Q&A: The Tablets
The Tablets
Question
Hi,
As I understand it, you think it is very plausible that at least parts of the Five Books of the Torah are authentic, meaning that they were given to Moses at Sinai.
- Would it be correct to say that in your view the Ten Commandments are the most authentic part? After all, the central event of the Torah is its very giving, and according to the text what was given first and foremost was the tablets.
Answer
The most authentic part is the very occurrence of the revelation itself. The last eight commandments, according to the tradition of the Sages, aside from the first two, were not actually heard directly from the mouth of the Almighty. Beyond that, it is possible that the text underwent editing as well (there are variant versions between the first tablets and the second ones).
Discussion on Answer
I wasn't referring to the text but to the content described in it. As for the text, I can't say which part is the most authentic.
If you don't decide what, in your view, is the most authentic part of the Five Books, I think you run into a problem. The validity of the Torah for a believer derives, by its own account, first and foremost from its own testimony that it was given to Moses by God. Now, a principled clarification of that question can't avoid the following decision: which passages were likely given as they are, and which were likely fabricated later.
On the face of it, the most central and important part of the entire Five Books—from its own point of view—is the tablets (because only regarding them does the text testify that they were given directly by God). If that's true, then the text has seemingly already chosen for you not only what its most important part is (the commandments), but also "decided" that this is the most authentic passage.
If I'm right, turning your back on that truth is a problem..
In the next comment I'll demonstrate a difficulty that can arise if you haven't chosen what is most authentic.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that an insightful reader reaches the conclusion that the stories of the Patriarchs are, in his view, the most authentic part (say he was convinced of this on the basis of biblical scholarship, etc.).
The problem is that such a position contradicts the most basic truth that the Torah is trying to persuade us of—namely, that it itself was given at Sinai. But the stories of the Patriarchs are part of the Torah, and therefore were supposed to have been transmitted to us at Sinai (or at least sanctified by virtue of the Sinai revelation)…
This is a paradoxical position and therefore also a problematic one.
I hope you understood what I mean (I'm betting you'll say you didn't—please try to prove me wrong…)
I tried, but you were proved wrong. 🙂
If I was proved wrong, then that means you did understand…
That's what happens when you have a day off from work. You sit in a café and waste your limited time anyway on nonsense like this..
Great fun!!
I no longer expect you to read what I write, but at least read what you wrote.
Unfortunately, I'm not sitting in a café, so allow me not to waste my time. Even if you're interested in wasting your own time, it's worth taking others into account too.
Apparently I didn't explain myself well… When I'm on vacation I have more time to delve into your words (to the extent of my modest abilities, of course), and I stand behind what I wrote. Vacation or no vacation.
I think I touched on a real problem, and from your words it emerges that not only do you not understand me (which really isn't so terrible..), you also don't understand it.
This wasn't trolling from the outset, but rather a sincere question.
A sincere question, of course.
Sincere… this spell-checker is killing me.
Let's leave aside the matter of your being proved wrong (for that you only need to read what you wrote). I don't understand the question. I'll just note that belief in the giving of the Torah is based not only on the Torah's own testimony but mainly on our tradition.
I don't understand your sharpening of the point about my being proved wrong. Apparently it's too deep for me.
I'll just note that in your last sentence ("belief in the giving of the Torah is based not only on the Torah's own testimony but mainly on our tradition") you opened a somewhat new discussion. Maybe this isn't the place to address it, but I will say that you've just revealed something astonishing to me.
It turns out that in your view Judaism is built first and foremost on the tradition transmitted/created by flesh-and-blood human beings, and not on Torah from Heaven.
Very puzzling to me..
On the other hand, maybe your answer reveals from another direction the paradoxical nature I pointed out earlier. That's something too.
Do you mean to say that the most authentic part is that section of text
that describes the event? And if so, which event? Moses going up the mountain? The people below seeing the voices?
I'm not asking about what can be found in the tradition of the Sages or in other traditions, but about what is found in the Five Books of the Torah themselves (the plain, simple meaning).
The background to the question is my impression that the plain meaning suggests that the most important passage in the entire Five Books is the Ten Commandments. If that's true, then one has to ask whether the Ten Commandments are also the most authentic.