Difference between revisions of "Adding and Subtracting from Torah/1"
m |
m |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
<h2>Biblical Cases</h2> | <h2>Biblical Cases</h2> | ||
Throughout Tanakh, Biblical figures from Shelomo to Esther appear to change, suspend, or enact new laws.  In building the Mikdash, Shelomo does not suffice with the vessels made for the Mishkan, but adds ten tables and lamps. He further celebrates "the holiday" (Sukkot) for fourteen days, rather than the week prescribed in Torah.  Ezra mandates a third of a shekel contribution rather than half a shekel. Eliyahu builds a private altar in an era when these are forbidden, and Esther creates an entirely new holiday.  Are any of these actions a transgression of the prohibition of "לֹא תֹסֵף"? None of the leaders are rebuked for their deeds, suggesting that their actions were not problematic.  What, then, might these examples suggest about what is or is not inlcuded in the prohibition? | Throughout Tanakh, Biblical figures from Shelomo to Esther appear to change, suspend, or enact new laws.  In building the Mikdash, Shelomo does not suffice with the vessels made for the Mishkan, but adds ten tables and lamps. He further celebrates "the holiday" (Sukkot) for fourteen days, rather than the week prescribed in Torah.  Ezra mandates a third of a shekel contribution rather than half a shekel. Eliyahu builds a private altar in an era when these are forbidden, and Esther creates an entirely new holiday.  Are any of these actions a transgression of the prohibition of "לֹא תֹסֵף"? None of the leaders are rebuked for their deeds, suggesting that their actions were not problematic.  What, then, might these examples suggest about what is or is not inlcuded in the prohibition? | ||
| + | |||
| + | <h2>Textual Questions</h2> | ||
| + | <p>Our verses raise several textual questions:</p> | ||
| + | <ul> | ||
| + | <li><b>Context</b> – The context of the prohibition in Devarim 4 is a discussion of the sin of Baal Peor (and idolatry in general), while the directive in Devarim 13 follows a discussion regarding sacrificing in "the place which Hashem shall choose" and a warning against child immolation. What might the context teach about the nature of the prohibition?</li> | ||
| + | <li><b>Relationship between Devarim 4 and 13</b> – Why is the prohibition mentioned twice? Is there any significance to the slight changes in wording?  Why is Devarim 4:2 formulated in the plural while Devarim 13:1 is worded in the singular?</li> | ||
| + | <li><b>Relationship between "לֹא תֹסֵף" and "לֹא תִגְרַע"</b> – Are these two prohibition simply the inverse of one another, or is it possible that the second phrase comes to elaborate on the first, perhaps teaching something about the nature of the prohibited addition?</li> | ||
| + | </ul> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <h2>Theological Questions</h2> | ||
| + | <ul> | ||
| + | <li>What is the purpose of the prohibition?</li> | ||
| + | </ul> | ||
</page> | </page> | ||
</aht-xml> | </aht-xml> | ||
Version as of 07:36, 19 February 2021
Adding and Detracting from Torah
Introduction
The Scope of the Law
At the beginning of Moshe's legal speech (Devarim 4:2), he warns the nation against adding or detracting from Hashem's command:
לֹא תֹסִפוּ עַל הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם וְלֹא תִגְרְעוּ מִמֶּנּוּ לִשְׁמֹר אֶת מִצְוֺת י״י אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם.
You shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish from it, that you may keep the commandments of Hashem your God which I command you.
The warning is repeated in very similar wording in Devarim 13:1:
אֵת כׇּל הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם אֹתוֹ תִשְׁמְרוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת לֹא תֹסֵף עָלָיו וְלֹא תִגְרַע מִמֶּנּוּ.
Whatever thing I command you, that you shall observe to do: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
The verses do not elucidate further, leaving the reader to wonder what exactly is included in the prohibition. How broad is its scope? Does Moshe refer to changing the form of existing laws or to enacting new ones? If one performs a commandment more times than required, or at a time not mandated, would that be a violation? Is voluntary performance of a mitzvah from which one is not obligated included in the prohibition? Finally, does the directive include only the total nullification of a law or also individual non-compliance?
Rabbinic Laws
One of the most troubling questions raised by the prohibition not to add or detract from Torah relates to Rabbinic law. Given the prohibition of our verses, why are Rabbinic decrees and safeguards allowed?1 Mishna Avot and R. Kahana in Yevamot speak of the importance of making fences around Torah, but is not adding to the list of forbidden unions, or extending the prohibitions of Shabbat a violation of "לֹא תֹסֵף"? Many rabbinic decrees, like the institutions of Chanukah, Purim, or the washing of hands, are not even meant to protect Hashem's commands, but are totally new decrees. Why are these permitted?
Biblical Cases
Throughout Tanakh, Biblical figures from Shelomo to Esther appear to change, suspend, or enact new laws. In building the Mikdash, Shelomo does not suffice with the vessels made for the Mishkan, but adds ten tables and lamps. He further celebrates "the holiday" (Sukkot) for fourteen days, rather than the week prescribed in Torah. Ezra mandates a third of a shekel contribution rather than half a shekel. Eliyahu builds a private altar in an era when these are forbidden, and Esther creates an entirely new holiday. Are any of these actions a transgression of the prohibition of "לֹא תֹסֵף"? None of the leaders are rebuked for their deeds, suggesting that their actions were not problematic. What, then, might these examples suggest about what is or is not inlcuded in the prohibition?
Textual Questions
Our verses raise several textual questions:
- Context – The context of the prohibition in Devarim 4 is a discussion of the sin of Baal Peor (and idolatry in general), while the directive in Devarim 13 follows a discussion regarding sacrificing in "the place which Hashem shall choose" and a warning against child immolation. What might the context teach about the nature of the prohibition?
- Relationship between Devarim 4 and 13 – Why is the prohibition mentioned twice? Is there any significance to the slight changes in wording? Why is Devarim 4:2 formulated in the plural while Devarim 13:1 is worded in the singular?
- Relationship between "לֹא תֹסֵף" and "לֹא תִגְרַע" – Are these two prohibition simply the inverse of one another, or is it possible that the second phrase comes to elaborate on the first, perhaps teaching something about the nature of the prohibited addition?
Theological Questions
- What is the purpose of the prohibition?
