Simon Holloway said...
I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts concerning Torah min HaShamayim. That's something that interests me a great deal. Do you think that the Rabbis genuinely meant that the whole Torah was divine? Or did they use it in the same way that they suggested that anything an advanced pupil comes up with was Halakhah leMoshe miSinay (ie: as an expression indicative of the statement's validity, but nontheless cognizant of its own necessary untruth)?
I haven't really finished forming my ideas about TMS, but it's definitely an interesting topic.
I also wonder what the Rabbis really thought. There are the arguments in the Talmud (I think it's the Talmud) about who wrote the final verses, and which version of the Torah is the correct one. But these are minor things compared to the authorship of the entire Pentateuch. I think the arguments about the minor points indicates that they did believe that it was of divine origin, but that it was corrupted by human involvement, at least in some small way.
At the moment I have two main theories. One is human authorship entirely. I haven't studied documentary hypothesis enough to know if I really find it plausible, but I certainly don't think it's impossible that the Pentateuch had a single author. I think
The other theory I have, which in a way is far more disturbing, is that there was some kind of revelation on Sinai, but that the Torah was corrupted far more than Orthodox Judaism would like to believe. There were several opportunities for this to happen (Josiah, Ezra). It would be so tempting, with the masses ignorant, to change the text that they believed was divine. To fix a name that no longer made sense. To make it more relevant. I think it's likely that at some point, perhaps not until after the second Temple time, there was some kind of shift of power.
To me the reapplication of the phrase "לֹ֥א בַשָּׁמַ֖יִם הִ֑וא" ("It is not in heaven", Deut 30:12*) is pivotal. Taken in context, this verse is about the law being approachable and doable (it is?). Rabbi Yehoshua reapplies it to mean that halachic decisions will be made by the Rabbis, rendering Rabbi Eliezer's proofs from heaven invalid. If the Rabbis were meant to have this much power, I believe it should have been in the Torah. In fact we see the opposite:
וּשְׁמַרְתֶּ֣ם לַעֲשֹׂ֔ות כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוָּ֛ה יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶ֖ם אֶתְכֶ֑ם לֹ֥א תָסֻ֖רוּ יָמִ֥ין וּשְׂמֹֽאל
Be careful to do as YHVH your God commanded you; do not turn left or right. (Deut 5:32*)
And:
לֹ֣א תֹסִ֗פוּ עַל־הַדָּבָר֙ אֲשֶׁ֤ר אָנֹכִי֙ מְצַוֶּ֣ה אֶתְכֶ֔ם וְלֹ֥א תִגְרְע֖וּ מִמֶּ֑נּוּ לִשְׁמֹ֗ר אֶת־מִצְוֹת֙ יְהוָ֣ה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶ֔ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר אָנֹכִ֖י מְצַוֶּ֥ה אֶתְכֶֽם
Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of YHVH your God that I give you. (Deut 4:2*)
Yet somehow, the idea of the Oral Law allows the Rabbis to add (OK, not so much subtract) and change the meaning of verses ("לֹ֥א בַשָּׁמַ֖יִם הִ֑וא" is a prime example).
I'm not sure if I believe this or not, but it does worry me. I need to study a lot more before I can form a final opinion, but this is what's floating around my head right now.
* Of course, it's interesting that these verses are all from Deuteronomy, which is meant to be the book that Josiah found. Oh, and all translations are my own.
|