2 added 1 characters in body
source | link

There is a name for this. It is called an "asmachta"

DoDue to some grammatical and theological issues, the statement by the Netziv is misleading as translated.

When he writes: "“there is no tradition that is not hinted at in the biblical text” What he means is the following.

For every oral tradition that was not based on the text of the Torah, there is a pasuk which has been assigned to that oral tradition, as an aide to memory. (Rambam, intro to the Mishna)

Normally, if I am not mistaken, the first hint that something is an asmachta and not a proof text, is the fact that the verse is from Neviim or Ketuvim,and not a pasuk from the Torah. But sometimes pasuks from the Torah are used as an ashmachta as well.

There is a name for this. It is called an "asmachta"

Do to some grammatical and theological issues, the statement by the Netziv is misleading as translated.

When he writes: "“there is no tradition that is not hinted at in the biblical text” What he means is the following.

For every oral tradition that was not based on the text of the Torah, there is a pasuk which has been assigned to that oral tradition, as an aide to memory. (Rambam, intro to the Mishna)

Normally, if I am not mistaken, the first hint that something is an asmachta and not a proof text, is the fact that the verse is from Neviim or Ketuvim,and not a pasuk from the Torah. But sometimes pasuks from the Torah are used as an ashmachta as well.

There is a name for this. It is called an "asmachta"

Due to some grammatical and theological issues, the statement by the Netziv is misleading as translated.

When he writes: "“there is no tradition that is not hinted at in the biblical text” What he means is the following.

For every oral tradition that was not based on the text of the Torah, there is a pasuk which has been assigned to that oral tradition, as an aide to memory. (Rambam, intro to the Mishna)

Normally, if I am not mistaken, the first hint that something is an asmachta and not a proof text, is the fact that the verse is from Neviim or Ketuvim,and not a pasuk from the Torah. But sometimes pasuks from the Torah are used as an ashmachta as well.

1
source | link

There is a name for this. It is called an "asmachta"

Do to some grammatical and theological issues, the statement by the Netziv is misleading as translated.

When he writes: "“there is no tradition that is not hinted at in the biblical text” What he means is the following.

For every oral tradition that was not based on the text of the Torah, there is a pasuk which has been assigned to that oral tradition, as an aide to memory. (Rambam, intro to the Mishna)

Normally, if I am not mistaken, the first hint that something is an asmachta and not a proof text, is the fact that the verse is from Neviim or Ketuvim,and not a pasuk from the Torah. But sometimes pasuks from the Torah are used as an ashmachta as well.