Why is there an Oral Torah?
I read with great interest your response to my question about the Oral Torah. Thank you very much for your clear explanation. Based on what you wrote, I have some follow-up questions, if I may.You wrote that
G-dtaught the entire Torah to Moses orally during the forty days he was atop the Mount. Did He reveal to Moses the future events which He later dictated to Moses how to record? Also, I assume there is a reason why G-dgave the Torah orally. What reason would that be? If there is a special reason, why did He later command to write at least some of it down? Conversely, assuming G-dwilled that the rest remain oral (as you explained), why did the Sages eventually write it down in the Talmud? And how do we know what they wrote was accurate after 1500 years? Regarding what you describe as the Talmudic rabbis’ own additional legislation, where did they get the authority to do that, and is it as binding as Torah Law? What about rabbis after the Talmud — can they change or nullify the Rabbinic Oral Law, and can they make up their own new legislation?
I’m inspired by, and happy to address, your further interest — which will hopefully also benefit many other readers as well. But since you have posted many questions, I’ll need to answer each one briefly.
Regarding events that preceded Moses’ life, such as Creation, the lives of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, etc.,
There are in fact many reasons, both technical and ideological, why
The pragmatic considerations were related to the context of wandering in the Wilderness and of preservation. For one, they did not have an abundance of materials to make the many scrolls that would be needed to supply the Oral Torah in writing for the entire nation. And, anyway, they had enough to carry, without heavy, burdensome scrolls that would need special protection from the elements. Rather, all the information taught by
Regarding the ideological or qualitative reasons, the Oral Torah is learned through interactive discussion. This makes the experience dynamic and in-depth, and preserves accuracy by comparison of ideas and comprehension. Since it is learned orally and by memorization, it is internalized and becomes holistically integrated into one’s entire way of life. And because the preservation of an oral tradition relies on transmission from one generation to the next, it engenders respect for Elders, the source of the knowledge, and ensures a strong connection to future generations, eliminating deteriorating generation gaps, as great-grandfathers, grandfathers, fathers and sons all learn together. Finally, as an Oral Torah the knowledge remains elastic, allowing it to be extended, modified, and applied to the times. But being simultaneously communal creates a built-in safety mechanism that ensures it won’t be stretched beyond the intended limit.
Despite the many advantages of keeping the entire Torah oral,
Similarly, even regarding the rest of the Torah which originally remained oral, the advantages thereof depend on the security and cohesiveness of the entire people. And the leaders of each successive generation were responsible for gauging the integrity of the transmission. For some 1,500 years, (despite great trials and tribulations) those with their fingers on the spiritual pulse of the nation confirmed this integrity and upheld the form of the Oral Torah. However, by Talmudic times, after the destruction of the Temple and the dispersal of the Jewish People, there was a concern that if this remainder stayed oral it might be compromised sometime in the future. Therefore, the Sages of those generations, despite the ideal of keeping it oral, took a realistic approach and began to write the Oral Torah as the Mishna and the Gemara.
We know that their written version of the Oral Torah was relatively accurate because otherwise the decision to write it down would have been made by the leaders of an earlier generation before it would be tainted or forgotten. And also it is clear from the very sparing way in which the Talmud is written that the Sages were not writing out of crises but rather out of responsible concern for the distant future.