Dear Sarah,



The question which should be asked is not whether we reject or deny that the Torah was given by G-d, but whether what is written in the Torah is relevant to us, regardless of who wrote it — G-d or man — and take the truth from whoever says it.

I will present the opinions of the great rabbis accepted by religious Jews to show that even those who think that G-d wrote the Torah think that it spoke to the generation which left Egypt and our generation has nothing to learn from it.

Maimonides, in his book Guide to the Perplexed, explains that the central educational goal of the Torah is to uproot faith in idols and to instill belief in the one unique G-d. “For the main point of the Torah is to uproot that idea [idolatry] and erase its memory” (part three, chapter 30). The Torah was relevant to the generation which left Egypt, who believed in idolatry, and is not relevant to our generation, which does not believe in idolatry. Thus does Maimonides explain the Torah method of education: Since the generation which left Egypt was accustomed to making sacrifices to the sun, moon, and stars, and to building temples and altars to them, and so that the community would accept the worship of G-d as a substitute for the worship of the sun, G-d “compromised” with human nature, which finds it difficult to give up its habits. Therefore He permitted sacrifices and the building of the Holy Temple as long as the intent was for Heaven, for He knew that had He forbidden it all, as demanded by Divine truth, they would have accepted nothing and would have even rejected faith in G-d’s existence (part three, chapter 32). From Maimonides’ words we see that most of the Torah is not relevant to our generation which mocks ritual. The Torah’s method of education is not suited for our times and were the Torah to be given in our time the commands of sacrifices and the Temple would never have been mentioned.

To support our words we will continue with the words of Maimonides and reveal an amazing secret to which he hinted. To explain the Torah’s educational method which we will call the “compromise method” (achieving one educational goal at the expense of a less important educational goal) Maimonides brings an example which was suited for his generation (the Middle Ages) and says: Man’s nature is such that he always tends toward habits. If a prophet were to arise in our days and call for worship of G-d not through prayer and fasts and requests for salvation in times of trouble, if he instead called for worship through thought only, with no action [the people would not accept this worship of G-d because they are accustomed to prayers and the ceremony of the holidays]” (part three, chapter 32). According to Maimonides the Torah uses educational trickery so the generation which left Egypt would accept the worship of G-d. They were left their ritualistic customs though according to the “Divine truth” they are not appropriate. Note the example that Maimonides chose to bring. In our opinion he hints that even the prayers and fasts which are practiced in our days are not the final and true educational goal. In his opinion worship in the mind, with no ceremonies and rituals, is the most appropriate, and it is possible that a generation may arise in the future which will be capable of accepting the “worship of G-d” with no ceremonies, in the mind only.

To summarize Maimonides’ opinion he wrote: “The Torah wrote in a human manner,” that is, according to the outlook and understanding of man at the time the Torah was written. The outlook and understanding of the generation which left Egypt was inferior to that of people in Maimonides’ generation. The generation which left Egypt was not prepared or able to accept the idea of G-d’s existence without the Torah turning G-d physical and unless the Torah permitted the rituals of sacrifice and the Holy Temple. Maimonides’ generation had advanced farther towards the final educational goal and was ready and willing to accept the existence of G-d without His corporeality and without sacrifices and the Temple, yet still needed fasts, prayers, and the ceremony of the holidays.

The opinion of Rashi is also that the Torah uses a “compromise method” of education which suits the generation.

The Torah permits one, in time of war, to capture a beautiful woman and marry her: “When you take the field against your enemies and the Lord your G-d delivers them into your power and you take some of them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman and you desire her and would take her to wife” (Deuteronomy 21:10-11).

Rashi wrote: “And would take her to wife — the Torah spoke only to appease the evil inclination, for if the Torah did not permit this he would marry her though it is forbidden.”

This is the compromise method of education. According to the true and most appropriate education, one would be forbidden to take a woman captive in any situation, but since the generation was licentious and would not have obeyed the prohibition, the Torah compromised and permitted the captive woman under limiting conditions. In our generation it is clear, beyond a doubt, that one may not take women captives, and there is no need for a “compromise.” Thus you see that the Torah was relevant to the generation which left Egypt, a generation which was licentious, but is not suitable for our generation.



Sincerely,



Daat Emet