Why is the Torah divided into five books?

Question

When the Torah refers to itself, it refers to itself in the singular. There are numerous verses, notably in Devarim. One notable example Devarim 31:16 (Sefaria English translation:)

"לָקֹחַ אֵת סֵפֶר הַתּוֹרָה הַזֶּה וְשַׂמְתֶּם אֹתוֹ מִצַּד אֲרוֹן בְּרִית־ה' אֱלֹקיכֶם וְהָיָה־שָׁם בְּךָ לְעֵד׃"

Take this book of Teaching and place it beside the Ark of the Covenant of the LORD, your God; it will be there for you, forever.

Yet, we see that there are five sefarim (books) and on parchment, we denote the separate books by leaving several lines of spacing between the end of one book and the start of the next.

I notice that Rash"i as well as the Gemarah refer to some of the separate books by names such as "Torat Kohanim" (Vayikra) and "Mishneh Torah" (for Devarim).

When did the concept of separating the Torah into Five books begin? And, why was there a requirement to write a Torah into five books? Is that miSinai (from Sinai)? It doesn't appear to be this way from the Torah's verbage. Even it is miSinai, why separate it into five books?

Answer 1

The first reference to the five-sefarim division of the Torah goes back to Philo (ca. 25 B.C.E.- 50 C.E.) in the opening of his De Abrahamo, in which he states that the Torah has five books:

τῶν ἱερῶν νόμων ἐν πέντε βίβλοις ἀναγραφέντων ἡ πρώτη καλεῖται καὶ ἐπιγράφεται Γένεσις ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου γενέσεως

The first of the five books in which the holy laws are written bears the name and inscription of Genesis, from the genesis or creation of the world, an account of which it contains at its beginning (Translation by F. H. Colson).

He also declares the same in the De Aeternitate Mundi.

Decades later, Josephus in Against Apion, 1:8 states:

οὐ μυριάδες βιβλίων εἰσὶ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν ἀσυμφώνων καὶ μαχομένων, δύο δὲ μόνα πρὸς τοῖς εἴκοσι βιβλία τοῦ παντὸς ἔχοντα χρόνου τὴν ἀναγραφήν, τὰ δικαίως πεπιστευμένα. καὶ τούτων πέντε μέν ἐστι Μωυσέως, ἃ τούς τε νόμους περιέχει καὶ τὴν ἀπ᾽ ἀνθρωπογονίας παράδοσιν μέχρι τῆς αὐτοῦ τελευτῆς

Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. (Translation by Henry St. John Thackeray)

The same expression is later found in the Yerushalmi (see Sotah 26a), Otios de Rabi Akiva (Nusach Alef), the Medrash Shocher Tov (and etc).

Despite these sources do not explain the reason behind that, it resembles to have something related with its content. This is what Jeffrey Tigay presents,

“The Torah in its final form is divided into five separate books because ancient scrolls could not contain a work of that length. Nevertheless, the books were not divided arbitrarily but at natural transition points.” (“Exodus,” in The Jewish Study Bible, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 95)

Answer 2

Tikuney Zohar (25) seems to equate the number of books in the Torah with the five ‘wings’ of an animal’s lungs. Saying too, that a Torah must be exactly perfect not more, less or exchanged. So to the lungs, if they are additional or lacking the animal is invalid.

And one who transgresses one has certainly the other.

כְּגַוְונָא דָא אִינוּן חָמֵשׁ כַּנְפֵי רֵיאָה, כְּגַוְונָא דַחֲמִשָּׁה חוּמְשֵׁי תוֹרָה, וּוַרְדָּא כְּגַוְונָא דְזֶה סֵפֶר דְּאִיהוּ סֵפֶר יְשָׁרִים, אִי אוּנֵי חַסִּיר אוֹ יַתִּיר אוֹ חֲלִיף, אִיהוּ אִמְרָא פָּסוּל, וּמָאן דְּעָבַר עֲלַיְיהוּ כְּאִלּוּ עָבַר עַל אוֹרַיְיתָא וַחֲמִשָּׁה חוּמְשֵׁי דִילָהּ, דַּחֲמִשָּׁה כַנְפֵי רֵיאָה וּוַרְדָּא אִינוּן שִׁית, דָּא ו', כָּל מָאן דְּעָבַר (על דא, כאלו עבר) עַל דָּא.

Answer 3

The extract below from The Laws & Customs of Kerias Hatorah by Rabbi Yaakov Goldstein available at:

https://shulchanaruchharav.com/halacha/understanding-the-divisions-of-the-parshiyos/#_ftn5

addressees part of the OP's question "When did the concept of separating the Torah into Five books begin?" as well as other aspects of the questions posed by the OP:

It is universally accepted that the Chumash is divided into five books, known as the five books of Moshe, containing the names 1) Bereishis; 2) Shemos; 3) Vayikra; 4) Bamidbar 5) Devarim. This division is mentioned in various places in the Talmud[fn7] which states “Chamisha Chumshei Torah/The five Chumashim of Torah.” It is likely attributed to Moshe Rabbeinu himself.[fn8] Nonetheless, we do not have a Talmudic source which points at the areas of division of the five books, and where their start and end points are located. Thus, while the general division of the Chumash to five books has Talmudic basis, its names and groupings of Bereishis, Shemos, Vayikra, Bamidbar and Devarim is not all found in the Talmud.[fn9] Interestingly, a second opinion voiced in the Talmud[fn10] states that there are actually seven books, or seven divisions, in Chumash and not five.[fn11] This approach learns that the two verses of “Vayehi Binsoa Haaron” found in Parshas Behaalosecha is its own Sefer, and hence book four is Bamidbar, book five is “Vayehi Binsoa”, book six is “Vayehi Ha’am Kimisonanim,” and book seven is Devarim.[12]

Footnotes:

[7] Chagiga 14a; Megillah 15a and Rashi Megillah 29b; Nedarim 22b; Sanhedrin 44a; Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 10:1 [50b]; Sotah 5:6; Yalkut Shimoni Toldos Remez 111; Mishleiy Remez 944; The concept of Chumashim is mentioned in Megillah 27a

[8] See Mishneh Kesef of Rav Yosef Even Kasafi [1200’s] p. 112 “We will never really know who was the first person to separate the Parshiyos and make the Torah into five parts, but most likely this was done by Moshe himself.”

[9] See Mishneh Menachos 4:3 who mentions Chumash Pikudin and Toras Kohanim; See Rav Menachem Kasher in Miluim Letorah Shleima 8:1

[10] Shabbos 116a “There are seven Sifrei Torah” Rashi ibid “The verses of Vayehi Binsoa Haron are their own Sefer, and it hence splits [Bamidbar] into three Sefarim.”; Yalkut Shimoni Mishleiy Remez 944; See Zohar Mishpatim p. 119b

[11] This is derived from the verse Mishlei 9:1 “Chatzva Amudeha Shiva.” [Yerushalmi ibid]

[12] Shabbos ibid

Answer 4

Here is a listing of some of the earliest references in Sifrei Chazal to a notion of five separate Chumashim.

Let's start with ויקרא, במדבר since they are mentioned clearly in the Mishna. The most prominent mention is in מנחות ד:ג which brings them together

אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.....שֶׁכָּל הָאָמוּר בְּחֻמַּשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים, קָרַב בַּמִּדְבָּר. וְכָל הָאָמוּר בְּתוֹרַת כֹּהֲנִים, לֹא קָרַב בַּמִּדְבָּר

For ויקרא we additionally have מגילה ג:ה

בְּפֶסַח קוֹרִין בְּפָרָשַׁת מוֹעֲדוֹת שֶׁל תּוֹרַת כֹּהֲנִים

And for במדבר we additionally have the following line in both יומא ז:א, סוטה ז:ז

וּבֶעָשׂוֹר שֶׁבְּחֻמַּשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים קוֹרֵא עַל פֶּה

It appears that דברים is also mentioned in the very next Mishna in Sota (ז:ח) regarding the Torah reading of the mitzva of Hakhel. (It could theoretically mean the "פרשה פתוחה "אלה הדברים but the context seems to imply a sefer name)

וְקוֹרֵא מִתְּחִלַּת אֵלֶּה הַדְּבָרִים עַד שְׁמַע

For שמות we find a reference to it (as חומש שני) in a Baraisa - בבלי סוטה לו עמ' א,ב (just after another reference to במדבר) when describing the arrangement of the names of the 12 shevatim on the אבני זכרון

רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: לֹא כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁחֲלוּקִין בְּחוֹמֶשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים, חֲלוּקִין בְּאַבְנֵי אֵפוֹד, אֶלָּא כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁחֲלוּקִין בְּחוֹמֶשׁ שֵׁנִי.

Upon further consideration ספר שמות has been mentioned in the midrash and meforshim as a candidate for an internal reference in the Chumash when it comes to the mysterious and cryptic pasuk in the leadup to שירת הבאר:

במדבר כא:יד - עַל כֵּן יֵאָמַר בְּסֵפֶר מִלְחֲמֹת ה' אֶת וָהֵב בְּסוּפָה וְאֶת הַנְּחָלִים אַרְנוֹן

While much ink has been spilled on the identity of this mystery-sefer, the מדרש אגדה states that it's none other than ספר שמות

על כן יאמר בספר מלחמת ה'. זה ספר ואלה שמות, שבו כתוב המלחמה שעשה הקב"ה עם מצרים, והמלחמה שעל הים, שנאמר ה' ילחם לכם ואתם תחרישון (שמות י"ד י"ד), זו מלחמת הים, כי ה' נלחם להם במצרים (שם שם כ"ה), זו מלחמת מצרים, מה כתיב שם, כמו שעשה להם הקב"ה על ים סוף, שנאמר עד יעבור עמך ה' עד יעבור עם זו קנית (שמות ט"ו ט"ז). עד יעבור נחלי ערנון עד יעבור את הירדן, לכך נאמר את והב כסופה, את אשר יהב בסוף כן יעשה בנחלי ארנון

The אלשיך (and a few others) also chime in with similar statements like the following:

והיא שאומר על כן יאמר כלומר יאות ליאמר נס זה בספר מלחמות ה' הוא ספר שמות ששם מלחמות ה'. כי הלא את והב בסופה כלומר אשר יהב ה' בים סוף ידמה אל הנחלים ארנון שנוכל להשוותם את והב בסופה ואת הנחלים ארנון.

This does make much sense since when you search the Chumash for mentions of שם השם immediately adjacent to a lashon of מלחמה (aside from בספר מלחמת השם), four out of the six other occurrences appear in שמות regarding G-d waging war against the Egyptians and against Amalek:

ה' יִלָּחֵם לָכֶם וְאַתֶּם תַּחֲרִשׁוּן (שמות יד:יד)

וַיָּסַר אֵת אֹפַן מַרְכְּבֹתָיו וַיְנַהֲגֵהוּ בִּכְבֵדֻת וַיֹּאמֶר מִצְרַיִם אָנוּסָה מִפְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי ה' נִלְחָם לָהֶם בְּמִצְרָיִם (שמות יד:כה)

ה' אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה ה' שְׁמוֹ (שמות טו:ג)

וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי יָד עַל כֵּס יָהּ מִלְחָמָה לַה' בַּעֲמָלֵק מִדֹּר דֹּר (שמות יז:טז)

בראשית is another matter entirely. While it's not mentioned by name in דברי תנאים, it does make an appearance as ספר הישר in multiple places which actually derive the name from Tanach. To preface, we must examine the following two pesukim:

(יהושע י:יג) ...וַיִּדֹּם הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְיָרֵחַ עָמָד עַד יִקֹּם גּוֹי אֹיְבָיו הֲלֹא הִיא כְתוּבָה עַל סֵפֶר הַיָּשָׁר

(שמואל ב א:יח) וַיֹּאמֶר לְלַמֵּד בְּנֵי יְהוּדָה קָשֶׁת הִנֵּה כְתוּבָה עַל סֵפֶר הַיָּשָׁר

And then let's examine two gemaros which derive from these pesukim:

ירושלמי סוטה פרק א

אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ.....הֲלֹא הִיא כְתוּבָה עַל סֵפֶר הַיָּשָׁר. תְּרִין אֲמוֹרִין. חַד אָמַר. זֶה סֵפֶר בְּרֵאשִׁית. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר. זֶה חוּמָשׁ הַפִּיקּוּדִים.

בבלי ע"ז כה עמ' א

כתיב (שמואל ב א, יח) "ויאמר ללמד בני יהודה קשת הנה כתובה על ספר הישר". מאי ספר הישר? א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן זה ספר אברהם יצחק ויעקב שנקראו ישרים דכתיב בהו (במדבר כג, י) תמות נפשי מות ישרים ותהי אחריתי כמוהו

Additionally, the Midrash Rabba mentions the existence of ספר בראשית as a standalone entity:

שמות רבה ה:כב

וּמשֶׁה אָמַר לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: לָמָה הֲרֵעֹתָה לָעָם הַזֶּה, אֶלָּא כָּךְ אָמַר לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, נָטַלְתִּי סֵפֶר בְּרֵאשִׁית וְקָרָאתִי בוֹ וְרָאִיתִי מַעֲשֵׂיהֶן שֶׁל דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל הֵיאַךְ נִדּוֹנוּ, מִדַּת הַדִּין הָיְתָה, וּמַעֲשֵׂה דּוֹר הַפְלָגָה וְשֶׁל סְדוֹמִיִּים הֵיאַךְ נִדּוֹנוּ, וּמִדַּת הַדִּין הָיְתָה.

פירוש מהרז"ו - "נטלתי ספר בראשית". משמע שספר בראשית היה כבר כתוב כולו

Finally, the following sources mention a distinction of five different Chumashim in the laws of ספרי תורה:

מס' סופרים ב:ד

מניחין בין ספר לספר בתורה ארבעה שיטין

ברייתא בבא בתרא יג עמ' ב

בֵּין חוּמָּשׁ לְחוּמָּשׁ שֶׁל תּוֹרָה – אַרְבָּעָה שִׁיטִין

מס' סופרים ג:ג

אין עושין תורה חומשין כשהן מפוזרין תורה חומשין מקובצין שאין מורידין מקדושה חמורה לקדושה קלה אבל עושה חומשין תורה אימתי בזמן שמדתן ושיטתן שוין

Answer 5

B"H

There's no indication in any Torah sources that I'm aware of that suggest that the Torah (books Moshe) was ever any number of books other than 5, and then divided up later

(There is an opinion that it's really 7, but that's different than saying it was divided up later, it's just another perspective, and many commentators say the 7 and 5 division is just different levels of the Torah)

Each book of the Torah has to be separated by 4 blank lines, and every Torah that's written has to be written based off of another Torah, all the way back to Moshe, so it doesn't seem possible that there was ever a time that they were one then divided up later The Rebbe address the significance of the 5 books of the Torah in Sefer Hasichos 5751, section 10 (pages 10 and 11)

In short, the Torah can be divided either into 5 books, or 7.

If one counts the two verses vayehi binsoa haaron, "when the Ark would travel.. Etc.", as some do, then the book of Bamidbar is divided into 3 sections - Bamidbar, Vayehi Binsoa, and the passage after it, "the nation was complaining".

It explains that that last book (of the Bamidbar division) is specifically all about negative things (Jews complaining, spies, korach, bilaam, minyan women etc etc), in order to elevate even mundane matters and make them part of the Torah.

An example it gives of this is a lever to lift up a house; in order to properly lift it up, it has to be lifted from the bottom. So too in order for the Torah to properly elevate the world, it has to elevate the lowest elements.

This is the idea of 7 (books), corresponding to all of the seven sefiros, even those that give room for "the other side", in order to elevate even that.

In general there are 7 types of Jews total, corresponding to the 7 branches of the menorah. This Includes ALL types, even types of Jews that aren't necessarily "holy".

5, however, only corresponds to the sefiros of chesed through hod, the sefiros that don't give any room for evil or anything "outside" of holiness.

In terms of the Jews, it says in pirkei Avos chapter 2 that rabbi yochanan Ben Zakaria had 5 students.

But did he, who started yavneh and it's wise ones, and continued all of Torah learning in exile after the churban, only have 5 students?

The sicha says no, but that all of the students, learners of Torah, that he had are all divided into 5 general categories.

This is only referring to categories of torah learning, unlike the 7 general types which includes even types that aren't directly involved in holiness.

So the 7 books of the Torah division represents how the Torah elevates even the "lower" level of Jews, all 7 types, both holy and not, while the 5 books division of the Torah represents how the Torah exists just in a state of holiness -- corresponding to the first 5 sefiros only, and the 5 categories of students of Torah (rabbi yochanan ben zakai is said to be eternal in this context the 5 categories of students etc)

It goes into a lot more detail about the significance of the divisions of 5 or 7 books corresponding to the avoda we do with ourselves, or with others, and lots of more details; see there.

Answer 6

The reason for 5 be due to the number 10, not the number 5. The 5 books are half of the 10, which are completed by the 5 books of Tehilim. See Midrash Tehillim (Shocher Tov) 1. 10 is the number of Sefirot... Hashem gives us half and we give half, and then the Torah is complete.

Answer 7

I was pointed out in one of the classes that the gematria of the first letters of each chumash is 21. The first words are:

בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית, וְאֵ֗לֶּה, וַיִּקְרָ֖א, וַיְדַבֵּ֨ר, אֵ֣לֶּה

The gematria of first letters: 2+6+6+6+1=21, which is the same as gematria of the Hashem's name א-ה-י-ה (Shemos 3:14). This name governs developing reality. The meaning of the name is further discussed in Shemos Rabba 3:6.

We might not have had the Torah at all if Adam, generation of the flood, and generation of the Tower of Bavel did not sin. Creation of Abraham and Jewish people is what brought the need for the Torah.

The entire Chumash could have been one book. However, certain key events changed the straight path into a winding one. The brothers sold Yosef which created sefer Shemos. Ma'aseh haEgel created the need to build the Mishkan as an attonement and description of the service there in Sefer Vayikra. The constructed Mishkan started functioning when Nadav and Avihu brought foreign fire. Midrash Bamidbar Rabba 15:25 connects the fire of physical desires displayed by people during travels with the fire of Nadav and Avihu:

“Gather to Me” – did they not have elders before then? But is it not written at Mount Sinai: “Moses and Aaron, Nadav and Avihu [and seventy of the elders of Israel] ascended” (Exodus 24:9). This portion was after that, and there were elders then. It is, rather, that when Israel encountered these matters: “The people were seeking complaints...[a fire of the Lord burned in their midst, and it consumed at the edge of the camp]” (Numbers 11:1), they were all burned at that time. Their burning was like the burning of Nadav and Avihu, as they, too, conducted themselves with inappropriate levity when they ascended Mount Sinai, when they saw the Divine Presence: “They beheld God and they ate and they drank” (Exodus 24:11). Was there eating and drinking there? To what is the matter comparable? It is to a servant who was serving his master with his food in his hand and he would take bites from it. So, they conducted themselves with inappropriate levity, as though they were eating and drinking. The elders and Nadav and Avihu were deserving of being burned at that moment, but because the day of the giving of the Torah was very dear before the Holy One blessed be He, therefore He did not want to strike them on that day and cause a breach through them. That is what is written: “He did not extend his hand against the noblemen of the children of Israel” (Exodus 24:11); by inference, they were deserving of His hand being extended against them. However, after the passage of time, he collected from them. Nadav and Avihu, too, were burned when they entered the Tent of Meeting, and they were burned when they expressed that craving, as it is stated: “The rabble [vehasafsuf] that was among them expressed a craving” (Numbers 11:4).

In other words, Nadav and Avihu brought to us Sefer Bamidbar with all the strife therein.

Finally, the report of the Spies forced additional time in the desert and a new Sefer Devarim, which Moshe starts with the warning איכה (Devarim 1:12) and rebuke regarding sin of the Spies (Devarim 1:22).

Answer 8

According to בית אלהים, שער היסודות פרק לב, there are several possibilities.

Five book correlate to Adam, Noach, Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov.

Or: Amraam, Yocheved, Aharon, Miriam, Moshe.

Alternatively corresponding to five places: Mitzrayim, Marah, Har Sinai, Ohel Moed, Aravos Moav.