<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Michael Makovi <<a href="mailto:mikewinddale@gmail.com">mikewinddale@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
And let's face it, the ENTIRE Torah has a backdrop of ancient Semitic<br>
culture which we today are not familiar with. Every single instance in<br>
the Torah of some minhag, whether ours or another nation's (who is<br>
this "molech"?), presumes that the audience knows about this minhag.<br>
Also Rav Hirsch points out that parallel to the Torah, we'd have an<br>
oral tradition of stories of our ancestors. (I can't remember where<br>
this is, however.)</blockquote><div><br>this is why I find the study of much of Nach confusing. The meforshim were clearly guessing on the symbolism of certain metaphors. for me personally - it is probably better to admit that the original backdrop has been lost to the sands of time...<br>
<br>And it is no wonder that the SA haRav hilchos Talmud Torah essentially substitutes the study of Humash and Rashi for that of all of Tanach. Nach has grown obscure to us on many levels.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
I've also quoted Rav Hirsch from the introduction to Trumath Tzvi<br>
(Judaica Press's abridged Hirsch Chumash) where he says we must study<br>
Egyptian, Canaanite, Greek, and Roman history, in order to understand<br>
Torah **morality** (as opposed to "ritual" mitzvot). Obviously, the<br>
Torah couldn't give us Greco-Roman history, but why didn't the Torah<br>
give us Egyptian and Canaanite history? It presumes we know it<br>
already! And yet we don't know it today from our parents, and we must<br>
instead turn to secular history books, according to Rav Hirsch! And<br>
Rav Hirsch is the champion of symbolic meanings of our mitzvot, so if<br>
he admits this (that we must study their history to understand our<br>
mitzvot), kol vachomer we all must, at least to the same extent (viz.<br>
in morality mizvot) that Rav Hirsch does (dayyo). (I am well aware<br>
that Rav Hirsch was opposed to many taamei hamitzvot of Rambam,<br>
relating our mitzvot to pagan practices. But Rav Hirsch apparently is<br>
not opposed to relating our mitzvot to the **immoral** practices of<br>
the Egyptians and Canaanites, even if he is opposed to relating our<br>
mitzvot to the **ritual** practices.)<br>
<br>
Why G-d spelled some things out, and left others for us to just stam<br>
know or forget, is definitely a question. A very good one, I'll agree,<br>
but it is a question that I do not believe negates the fact (IMHO)<br>
that the Torah's mitzvot do often relate to ancient realities with<br>
which we are today unfamiliar with.<br>
<br>
But as I said, we must remember that ordinarily, the prodigious<br>
Oriental memory and talent for oral transmission would have protected<br>
all these details, but for our sins. So really, the question isn't on<br>
G-d, but rather, it is on us.<br>
<br>
Mikha'el Makovi<br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">_______________</div></div></blockquote></div><br>Let's face it. All the osos I mentioned so far would have problem been known by the observant class throughout bayyis Rishon. It is obvious to me that the intstitutional memory faded during the Babylonian Exile [and for good reason] and so things morphed. And if R. Akiva failed to see the ancient symbolism does not mean that Yirmeyahu or Yoshiyahu missed it. Which means the original Torah was probably BETTER self-understood for the first 800+ years. Micha seems to be complaining that HKBH would not have given us a Torah that would have been obscure for the next 2500 years. I say - umipnei chat'a'einu galinu mei'artzeinu and how can you tie HKBH's hands to ensure that the symbolism would last for ever in a changing climate?<br>
<br>Why stick to highly kvetchy rationalizations when simple explanations will do? I do not wish to invoke Occum's razor, but...<br><br>HKBH gave us tools that others did not have. Why SHOULDN'T we use them? If the Greek Hydra is use dby Shas t oexplain pri eitz Hadar, why shouldn't we use are contemporary knowledge-based to understand the meaning of osos?<br>
<br><br clear="all">-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br>RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com<br>see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>