[Avodah] Lying to protect the simple of faith
Michael Makovi
mikewinddale at gmail.com
Mon Apr 21 23:03:45 PDT 2008
I've been having a debate on the Zohar at
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2313958934&topic=4034&start=0&hash=a8312a32e51a84740189bd00fe73a8c2,
and at one point, I brought up ibn Ezra saying that there could be
post-Moshe pesukim, and Dr. Marc Shapiro of course came up. I made the
following post, from which, for Avodah, I would like to discuss my
second point regarding a Torah authority lying to protect the simple
of faith (but I'll post my entire post).
I had previously there brought up an article by Dr. Shapiro that
mentions this opinion of ibn Ezra, but then...
--------
Just this past Yom Tov Pesach, I saw Marc Shapiro's book The Limits of
Orthodox Theology, and I saw that it truly is a magnificent sefer -
basically, he collects classical Torah opinions that controvert
Rambam's 13.
I opened it up, and what do you know, but the page on ibn Ezra is what
it immediately opened to! In this chapter, he makes several points:
1) When Rambam says the Torah we have is the same as given by Moshe,
Rambam cannot possibly believe that this is literally true, for Rambam
was extensively involved in textual study of different texts, and even
advocated certain Masoretic texts (ben Asher I believe) over others.
Moreover, Rambam's son refused to pasken on which scroll is kosher,
because there are so many, and who are we to advocate one over the
other.
1a) Rather, then, Rambam is saying that no deliberate additions were
made after Moshe. However, while Rambam is saying that this is the
case, he cannot possibly be saying it is heretical to say otherwise.
For ibn Ezra, as interpreted by a large list of authorities, held that
many verses are post-Moshe. Rabbi Yehuda heChasid went even further,
and said that entire narratives could be added to. According to one
authority, Ezra (not ibn Ezra) had the ability to add to narrative
(not mitzvot-ic) sections of the Torah. Most importantly, the Gemara
itself opines that Yehoshua wrote the end of the Torah - surely Rambam
cannot declare Chazal to be heretics! So while Rambam says no
post-Moshe additions were made, the contrary opinion is not heresy. As
one prominent rabbi, quoted by Marc Shapiro (I forget his name), says,
the basic principle is that "for all intents and purposes", the Torah
we have is what Moshe gave, but in certain details and pesukim, it
very well may differ. And the Gemara doesn't say that one must hold
the Torah is from Moshe, but rather only that it is from Heaven, and
this includes any divine source.
2) As an alternative to point 1 above: Rambam knew that there were
textual variants in our Torah scrolls, but he very well have lied
about this, and said that there were no variants, and that we today
have the exact same scroll as given by Moshe. In fact, in his Iggeret
Teiman, Rambam makes exactly such an explicit lie. Back then, the
Muslims were accusing us of falsifying the Torah, and any admission on
our part would have harmed the faith of the ignorant and led them to
heresy, for they would be unable to understand the complex picture as
shown in points 1 and 1a. Better then to lie to the ignorant and
simple of faith and tell them that we have the same scroll as Moshe
bli safek; those who are more learned, and can accept the complex
truth, will learn it.
--------
So I'd like to discuss my second point above, which seems ripe for controversy.
Mikha'el Makovi
More information about the Avodah
mailing list