Question

In honor of Rabbi Dr. Michael, hello,
 
I am A', who discussed with you quite a bit the issue of the obligation to observe the commandments according to the Pharisaic tradition as opposed to other traditions such as the Sadducees.

As I understood it, you argued that since all we have in our hands is the Pharisaic tradition, and it seems that the Holy One, blessed be He, would not expect us to act in accordance with something we do not know—rather, if He gave a Torah, then presumably He expects us to interpret it as best we understand it—then what remains for us is to act according to what we have, according to the interpretation accepted among us, namely the Pharisaic tradition.

What interests me is what you would say about the idea that the commandments should be observed in the approach of Jesus, the founder of Christianity.
I am not giving rational legitimacy to the Christian approach that cancels the commandments altogether (and certainly not to a rational belief in the miracles described in the New Testament).
But it seems that Jesus, the original figure whom a substantial segment of the Judaism of his time—including major rabbis—supported, would suggest taking the commandments into account, but not all the fine details—

In the Sermon on the Mount—
 

"Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying: The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat. Therefore whatever they tell you, keep and do; but do not do according to their deeds, for they speak and do not act." (Matthew 23)

 
It is also told that he allowed his disciples to pluck ears of grain on the Sabbath, and not to wash their hands, and the message seems to be that one should observe the commandments found in the Pharisaic tradition, but not their details.

And it seems that Jesus was an ordained rabbi, and many Jews followed him, including many rabbis.

If for a moment we relate to the normative value taught by Jesus and his early disciples, who still observed commandments to one degree or another, and set aside all the miracle stories and wonders—which, if I were to take anything from them, would perhaps be only something metaphorical—perhaps we could conclude that we have in our possession another tradition: a tradition that says one should observe Jewish law according to the Pharisaic tradition in the days of Jesus (and it would be interesting whether it is possible to reconstruct it, based on research into the sources of the traditions in the Mishnah and the baraitot and the halakhic midrashim of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Ishmael, and in Talmudic traditions…) and to follow it.

But the argument does not end there. If we really could reconstruct such a Jesus-based Jewish law that one should follow, and remember to go by the essence of the Jewish law and not get caught up in every fine detail, then perhaps this is also a tradition that is much more likely to come from God, the creator of the natural morality in our hearts.

As you already agreed with me, natural morality too was created by God, and therefore we can learn from it about God's will for us. If so, it is more coherent, and requires fewer assumptions, than believing in so many fine points of Jewish law as opposed to the halakhic command reflected in the words of Jesus and his early disciples.

I should emphasize that I do not know Christianity well, and I am speaking from what I do know. I do not present myself as an expert or as someone who knows these matters in an orderly, systematic way. But it seemed worthwhile to ask you, also because these things trouble me personally as a Jewish person for whom it is not easy to identify with the figure who gave rise to Christianity. It's just that truth compels me to deal with it.

With holiday blessings and in doing God's will,
A'