Q&A: Changing the verses because of reality
Changing the verses because of reality.
Question
Hello to our master, may he live long. It is well known, the story about Aher, who saw a child killed after he had fulfilled two commandments about which it is written, “so that your days may be lengthened,” and therefore he became a heretic. The Talmud tries to understand how this could be, and in the end takes the verse away from its plain meaning and claims that it refers to a day that is entirely long—the World to Come (even though that is strained, because it says “upon the land”). From here I learned two things.
1) That, as usual, you are right, and the interpretation of verses was not transmitted to Moses, although it is still not clear to me by what authority the sages permit themselves to change explicit verses?
2) That every verse that does not fit reality we should take away from its plain meaning in the name of reason; therefore the most obvious thing to do in the story of creation is to take the verses out of their plain meaning, since even the sages did so.
Do you agree with all of the above?
Answer
- Indeed, I am always right. But in this case there is no proof, since it is possible that Aher was mistaken, and already in his time it was known that this refers to the World to Come. The gates of interpretation were not locked.
- Indeed. And it is still not clear how they can come with complaints against Aher when he interpreted it according to the plain meaning.
Strange—why didn’t they take the approach of Rabbi Isaac Arama in his explanations of aggadah (“he will have male children,” etc.)? They could simply have said that those who died were wicked.