Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In a discussion to my answer on Mordechai - was he or wasn't he? I was told that the Gemara can not be used as scriptural basis to prove a point. Being that the Gemara clarifies scripture is that true?

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by msh210 Feb 13 '12 at 22:41

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    
I guess it depends which poster you ask. :) –  Shmuel Brin Feb 13 '12 at 22:25
2  
I think that the question could use some clarification (which may point to an answer). Of course we can use the Gemara to understand the text of Tanach. But is that dispositive in the sense that this closes the issue and there is no other possible valid way to understand the pasuk? The fact that classic mefarshim such as Rashbam, Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel frequently give explanations different from the Gemara's implies that the answer is "no." –  Alex Feb 13 '12 at 22:27
    
    
I suspect that a proper definition of "scriptural basis" would provide the answer. –  jake Feb 13 '12 at 22:31
2  
This question can't be answered objectively, and I'm closing it: whether g'mara can be used as "scriptural" evidence depends on who's seeking scriptural evidence and how he defines "scriptural". Feel free to emend it to another similar question and ping me in a comment here with @msh210 for reopening. –  msh210 Feb 13 '12 at 22:41

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.