Q&A: Question
Question
Question
Honorable Rabbi, hello,
I am unsure about several things.
I would be glad if the Rabbi could answer.
A. Maimonides wrote in the introduction to the Mishnah that when the sages disagree about the source of a derivation but everyone agrees that it is indeed derived, then it is a law given to Moses at Sinai. I was unsure about this, since in Kiddushin there is a dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel whether it is a perutah or a dinar, and no one there disputes that betrothal can be effected with money according to everyone; the question is only how much money. And if this is a tradition from Moses, why are they disputing? And even if we say that we received from Moses that one betroths with money but not the amount, why does Maimonides himself write that money is rabbinic?
And seemingly he contradicts himself, since there was no dispute in the Talmud about whether we derive money or not.
B. Are the hermeneutical principles by which the Torah is interpreted from the Torah itself, or are they rabbinic?
Answer
To the best of my knowledge, it does not say any such thing there. It says that even if there is a dispute, that is not proof that we are not dealing with a law given to Moses at Sinai. It does not say that every unanimously accepted law is a law given to Moses at Sinai.
Incidentally, according to Maimonides, a law given to Moses at Sinai is a law of rabbinic status, not Torah-level.
Regarding betrothal by money, there have already been many interpretations of this. Maimonides himself, in a responsum to Rabbi Pinhas the judge of Alexandria, wrote that this is because the matter emerges from a derivation, and anything that emerges from a derivation is of rabbinic status (as explained in the second root).
I did not understand your question regarding the amount. Even if betrothal by money is from the Torah, the amount can still be subject to dispute. All the more so since disputes abound even in Torah laws. As far as I know, Maimonides does not write that there is no dispute in Torah laws.
The laws derived through the hermeneutical principles are, according to Maimonides, of rabbinic status, as explained in the second root.
Discussion on Answer
Correct.
Even Maimonides' determination that no dispute arose regarding a law given to Moses at Sinai does not stand the test of the facts. He discussed this at length in responsa Havot Yair 192, if I remember correctly.
What is the Rabbi's opinion about "an eye for an eye"?
In light of studies that prove that in the time of the sages "an eye for an eye" meant it literally, and because of changing times in the world they changed it to money—if the sages also changed it, is that heresy?
I am not familiar with those studies, and I am also not inclined to attribute much reliability to them. But I did not understand the question: is what the sages did heresy? Or is thinking that this is what they did heresy? The answer to both of these is no.
So it comes out that we cannot know what we received from Moses at Sinai?