Why Did G-d Give An Oral Torah?Now that it has been established that there is an oral tradition regarding the law, the question remains why G-d intentionally gave the Torah in two parts -- a written part and an oral part.
20. As we said above (1), any written book is subject to ambiguity [Maimonides, Moreh Nevuchim, 1:71]. Since that is the case, had G-d only given us a written Torah, its interpretation would have been debated due to vagueness. Therefore, G-d also gave a tradition that would be taught orally from teacher to student so that the teacher could clarify any ambiguities [Rashi, Eiruvin, 21b sv. Veyoter; R. Yosef Albo, Sefer HaIkkarim, 3:23]. R. Yair Bachrach [Responsa Chavat Yair, 192] and R. Ya'akov Tzvi Mecklenburg [Haketav Vehakabalah, vol. 1 p. viii] dispute this argument and claim that since G-d is omnipotent, He could have created a totally unambiguous book. However, it seems to this author that the original argument was assuming that any written book is, by definition, ambiguous. It is a logical impossibility to have a completely unambiguous book. In fact, the example that R. Bachrach offers of an unambiguous book is Maimonides' Mishneh Torah which, despite its clarity and brilliance, has dozens if not hundreds of commentaries that try to clarify its ambiguities.
1. Perhaps Gil Student is right in that all books are ambiguous to some degree. That still does not explain why only Tanakh, only this one book, should have a divine oral tradition associated with it. Why isn't there an oral tradition for any other book? Why isn't there a need for an oral tradition for any other book?
2. Debates due to vagueness: This amounts to an appeal to consequences, which is a logical fallacy. Student says that less debate is more desirable, and therefore Orthodox Judaism is superior to Biblical Judaism because it reduces debate. But this point does not argue for the Oral Law based on its merits. We could create a system where all is decided by a single person. Under this system, there would be no debate or vagueness at all, yet it does not mean that such a system is correct.
3. Debates due to vagueness: Let us compare Biblical and Orthodox Judaisms on the amounts of vagueness. There is much more vagueness under Orthodox Judaism! Thus, if we really went by Student's appeal to consequences, we would have to prefer Biblical Judaism.
Here is a proof that there is less debate under Biblical Judaism: Judaism specifies a number of commandments. We must do all that the commandments tell us to do, and avoid all that the commandments forbid us. But on everything else, we can do as we please. Different people might understand each of the commandments differently. Vagueness is the amount of various interpretations possible for each commandment. The total amount of vagueness is the summation of vagueness over each commandment. In Biblical Judaism, (1) there is less commandments in total, and (2) the amount of vagueness in each commandment is less. Thus, the total amount of vagueness is necessarily less.
Less commandments: Orthodox Judaism contains all of the commandments in the Torah plus all of the commandments in the Oral Torah. The total number of commandments in Orthodox Judaism is much greater than in Biblical Judaism. This is because
(1) Oral Torah claims that there are some Biblical commandments that do not actually exist in the Torah. For example, the prohibition on mixing mammalian meat and dairy, private domains, and tefillin are claimed to be from the Torah while they are actually not.
(2) Oral Torah expands existing (and invented) Biblical commandments into other commandments. In this category, it is forbidden to mix bird meat and dairy, eruv, and all the laws of making a tefillin.
(3) Oral Torah adds completely new commandments as well. For example, one hundred blessings per day, covering one's head, and Shabbat candles are exclusively from the Oral Torah.
Less vagueness per commandment: the commandments in Biblical Judaism are based on the plain (not necessarily literal) meaning of the text as it would have been understood by its original readers. In Orthodox Judaism, each verse can have many "hidden" meanings. These additional meanings are a source of added vagueness.
Vagueness abounds in Orthodox Judaism. Pick almost any law, and there is at least two opinions on it. Here are just some simple questions to ask your Local Orthodox Rabbi, off the top of my head. I am sure I could come up with better examples if need be: Can we only drink milk that is cholov yisroel? What is the order of the scrolls inside the tefillin? What is the specific definition of a private domain? Which blessings are we required to say each day? What distance can one walk with an uncovered head? How long before Shabbat do we light the candles?
In fact, proponents of Orthodox Judaism often say that vagueness is a good thing as it gives the laws enough flexibility to apply them to the "real world". Biblical Judaism is often criticized for being "too rigid". So it's rather surprising to see Student arguing here that Orthodox Judaism has less vagueness.
3. Teachers are very important. While it's possible to learn almost any subject by simply reading books, most people do learn with a teacher, especially when they are learning the more difficult subjects such as math or the sciences. Still, not one of these difficult subjects has an "oral tradition" or, what's more, a divine oral tradition. All of the known math is written down, and a student who does not have a teacher can learn math from a book. In fact, many teachers, when teaching, simply go by the book: there is nothing new that they can add.
Posted by Ami at March 14, 2004 12:07 AM | TrackBack