If someone says "I believe that the Mishnayos/Braisos/Toseftas are accurate, but I think that the Gemara made mistakes and has no holiness.

Is such philosophy heresy?

What about someone who argues on specific Mishnas?

What about someone who argues on ALL the Mishnas (he believes that there was an Oral Torah, but it got forgotten)?

  • 2
    'made mistakes' and 'has no holiness' are different claims. – Double AA Jan 4 '13 at 18:19
  • Do you mean Bavli or Yerushalmi? – Double AA Jan 4 '13 at 18:19
  • What do mean the Mishna etc. is accurate? That it is an absolute truth? – Double AA Jan 4 '13 at 18:37
  • then: related judaism.stackexchange.com/q/13058/759 – Double AA Jan 4 '13 at 18:55
  • It would be best to clarify exactly what you mean in the question itself. Consider also including if the content of the argued-about Mishna includes things like traditions from Sinai, matters of interpretation of pesukim or of rabbinic decrees, historical assertions, scientific assertions etc. – Double AA Feb 28 '13 at 17:56

כופר בתורה שבעל פה does not mean that he denies the theoretical existence of any תורה שבע"פ but that he denies the actual תורה שבע"פ in our possession--so if someone denies the authentic תורה שבע"פ he would fall under that category. Furthermore, such a person would be included under the category of מכחיש מגידיה as someone who denies the reliability of the bearers of our tradition (Rambam, Hil. Teshuvah 3:8).

  • 1
    Is every line of Gemara a received tradition from Sinai? – Double AA Mar 8 '13 at 19:34
  • 2
    oh you're answering his last question. – Double AA Mar 8 '13 at 19:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .