What is the Oral Torah and why
was it later recorded in writing?
A perfect text must, by
definition, be totally unambiguous, requiring no additional information to be
understood. Since the Torah is “perfect” (Psalms 19:8), the Torah must not contain
ambiguities. The Written Torah, however, is pregnant with startling ambiguities!
Therefore, although all 613
commandments are identified in the Written Torah, the Oral Torah supplies the
necessary, detailed information that has enabled us throughout Jewish history
to perform these commandments. . . . .
The following are just a few of
the numerous striking examples of commandments (mitzvot), where the
Written Torah does not supply the necessary information which would explain how
to fulfill these ordained commandments highlighted in the Torah:
·
Moses instructed the Jewish people to perform kosher
slaughter כַּאֲשֶׁ֖ר צִוִּיתִ֑ךָ, “as I have commanded you” (Deuteronomy
12:21). Yet nowhere in the written text of the Torah do we find even a hint of
one of the intricate and demanding rules of kosher slaughter. Where can be find
these instructions that God demanded?
·
The Torah states that “It is a law for all time,
throughout the ages, in all your settlements; you must not eat any at or any
blood” (Leviticus 3:17). To what type of fat was Moses referring? What exactly
is fat? Are there different types of animal fat, some of which are permitted
and some which are forbidden? How are these fats differentiated? . . .
·
When the Jews returned to Jerusalem following a
7-year Babylonian exile, with permission from the Persian government to rebuild
the Temple, the prophet Haggai tested the priests on their knowledge of the
laws of purity. He asked them the following two questions:
If a man is carrying a sacrificial flesh in a fold of his garment, and with
that fold touches bread stew, wine, oil, or any other food, will the latter
become holy?...If someone defiled by a corpse touches any o these, will it be
defiled?
(Haggai 2:12-13)
The answers to these questions are not found anywhere in the Torah/ How were
the priests to know the answers if not from an oral tradition? . . .
·
In spite of the unambiguous declaration in the
Torah, the Oral Torah states that the phrase “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a
tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot” (Ex 21:22-27) is not to be
understood literally. Instead, these punishments are held in the oral tradition
to imply monetary compensation—as opposed to a literal Lex talionis,
where the person who has injured another person receives the same injury in compensation.
Logically, since the Torah requires that penalties be universally applicable,
the phrase cannot be interpreted literally; it would be inapplicable to blind
or eyeless offenders. The Oral Torah explains that this concept entails
monetary compensation in tort cases (Talmud Bava Kama 841). . . .
The marriage of Boaz to Ruth, who
was a Moabite as described in the Book of ruth, directly contradicts the
prohibition found in Deuteronomy 23:3-4, where the Torah emphatically states
that it is forbidden for a Jew to marry a Moabite. In fact, Scripture
explicitly states that a Moabite may never become a member of the Jewish Nation!
In view of this prohibition in the Written Torah, how is it possible that
direct descendants of Ruth—all the Davidic kings, including King David and the
messiah—could become leaders of the Jewish people?
The Oral Torah, however, explains that this prohibition is limited to Moabite
men, not women. Thus, only the Oral Law enabled Ruth to become the progenitor
of the most illustrious men in Jewish history.
Once again, Christendom is forced to rely entirely on the Oral Torah to advance
the core tenant of its belief. (Tovia Singer, Let’s Get Biblical: Why
Doesn’t Judaism Accept the Christian Messiah? 2 vols. [Forest Hills, N.Y.:
Outreach Judaism, 2014], 1:248, 251-52, 253, 255)
