<html>
<body>
<font size=3>It seems to me that one of the most important things to
understand is the relationship between the Written Torah (Torah
Shebiksav) and Oral Torah (Torah Shebaal Peh). Rabbi Samson Raphael
Hirsch writes the following in his commentary on the second posuk in this
week's Parsha, Mishpatim. YL<br><br>
</font><font size=4><b>2 </font><font size=3><i>If you purchase a Hebrew
servant, he shall serve for six years; but in the seventh he shall go out
free, without paying.<br><br>
</i></font><font size=4>2 </b><i>Ki sikna eved
Ivri</i></font><font size=3>. To the unprejudiced mind, nothing could
demonstrate<br>
the authenticity of the Oral Law as cogently as the first two
subsections<br>
— verses 2–6 and 7–11 — with which “Mosaic law” begins.<br>
This is to be the civil and criminal code of a nation; it is to set
forth<br>
the principles and ordinances of justice and humanity that are to
regulate<br>
human relationships within the framework of the state. As to be<br>
expected, the first section of the code deals with personal rights.
<i>But<br>
with what does this section begin? With laws applicable if a man
sells<br>
another man, and if a man sells his own daughter as a slave!!!<br>
</i>This beginning would be unthinkable, inconceivable, were the
Written<br>
Law actually the “book of law” of the Jewish people, the sole
primary<br>
source of “Jewish law.” What a mass of laws and legal principles
must<br>
have already been stated and established, considered and clarified,
before<br>
the Torah could even turn to treat these cases, which surely are
only<br>
exceptional cases! And yet it is precisely with these verses, which
limit<br>
the most sacred of human rights and negate the right to personal
freedom,<br>
that the Law <i>begins!<br><br>
</i>However, the primary source of Jewish law is not the written
word,<br>
the “Book,” but the living teachings of the oral tradition; the
“Book”<br>
serves only as an aid to memory and a resource when doubts arise.
The<br>
Book itself establishes the fact that the whole Torah had already
been<br>
transmitted to the people and impressed upon them and lived by them<br>
for forty years, before Moshe — just before his death — turned over<br>
to them the Book of the Torah. Accordingly, it is primarily the
exceptional<br>
cases that are recorded; for it is precisely from them that the<br>
principles of ordinary life can be derived most clearly.<br><br>
On the whole, the “Book” records not principles of law, <i>k'lalim</i> ,
but<br>
individual concrete cases, and they are recorded in such an
instructive<br>
manner that one can easily deduce from them the principles that were<br>
entrusted to the living consciousness of the oral tradition. The
language<br>
of this “Book” was so skillfully chosen that in many instances an
unusual<br>
term, a change in sentence structure, the position of a word, an
extra<br>
or missing letter, and so forth, can imply a whole train of legal
concepts.<br><br>
This Book was not intended as a primary source of the Law. It was<br>
meant for those who were already well-versed in the Law, to use as a<br>
means of retaining and reviving, ever anew, the knowledge that they<br>
had already committed to memory. It was intended as a teaching aid<br>
for teachers of the Law, as a reference to confirm the Oral Law, so
that<br>
the students should find it easy, with the aid of the written text
before<br>
them, to reproduce in their minds, ever anew, the knowledge they
received<br>
by word of mouth.<br><br>
The relationship between <i>Torah Shebiksav</i> and <i>Torah Shebaal
Peh</i> is like that<br>
between brief written notes taken on a scientific lecture, and the
lecture<br>
itself. Students who attended the oral lecture require only their
brief<br>
notes to recall at any time the entire lecture. They often find that
a<br>
word, a question mark, an exclamation mark, a period, or the
underscoring<br>
of a word is sufficient to bring to mind a whole series of ideas,<br>
observations, qualifications, and so forth. But for those who did
not<br>
attend the instructor’s lecture, these notes are not of much use. If
they<br>
try to reconstruct the lecture solely from these notes, they will of
necessity<br>
make many errors. Words, marks, and so forth, that serve the<br>
students who listened to the lecture as most instructive guiding
stars<br>
for the retention of the truths expounded by the lecturer appear
completely<br>
meaningless to the uninitiated. The non-initiate who will attempt<br>
to use these same notes in order to construct (as opposed to
<i>reconstruct</i> )<br>
for himself the lecture he did not attend will dismiss what seems
unclear<br>
as baseless mental gymnastics and idle speculations leading
nowhere.<br><br>
God’s Law, the Torah, wants to instill in us the principles of
justice<br>
and humanity, on the basis of which it commands us to respect human<br>
rights. It starts off with the <i>criminal</i> , specifically one who
takes the<br>
property of his fellow man, a crime that in all other states is
punished<br>
by severe corporal punishment and imprisonment.<br><br>
<br>
</font></body>
</html>