New on the site: Michi-bot. An intelligent assistant based on the writings of Rabbi Michael Avraham.

Legends of all kinds

שו”תCategory: faithLegends of all kinds
asked 7 months ago

Towards the end of the daily page of Part Chalak, I couldn’t help but rethink every concept of Agadot Chazal (I haven’t yet read the virtue of forgetfulness at the end of the tractate, so I still remember a little).
In the Talmud, and in particular in Part One, there are all kinds of different and strange legends.
I think the attitude that the Rabbi presents is the correct one. Although I think it is necessary to clear up a few points that I am satisfied with.
There are actually several types:
Legends that don’t claim to be historical and have a moral – it’s clear that it wasn’t real but only came to teach some point.
Legends that claim to be historical and have a moral – is there any point in believing that they really existed? I’m talking about things that could have existed physically and historically, but that Zehl had no way of knowing about or that the probability is low and they probably invented them (for example, all the Sodom stories in the episode with Eliezer – it’s pretty clear that Zehl was just looking to pour all sorts of conspiracies about Sodom that they themselves knew about and pinned it on Eliezer, who was the closest historically)
Legends that claim to be historical and have no moral – is there any point in believing them? After all, there is no moral here anymore. (You could say that it was just boring in the Beit Midrash and they wanted to break the atmosphere a bit with stories)
Legends that do not claim to be historical and have no moral – why were these legends brought? Is there any point in studying them? (For example, the graphic descriptions of Zimri ben Salva 21+ inside the tent, it is clear that no one was there with him to tell all this and it is clear that it is physically impossible and it is all just for nothing, but then it is not clear why it was even written in the Gemara. On a personal level, I was shocked to read this and did not understand why it was even in the Gemara and not censored over the years. In my opinion, it is completely unnecessary)
I would be happy if the Rabbi would address and perhaps add more points according to the holy custom.
Thank you very much.


Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

0 Answers
מיכי Staff answered 7 months ago
In general, I see no reason to accept a legend as a historical account. So why were they brought in? I have no idea.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

ינון replied 7 months ago

Thank you. Has the rabbi previously addressed biblical criticism? It seems that their factual claims are correct but the interpretation is wrong.

מיכי Staff replied 7 months ago

Only in a very general way. The reason for this is that their claims, even factually, really don't sound true to me. On the contrary, they're pretty much floating around in the air. There are many disputes and blatant agenda biases within them as well. Speculative considerations that change frequently, every time with a new idea. It doesn't really sound convincing to me. I'm not an expert in the field, and if it interests you, you should talk to experts, but that's my impression, and that's exactly why I'm not an expert in the field. It doesn't seem interesting or useful to me.

מיכי Staff replied 7 months ago

There is a general reference to this at the end of the second book in my trilogy.

Leave a Reply

Back to top button