to the Mishnah, and indeed even the entire Talmud is a . To say the writings of men, regardless how Godly and studied they may be, are equivalent to God’s is not just sin but possibly transgression. I still think there is much we can learn from the Mishnah. But it was not the early framers of the Oral Traditions who made their own works holy writ. While certainly ancient cultures had the capacity to preserve oral traditions, there are no guarantees they would survive the centuries wholly intact, nor that when codified they would not be tampered with.

As Meshiachim we look to both Christianity and Judaism and preserve what is right. But this requires we also become brutally honest about what is wrong in both. Coming from Christian backgrounds most of us find it easier to spot the flaws and false teachings there. But Judaism is, while possibly not as bad as their Christian counterparts still not immune to human nature and tampering.

I took the quote from Dr. Neusner from a teaching by a Messianic Rabbi. I looked it up, and it is an interesting read (though I didn’t read the entire thing). Both Dr. N, himself a Jewish scholar, and the Messianic Rabbi place the blame for this on Christians who in the third and fourth centuries were “forcing” a Hebrew canon on the Jews. I disagree (while acknowledging their superior educations and understandings). Being an aged human I do however have some understanding of human nature. And being Jewish they both seem to want to blame Christianity for all the ills that have befallen the Jews. I think this is one the Rabbis will have to own themselves. If they saw no advantage to making their own writings holy “Law” then nothing could have forced them into this thinking.

Both Dr. N and the Ravi agree that even today the Jews do not see scripture as a closed canon. They look to many different writings. Not that they just accept whatever they read as truth from God. If you get a copy of the JPS Study TNK, you’ll soon find that no one can parse out writings like a Jewish scholar! These guys tear down scriptures, milking understandings from them you won’t (and sometimes shouldn’t) believe. Like all scholars, sometimes their education gets in the way. But they break down not only wordplay but stylistic and other variations as well to a degree I can only look at with awe and respect.

In the context of looking at the Mishnah as another writing, possibly inspired to some extent, I’d have no problem. But like Christians who decide what the so called “New Testament” is saying to them and then going back make the "Old Testament” match; so the Jews decide what they want in the Talmud, including the Mishnah, then say it supersedes . That is akin to Muhammad deciding he doesn’t really love everyone, so he later writes we should all be killed and says any later revelations that contradict what he wrote earlier take precedence. I know, there is a lynch-mob coming for me even now because I made this comparison; but think about it. If you can change the supposed basis for your entire faith just by writing something different, what is the point?

Jews are far closer to the truth than Christians, and Muslims are not even in the same “truth galaxy.” But when I did martial arts we were taught that whether your opponent misses by a foot or by a fraction of an inch, a miss is a miss. Neither does any damage. The difference is in perception. If he can get you to flinch or to move and break structure, he can control you. But if you can make him think he is going to land a blow and to commit, you can use his momentum and structure to control him. My brother, the sorry little mishpocheh was a master of this. I came away from more sparing sessions bruised and sore because I thought I had him. But a miss is a miss, regardless by how much, and any miss can open you to an attack by the evil one (my brother, or sometimes even ha’satan his-self). Spiritually, whether you barely miss the mark or miss by a mile, a miss is still a miss, and the consequences far worse than meeting my brother down at the horse barn for a little "fun and recreation."

Alon (owwww ) C

[alon]

Moderator note: combined threads to make it easier to search.

Dan