How can all explanations of the Torah be True when they contradict each other (eilu v'eilu)?

Question

I've read multiple questions/answers that discuss Eilu V'eilu. However, the seem to always come back to the discussion of how it applies to Halacha. My question is stemming from somewhere else.

If Midrashim and Rishonim's explanations of the Torah are all from mesorah, how can they argue about practical historical things.

As an example, In parshas Noach, Chapter 7 verse 2, it says 'Of every pure animal take unto you seven by seven etc.' There is a Machlokes whether that means 7 pairs of animal or just 7 individual animals (see Rashi and Medrash Rabbah).

They cannot both be True. How can this be reconciled?

Maybe I am approaching this wrongly, but I want to treat the explanations of the Torah as divine. I find it difficult to understand how they can all be divine if they cannot all be True.

EDIT: After reading a couple of answers and comments, I feel the need to clarify a little. I understand that the way to understand the meaning of the Torah was given in the oral part of the Torah (i.e. midrashim). But if that's the case then how can there be contradictions in the explanation of the Torah itself. I'm not referring to arguments among the sages or the like. In the example I give by Noach, how am I supposed to understand the words of the Torah? Both explanations cannot be true, and if you say only one is true, then where did the other one come from? Aren't all the explanations from the oral Torah passed down?

Answer 1

You have a good question, and you're not the only one who ask this, many seforim are talking about that, and all of them have answers to that question.

However I saw the Meor einayim answers that, that in real world is only one true, but every word of the Gemara and Midrashim has a deeper meaning of how we understand it, and some times their is no difference between them.

So for us to understand that in every case is impossible, some times it will be possible and some times not.

Answer 2

On a basic level, Eilu v'elu is not necessarily applied to all machloksim, and even when it is, it's often explained to mean that they were both referring to different things and that they don't actually contradict. I don't have the whereabouts of the cases I'm referring to off-hand, but if you want their location, ask me and I can try to look them up for you. In terms of them all having deeper meanings that don't contradict, I don't have an opinion on that, but I can definitely understand if all that meant was that generally the reasons that the sages say what they say, is based upon very lofty and deep understandings, but obviously in many cases, practically speaking, one of them goes wrong somewhere, and thus only one of them are technically correct.

I think the most essential thing to be aware of, is that the Gemara is full of a) Sages rebuttals to the opinions of other Sages. b) Retractions by Sages of their own opinions. c) And most basic and common, arguments. As far as I know, an argument is where you hold the other is wrong and you are right. If the Sages believed that I assume you can believe that, but I might be wrong.

Edit: Maybe the chiddush of the memrah that "all that any serious Torah Learner is going to be mischadesh was already said by Sinai" is that it didn't have to be true to be considered Torah to be said at Sinai. Rather, it just had to be coming from a place of holiness.

Another pshat might be, That it's indeed only referring to the true chiddushim. However, you may think that it was hidden in the Torah and not ever revealed until that Talmid came along... Ka mashma lan that it was already said to Moses on Sinai.

Answer 3

Very simple, they are not all true. Though being they are smarter men than you and I, and have came to the conclusions from their studies (Unless it can be outright refuted by others) we can keep it in our mind as a suggestion, or something to use in drash or remez, nothing more maybe less.

I say this because there's only one truth not more and 99 percent truth is 100 percent lie, yes even if there's some truth to it, none the less the rule still holds. Likutay Moharan, MM Schnerzon and more have stated this rule.

Back in the ancient days the way to learn the torah was to learn to use the intellect with a strong intuition, to derive the Halacha, hence mishna she-ba'al pe, now being they used their heads instead of scripture many had different interpretation of what they read during their reading of the unspoken rules of the world or the Tora, as clarity decreased people feared of their intellectual clarity and honesty and decided to write things down, from then on, came the Talmud and debates.

Now the way (System) the tanaim used to learn is still known today, through the works of kabala, being so, this is how many rabbits came to their great findings (Chidushim) from then on came midrashim, it really has to do with how the mind is formulated with he education and beliefs the rabbi has when he comes to his revelation, creating or cooking the "masterpiece".

If you are interested to know how they learned, click on the link,

It's nine (9) classes in total, to teach you how to use your intellect with your intuition.

Good luck if you decide to go in that way.