Q&A: The Reliability of the Written Torah and Its Place in Judaism
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.
The Reliability of the Written Torah and Its Place in Judaism
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I have two questions, and I’d be happy if you could answer them or direct me to places that address the topic.
- Even if we assume that something from the Written Torah was given to Moses at Mount Sinai, I still think it is rather far-fetched to say that it was preserved and that the Torah we have today is identical to the Torah given to Moses at Mount Sinai. If so, why does דווקא this text obligate us—both on the level of the general stories presented there and on the level of specific words and letters on which the Sages rely so heavily in halakhic rulings?
- Following up on the previous question: even if we say that the Torah was preserved perfectly and that the text we have is completely identical to the one given at Sinai, the moment it was given in writing (and not, for example, imprinted within us), it is subject to personal interpretation. At the end of the day, we do not observe the Written Torah at all, only the Oral Torah. Even the way the Torah is to be interpreted was determined by human beings. The relationship to the Torah becomes like the relationship to a literary work—as raw material in the hands of the creator, which the Sages can analyze however they want and derive from it whatever suits them. Like a kind of springboard from which you can jump wherever you want. And of course that is what will happen, because once it was given in writing we are forced to interpret it in a human way. If so, Judaism and Jewish law are completely human and entirely disconnected from the divine—unless you say that the entire Oral Torah was also given at Sinai, but in my humble opinion that is rather far-fetched. So what is really the point of them? What is the point of everything we observe if it is all human, like any other legal system? One could say that Judaism is unique in that its legal system does not come only to regulate relations between people, but also includes commandments between man and God. But then the question remains: what is the difference between Judaism’s legal system and the legal systems of other religions, which also contain these criteria?
Thank you very much!
Answer
Hello Nitzan.
- Indeed, it is not likely that it was preserved in full, although there are fairly strict mechanisms of preservation. But it is hard to believe that no mistakes crept in. The question then becomes: what exactly do you think we are supposed to do with that assumption? If there is something that is clearly a mistake—fine. If it only seems to us to be a mistake—perhaps that too is fine. But a general assessment that mistakes occurred changes nothing. Bottom line, the assumption is that as long as it has not been proven that something is a mistake, there is a presumption that it is the binding source. Again, this does not stem from confidence that this is really the case, but it is a reasonable presumption to act on in situations of doubt. That is how presumptions work throughout Jewish law and in every legal system. When we do not know the situation, we follow the most reasonable assessment until proven otherwise. It is indeed true that if one accepts your assumption (and as I said, I share it), that makes it possible to deal with verses that raise serious problems. There is room to assume that they were not there originally, or that they changed. But of course one must be very careful about the degree of certainty and the evidence that there really is a problem here, and how much we change, and what we change toward, and who does the changing.
- I also share your second assumption, but here only partially. Indeed, most of what we have was not given at Sinai. That is completely clear (much more so than what I wrote regarding the Written Torah). On the other hand, the foundations were given there (such as the basic tools of interpretation and exposition). From that point on, this is a human interpretive and exegetical activity. But that itself is what the Holy One, blessed be He, expected when He gave the Torah. He gave us interpretive tools so that we would use them. Therefore, even though the Oral Torah is the work of human hands, it is still binding by the authority of the Holy One, blessed be He. It is like a minister who delegates authority to an official or to a ministry director-general (what in the legal world is called secondary legislation). The decisions are the official’s, but they are binding by virtue of the minister’s power and authority. And again, here too there is no doubt that quite a few mistakes were made, and therefore all my comments from the previous section are relevant here as well.