Oral Torah
Greetings to Rabbi Michael Avraham,
I understand that you believe that the Toshab’a developed relatively late, only during the Second Temple period. Also, it is implied from your words that until the Second Temple period, the halakhic tradition was oriented toward the simplification of the words of the Bible, and not rabbis that are far from the simplification of the Bible.
If that’s the case, I wanted to ask how it was possible for the Sages to innovate by taking the literal interpretations of the Bible out of their literal interpretations in practical matters of halakhic law? After all, they did not have an ancient tradition that this was the right and proper thing to do. And if this is an explanation, it is not at all clear that this is indeed the proper thing to do. So is it not appropriate in our day to return to the literal interpretation of the Bible?
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I didn't know you didn't think so, I don't remember where I got it.
If so, then why don't we find laws like sermons in the Nech.
And what does the rabbi think about the opinion of the scholars who claim that the Sermon is a development of the Second Temple? And before that, the Sadducees who were Karaites ruled. As I understand it, some of these dogmas take from the Nech as well.
In the Bible you will find almost no laws at all. It does not deal with that. The sermon is constantly evolving, but its source is the Bible.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
