Interpreting the Torah in accordance with cultural reality

שו”ת › Category: philosophy › Interpreting the Torah in accordance with cultural reality

asked 9 years ago

Hello Rabbi
The rabbi deals a lot with the issue of adapting the Torah to existing culture, and I thought that there might be a mechanism in the Torah that allows for adaptation between the Torah and culture.
The Torah is studied in many ways, and sometimes we find two contradictory forms, such as the Peshat and the Haredesh, and many have tried to reconcile the contradictions (eye for eye, etc.). I thought that the many levels of the Torah were intended to allow Torah scholars to study the Torah in a way that is appropriate for the culture.
And to say an eye for an eye, it may be a legitimate punishment in a certain culture, but the Sages, whose culture had no place for such punishment, established the law in the sermons that the eye can be exchanged for money.
We also found (I don’t remember the exact matter) that a Sha’ar established a law contrary to earlier generations by virtue of “its ways are the ways of pleasure,” and there too it is possible that a Sha’ar established a different interpretation of the Torah because that is how the Torah suited his culture.
Does the rabbi know of any reference in the sources to such a possibility?
Honorable Mention

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 9 years ago

Hello Rafi. There is no need for the sermon to be suitable for the layman, as the Gra wrote. But even a sermon has rules, and it is unlikely that we do whatever we want there just to achieve a desired result. Otherwise, the Torah loses its meaning, because we are simply doing what we decided. Therefore, even a midrashic argument should hold water on its own, and it is not enough that it yields the halakhah we desire. It is true that when interpreting/expounding the Torah, there is a dependence on the interpretation of the interpreter/preacher, but the interpretation is only a tool to direct it to one of the possible interpretations and not to create another interpretation out of thin air on demand. The sermon of the Rabbi is probably your intention to sit down with the Hadith in its context. This is an example that is usually cited to show that there is a creator of the sermon (and not just a supporter) and that the preacher’s interpretation and values influence the midrashic product. See, for example, Moshe Halbertal’s book Interpretive Revolutions in the Making. —————————————————————————————— Asks: I didn’t mean that you can interpret whatever you want, but that basically the Torah was given in several forms that exist in different situations, and therefore when there is a cultural change, the Torah will be given to be studied in a certain way that is consistent with the culture and the renewed reality. Of course, when it cannot be interpreted, we will not change the Torah, but as long as there are several interpretations, we will accept one of the interpretations because it is adapted to reality and culture. —————————————————————————————— Rabbi: I don’t think it is necessary to assume that the Torah was given in advance in several forms. The Torah is one, and the interpretation is a result of the circumstances. It is clear that the same thing can be seen or applied in several ways according to the person and the circumstances. The assumption that all the circumstances were thought out in advance is not necessary here. But this is a minor matter, in principle I agree.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.