Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
Can someone explain the oral Torah and show references as to where it came from and how it came into existence? Any scriptural references?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
? Oral Torah ?
- Thread starter Berachiah Ben Yisrael
- Start date
Poisonshady313
Well-Known Member
This article was written by a friend of mine on an anti-missionary website. It should answer your questions about the oral torah.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Verdana] Christians claim that the Oral Torah, the Mishnah, was fabricated by Rabbis. Orthodox Judaism on the other hand teaches that the Oral Law was given to Moses on Mt. Sinai along with the Written Torah. Various groups within Judaism have rejected the Oral Law throughout history or been excluded in such a way as to not have the option to accept it. Sadducees, for example, rejected the Oral Law. Sadducees also ceased to exist in the second century CE. Falashas in Ethiopia had no Oral Torah due to geographical isolation and came up with a radically different way of interpreting the written Torah. From the Falashas can be learned a valuable lesson – without the guidance of the Oral Torah, it is impossible to interpret and understand the Written Torah correctly. An excerpt from the Talmud (The Talmud is the Mishnah with the Gemara) highlights this point quite lucidly:
“Our Rabbis taught: A certain heathen once came before Shammai and asked him, 'How many Toroth have you?' 'Two,' he replied: 'the Written Torah and the Oral Torah.' 'I believe you with respect to the Written, but not with respect to the Oral Torah; make me a proselyte on condition that you teach me the Written Torah [only]. [But] he scolded and repulsed him in anger. When he went before Hillel, he accepted him as a proselyte. On the first day, he taught him, Alef, beth, gimmel, daleth; the following day he reversed [them] to him. 'But yesterday you did not teach them to me thus,' he protested. 'Must you then not rely upon me? Then rely upon me with respect to the Oral [Torah] too.” (Shabbath 31)
Christians are like the heathen in this tractate. They want to accept the Written Torah that was packaged into their Christian Bible, but yet they reject the entire historical context that surrounds it. And we all know that something can’t be understood outside of its context. Rejecting the Oral Torah, as this tractate illustrates, is akin to rejecting the very syntax of language. Rejection of the Oral Torah makes the Written Torah impossible to understand. Here are some examples in the Written Torah that both refer directly to the Oral Torah and demonstrate the point illustrated above. [/FONT]
“Our Rabbis taught: A certain heathen once came before Shammai and asked him, 'How many Toroth have you?' 'Two,' he replied: 'the Written Torah and the Oral Torah.' 'I believe you with respect to the Written, but not with respect to the Oral Torah; make me a proselyte on condition that you teach me the Written Torah [only]. [But] he scolded and repulsed him in anger. When he went before Hillel, he accepted him as a proselyte. On the first day, he taught him, Alef, beth, gimmel, daleth; the following day he reversed [them] to him. 'But yesterday you did not teach them to me thus,' he protested. 'Must you then not rely upon me? Then rely upon me with respect to the Oral [Torah] too.” (Shabbath 31)
Christians are like the heathen in this tractate. They want to accept the Written Torah that was packaged into their Christian Bible, but yet they reject the entire historical context that surrounds it. And we all know that something can’t be understood outside of its context. Rejecting the Oral Torah, as this tractate illustrates, is akin to rejecting the very syntax of language. Rejection of the Oral Torah makes the Written Torah impossible to understand. Here are some examples in the Written Torah that both refer directly to the Oral Torah and demonstrate the point illustrated above. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]1. The Written Torah cannot be understood without the Oral Torah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Leviticus 23:40, “On the first day you shall take the produce of hadar trees, branches of palm trees, boughs of leafy trees, and willows of the brook, and you shall rejoice before the Lord your God seven days.” (JPS)
Why these four items? Which items specifically do hadar trees and leafy trees refer to? More importantly, what do you do with these items when you take them? How do you rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days with these items? These are all questions that are answered only with the Oral Law regarding the arba minim. Only through the Oral Law would you know that hadar trees (some translations citrus or bountiful trees) refers to the ertog, and that myrtle is what leafy trees refers to. Only through the Oral Law would you know that exactly how much of each item you need. And only through the Oral Torah would you know that these items are to be bound together in the lulav, held, waved, and used to recite blessings over. THAT is what you do with them, and that is how you “rejoice before the Lord your God [for] sven days” with them.
Leviticus 7:26, “And you must not consume any blood, either of bird or of animal, in any of your settlements.” (JPS)
This tells what must not be done. Does it clarify how blood is to be removed from flesh? Do you really know if you are eating blood when you eat a steak, a hamburger, a chicken salad, etc.? Only the Oral Law clarifies how you kosher your meat. The Written Torah explains what (or in this case, what not) to do, the Oral Torah explains how.
Deut 12:21, “If the place where the Lord has chosen to establish His name is too far from you, you may slaughter any of the cattle or sheep that the Lord gives you, as I have instructed you.” (JPS)
Most Christians do recognize kosher slaughter as something Biblical. Yet, it isn’t mentioned anywhere in the Bible! This verse instructs you to slaughter animals in the method that God instructed. However, this method is not outlined anywhere in the Written Torah. Kosher slaughter is explained only in the Oral Torah.
Deut 6:8-9, “Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead; inscribe them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.” (JPS)
This verse refers to the mezuzah and tefillin. How do we know? The Oral Torah tells us. If you gave this verse were given to five different people who have never read the Torah and told them to keep this law, each person would interpret it differently. Some might carve God’s instructions into their doorposts, some might write them with ink. Some might write them on their hand, tie papers to their hands, or even tattoo them on their hands. This verse alone is relatively vague, yet Jews have known from the beginning how to follow it properly. Only the Oral Torah gives that instruction.
Deut 11:18, “Therefore impress these My words upon your very heart: bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead.” (JPS)
The same instruction on tefillin; it tells what to do but not how to do it. Do you tie them to your forehead, tape them to your forehead, glue them to your forehead, or tattoo them on your forehead? The interpretations are limitless (and incorrect) without the Oral Law.
Deut 14:1, “You are children of the Lord your God. You shall not gash yourselves or shave the front of your heads because of the dead.” (JPS)
Some translations render “front of your heads” as “between the eyes.” Do the front of your heads (forehead) or between your eyes actually have any hair to shave? Most would say no. Only through the Oral Law do we know that this is refers to the top of your head, and that shaving heads in mourning was a practice of the Israelite’s pagan neighbors. The latter can be learned through history, but the former interpretation of the prohibition can only be learned from the Oral Law.
Exodus 22:16, “If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still weigh out silver in accordance with the bride-price for virgins.” (JPS)
How much is the bride-price for virgins? You don’t know without the Oral Torah. Rashi stated, “fifty silver shekels in the case of one who seizes a virgin and forcibly lies with her, as it is said: “The man who lay with her shall give the maiden’s father fifty silver shekels” (Deut. 22:29). -[From Keth. 10a]”
Exodus 12:2, “This month shall mark for you the beginning of the months; it shall be the first of the months of the year for you.” (JPS)
Which month? The Written Torah doesn’t state the month; it expects you to know this from the Oral Torah. Nisan is the first month. This also demonstrates that the months were already known outside of the Written Torah as well.
Nehemiah 8:8, “They read from the scroll of the Teaching of God, translating it and giving the sense; so they understood the reading.” (JPS)
This is one of the references to Targums, when the Torah would be read out loud from a foreign language and translated. Notice that it refers first to translating it (the Targum) and second to giving the sense, which is explaining the meaning by the Oral Law.
Ezra 10:3, “Now then, let us make a covenant with our God to expel all these women and those who have been born to them, in accordance with the bidding of the Lord and of all who are concerned over the commandment of our God, and let the Teaching be obeyed.” (JPS)
Which Teaching is this? Obviously not the “scroll of the Teaching of God” mentioned above in Ezra. The Written Torah doesn’t instruct this. It is pure Oral Law. Yet if you accept Ezra and the Bible, you must accept this Oral Law that it rests upon as well.
Now, I’m sure some will still resolutely cling to sola scriptura, the belief that everything is found within the Written Torah. Why? I’m not sure – the Torah doesn’t say that everything is found within the Written Torah. It clearly endorses the Rabbinic Oral Law. In fact, even after Moses received the entire Torah there were points that had to be explained from the Oral Torah, from God: [/FONT]
Why these four items? Which items specifically do hadar trees and leafy trees refer to? More importantly, what do you do with these items when you take them? How do you rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days with these items? These are all questions that are answered only with the Oral Law regarding the arba minim. Only through the Oral Law would you know that hadar trees (some translations citrus or bountiful trees) refers to the ertog, and that myrtle is what leafy trees refers to. Only through the Oral Law would you know that exactly how much of each item you need. And only through the Oral Torah would you know that these items are to be bound together in the lulav, held, waved, and used to recite blessings over. THAT is what you do with them, and that is how you “rejoice before the Lord your God [for] sven days” with them.
Leviticus 7:26, “And you must not consume any blood, either of bird or of animal, in any of your settlements.” (JPS)
This tells what must not be done. Does it clarify how blood is to be removed from flesh? Do you really know if you are eating blood when you eat a steak, a hamburger, a chicken salad, etc.? Only the Oral Law clarifies how you kosher your meat. The Written Torah explains what (or in this case, what not) to do, the Oral Torah explains how.
Deut 12:21, “If the place where the Lord has chosen to establish His name is too far from you, you may slaughter any of the cattle or sheep that the Lord gives you, as I have instructed you.” (JPS)
Most Christians do recognize kosher slaughter as something Biblical. Yet, it isn’t mentioned anywhere in the Bible! This verse instructs you to slaughter animals in the method that God instructed. However, this method is not outlined anywhere in the Written Torah. Kosher slaughter is explained only in the Oral Torah.
Deut 6:8-9, “Bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead; inscribe them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.” (JPS)
This verse refers to the mezuzah and tefillin. How do we know? The Oral Torah tells us. If you gave this verse were given to five different people who have never read the Torah and told them to keep this law, each person would interpret it differently. Some might carve God’s instructions into their doorposts, some might write them with ink. Some might write them on their hand, tie papers to their hands, or even tattoo them on their hands. This verse alone is relatively vague, yet Jews have known from the beginning how to follow it properly. Only the Oral Torah gives that instruction.
Deut 11:18, “Therefore impress these My words upon your very heart: bind them as a sign on your hand and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead.” (JPS)
The same instruction on tefillin; it tells what to do but not how to do it. Do you tie them to your forehead, tape them to your forehead, glue them to your forehead, or tattoo them on your forehead? The interpretations are limitless (and incorrect) without the Oral Law.
Deut 14:1, “You are children of the Lord your God. You shall not gash yourselves or shave the front of your heads because of the dead.” (JPS)
Some translations render “front of your heads” as “between the eyes.” Do the front of your heads (forehead) or between your eyes actually have any hair to shave? Most would say no. Only through the Oral Law do we know that this is refers to the top of your head, and that shaving heads in mourning was a practice of the Israelite’s pagan neighbors. The latter can be learned through history, but the former interpretation of the prohibition can only be learned from the Oral Law.
Exodus 22:16, “If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still weigh out silver in accordance with the bride-price for virgins.” (JPS)
How much is the bride-price for virgins? You don’t know without the Oral Torah. Rashi stated, “fifty silver shekels in the case of one who seizes a virgin and forcibly lies with her, as it is said: “The man who lay with her shall give the maiden’s father fifty silver shekels” (Deut. 22:29). -[From Keth. 10a]”
Exodus 12:2, “This month shall mark for you the beginning of the months; it shall be the first of the months of the year for you.” (JPS)
Which month? The Written Torah doesn’t state the month; it expects you to know this from the Oral Torah. Nisan is the first month. This also demonstrates that the months were already known outside of the Written Torah as well.
Nehemiah 8:8, “They read from the scroll of the Teaching of God, translating it and giving the sense; so they understood the reading.” (JPS)
This is one of the references to Targums, when the Torah would be read out loud from a foreign language and translated. Notice that it refers first to translating it (the Targum) and second to giving the sense, which is explaining the meaning by the Oral Law.
Ezra 10:3, “Now then, let us make a covenant with our God to expel all these women and those who have been born to them, in accordance with the bidding of the Lord and of all who are concerned over the commandment of our God, and let the Teaching be obeyed.” (JPS)
Which Teaching is this? Obviously not the “scroll of the Teaching of God” mentioned above in Ezra. The Written Torah doesn’t instruct this. It is pure Oral Law. Yet if you accept Ezra and the Bible, you must accept this Oral Law that it rests upon as well.
Now, I’m sure some will still resolutely cling to sola scriptura, the belief that everything is found within the Written Torah. Why? I’m not sure – the Torah doesn’t say that everything is found within the Written Torah. It clearly endorses the Rabbinic Oral Law. In fact, even after Moses received the entire Torah there were points that had to be explained from the Oral Torah, from God: [/FONT]
Poisonshady313
Well-Known Member
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]2. Written Torah validates rabbinic authority and Oral Torah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Numbers 15:34, “He was placed in custody, for it had not been specified what should be done to him.” (JPS)
Obviously this wasn’t in the Written Torah, because it was not yet specified. Moses had to go back to God and get more of the Oral Law to clarify the punishment.
Exodus 34:27, “And the Lord said to Moses: Write down these commandments, for in accordance with these commandments I make a covenant with you and with Israel.” (JPS)
Well wait a minute; doesn’t this say to write down the commandments? How does this support an Oral Torah? The written commandments refer to the Written Torah, whereas the word translated to “accordance” refers to the Oral Torah. In Hebrew this is, “peh dabar karath.” Peh literally means “mouth.” Notice how the KJV translates this, “And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.” So we learn that Moses wrote the Written Torah and by the mouth, peh, the Oral Torah, he made a covenant with Israel as well.
Deut 31:28, “Gather to me all the elders of your tribes and your officials, that I may speak all these words to them and that I may call heaven and earth to witness against them.” (JPS)
In this chapter, Moses commands the Levites to place the Written Torah by the Ark of the Covenant, and then he calls all of the elders to speak all of these words to them? Why would Moses have to give oral instruction to the elders if everything were in the Written Torah? He was giving the Oral Torah to the elders, and starting the rabbinic tradition.
Deut 32:7, “Remember the days of old, consider the years of ages past; ask your father, he will inform you, your elders, they will tell you.” (JPS)
If it is all in the Written Torah, why did Moses instruct Israel to ask their elders? The elders he had just got done imparting the Oral Law to in Deut 31. The Torah encourages the rabbinic tradition; it encourages asking your elders for the Oral Law.
Deut 17:8, “If a case is too baffling for you to decide, be it a controversy over homicide, civil law, or assault – matters of dispute in your courts – you shall promptly repair to the place that the Lord your God will have chosen and appear before the levitical priests, or the magistrate in charge at the time, and present your problem. When they have announced to you the verdict in the case, you shall carry out the verdict that is announced to you from that place that the Lord chose, observing scrupulously all the instructions to you. You shall act in accordance with the instructions given to you and the ruling handed down to you; you must not deviate from the verdict that they announce you either to the right or to the left.” (JPS)
Why would a case be too baffling to decide if everything is contained within the Written Torah? More importantly, this demonstrates that the levitical priests and the magistrates have authority given to them by the Written Torah to arbitrate in the law. It is from these magistrates that rabbis derive their authority. In fact, many Orthodox Rabbis receive their semichas as judges specifically; this is called a yadin yadin.
Still not convinced? The Written Torah and the rest of the Tanach distinctly refer to multiple Torahs. [/FONT]
Obviously this wasn’t in the Written Torah, because it was not yet specified. Moses had to go back to God and get more of the Oral Law to clarify the punishment.
Exodus 34:27, “And the Lord said to Moses: Write down these commandments, for in accordance with these commandments I make a covenant with you and with Israel.” (JPS)
Well wait a minute; doesn’t this say to write down the commandments? How does this support an Oral Torah? The written commandments refer to the Written Torah, whereas the word translated to “accordance” refers to the Oral Torah. In Hebrew this is, “peh dabar karath.” Peh literally means “mouth.” Notice how the KJV translates this, “And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.” So we learn that Moses wrote the Written Torah and by the mouth, peh, the Oral Torah, he made a covenant with Israel as well.
Deut 31:28, “Gather to me all the elders of your tribes and your officials, that I may speak all these words to them and that I may call heaven and earth to witness against them.” (JPS)
In this chapter, Moses commands the Levites to place the Written Torah by the Ark of the Covenant, and then he calls all of the elders to speak all of these words to them? Why would Moses have to give oral instruction to the elders if everything were in the Written Torah? He was giving the Oral Torah to the elders, and starting the rabbinic tradition.
Deut 32:7, “Remember the days of old, consider the years of ages past; ask your father, he will inform you, your elders, they will tell you.” (JPS)
If it is all in the Written Torah, why did Moses instruct Israel to ask their elders? The elders he had just got done imparting the Oral Law to in Deut 31. The Torah encourages the rabbinic tradition; it encourages asking your elders for the Oral Law.
Deut 17:8, “If a case is too baffling for you to decide, be it a controversy over homicide, civil law, or assault – matters of dispute in your courts – you shall promptly repair to the place that the Lord your God will have chosen and appear before the levitical priests, or the magistrate in charge at the time, and present your problem. When they have announced to you the verdict in the case, you shall carry out the verdict that is announced to you from that place that the Lord chose, observing scrupulously all the instructions to you. You shall act in accordance with the instructions given to you and the ruling handed down to you; you must not deviate from the verdict that they announce you either to the right or to the left.” (JPS)
Why would a case be too baffling to decide if everything is contained within the Written Torah? More importantly, this demonstrates that the levitical priests and the magistrates have authority given to them by the Written Torah to arbitrate in the law. It is from these magistrates that rabbis derive their authority. In fact, many Orthodox Rabbis receive their semichas as judges specifically; this is called a yadin yadin.
Still not convinced? The Written Torah and the rest of the Tanach distinctly refer to multiple Torahs. [/FONT]
Poisonshady313
Well-Known Member
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]3. Written Torah distinctly refers to Oral Torah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Genesis 26:5, “Inasmuch as Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge: My commandments, My laws, and My teachings.” (JPS)
In Hebrew this corresponds to mitzvah, chuqah, and torah. Since the Written Torah consists of the 613 mitzvah, what does torah refer to here? The Oral Torah.
Exodus 16:28, “And the Lord said to Moses, “How long will you men refuse to obey My commandments and My teachings?”” (JPS)
Now, Christians might interpret this as being the 10 commandments and whatever “teachings” they want it to be. What they often don’t realize is that God gave 613 mitzvah (not just 10) in the Written Torah. The words corresponding to commandments and teachings here are mitzvah and torah respectively. Since mitzvah refers to the 613 written laws, what does torah refer to that Israel has to keep? The Oral Torah.
Exodus 18:16, “When they have a dispute, it comes before me, and I decide between one person and another, and I make known the laws and teachings of God.” (JPS)
The laws and teachings here similar to above, choq and torah. If choq refers to the Written Laws, the 613, then torah must refer to the Oral Law.
Exodus 18:20, “And enjoin upon them the laws and the teachings, and make known to them the way they are to go and the practices they are to follow.” (JPS)
The same as above, choq and torah.
Leviticus 26:46, “These are the laws, rules, and instructions that the Lord established, through Moses on Mount Sinai, between Himself and the Israelite people.” (JPS)
Only a slight variation here, choq, mishpat, and torah.
Isaiah 24:5, “For the earth was defiled under its inhabitants; because they transgressed teachings, violated laws, broke the ancient covenant.” (JPS)
Here we see torah and choq. Notice how violating both (the former, the Oral, the latter, the Written) is considered breaking the ancient covenant.
Ezekiel 43:10-11, “[Now] you, O mortal, describe the Temple to the House of Israel, and let them measure its design. But let them be ashamed of their iniquities: When they are ashamed of all they have done, make know to them to the plan of the Temple and its layout, its exits and entrances – its entire plan. Write it down before their eyes, that they may faithfully follow its entire plan and all its laws.” (JPS)
Here we see the same words, chuqqah and torah. However, this verse is important because it also lets us know that not all of the Torah was written. Ezekiel had to write down this part of the Torah so that Israel could follow its plan and its laws. Why would he have to do such a thing if it were all in the Written Torah already? Answer – it wasn’t. He was instructed to write down this part of the Oral Torah for easier transmission, in much the same way the Mishnah was eventually written.
Ezekiel 44:5, “Then the Lord said to me: O mortal, mark well, look closely and listen carefully to everything that I tell you regarding all the laws of the Temple of the Lord and all the instructions regarding it. Note well who may enter the Temple and who must be excluded the Sanctuary.” (JPS)
This is similar to the verses above. God instructs Ezekiel to listen carefully to the torah that he gives, although this is a distinctly different Torah than the Written Torah.
Ezekiel 44:24, “In lawsuits, too, it is they who shall act as judges; they shall decide them in accord with My rules. They shall preserve My teachings and My laws regarding all My fixed occasions; and they shall maintain the sanctity of My sabbaths.” (JPS)
Again, we see mishpat, torah, and chuqqah. This is an important verse because it tells us that God gave the levitical priests the authority to arbitrate on matters of the Torah, both Oral and Written. Were it only the Written Torah, there would be no need for the arbitration that God commands.
Psalm 105:45, “That they might keep His laws, and observe His teachings. Hallelujah.” (JPS)
Choq and torah!
Nehemiah 9:13-14, “You came down on Mount Sinai and spoke to them from heaven; You gave them right rules and true teachings, good laws and commandments. You made known to them Your holy sabbath, and You ordained for them laws, commandments and Teaching, through Moses Your Servant.” (JPS)
Here we see right rules and true teachings, good laws and commandments. Mishpat, torah, choq, and mitzvah. This clearly draws a line between the Written Torah, or the mitzvah, and another Torah found outside of it.
So what have we learned? The Written Torah can’t be understood outside of its context. Context includes language, history, and culture among other things. Part of that is the Oral Torah, which was given to Moses on Sinai along with the Written. The Written Torah can’t be understood without the Oral Torah. Try and understand any one of the verses listed in the first section without the Oral Torah, it can’t be done.
The Written Torah validates rabbinic authority. Multiple times God and Moses affirm the power of the judges (who would become the rabbis) and the priests to arbitrate law. What the rabbis state, according to the Torah, is law. And what the rabbis teach is what Moses taught to the elders, and what was passed on until this very day. This is not the “traditions of men” as Christians would have you believe, but rather the very teachings and traditions established by God. Instead of “traditions of men” try “traditions of Hashem.”
The Written Torah directly refers to multiple Torahs. It refers to Moses receiving new traditions from God even after he had received the Torah. It also refers to Abraham knowing the Torah even though he predated Moses and the Written Torah. Multiple places throughout the Tanach an Oral Torah is affirmed. To reject the Oral Torah is to reject what the Written Torah teaches. [/FONT]
In Hebrew this corresponds to mitzvah, chuqah, and torah. Since the Written Torah consists of the 613 mitzvah, what does torah refer to here? The Oral Torah.
Exodus 16:28, “And the Lord said to Moses, “How long will you men refuse to obey My commandments and My teachings?”” (JPS)
Now, Christians might interpret this as being the 10 commandments and whatever “teachings” they want it to be. What they often don’t realize is that God gave 613 mitzvah (not just 10) in the Written Torah. The words corresponding to commandments and teachings here are mitzvah and torah respectively. Since mitzvah refers to the 613 written laws, what does torah refer to that Israel has to keep? The Oral Torah.
Exodus 18:16, “When they have a dispute, it comes before me, and I decide between one person and another, and I make known the laws and teachings of God.” (JPS)
The laws and teachings here similar to above, choq and torah. If choq refers to the Written Laws, the 613, then torah must refer to the Oral Law.
Exodus 18:20, “And enjoin upon them the laws and the teachings, and make known to them the way they are to go and the practices they are to follow.” (JPS)
The same as above, choq and torah.
Leviticus 26:46, “These are the laws, rules, and instructions that the Lord established, through Moses on Mount Sinai, between Himself and the Israelite people.” (JPS)
Only a slight variation here, choq, mishpat, and torah.
Isaiah 24:5, “For the earth was defiled under its inhabitants; because they transgressed teachings, violated laws, broke the ancient covenant.” (JPS)
Here we see torah and choq. Notice how violating both (the former, the Oral, the latter, the Written) is considered breaking the ancient covenant.
Ezekiel 43:10-11, “[Now] you, O mortal, describe the Temple to the House of Israel, and let them measure its design. But let them be ashamed of their iniquities: When they are ashamed of all they have done, make know to them to the plan of the Temple and its layout, its exits and entrances – its entire plan. Write it down before their eyes, that they may faithfully follow its entire plan and all its laws.” (JPS)
Here we see the same words, chuqqah and torah. However, this verse is important because it also lets us know that not all of the Torah was written. Ezekiel had to write down this part of the Torah so that Israel could follow its plan and its laws. Why would he have to do such a thing if it were all in the Written Torah already? Answer – it wasn’t. He was instructed to write down this part of the Oral Torah for easier transmission, in much the same way the Mishnah was eventually written.
Ezekiel 44:5, “Then the Lord said to me: O mortal, mark well, look closely and listen carefully to everything that I tell you regarding all the laws of the Temple of the Lord and all the instructions regarding it. Note well who may enter the Temple and who must be excluded the Sanctuary.” (JPS)
This is similar to the verses above. God instructs Ezekiel to listen carefully to the torah that he gives, although this is a distinctly different Torah than the Written Torah.
Ezekiel 44:24, “In lawsuits, too, it is they who shall act as judges; they shall decide them in accord with My rules. They shall preserve My teachings and My laws regarding all My fixed occasions; and they shall maintain the sanctity of My sabbaths.” (JPS)
Again, we see mishpat, torah, and chuqqah. This is an important verse because it tells us that God gave the levitical priests the authority to arbitrate on matters of the Torah, both Oral and Written. Were it only the Written Torah, there would be no need for the arbitration that God commands.
Psalm 105:45, “That they might keep His laws, and observe His teachings. Hallelujah.” (JPS)
Choq and torah!
Nehemiah 9:13-14, “You came down on Mount Sinai and spoke to them from heaven; You gave them right rules and true teachings, good laws and commandments. You made known to them Your holy sabbath, and You ordained for them laws, commandments and Teaching, through Moses Your Servant.” (JPS)
Here we see right rules and true teachings, good laws and commandments. Mishpat, torah, choq, and mitzvah. This clearly draws a line between the Written Torah, or the mitzvah, and another Torah found outside of it.
So what have we learned? The Written Torah can’t be understood outside of its context. Context includes language, history, and culture among other things. Part of that is the Oral Torah, which was given to Moses on Sinai along with the Written. The Written Torah can’t be understood without the Oral Torah. Try and understand any one of the verses listed in the first section without the Oral Torah, it can’t be done.
The Written Torah validates rabbinic authority. Multiple times God and Moses affirm the power of the judges (who would become the rabbis) and the priests to arbitrate law. What the rabbis state, according to the Torah, is law. And what the rabbis teach is what Moses taught to the elders, and what was passed on until this very day. This is not the “traditions of men” as Christians would have you believe, but rather the very teachings and traditions established by God. Instead of “traditions of men” try “traditions of Hashem.”
The Written Torah directly refers to multiple Torahs. It refers to Moses receiving new traditions from God even after he had received the Torah. It also refers to Abraham knowing the Torah even though he predated Moses and the Written Torah. Multiple places throughout the Tanach an Oral Torah is affirmed. To reject the Oral Torah is to reject what the Written Torah teaches. [/FONT]
Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
Todah Posionshady313. I have seen this before and it has alot of info as to what oral torah claims to be and come from but is there any other proof? I mean is there anywhere in the written torah where it states point blank that there is also a oral torah and that you must have it to understand what you are reading? Is there any verse in the written where it plainly states that the oral was given along with the written? I understand that everything that was spoken is oral prior to writting, what was spoken, down. But to say that we have a written and also a oral makes me question as to where is it said?
Poisonshady313
Well-Known Member
You're not satisfied with the fourth post of this thread?
If you're looking for a verse that says "And God told the people "There is an oral law to be followed in conjunction with the written law. I am the Lord"
No such verse exists. No such verse needs to exist. The article I posted more than justifies biblical support of the existence of the Oral Torah.
Elessar
Well-Known Member
A non-Jew is not welcome to contradict Jewish theology in the Judaism forum. While you are partially correct, and not all Jews believe the oral Torah to be divinely inspired, this is not the right place to state your belief. The question was asked of Jews, not of Catholics on their beliefs about Jews.
That said, not ALL Jews believe the oral Torah to be as binding as the written Torah. I, myself, hold the oral Torah to a lower place, as do many Reform Jews and even some Conservative Jews; I, myself, believe it is tradition, some of which was handed down from Moses, and other parts handed down from various periods throughout Jewish history, to form it when it was codified in the Talmud. I, myself, believe it was meant to be fluid, to change with the times, alike to, but not directly correlative with, the idea of the English Common Law. I think codification of the oral Torah was a bad thing, which has led many to hold it as highly as the written Torah, when it was not intended to be. However, many Jews (perhaps most) would disagree with me.
It is a useful resource, without question, when interpreting the Torah. There are almost no Jews that reject the oral Torah entirely.
Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
With all due respect, no it did not satisfy me nor do I agree that any of it justified anything for me. It may have been enough for you which is fine but I can find verses that command the writting of all the things that were said so that they can be rehearsed and taught to the generations but I have yet to find where it is stated that "Also with the written there is a oral to help with the understanding of the written, thus saith Yah!
No offence but I only ask for positive proof, and not conjecture nor thoughts or fellings, and have yet to receive it.
Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
Can we please stay on topic?
NoahideHiker
Religious Headbanger
Another great thread in the Judaism section. A christian comes in asking a supposedly innocent question about Judaism just so all the christians can tell the Jew why he and his religion are wrong.
Caladan
Agnostic Pantheist
If the parent's milk is corrupted its children have no source of nourishment.
Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
Please be careful as to whom you imply to be christian so as not to offend.
And again, I beg you, please stay on topic.
Deut 13:1
Well-Known Member
As poison lady said, there is no verse that you look for. Without the Talmud though, you're really no different then Christians who read the text and apply their own interpretations to the text. Without the Oral law, any number of 'signs' can be interpreted any way they want. So tell me about tefillin and mezuzah without the oral law, or even better, how do you interpret the text since you obviously don't have either?
Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
Well I guess there isnt any scriptural proof then. Thanks for your cooperation.
Oh, and if Im not mistaken, Posionshady313 is a guy.
Theres no need for bigotry and name calling.
Yes, I see what you mean. It probably wasnt enough to allow scripture to interpret scripture.
I find neither of these words in scripture and find no instance in the making of such through the law or the prophets. We have all kinds of instruction on the building of the ark of Noah, the Tabernacle, the Temple, the Ark of the Covenant as well as the dress of the Priest and so forth but nothing as to these items. Nothing mentioned whatsoever.
As far as my understanding of the two and the text, I would be more than happy to share with you outside of this thread via "PM" or another thread pertaining to such but out of respect to this forum it is not appropriate for me to do so here. I only mean to respectfully ask questions to gain understanding.
I am sincerely trying to understand these things and is the reason behind my questions. Im all for, and have no problem with, the oral Torah if there was proof scripturally but I see none and so I ask and as yet no one can give any concise respectable proof as to its authenticity of coming from Sinai.
I have respectfully asked a question for understanding and have only been ridiculed by my not understanding what was laid before me. I have been offended with adolescent name calling and belittling. I only hope that this behavior doesnt represent the whole of Judaism. Just because one doesnt understand something that you believe to be true doesn't give you the right to slander them. to do such things just shows a lack of maturity.
Poisonshady313
Well-Known Member
I am sincerely trying to understand these things and is the reason behind my questions. Im all for, and have no problem with, the oral Torah if there was proof scripturally but I see none and so I ask and as yet no one can give any concise respectable proof as to its authenticity of coming from Sinai.
You seem to be confusing the concept of "proof" with "an explicit statement".
Can you use the text of the declaration of independence as proof that it was written by Thomas Jefferson? According to your standards, no, because there is no statement that explicitly says "This document that you're reading was written by Thomas Jefferson".
The sort of proof you seek exists through inference... clues, hints... and they're not hiding. If God tells Moses something, and didn't see fit to have him write it down... then it must be oral. Quite a few instances tell you to do certain things... but don't tell you how. You really think Moses wouldn't have asked God when he had the chance?
According to the Torah, Moses lived to be 120. Do you really believe that each and every word God spoke to Moses was written down into what we know as the five books of Moses? Moses was unique among the prophets in that he was fully conscious and aware while he was talking to God... they communicated regularly.
Let me put it to you in simple terms:
If a verse in Leviticus said "Jump, so saith the Lord"... Moses asked God "How high?"... and he jumped that high.. . and told the people with him "how high"... and they told their children... and they told their children.
If you're looking for the Talmud to be an explicit command, you won't find it. All that means is that proof of the oral law isn't explicit. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
No, I simply asked for proof of something other than he said she said. If there isnt any then that is fine. I can move on. Otherwise please post it.
That is not the same thing. I wasnt asking who wrote the Torah. I was asking if there was proof SCRIPTURALLY and if not then what other CONCISE RESPECTIBLE proof is there that the so called oral traditions came from Sinai. Its not that hard to understand. I wouldnt expect for Jefferson to state on the last line he wrote that oh by the way I Thomas Jefferson wrote all of this no more than I would expect Moshe to do the same with the Torah. Though it is very clear that Torah states that Yah commanded Moshe to write all of these words in a book. I see no instance where Yah commanded though these words I speak to you dont write in this book but keep them secret until the need comes to express them. Not meaning to continue to be redundant but, simply put, I am not questioning the authorship of the Torah but rather asking for genuine proof of the so called oral traditions being something that was also conveyed to Moshe on Mt. Sinai.
I beg to differ. I want no inference of anything here. That is nothing more than what it already is.
Not so much clues and hints but would rather have just plain old text which gives a clear and conscience understanding that such a thing has been in existence since Sinai.
If Yah told Moshe something and didnt see fit for him to write it down then it must be THAT IT WASNT PERTINENT!!!!!!!!.
Exo 34:27 YAH said to Moshe, "Write you these words: for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Yisra'el."
What is a covenant other than a contract? They are one in the same. Who has had a contract that had contractual binding and legally enforced stipulations that was never in the text but rather was oral? No one, unless it was a separate contract that was made and it was to be a oral contract, but there is nothing in all the world that shows, are even implies that there was such a oral contract made. Only the written and if it wasnt written in the contract, or provisions made there of, then it wasnt pertinent to it and therefore is not binding to the parties involved. All we have is man saying its so when we dont have Yah saying its so. Are we to put our trust in man or Yah?
So are we to discuss each instance as to what was not understood in Torah which needed to be instructed out of the oral traditions? Im game if you are but this might not be the thread for such a discussion. For the record though I do not believe there is such a instance that cannot be relatively explained using the text of the law and the prophets but if I am mistaken then I guess I can always fall back on the laws pertaining to ignorance.
I dont question the existence of it but rather its origin.
I see this really going nowhere and my questions continuing to be left unanswered. But this is o.k. I really didnt expect a real answer to begin with but more of what I had already heard time and time again which has been refuted time and time again.
I mean no offence and again I truly came to respectfully ask and understand how certain peoples of this world can believe that the oral traditions came from Yah to Moshe at Mt. Sinai and that it is part of the binding covenant that was made there with Moshe and the sons of Yisrael. I apologize if I seem to argue my points at times but arguing was not my intent but felt that I was rather put in that position to explain the meanings of what I tried to convey in my text. All is well and everything is everything.
One other question though
2Ch 34:14 When they brought out the money that was brought into the house of YAH, Chilkiyah the Priest found the scroll of the Torah of YAH [given] by Moshe.
2Ch 34:19 It happened, when the king had heard the words of the law, that he tore his clothes.
2Ch 34:20 The king commanded Chilkiyah, and Achikam the son of Shafan, and `Avdon the son of Mikhah, and Shafan the scribe, and `Asayah the king's servant, saying,
2Ch 34:21 Go you, inquire of YAH for me, and for those who are left in Yisra'el and in Judah, concerning the words of the book that is found; for great is the wrath of YAH that is poured out on us, because our fathers have not kept the word of YAH, to do according to all that is written in this book.
2Ch 34:22 So Chilkiyah, and they whom the king [had commanded], went to Chuldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tokhat, the son of Chasrah, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she lived in Yerushalayim in the second quarter) and they spoke to her to that effect.
2Ch 34:23 She said to them, Thus says YAH, the Elohim of Yisra'el: Tell you the man who sent you to me,
2Ch 34:24 Thus says YAH, Behold, I will bring evil on this place, and on the inhabitants of it, even all the curses that are written in the book which they have read before the king of Judah.
2Ch 34:25 Because they have forsaken me, and have burned incense to other elohims, that they might provoke me to anger with all the works of their hands; therefore is my wrath poured out on this place, and it shall not be quenched.
2Ch 34:26 But to the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of YAH, thus shall you tell him, Thus says YAH, the Elohim of Yisra'el: As touching the words which you have heard,
2Ch 34:27 because your heart was tender, and you did humble yourself before Elohim, when you heard his words against this place, and against the inhabitants of it, and have humbled yourself before me, and have torn your clothes, and wept before me; I also have heard you, says YAH.
2Ch 34:28 Behold, I will gather you to your fathers, and you shall be gathered to your grave in peace, neither shall your eyes see all the evil that I will bring on this place, and on the inhabitants of it. They brought back word to the king.
How long was this after Sinai and where was the tradition of the elders then? Oh thats right ..
2Ch 34:24 Thus says YAH, Behold, I will bring evil on this place, and on the inhabitants of it, even all the curses that are written in the book which they have read before the king of Judah.
2Ch 34:25 Because they have forsaken me, and have burned incense to other elohims, that they might provoke me to anger with all the works of their hands; therefore is my wrath poured out on this place, and it shall not be quenched.
These were their traditions.
I dont see any of the so called oral traditions here and only see the scroll of the Torah being found and read. If the written had been lost until now one would also think the so called oral would have been also or Yisrael wouldnt have fallen into such a mess. How then did the oral traditions find there way back if they hadnt been passed down and adhered to? All I keep seeing is books and it is written but no where do I see it is spoken or said unless it was then written.
NoahideHiker
Religious Headbanger
So you see Poisonshady, even though you may have been raised a Jew by Jewish parents who's liniage goes all the way back to Mount Saini and your family have thousands of years of Jewish thought and teaching and you may have personally attended a yeshiva and have been through the theological equivalent of an associates degree in Judaic studies, as has been pointed out here you are simply wrong about the religion you follow. Oral Torah is obviousely false. [/sarcasm]
Berachiah Ben Yisrael
Active Member
I wouldn't go so far as to say all that but I fully understand where you would.
And just because anyone may have done, and be all, that you say doesn't impress me at all. Scripture is full of those that were considered great and smart plus knew the law, without exception, but still acted as though they had never had a clue. I'm not saying that Poisonshady313 is as this but Yisrael has shown all down through time that they refuse to get it right and only want to do it the way they want to with no regard as to how Yah intended it to be as has been written.
I only respectfully asked a question and am trying to understand the answers with sincere and honest conclusions. I havent attacked or made any baseless accusations as you have implied by your sarcastic remark.
This is a discussion forum and not a debate. I am within the scope of the OP and you sir are out of bounds. I respectfully ask you to take your swill elsewhere.
IF_u_knew
Curious
PoisonShady313: Excellent explanation! It is understandable and you are very kind in your replies. I think it is the attitude that is displayed by *some* (certainly not all, and I would not even assume most) Jews that serves as an aversion to *any* explanation (good or bad) that is given by a Jew. Still... the flaw would be in not seeking out Jewish understanding simply because some Jewish people thumb their noses at those trying to understand why, how, and what they should know. To those who want to understand, nothing can stop them; and as I have found, G-d gives knowledge to those who are persistent in seeking His ways.
OP: Remember, there has always been those w/in even the Jewish community who have disputed sections of the "oral torah" as it is written in the Talmud and so, one must always use discretion; the same can be said when reading the Old Testament (I do not subscribe to the New Testament personally) as it has been translated to us in our language.
Example: Isaiah 7: 14 the word virgin is a misunderstanding (or rather, I believe a deliberate mistranslation for purposes of "validating" the New Testament) and one is able to discern this by looking at what the beliefs were at the time the prophecy was given. Virgin births were strictly a pagan belief and there is your clue for discernment.
It works the same with the Talmud. It is interpretations of the written law that was to be given orally; the paradox is that it is written now, but that is understandable considering the persecution the Jewish people have had to endure... it was feared that the oral tradition would be "lost."
I do agree with the poster who said that it is ridiculous for us to turn to the knowledge of those outside the Jewish community for understanding the Hebrew Scriptures (although I think the tone may have been a bit of a turn off). Though one can use discernment in judging an interpretation, you are most certain to get a more concise interpretation from the people in which the Scriptures originated. There has been much mutilation to the Word courtesy of the Christian community and their lack of even TRYING to understand the Jewish history, customs, and over all way of life.
Here is a link that you may find useful. I know I have.
The Oral Law
OP: Remember, there has always been those w/in even the Jewish community who have disputed sections of the "oral torah" as it is written in the Talmud and so, one must always use discretion; the same can be said when reading the Old Testament (I do not subscribe to the New Testament personally) as it has been translated to us in our language.
Example: Isaiah 7: 14 the word virgin is a misunderstanding (or rather, I believe a deliberate mistranslation for purposes of "validating" the New Testament) and one is able to discern this by looking at what the beliefs were at the time the prophecy was given. Virgin births were strictly a pagan belief and there is your clue for discernment.
It works the same with the Talmud. It is interpretations of the written law that was to be given orally; the paradox is that it is written now, but that is understandable considering the persecution the Jewish people have had to endure... it was feared that the oral tradition would be "lost."
I do agree with the poster who said that it is ridiculous for us to turn to the knowledge of those outside the Jewish community for understanding the Hebrew Scriptures (although I think the tone may have been a bit of a turn off). Though one can use discernment in judging an interpretation, you are most certain to get a more concise interpretation from the people in which the Scriptures originated. There has been much mutilation to the Word courtesy of the Christian community and their lack of even TRYING to understand the Jewish history, customs, and over all way of life.
Here is a link that you may find useful. I know I have.
The Oral Law
Last edited:
Amazed
Member
Here's an interesting Scripture instructing how to say what is written (but nothing about how to say what has been said)
Jos 1:8 "Do not let this Book of the Torah depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you guard to do according to all that is written in it. For then you shall make your way prosperous, and act wisely." :seesaw:
_____________________________________________________________