Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site aecom.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!aecom!teitz From: teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Re: Controlling one's ([homo]sexual) urges and Halakha Message-ID: <1700@aecom.UUCP> Date: Wed, 29-May-85 14:46:44 EDT Article-I.D.: aecom.1700 Posted: Wed May 29 14:46:44 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 31-May-85 02:01:38 EDT References: <411@oakhill.UUCP> <564@sfmag.UUCP> <1672@cornell.UUCP> <191@ucdavis.UUCP> <273@unc.UUCP> Organization: Albert Einstein Coll. of Med., NY Lines: 103 Quote at end. The Talmud was written by men and is the discussion of men. The Rabbis were empowered to interpret the Torah following a set of guidelines, known as the 'Middot sheHatorah nidreshet bahem', the rules by which the Torah is interpreted. The Talmud has different lists of rules ranging from 13 rules to 42 rules ( as I remember; I might be wrong ). The rabbis in the time of the Talmud knew how to apply these rules and therefore how to interpret the Torah. We today do not know how to use these rules; we simply know of their existence. If we could somehow find out how to properly use these rules we could, theoretically, disagree with the Talmud. However, since we do not know how to implement the rules we must abide by the Talmud. The Conservative approach to the Talmud is basically the same. They differ in that they feel that they have the right to disagree with the Talmud, even in our present day and age. They bring up proposals for votes by their rabbinic assembly and by the faculty of their seminary. Why a history professor at the seminary feels qualified to vote on proposals is beyond me; yet, such a vote counts as much as the Talmud professor's vote. The Reform movement has a totally different approach to the problem. They do away with the Divinity of the Torah, saying that it does not apply any more, and that it is simply a history book, of sorts ( if you do not believe this, try reading some reform responsa, where it is written out very clearly ). As for the lesson to be learned from the story in the g'mara ( about flying trees ), the Talmud itself says that the moral is ' lo bashamayim he', the Torah is not in the heavens, meaning, it is up to man to decide on the interpretation of the Torah, and not heavenly voices. Eliyahu Teitz. p.s. As for the whole Torah being taught to Moshe from the mouth of G-D. There is a story related in the g'mara about thee giving of the Torah. G-D said, 'if Moshe had not given the Torah, Rabbi Akiva would have been the one to receive it'. Moshe was curious to see who this Rabbi Akiva was, so he came down to this world to seek out R. Akiva. R. Akiva happened to be in the middle of a class, so Moshe sat in the back and listened. What he heard was totally foreign to him, he did not understand what R. Akiva was talking about. The g'mara says that R. Akiva was expounding on the crowns of the letters as they are written in the Torah. If Moshe had heard every bit of Torha that was orah that was ever to be said, how come he didn't recognize what R. Akiva was talking about. The answer is simple. Moshe was taught all the laws. He was given the Torah and from reading it he could learn out all the laws. By the time of R. Akiva people had forgotten many laws, and they couldn't figure them out from a simple reading of the Torah. What R. Akiva was showing them was a way to figure out the laws. Moshe didn't need this, since he saw the laws clearly with a simple reading of the Torah. G-D never had to show him these hints and calculations, since to Moshe they were elementary. So G-D never told Moshe about what R. Akiva, or any other rabbi, was going to say. He showed Moshe the laws, and the future generations tried to remember them by writing the Talmud. Eliyahu. > In article de@moscom.UUCP (Dave Esan) writes: > > > Once the Torah was given to man it was up to man to interpet it, > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > even(!) if it was incorrect. The point remains that the > > Talmud is the interpretation of the Torah, and is the point we follow. > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Wait a minute! You are saying that the Talmud is the work of men, > not God! > > I thought this was the Conservative Jewish point of view. > Conservative Jews believe that the Talmud is merely Rabbinical wisdom > and tradition. While one usually respects the wisdom of the ages, > the Jewish community is free to re-interpret the Torah, and thus set > aside specific Talmudic prohibitions. > > It was my understanding, however, that the Orthodox belief is that > the Talmud is NOT the human interpretation of the Torah, > but rather a vital part of the Torah, given orally by God "in person" > to Moses and the Israelites. > > >There is a terrific story in the Talmud of the argument of two rabbis in > >the Sanhedrin over a point of law. The Sanhedrin had voted for one, and > >the other stood firm in his rejection of that opinion. He made trees jump, > >rivers back up, and the walls of the building begin to tumble, all in an > >attempt to prove that he was correct. He even asked for a voice from > >heaven, which came and said that he was right. The head of the Sanhedrin > >then announced that the Torah was man's to interpet, and that man must > >do it without heaven's interference. > > I thought the point of this story was that you should not rely on > signs and wonders, because even evil men can perform magical tricks. > > I pose this question to the net: Is the Talmud an unchangeable work of God, > written down by Jewish scribes, or is it the work of men interpreting the Torah, > and thus subject to re-evaluation? > > Frank Silbermann *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***