Oral Torah vs. Written Torah

By Nechama Stampler

As mentioned earlier, there are two “Torahs”: the Written and the Oral. In Jewish tradition, both were given to Moses at Mt. Sinai and during the forty years in the desert, and taught to the whole nation. [In fact, when Judaism says "G-d gave the Torah to Moses at Sinai” it is talking only about the Oral — otherwise, Moses should have known about the Golden Calf, and as for Korach’s Rebellion, Moses should have reacted "well, we’ve been expecting you…"]

Both have been with us, according to Jewish sources, for all of the past 3300 years. And without both, it is impossible to fully understand traditional Jewish teaching or thought. The Written Torah, mentiones each of the Commandments, or Mitzvos, only in passing or by allusion. The Oral Law fills in the gaps.

Here is an example: “And you shall tie them as a sign on your arm and for (Totafos) between your eyes.” (Deut. 6 8) This is the source for the Mitzvah of Tefillin (phylacteries – if that’s any clearer), but it doesn’t tell us that much. From this alone, we’d never know how to do this Mitzvah. What are we supposed to tie to the arm? With what do we tie it? What are “Totafos?” What is it a sign of? Without the Oral Law, quite simply, there’s no Mitzvah of Tefillin. And there aren’t too many other Mitzvos that’ll make much sense either. Not, that is, without some form of commentary.

With that said, it wouldn’t have made any sense for the Author of the Five Books to have left us nothing more than tantalizing hints we still would have no idea what to do. So, either the Torah was written by an idiot (or a relatively clueless ‘redactor’ according to modern theorists) who just never thought things through enough to tell us what to put into our Tefillin… or there must be an instruction manual somewhere that came in the same package. We call this “instruction manual” the Oral law.

Let’s see another example. “When you shall be far away from the place that the L-rd your G-d shall choose to place His name (i.e. when you’ll live far from Jerusalem and the Temple), slaughter from your herd and from your flock that which the L-rd has given you, as He has commanded you…” (Deut. 12 21)

This passage informs us that even when we will live far away from the Temple, we will still be able to enjoy meat (for the entire 40 years in the wilderness the Jews ate meat only from Temple/Tabernacle offerings). Simply take an animal from your own herd or flock and slaughter it…”as He has commanded you.” Now, you can search the Bible from beginning to end, but you won’t find any instructions or command concerning the technique of animal slaughter that would justify the words “as He has commanded you.” It’s simply not there. Either the author of this Torah forgot… it slipped his mind… he had a bad day (you know, his kids were going berzerk, the air conditioner broke down, and nothing went right) or else He gave us an Oral Law to go with the written. Not surprisingly, Jewish tradition sides with the latter possibility.

So if it’s an “Oral” Law, how come it’s written down? The answer has to do with human frailty.

In the lifetime of Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi (around 1700 years ago), Roman persecution, the recent destruction of the second Temple and the disruption of stable Jewish community life threatened our ability to properly retain and transmit this oral law. Rabbi Yehuda, therefore, wrote down the bare basics in the Mishna. A couple of centuries of hardship and persecution later, the rabbis of Babylonia saw a need to record even more detail and compiled a written version of what is known as the Talmud. Somewhere in between, the rabbis of Israel had begun work on a “Jerusalem Talmud” which is still an important part of the Jewish library, but, due to Roman/Christian persecution, was never really finished.

So why wasn’t it written down in the first place? There are many reasons, but think of this. The Torah contains 613 Mitzvos, their many and detailed instructions and the information needed to apply them to every possible circumstance that history can throw at the Jewish people (e.g. electricity and the Sabbath). It includes the philosophy that binds a Jew to the Torah and the fire that will ignite the heart of each Jew in the service of his G-d. Now there are as many different types of Jews as there are Jews, and each one has a different “boiling point,” yet for each of us there’s a path to true emotional involvement in Mitzvah-observance and Torah study. And that path is found in the Oral Torah.

Writing down the Oral Law in a book you’d be able to carry on something smaller than the average bus, yet which contained all of the detail and variety we’ve discussed, is simply not practical. Now that Rabbis have devoted themselves to writing down their oral teachings, libraries of Jewish books, all “Torah”, have been published. Furthermore, reading such a book in a way that keeps the flavor of a living Torah — one you’ve learned from a living teacher who learned from his living teacher who learned from his… is also a challenge. So in the best of all possible worlds, the oral Torah would have best been kept oral — but we simply cannot remember it all.

Does that mean that, now, in the imperfect world in which we live, that we no longer have the real thing? Jewish tradition says no. Despite the fact that we have printed versions of the Talmud and many other books as well, the Oral Torah is still oral at its essence. For one thing, it’s nearly impossible to master the logic and style of the Talmud without a real, live teacher. As brilliant as you might be, and even with an English translation, it will probably remain a confused collection of scattered ideas and disjointed reasoning until you’re given the key by an expert. We’re forced, therefore, to take our Talmud with a dose of the oral Torah.

In addition, the Talmud’s oral flavor can still be tasted through its flexibility. Take, as an example, the 19th Century decision that the opening and closing of electrical circuits was prohibited on the Sabbath. This decision wasn’t a simple matter of personal preference or a random guess, but, as a review of the literature will show, was firmly rooted in the Talmud itself.


----------------

Was there really an Oral Law that Moses received?

In short—no. And it can be easily proved.

First, if the Oral Tradition truly came from Sinai then it would have been completely supernatural that it was passed down for over one thousand years unchanged. If my wife sends me to the store to buy five things, unless I write them down, not only will I forget to buy what she asked me to, but I will return home with things that she didn’t ask me to buy! So if it was supernatural, then there would have been no need to write out the Oral Torah as Rabbi Judah Hanasi did in 200 CE. If God had watched over it since Moses, surely He could continue.

Secondly, there couldn’t have been an Oral Law because in the time of King Josiah, they had lost the Book of the Law and it appears that they didn’t even know what Passover was or certainly how to celebrate it! The Temple was in ruins and the King ordered its restoration. In the midst of this great undertaking the Torah was recovered.

Hilkiah the high priest said to Shaphan the secretary, “I have found the Book of the Law in the temple of the Lord.” (1 Kings 22:8)

The king called all the people together and they read the Book of the Covenant. Together, they renewed the covenant with the Lord. King Josiah ordered that the Passover be celebrated.

The king gave this order to all the people: “Celebrate the Passover to the Lord your God, as it is written in this Book of the Covenant.”  Neither in the days of the judges who led Israel nor in the days of the kings of Israel and the kings of Judah had any such Passover been observed. But in the eighteenth year of King Josiah, this Passover was celebrated to the Lord in Jerusalem. (2 Kings 22:21-23)

To summarize, the Torah had been lost as the Temple was in ruins. The king of Israel and the priests did not even know what Passover was—or at least, the details of proper Passover observance. Since the Mishna (the Oral Law in writing, as part of the Talmud) speaks of the Passover at length—in fact it has an entire tractate (major section) called Pesachim (Passovers) that teaches in incredible detail how to correctly celebrate Passover—it had to have been created after the time of Josiah. (In fact, the instructions are so detailed, that it becomes ridiculous to think that God is that mechanical. If you want a brief look, check this out.)

In addition, had there been an Oral Law passed down from Moses it was certainly forgotten. And unlike like a Written Torah, that could be found in the ruins of the Temple, it would be impossible to recover an Oral Torah.

Third, we find an interesting passage in the Torah that refutes the idea of a non-written Torah.

When Moses went and told the people all the LORD’s words and laws, they responded with one voice, “Everything the LORD has said we will do.” Moses then wrote down everything the LORD had said. (Exodus 24:3-4a)

Could it be any clearer? God shared all His laws with Moses and then Moses wrote downeverything. In the Hebrew it says Kol Div’re Adonia—all the words of the Lord. There was no secret Oral Tradition; all was written. (Here are a few more passages you can reference: Deuteronomy 30:10, 31:9, 24, 26, and Joshua 1:8).

And fourth, one primary reason the Word of God needed to be put down in words was to protect Israel from deception. An Oral Torah would have led to all kinds of duplicity and many would have changed it for their own purposes. Keep in mind, the Children of Israel, my ancestors, went through many periods where they forsook the Lord. Not only would an Oral Law have been abused by leaders during such a time—it would have been eventually ignored and utterly forgotten.

The idea of an Oral Law is not unique to Judaism. Virtually every religion has an Oral Tradition. The Pope’s rulings become the Oral Law of the Catholic church. Catholics claim the Holy Spirit guides their magisterium—that is, the official teaching of the Catholic Church. Islam not only as the Koran, but also the Hadith, ‘the collections of the reports of the teachings, deeds and sayings of the Islamic prophet Muhammed.’ (Wikipedia) Hinduism is based on an every evolving oral tradition.

So Where did the Oral Law come from?

One of the most respected Talmudic scholars in the world, Michael Rodkinson, writes in the very first sentence of his highly respected The History of the Talmud:

The name Written Law was given to the Pentateuch (Torah), Prophets and Hagiographa, and that of Oral Law to all the teachings of the sages consisting of comments on the text of the Bible.

In other words, the Oral Tradition was merely the customs, teachings and opinions of Jewish leaders throughout the centuries. It would be no different then the teaching of a popular author today… had he lived millennia ago.

For instance, recently in Israel one of the most influential religious leaders, Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky, 84, declared that iPhones and other smartphones are immoral (because of ease of ability in obtaining pornography) and that Orthodox Jews cannot own one. In Judaism these types of declarations are binding because it is taught that God has given the rabbis the authority to make these pronouncements. Now if this had happened around 300 CE (when iPhones were still in the first generation) it would have been recorded in the Talmud.

Not everything in the Talmud is bad and not everything good. It is opinions and traditions. That’s it.

There seems to be things within the New Testament that are not found in the written Torah. Here is a list from Messianic Publication:

Matt. 9:14, 15 – The argument of Yeshua, in which He defends the manner in which His disciples fast, is based upon a recognized halakah that it is improper to fast in the presence of a bridegroom. This is not found in the written Torah. Cp. b. Sukka 25b; t. Ber. 2.10.

Matt. 10:24 – A saying of the Sages, perhaps proverbial

Matt. 12:5 – The teaching or halakah which states that the priests break the Sabbath but are innocent is not found in the written Torah. Cp. b. Shabbat 132b. For other instances where the Sabbath may be profaned, cp. m. Ned. 3.11 (circumcision); m.Pesah 6.1-2; t. Pesah 4.13 (Passover sacrifices).

Matt. 15:1 – Pharisees are inquiring about the disciples of Yeshua: why do they transgress the traditions of the elders by not washing their hands according to halakah before eating? Yeshua rebukes them, citing also their use of korban to “hide” their wealth from aging parents who needed their support. In both cases, it is clear that the Pharisees consider the halakah, based on oral Torah, as binding. Cf. m. Hag. 2.5; b.Sabb. 13b-14a; y. Sabb. 1.3d; b. Yoma 87a.

Matt. 15:36 – There is nothing in the written Torah about giving thanks before eating. Saying the berakah before eating is part of the oral Torah.

Matt. 22:40 – Yeshua quotes the Shema and Lev. 19:18, stating that upon these two preceptshang (krevmatai, krematai)[55] the Law and Prophets. The terminology of the Law and Prophets hanging from something is derived from oral Torah, cp. m. Hagiga 1.8; b. Ber. 63a.

Matt. 23:16, 17 – The Pharisees found a way to deny certain oaths (those sworn by the temple) and to allow others (those sworn by the gold of the temple), cf. M. Nedarim 1.3, 4;[56] cp. alsob.Tem. 32a-33b. Yeshua argues that the Temple actually sanctifies the gold. This is not found in written Torah.

Matt. 23:23 – The matter of tithing very small amounts of produce from volunteer seedlings is not taken up in the written Torah, but is part of the oral Torah, cp. m. Maasarot 1.1; b. Yoma 83b;b.Nidah 5a; b. Rosh HaShanah 12a; b.Shabbat 68a.

Matt. 24:20 – The whole issue of travel on the Sabbath is defined in oral Torah, not written Torah. There are no specific prohibitions in the written Torah restricting travel on the Sabbath. [The prohibition of Ex. 16:29 cannot mean that one is restricted to stay within his dwelling (the Hebrew has אִישׁ מִמְּקֹמוֹ, “each man from his place” not אִישׁ מִבֵּיתוֹ, “each man from his house”). Yet the written Torah does not define the dimensions of one’s “place.” It was the oral Torah that developed, for instance, a “Sabbath-day’s journey.”] cf. b. Erubin 4.5; Acts 1:12. Jer. 17:19-22prohibits the carrying of loads out of one’s house, but this is clearly defined as “work.”

Matt. 26:20 – Reclining is the position of eating at the Pesach meal, but is not prescribed in the written Torah. Cf. m. Pesachim 10:1. Reclining is an halakic requirement before one can eat the Passover.

Matt. 27:6 – The written Torah prohibits the wages of a temple prostitute to come into the Temple treasury (Deut. 23:19). Of interest is b. Aboda Zera 17a where Jacob, a disciple of Yeshua of Nazareth, is said to have had an interaction with R. Eliezer over a saying of Yeshua based onDeut. 23:19. The oral Torah expanded this to include any money obtained for unlawful hire (cf.b.Temurah. 29b).

Lk. 6:9 – Cp. m.Shabbat 22.5. The issues of healing (see the parallel in Matt. 12:10) on the Sabbath are part of the oral Torah, to which Yeshua no doubt refers.

Lk. 11:44 – The written Torah declares that a person is unclean from a corpse if he touches it or is in the same room with it (Nu. 19:11-15). The Pharisees extended the communication of impurity to any object overshadowed by a corpse (or part of a corpse) or any object whose shadow contacts a corpse or tomb (m.Oholot 16.1,2). The oral Torah further elaborates the means by which impurity is transmitted from a corpse to an object. It appears that Yeshua accepted at least some of this oral Torah as grounds for His illustration of the Pharisees as concealed tombs that rendered those who overshadowed them unclean.

Jn. 7:51 – The written Torah suggests that a matter of law be carefully examined, but does not specifically say that the accused must be given the right to speak (cp. Ex 23:1; Deut. 1:16; 17:4). Oral Torah, however, required that the accused be given the opportunity to speak for himself (Ex. Rabbah 23.1)

Ac. 18:13 – Paul is accused of teaching the Jewish community to worship contrary to the law, but by his own testimony he did not teach contrary to the written Torah (Ac 21:24; 22:3). He is accused of bringing Greeks into the Temple (Ac 21:28), and the issue in Ac 18:13ff consists of issues relating to “words and names and your own law” (v. 15). This must be oral Torah, not written.

Ac. 21:21 – The phrase “walk according to the customs” (toi`~ e[qesin peripatei`n) is the equivalent of halakah—life regulated by issues of oral Torah.

Ac. 23:3 – What law was violated when Paul was struck? The idea that a person was innocent until proven guilty is a function of oral Torah, not written Torah.

Ac. 25:8 – The threefold designation, “law of the Jews, or against the Temple or against Caesar” seems to define the three most powerful arms of law: Pharisees (law of the Jews), Sadduccees (against the Temple) and Rome (against Caesar). Each of these is referred to by the term “Law” in this instance.