Q&A: The Authority of the Sages
The Authority of the Sages
Question
Hello Rabbi, I’ve seen in a few places that you write that midrashim should not be taken seriously. Recently you wrote such an answer regarding a question about midrashim on the three patriarchs. I wanted to ask: why do you rely on the Oral Torah, on the tradition of the hermeneutical principles by which the Torah is interpreted, and so on? If you think that came down by tradition from Sinai, then that should also be true of the midrashim.
I am aware of your usual distinction between a formal halakhic obligation and beliefs; in any case, that still does not answer my question. The main point of my question is that you rely on tradition in certain matters (such as the principles by which the Torah is interpreted), and there is no reason that this should be different from a midrash that tells a story said to have come from Sinai, describing facts about the holy patriarchs.
Answer
You answered that within the question itself. Midrash did not come from Sinai. It is a literary tool used by preachers to convey messages, exactly like the sermons you hear today.
Discussion on Answer
You yourself mention the difference between facts and norms. So I do not understand the question.
To say about our forefather Abraham that he did not look at his wife is a fact: either it happened or it did not. The same is true of any midrash that tells what took place. So I am trying to understand your view: why not rely here on the sages when they tell us that this is what they received? Why assume that these are literary devices or parables meant to convey a message? Why not rely here on the sages when they describe facts they received?
One has to recognize literary genres. They also spoke about the bar yokhani and about 600,000 cities in Har HaMelekh, among other things. Maimonides already wrote in his introduction to the Mishnah that one who interprets all aggadic passages literally belongs to the class of fools.
Yes, I understood that, and still my claim is that there are things where even you need to rely on tradition, such as the way to issue a formal halakhic ruling, and the principles by which the Torah is interpreted. If so, why assume דווקא regarding Jewish law that the tradition is correct, but not regarding midrashim, which also purport to present facts they received from Sinai? Midrash does not present itself as a literary tool; midrash presents itself as conveying stories that it heard. Why should you think otherwise? I agree that regarding beliefs about reality, tradition will not help, but regarding stories, why think they are not true and were not received from Sinai?