Difference between revisions of "Avot and Mitzvot – Was Avraham the First Jew/2/en"
(Original Author: Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
(Original Author: Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
||
Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
<mekorot> | <mekorot> | ||
<multilink><aht source="VayikraRabbah2-10">Vayikra Rabbah</aht><aht source="VayikraRabbah2-10">2:10</aht><aht parshan="Vayikra Rabbah" /></multilink>,<fn>This is true only for the Vilna edition of Vayikra Rabbah which reads "אברהם קיים את התורה כולה" as opposed to the other characters who observed only specific mitzvot. However, all manuscripts of Vayikra Rabbah, as well as the Ish Shalom edition of <multilink><aht source="EliyahuRabbah7">Seder Eliyahu Rabbah</aht><aht source="EliyahuRabbah7">7</aht><aht parshan="Eliyahu Rabbah" /></multilink>, read "אברהם קיים את התורה", and it is Yosef who fulfilled "כל התורה כולה". See also the earlier edition of Seder Eliyahu Rabbah 6 which conflates both possibilities. [Note that M. Margulies, in his edition of Vayikra Rabbah, asserts that the entire passage is a later addition.]</fn> | <multilink><aht source="VayikraRabbah2-10">Vayikra Rabbah</aht><aht source="VayikraRabbah2-10">2:10</aht><aht parshan="Vayikra Rabbah" /></multilink>,<fn>This is true only for the Vilna edition of Vayikra Rabbah which reads "אברהם קיים את התורה כולה" as opposed to the other characters who observed only specific mitzvot. However, all manuscripts of Vayikra Rabbah, as well as the Ish Shalom edition of <multilink><aht source="EliyahuRabbah7">Seder Eliyahu Rabbah</aht><aht source="EliyahuRabbah7">7</aht><aht parshan="Eliyahu Rabbah" /></multilink>, read "אברהם קיים את התורה", and it is Yosef who fulfilled "כל התורה כולה". See also the earlier edition of Seder Eliyahu Rabbah 6 which conflates both possibilities. [Note that M. Margulies, in his edition of Vayikra Rabbah, asserts that the entire passage is a later addition.]</fn> | ||
− | <multilink><aht source=" | + | <multilink><aht source="RemaResponsa10">Rema</aht><aht source="RemaResponsa10">Responsa 10</aht><aht parshan="R. Moshe Isserles" /></multilink>, |
<multilink><aht source="MaharalGurAryehBereshit46-10">Maharal</aht><aht source="MaharalGurAryehBereshit46-10">Gur Aryeh Bereshit 46:10</aht><aht parshan="R. Judah Loew of Prague" /></multilink><fn>See below that Maharal also differentiates between positive and negative commandments.</fn> | <multilink><aht source="MaharalGurAryehBereshit46-10">Maharal</aht><aht source="MaharalGurAryehBereshit46-10">Gur Aryeh Bereshit 46:10</aht><aht parshan="R. Judah Loew of Prague" /></multilink><fn>See below that Maharal also differentiates between positive and negative commandments.</fn> | ||
</mekorot> | </mekorot> | ||
<point><b>Who observed?</b> According to this position, only Avraham chose to keep all of the mitzvot, while his descendants observed, at most, only selected commandments.</point> | <point><b>Who observed?</b> According to this position, only Avraham chose to keep all of the mitzvot, while his descendants observed, at most, only selected commandments.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Evidence of adherence</b> – <aht source="Bereshit26-5">Bereshit 26:5</aht> speaks specifically of Avraham's performance of all of the various types of mitzvot. According to the | + | <point><b>Evidence of adherence</b> – <aht source="Bereshit26-5">Bereshit 26:5</aht> speaks specifically of Avraham's performance of all of the various types of mitzvot. According to the Rema, <aht source="Bereshit18-19">Bereshit 18:19</aht>, which describes Avraham's legacy to his descendants, is referring only to the seven basic Noachide laws.</point> |
<point><b>Punishments for violators</b> – The generation of the Flood, the inhabitants of Sedom, and the Canaanites were punished for disregarding the basic Noachide laws.</point> | <point><b>Punishments for violators</b> – The generation of the Flood, the inhabitants of Sedom, and the Canaanites were punished for disregarding the basic Noachide laws.</point> | ||
<point><b>Religiosity of the Patriarchs</b> – According to this approach, there is a fundamental difference in character between Avraham, as the first Patriarch and the founder of monotheism, and the other Patriarchs and their descendants.<fn>It is unclear, though, what purpose there was in Avraham observing the mitzvot, if his immediate descendants were not going to follow in his footsteps.</fn></point> | <point><b>Religiosity of the Patriarchs</b> – According to this approach, there is a fundamental difference in character between Avraham, as the first Patriarch and the founder of monotheism, and the other Patriarchs and their descendants.<fn>It is unclear, though, what purpose there was in Avraham observing the mitzvot, if his immediate descendants were not going to follow in his footsteps.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>Patriarchal transgressions</b> – | + | <point><b>Patriarchal transgressions</b> – Rema notes that this opinion entirely avoids the problem raised by Yaakov's marrying two sisters. Only cases regarding Avraham would still be an issue, and see Maharal's discussion of Avraham's possible marriage to his half sister.</point> |
<point><b>Polemical motivations</b> – This position is able to maintain that the mitzvot predate Sinai and the Golden Calf, without being forced to defend each and every action of the Patriarchs and their households.</point> | <point><b>Polemical motivations</b> – This position is able to maintain that the mitzvot predate Sinai and the Golden Calf, without being forced to defend each and every action of the Patriarchs and their households.</point> | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> |
Version as of 19:49, 30 November 2013
Avot and Mitzvot – Was Avraham the First Jew?
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
In discussing to what extent the Patriarchs kept the Torah's commandments, commentators offer a full range of possibilities, from full observance to no observance at all. Some sources portray the founding fathers as voluntary pioneers of performance and not just faith, with some even going so far as to claim that they kept even rabbinic ordinances. Others attempt to demonstrate that the Torah is eternal, and that the mitzvot were given already to Adam.
As these positions encounter difficulties in explaining the Patriarch's apparent violations of some Biblical prohibitions, other commentators take the opposite tack, suggesting that the vast majority of the Torah's commandments began only at Sinai. A few different variations of a compromise approach suggest that there was partial observance by the Avot. This has the advantage of being able to explain away transgressions, while simultaneously maintaining a portrait of some early ritual observance.
Full Observance
All of the mitzvot existed and were observed before their transmission at Sinai. This position subdivides over whether there was a pre-Sinai Divine obligation to keep the mitzvot or whether it was man's voluntary initiative.
Hashem Commanded
Human Choice
- Torah observance was still optional and not yet obligatory – This appears to be the approach adopted by Bavli Pesachim, and is explicitly taken by Daat Zekeinim.
- The specifics of the implementation of these laws was affected by Noachide status – See Bavli Yevamot that there is no paternal lineage or familial relationships for Noachides. This principle is applied by Bavli Sanhedrin and R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Ramban to dispose of the apparent Patriarchal violations.29
No Observance
The Patriarchs fulfilled only what they were explicitly commanded in Sefer Bereshit, and these did not include mitzvot other than circumcision.
Partial Observance
The Patriarchs only partially observed the commandments. The multiple variations of this approach maintain that distinctions existed between different Patriarchs, types of commandments, and locations.
Only Avraham
Only Selected Commandments
- Rashbam suggests that only rational mitzvot which relate to a moral ethic were observed.39
- According to the Maharal, since the mitzvot had not yet been commanded, there was a constructive purpose in keeping only the positive, but not the negative, commandments.