Timeline for Why is the torah so misleading without the oral law
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 12, 2016 at 23:25 | comment | added | wfb | @Loewian It's not my idea. | |
| Feb 12, 2016 at 13:03 | comment | added | Loewian | @wfb I'm familiar with Mamrim 2:1. However, you're language: "the reason the oral law was not given in writing was to provide necessary flexibility", suggests that the Torah is open to change. The Rambam is clearly discussing a judiciary function, not a legislative one, i.e. the later Beit Din is assuming that the earlier one erred in interpreting/transmitting the original law. Your idea sounds more like Hilchot Teshuva 3:8. | |
| Feb 12, 2016 at 6:01 | comment | added | wfb | @Loewian see mamrim 2:1 | |
| Feb 11, 2016 at 14:47 | comment | added | Loewian | Similar perhaps to Maharal on literal meaning of Midrash representing Platonic ideal that influences reality tempered by natural laws. Not sure what that flexibility vort is though - if d'oraissas are flexible, what's the need for d'rabanans? | |
| Jun 1, 2014 at 5:47 | comment | added | ray | @wfb צחוק usually means laughter. that is most definitely the plain meaning especially since the torah uses that word when describing sarah's laughter | |
| Jun 1, 2014 at 2:54 | comment | added | Shmuel | According to your answer, the laws in the Written Torah aren't meant to be implemented or practiced. Then why are they there at all? And the text presents itself as practical laws - just look at Parshat Mishpatim! | |
| Jun 1, 2014 at 1:08 | comment | added | Shmuel | So מצחק can be used in a sexual context, Still doesn't explain why Rashi concludes that it means "murder" | |
| Oct 20, 2013 at 5:21 | comment | added | wfb | But Sarah's laughter is not the same as Avraham's. Or how about Gen. 26:8: והנה יצחק מצחק את רבקה אשתו | |
| Oct 20, 2013 at 5:00 | comment | added | ray | the context there is the birth of yitzchak and the torah uses the same word many times to convey laughter, such as that sarah "laughed", etc. | |
| Oct 20, 2013 at 4:52 | comment | added | wfb | מצחק does not always mean laughing. See e.g. Genesis 39:14. In any case, 1. in non-halakhic cases, there is greater latitude to explain the verse, and in this case there is a range of opinion too; 2. the word "צחוק" is used in a number of ways in describing the story of Yitzchak, so it should not surprise us to find it here. In other words, one must also look at the context to understand the Torah. | |
| Oct 19, 2013 at 17:29 | comment | added | ray | so how do you explain the second example with yishmael that commited the cardinal sin of "laughing"?is it also ideal to banish him for that? | |
| Oct 18, 2013 at 16:15 | history | answered | wfb | CC BY-SA 3.0 |