Difference between revisions of "Avot and Mitzvot – Was Avraham the First Jew/2/he"
m |
m |
||
Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
<point><b>ראיות לדבקות</b> – בבראשית י"ח:י"ט ובראשית כ"ו:ה' יש אזכור של חוקי מוסר או הוראות ייעודיות שנמסרו לאבות.  <br/> <a href="Bereshit18-19" data-aht="source">Bereshit 18:19</a> and <a href="Bereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 26:5</a> refer merely to ethical laws or to ad hoc instructions given to the Patriarchs.<fn>This is similar to the "peshat" interpretation offered by <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 26:5</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink> below.</fn></point> | <point><b>ראיות לדבקות</b> – בבראשית י"ח:י"ט ובראשית כ"ו:ה' יש אזכור של חוקי מוסר או הוראות ייעודיות שנמסרו לאבות.  <br/> <a href="Bereshit18-19" data-aht="source">Bereshit 18:19</a> and <a href="Bereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 26:5</a> refer merely to ethical laws or to ad hoc instructions given to the Patriarchs.<fn>This is similar to the "peshat" interpretation offered by <multilink><a href="RambanBereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 26:5</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink> below.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>עונשים לעוברי עבירה</b> – דור המבול, אנשי סדום והכנענים נענשו בשל הפרת חוק טבעי. עמדה זו מוצגת ע"י החזקוני. <br/>The generation of the Flood, the inhabitants of Sedom, and the Canaanites were punished for violating natural law.<fn>This approach would likely maintain that Noachide laws were also not given explicitly, but rather were part of natural law.</fn> This position is presented by <multilink><a href="ChizkuniBereshit7-21" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniBereshit7-21" data-aht="source">Bereshit 7:21</a><a href="ChizkuniBereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 26:5</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink>.</point> | <point><b>עונשים לעוברי עבירה</b> – דור המבול, אנשי סדום והכנענים נענשו בשל הפרת חוק טבעי. עמדה זו מוצגת ע"י החזקוני. <br/>The generation of the Flood, the inhabitants of Sedom, and the Canaanites were punished for violating natural law.<fn>This approach would likely maintain that Noachide laws were also not given explicitly, but rather were part of natural law.</fn> This position is presented by <multilink><a href="ChizkuniBereshit7-21" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniBereshit7-21" data-aht="source">Bereshit 7:21</a><a href="ChizkuniBereshit26-5" data-aht="source">Bereshit 26:5</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink>.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>דת האבות</b> – הדתיות של אבותינו באה לידי ביטוי במסירות | + | <point><b>דת האבות</b> – הדתיות של אבותינו באה לידי ביטוי במסירות שלהם להאמין באל יחיד ולעשות את דבר ה' ובסטנדרטים המוסריים והערכיים על פיהם נהגו, אך היא לא השתקפה בדרך כלל באמצעות מעשי פולחן.<br/><br/>The religiosity of our forefathers was manifest in their monotheistic dedication to following Hashem's instructions and in their moral and ethical standard of behavior, but it did not generally reflect itself through ritual performance.</point> |
<point><b>Patriarchal transgressions</b> – These commentators explain that the Patriarchs and their families were not yet bound by Torah laws.<fn>Although many of the prohibitions regarding improper relations are described by the Torah as "abominations", making it difficult to understand how the forefathers could engage in such actions even if not yet prohibited, this approach would posit that marrying two sisters or an aunt did not fall under this category.</fn></point> | <point><b>Patriarchal transgressions</b> – These commentators explain that the Patriarchs and their families were not yet bound by Torah laws.<fn>Although many of the prohibitions regarding improper relations are described by the Torah as "abominations", making it difficult to understand how the forefathers could engage in such actions even if not yet prohibited, this approach would posit that marrying two sisters or an aunt did not fall under this category.</fn></point> | ||
</category> | </category> |
Version as of 01:38, 23 May 2019
אבות ומצוות
גישות פרשניות
סקירה
בדיון אודות ההיקף בו האבות קיימו את מצוות התורה, פרשנים מציעים שלל אפשרויות, החל בשמירה מלאה על מצוות וכלה בהעדר מוחלט שלהן. חלק מהמקורות מתארים את האבות המייסדים כחלוצים מרצון של עשייה ולא רק של אמונה, וחלקם אף מרחיקים לכת וטוענים שהם שמרו אף על תקנות דרבנן. אחרים מנסים להמחיש כי התורה היא נצחית, וכי המצוות ניתנו כבר לאדם הראשון.
כאשר עמדות אלה נתקלות בקשיים בתירוץ העבירות של האבות על איסורים מקראיים, פרשנים אחרים נוקטים בגישה הפוכה ומציעים כי הרוב המכריע של מצוות התורה החלו רק בסיני. כמה חלופות לגישה מפשרת מציעות שהאבות שמרו על חוקי התורה באופן חלקי. לפתרון זה יש את היתרון ביכולת להסביר את העבירות, בד בבד עם שמירה על תמונה של קיום פולחן מוקדם.
קיום מצוות מלא
כל המצוות היו קיימות ונשמרו לפני שניתנו בסיני. בעמדה זו שיטות חלוקות בשאלה האם הייתה מחויבות אלוקית לקיים את המצוות טרום-סיני או שמא מדובר ביוזמה מרצון של האדם.
ה' ציווה
ספרי דברים
Sifre Devarim,1 Targumim, Avot DeRabbi Natan, Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer,2 Anan and other Karaite exegetes3
This position maintains that the Torah and its commandments were given already to Adam.4 The Midrashim derive this by reading the words "לְעָבְדָהּ וּלְשָׁמְרָהּ" in Bereshit 2:15 as referring to the Torah.5
Some exegetes6 point to the Torah's use of the term "הַבְּהֵמָה הַטְּהוֹרָה" in the Noach stories7 as proof that the laws of Kashrut were known already at that time.8
Some Karaite sources assert that the bringing of the Flood, the punishment meted out to the Canaanites for their sins, and the verses in Yechezkel which say that the Israelites deserved to be wiped out in Egypt demonstrate that the commandments existed before Sinai.
This position takes for granted that the Patriarchs observed all of the Torah's commandments.9
This approach encounters difficulties in explaining the instances in which our forefathers seem to have violated the Torah's prohibitions, particularly those of forbidden sexual relationships.10 Thus, Yefet goes so far as to assert that Leah and Rachel were merely relatives and not sisters,11 and that Yocheved was Amram's cousin rather than his aunt.12 Alternatively, these actions were, in fact, problematic.13
The implication of this position is that the laws of the Torah are immutable and eternal. It thus served as a direct response14 to both Christian contentions that the precepts were given only as a corrective for the sin of the Golden Calf, and Islamic claims that the Law is always subject to change.15
הבחירה האנושית
Bavli Yoma, Shemot Rabbah, Midrash Aggadah (Buber), Rashi, as well as other sources, all speak of the Patriarchs fulfilling all of the commandments, but it is difficult to determine whether they think this was obligatory or voluntary.18
These sources ascribe general performance of the mitzvot only to Avraham and his descendants. Avraham's initiative explains his selection to be the father of Hashem's chosen nation. Only a select group of commandments was fulfilled by earlier generations such as Adam and Noach.19
R. Shimon in Bereshit Rabbah attempts to address the question of "אב לא למדו ורב לא היה לו, ומהיכן למד את התורה". He describes in figurative language how Hashem provided Avraham's kidneys with the intuition to teach him Torah.20
The central prooftext for this position is Bereshit 26:5 which describes Avraham's special reward due to his fulfilling of Hashem's commandments.21 The verse refers to three categories of precepts ("מִשְׁמַרְתִּי מִצְוֹתַי חֻקּוֹתַי"). While earlier Rabbinic sources do not distinguish between the terms in this verse, Rashi identifies each with a different group of laws.22
R. Yochanan23 in Bereshit Rabbah deduces from the plural of "וְתוֹרֹתָי" that Avraham kept even the later ordinances of the sages such as הלכות עירובי חצרות.24 The standard printed edition of the Tosefta, though, applies the plural merely to the reasons for the mitzvot and their details.25 There is also room for discussion as to the scope of what is included according to the Bavli.26
According to this approach, the generation of the Flood, the inhabitants of Sedom, and the Canaanites were punished for violating the select group of Noachide laws which were given explicitly or considered to be natural law.27
This approach emphasizes the uniqueness of the Patriarchs in that they voluntarily assumed responsibility for keeping all of Hashem's commandments.
- שמירת מצוות היא עדיין בגדר רשות ועדיין לא חיוב - ככל הנראה גישה זו אומצה ע"י הבבלי בפסחים והיא מופיעה באופן מפורש בדעת זקנים.
- הפרטים של יישומם של חוקים אלה הושפעו ממעמד של בני נח - ראו בבבלי יבמות שאין שושלת יוחסין או יחסי משפחה בקרב בני נח. עיקרון זה מיושם על ידי הבבלי בסנהדרין, ר' יוסף בכור שור ורמב"ן בכדי להיפטר מהבעייתיות במעשי האבות.
In explaining cases like Yaakov's marrying sisters and Amram's marriage to his aunt, these sources have a couple of options open to them:
- 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.28
This position may have been intended to counter Christian claims that the mitzvot were given only in the aftermath of the sin of the Golden Calf.29 It thus emphasizes that the mitzvot existed and were observed centuries before that, and that the Patriarchs performed them voluntarily and not because they were an imposed penalty.30
העדר מצוות
האבות קיימו רק את מה שצוו באופן מפורש בספר בראשית וציוויים אלו לא כללו מצוות מעבר לברית מילה.
The Patriarchs fulfilled only what they were explicitly commanded in Sefer Bereshit, and these did not include mitzvot other than circumcision.
Bereshit 18:19 and Bereshit 26:5 refer merely to ethical laws or to ad hoc instructions given to the Patriarchs.31
The generation of the Flood, the inhabitants of Sedom, and the Canaanites were punished for violating natural law.32 This position is presented by Chizkuni.
The religiosity of our forefathers was manifest in their monotheistic dedication to following Hashem's instructions and in their moral and ethical standard of behavior, but it did not generally reflect itself through ritual performance.
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.38
- 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.