Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site aecom2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!linus!philabs!aecom2!teitz
From: teitz@aecom2.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.jewish
Subject: Re: Arndt attacks the world!!
Message-ID: <156@aecom2.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 27-Feb-86 15:31:37 EST
Article-I.D.: aecom2.156
Posted: Thu Feb 27 15:31:37 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Mar-86 08:38:28 EST
References: <1244@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Organization: Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Yeshiva University
Lines: 152
Xref: lsuc net.religion:737 net.religion.jewish:1873


  Long quote at the end.

	I am not going to get involved in the debate on whether abortion
 is comparable to the Holocaust or not. I just want to respond to a few
 points raised in the article about Torah and tradition.

	G-D gave us the Torah ( the Five Books of Moses ). The rest of
 the Bible, the writings of the prophets, were not necessarily the word
 of G-D. They might have been the prophets own words, written at G-D's
 command. The Torah, on the othe hand, was G-D's own work, in His own
 words. ( see the introduction of the Abravanel to the prophet Jeremiah
 for a more in-depth discussion of this matter ).

	G-D also gave to Moses, on Mount Sinai some specific laws not
 mentioned in the Torah, known as Halacha l'Moshe miSinai ( laws given
 to Moses at Sinai ). These laws were passed down, generation to
 generation, from Moses to Joshua, to his student,..., till the time of
 the writing of the Talmud. On these laws there are no debates or argu-
 ments. There can't be. They were given to Moses by G-D.

	Unfortunately, G-D didn't tell all that much to Moses. He didn't
 want to. What G-D wanted, as He told us in the Torah, was to figure out
 the laws for ourselves. G-D, in Deuteronomy ( I don't have the exact
 location at hand ), said, 'Lo bashamayim he,' ( It, the Torah, is not in
 the heavens ), meaning, it is up to us to interpret the Torah.

	One of the things that G-D did give Moshe was a set of rules by
 which to interpret the Torah. With those rules in hand, Moshe and every
 Jew could interpret the Torah. Unfortunately, we do not have these rules
 available to us. And even if we had them available we wouldn't be able
 to use them. Only people who were deemed knowledgable could use them.
 Moshe gave this distinction to Joshua, and he to his pupil. This chain
 continued, unbroken, until the time of the Talmud. This is why the Talmud
 is as binding as the Torah itself. Because G-D told Moshe that He wanted
 the Jewish nation to apply these rules to interpret the Torah. These
 interpretations were written down in the Talmud. Now you can ask, But
 there are contradicting opinions in the Talmud. Which do we follow. The
 answer is we follow the majority opinion ( At the time the Talmud was
 being compiled this did not apply. If a person had one teacher, who was
 deem worthy of interpreting ( by his teacher,..., back to Moshe ), then
 he could follow his teacher, even against the others. The Talmud relates
 many cases like this. One quick one relating to whether chicken is
 considered meat or not. One of the rabbis deemed it neutral, and in his
 city they ate chicken with milk, even though the law was eventually decided
 that it was indeed meat. Even after the decision a person from the rabbi's
 city could still eat chicken with milk, because he followed his rabbi's
 interpretation. We cannot pick and choose. Since we came after the fact,
 we must follow the majority opinion, which is why we consider chicken
 to be in the category of meats, as opposed to the category of neutrals ).

	The chain of generations was broken at the time of the compiling
 of the Talmud, when it was decided by the few who had the right to
 interpret that there was no one worthy of continuing. And rather than
 lower their standards they simply discontinued the chain. This led to
 big problems. Judaism would not be dynamic any more. It would have to
 remain, for the most part, in the form that it was at that time. All that
 could be done, from that point on, was to apply the laws written in the
 Torah and the Talmud to cases that didn't arise until much later on
 ( which is how we can decide problems such as using electricity on the
 Sabbath ).

	Just to conclude, let me say that the Talmud is as binding as the
 Torah because it is what G-D wanted us to do with the Torah. For an
 interesting story about what G-D wanted wit the Torah the Talmud relates
 what happened when some rabbis got together to decide a certain case. One
 rabbi was of one opinion and all the others were against him. He, the lone
 rabbi ( Rabbi Eliezer, I think ), to prove that his was the proper ruling
 called upon the trees to prove his assertion. And a tree uprooted itself
 and moved. The rabbis said that trees were no proof. He brought other
 proofs, all of which were rebuffed by the majority. Finally he called
 upon G-D to prove him correct. And a heavenly voice declared that indeed
 he was correct. At which point Rabbi Joshua stood up and said 'Lo
 bashamayim he', the decision is not in G-D's hands. Once He gave us
 the Torah, it is ours to interpret, according to the rules He set down, but
 G-D has no right to impose His interpretations upon us.( pretty strong
 words ). The decision went against R. Elazer, and like the majority. The
 end of the story relates that Eliyahu, the prophet, visited one of the
 rabbis. The rabbi inquired what G-D did when He heard R. Joshua speak.
 Eliyahu said that G-D laughed and said 'nitzchuni banai, nitzchuni'
 ( literally, My children have won Me they have won over Me ).

	I am not saying you have to believe this story literally. The point
 of the story though, illustrates what I have said. G-D gave us the Torah
 to interpret as we see fit, using His guidelines of interpretation. We,
 living in the 20th century, and for every century since the 4th or 5th, do
 not have the guidelines. Therefore we must rely on what was discussed in
 the past when the rules were known and in use. The day might come when G-D
 will relate these rules once again, and we will be able to set up our own
 rules and laws. But for now, we must use what was set down and that is what
 is binding upon us.


			Eliyahu Teitz.


> The point that I made -that appeals to Jewish 'tradition' are difficult
> to sustain with the same force of an appeal to Torah, the whole Law 
> (by which I mean what Christians call the Old Testament, not 
> including the Talmud, and not just the books of Moses), and that
> there is no one 'tradition' in Jewish thought, still stands.  Any appeal
> to 'interpretations', 'commentaries', etc. is always subject to the original
> body of law and CANNOT be AS binding! Especially extrapolations on fuzzy
> areas.  ONE MUST ALWAYS COMPARE AN 'OPINION' WITH THE TEXT!!  It is quite
> clear that when looking in the Talmud for 'tradition' there is no ONE tradition
> on many many topics.  ABORTION IS ONE OF THESE.  So when Reed or anyone else
> appeals to 'his' Jewish tradition, fine.  Which one??  And how does that
> square with the Law??
> 
> Realize that I am making a distinction here between Torah and tradition.
> Torah, the Law was WRITTEN down immediately, either by the speaker or
> someone else (Moses, the prophets, etc.).  Tradition is recognized as
> largely being oral and handed down from father to son (JewEnc xii,p.213).
> 
> Jewish 'traditions' are largely if not entirely found in the Talmud.
> The Talmud is comprised of the Mishnah and the Gemara.  The Mishnah is
> a collection of writings about the oral traditions that developed around
> the Law (Scripture), containing interpretations and applications to
> specific questions which the Law deals with only in principle.  The Gemara
> is comprised of discussions by teachers/speakers (Amoraim); again, dealing
> mainly with specific cases mentioned only in principle in the Law.
> 
> While the Mishnah was set down in writing by Rabbi Judah Ha-Nasi in the
> second century A.D. and contains material far older than that date, 
> the Gemara was being added to as late as the fifth century A.D., NEITHER
> OF THEM ARE FROM GOD IN THE SAME SENSE THAT THE TORAH IS. "Thus says the Lord",
> from the mouth of the prophet/speaker!  In fact some parts of the Haggada
> (part of the Gemara) speak on ideas not in the law at all and at times
> becomes fanciful or allegorical.
> 
> I cannot help but think that this kind of thing was the very point made so
> long ago by Jesus and Paul to the effect that 'your traditions have made the
> Law ineffective'.  I am thinking here as well of the building up of the Haggada
> after their time.
> 
> Layer on this the several 'sects' of Jewish belief - Orthodox, Conservative,
> Reform, and several others, and the web of what is 'tradition' becomes even
> more tangled.
> 
> It is indeed unfortunate that for some Jews the Talmud has become as authoritive
> as the Torah.  I beleive, no matter who says so, that this posture does not
> make sense.  It is rather like the Roman Catholic origin of authority for
> the Church - a three legged stool, the Bible, the pronouncements of Councils,
> and pronouncements of the Pope when speaking ex cathedra (which they have done
> on only a handful of times).  THE JEWS NEED A MARTIN LUTHER TO RISE AND SAY
> "HERE I STAND (on Torah), THE POPES AND COUNCILS (Talmud) HAVE OFTEN 
> CONTRADICTED THEMSELVES."  But for a Christian to take the writings of Luther
> as 'gospel' - binding as though from God, would be wrong.  I realize full well
> that many Christians have and are doing just what I am speaking against as a
> form of Jewish practice - taking the commentaries as as authoritative or binding
> as the original text.  
>