Dear Moshe,



In principle you are correct. The Sages of the Talmud and the rabbis from the Middle Ages to our days act as serving judges. But your analogy between our times and the Talmudic era is, to say the least, imprecise.

The creators of the Oral Torah (the sages of the Mishnah and the Talmud) completely ignored the laws of the (Written) Torah. They did not really mean to interpret the Torah’s laws; they only used them as a convenient framework within which to legislate new laws.

They exploited the faith of Jews of their eras and their view of the Torah as divinely authored, their view of the system of laws and commandments as lofty and superior, a myth which cannot be shaken though they did not know the details of its contents. [This is a situation similar to that of today, where most of the religious community sees the Scriptures as the Holy Book without knowing details of its contents.] It is easy to use a myth, to strengthen it, to glorify it, and simultaneously to empty it of its original contents and essence. This is the way of the masses: they cling to that which is hidden (the “Holy Writ”) and ignored what is clearly seen (the contents of the “Holy Writ”). Historical changes within nation’s faiths have generally taken place under slogans of preservation leading to radical change, a logical paradox which the human mind abhors.

Thus did the authors of the “Oral Torah” behave — preservation of the old (Holy Writ) in their preaching and speeches to satisfy the soul which seeks after the hidden , and simultaneously destroying the myth (the Holy Writ) in practice in order to match the lifestyle of the community in their time and place. In other words: they left the “poetry” alone while utterly changing the prose.

We have shown this, that the Oral Torah utterly uprooted the Written Torah, in many essays. As an illustration of this custom we will bring the Sages’ medrash agaddah which clearly shows that the Scriptures are naught but a springboard for the Sages’ view and that they did not truly mean to interpret the Scriptures.

The Scriptural story tells of Cain’s envy of his brother Abel, which caused Cain to kill his brother Abel. In the course of the story a verse, cut-off and incomprehensible, appears: “And Cain told his brother Abel, and when they were in the field Cain arose against his brother Abel and slew him” (Genesis 4:8). It is never said what Cain told Abel, as though words were cut out of the verse.



In the medrash (Medrash Rabbah parasha 22) Chazal ask “What were they discussing?” before Cain slew Abel. They give three answers in the names of three different sages.

1. They argued about property.

2. They argued about in whose territory the Holy Temple would be built.

3. There was a woman they both wanted and argued about who would possess her.



They completely ignored what is written in the Torah, that the reason for the killing was that Cain was envious of his brother Abel.

The Scriptural text is nothing but an empty field upon which they can build towers as grand as the architect can imagine.

The Sages wished to warn their listeners that disputes over property, religion, or sex may lead to useless fights and to murder. They searched the Scriptures for a convenient pillow upon which to lay their views and to present them to the nation as part of the “Holy Writ.” They did the same in determining new laws and amazing reforms which they presented to their followers.

This is an amazing thing in the history of changes in nations and religions: managing to preserve the lifeline to the past while in practice drawing life from a different source without noticing that there is a contradiction between them.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet

Dear Benny,



In other words, you are saying that only after we reject our own reason, logic, and opinions will we be able to accept the words of the sages.

That’s exactly what we argue: faith and reason cannot live under one roof, and one who is not willing to reject his own godly nature (reason) cannot accept the words of the sages as those of the living G-d.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet