[Avodah] Did the Patriarchs Speak Hebrew?

[Mandel, Seth]

From: Zev Sero <zev.sero at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 7:45 AM
> On 19/12/17 12:46, Mandel, Seth via Avodah wrote:
>> There is no proof that anyone spoke Hebrew. Chazal say that dibb'ra Torah
>> bilshon b'nei odom, and the Torah was written in Hebrew because that is
>> what the Jews understood at the time of Moshe Rabbeinu and the N'vi'im.

> Rashi Bereshis 2:23
> Bereshis Rabbah 18:4

I am talking objective proof, from the T'NaKh and other documents.

Medrashim of Chazal teaches us important ideas, but are not meant to
be literally true. They do not intend to be a historical document,
but rather contain important moral and ethical teachings which are
'emes in the spiritual sense.

There are plenty of Medrashim that have ideas that seem to indicate
that HQBH or the angels spoke Hebrew. But, as the Rambam indicates,
HQBH does not have a mouth and does not speak as people speak. Rather,
all the p'sukim saying that HQBH spoke to Moshe or Aharon mean that He
communicated with them directly to their mind, not that He spoke acoustic
sounds that they heard with their physical ears.

The argument that Prof. Levine brought in the name of R. Frankel, OTOH,
does indeed show that Yehudah must have been speaking Egyptian, but yet
the Torah quotes him in Hebrew.


[Email #2. -micha]

From: Zev Sero <zev.sero at gmail.com> on behalf of Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 9:01:31 AM
> 1. This medrash is clearly intended literally.  Not only does it not
> contain any important moral or ethical teaching, it cites a simple
> linguistic proof (albeit based on a very small sample of languages).

> 2. Rashi only cites those medroshim that he believes are necessary for
> pshat.

This is not a conversation that is worth continuing. I have the
greatest respect for Jews who learn and seek to understand. But there
are certain discussions where the locutors speak past each other for no
benefit to either.

However, for others in the group that may be curious: if you understand
what the Rambam says in his introduction to Chapter 10 of Mas. Sanhedrin
regarding three approaches to what Chazal say, you will understand that
there is no point in one group arguing with the other group. A similar
case would be that there would be no point in the Rambam arguing with
Rashi or Rabbeinu Tam about whether demons exist or whether the Earth
is flat or round. The basic assumptions about the way things work are
too far apart.

I have said what I meant about medrashim, and the medrash that R. Zev
quotes does not contradict in my mind my statement that there is no proof
about the actual historical language used in anything in the Torah.
Nor does Rashi's use of the medrash contradict what I said. It would
be impossible to convince R. Tam's belief that the Earth is flat,
since in his understanding of the universe everything points to the
world being flat, and he can find statements in the G'moro that seem
to him to prove his case, and all scientists from his culture "knew"
that the Earth is flat. I challenge those who believe that illnesses
are caused by bacteria or viruses to bring me one proof that they are;
most rishonim knew that they were caused by evil spirits or bodily humors.
What a person believes is based on some basic assumptions, and different
Rishonim held very different assumptions in certain matters.

People might and did challenge the Rambam that it appears from their point
of view that the Rambam did not believe what Chazal say, or that I do
not believe what Chazal say. The Rambam believed that everything that
Chazal said is 'emes, but read his comments in the Perush haMishnayos
to see that absolute Truth means different things in different approaches.

Another example is how to reconcile the Truth that HQBH gave men free
will with the fact that HQBH knows everything that will happen. That can
only be explained if people understand certain assumptions about space
and time.

Rabbi Dr. Seth Mandel
Rabbinic Coordinator
The Orthodox Union