Mapa bíblico
Es

Written and Oral Law

Found 7 Search results

  1. The Oral Law and the Two Versions of the Ten Commandments (Audio)

    Rabbi Yitzchak Blau | 10 minutes

    The Ten Commandments in Devarim are slightly different from their presentation in Shemot. Which version was given out loud, and which appeared on the tablets? Different approaches are examined, each with fascinating ideas pertaining to revelation, prophecy, and the connection between the written and the Oral Law.

  2. Pshat and Drash in the Law of Lashes

    Rabbi Amnon Bazak | 12 minutes

    In a number of cases of crime and punishment, the Oral Law seems to contradict the literal, plain meaning of the text. This shiur focuses on three cases dealing with lashes, whose literal law differs from Oral Law. What accounts for the discrepancies? Chazal seek to apply the Torah's law fully while also protecting human dignity.

  3. Inseparable Pair

    Rabbi Ben-Tzion Spitz

  4. Individual Torah

    Rabbi Ben-Tzion Spitz

  5. Saadia Gaon

    Dr. Avigail Rock

    The person who had the most profound and wide-ranging influence upon the development of the Jewish tradition in the early medieval period, was Rabbeinu Saadia Gaon. Rasag was a revolutionary in many spheres.  In the discipline of linguistics and halakhic writing, his work marks a turning point and a paradigm shift in the Jewish tradition. In the realm of parshanut, he is one of the founding fathers and trailblazers of the Jewish exegesis of Tanakh.

    The historical background of Rasag’s Commentary is a response to the rise of Islam and to the Karaite movement that denied the Oral Law and its divinity.

    The main aim of Rasag in his short commentary was to translate the Torah into the spoken Arabic of his world, in order to make it approachable for everyone, without dealing with broader issues of exegesis. However, even in this simple version Rasag was guided by several principles:

    ·         Avoids the anthropomorphization of God

    ·         Commentative elucidations

    ·         The identification of places, nations, objects and animals

    ·         Clarifications in the sphere of faith and philosophy

    ·         Alterations to prevent the desecration of God’s name

    In his longer commentary, of which we have only small portions, Rasag’s modus operandi was to explain the verses according to their simple meaning, unless: the sensory perception of the world or intellect refute the peshat, the Sages’ tradition refuted the peshat or the existence of contradicting verses forced one to reevaluate the peshat.

  6. R. Avraham ibn Ezra

    Part 3

    Dr. Avigail Rock

    Ibn Ezra believes that it is inconceivable for the Sages’ halakhic tradition to contradict the peshat of the verses. On this point, he argues with the Rashbam, who goes as far as to explain the halakhic verses against the tradition of the Sages. As we have explained in the previous lessons, Ibn Ezra supports the view of philological pashtanut and exerts great effort to explain the verses in accordance with the rules of grammar and topical logic. However, when there is a contradiction between the peshat and the Sages’ tradition in Halakha, ibn Ezra pushes the simple meaning of the words so that it will fit with the Sages’ view, while striving to have it dovetail with the rules of grammar and language.

    Despite these words of Ibn Ezra expressing the unquestionable authority of the Sages in Halakha, many times ibn Ezra veers in his interpretation from the interpretation of the halakhic ruling.

    ·       It may be that ignorance of the halakhic ruling – due to poverty and wandering - is what causes him to interpret verses differently than the Sages.

    ·       Alternatively, while the ibn Ezra sees himself as bound by the Sages’ legal authority, the Sages themselves do not believe that this is the verse’s intent, but they tie the law to the verse.

    While ibn Ezra had a profoundly negative view of the Karaites, it is important to note that he does not hesitate to cite their interpretations if he believes they are correct. According to his view, the truth of the Oral Torah may be established not only by finding its laws in the verses of Written Torah, but by confronting the reality of the absence of many laws in the Written Torah. These exigent rules are only found in the Oral Torah, and without their existence there is no significance at all to the laws of the Written Torah.

    Ibn Ezra was aware of Rashi’s status in France. Therefore, in his commentary to the Torah, ibn Ezra keeps his silence despite the fact that he disagreed with him.

    Ibn Ezra conceals issue in his commentary; he embraces the phenomenon of "sod" with regard to deep concepts, issues regarding the authorship of Torah and sins of great Biblical figures.

  7. Moshe Began to Explain

    Rabbanit Dr. Michal Tikochinsky