Saturday 17 January 2015

The Kaddish and the Undercover Karaite



undercover agent



Although I have previously been critical of the rabbinic Kaddish prayer, some interesting details emerge from further analysis.  I should reiterate that it is a rabbinically produced prayer, in Aramaic, which was written some time after the destruction of the 2nd Temple.

A full text appears here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaddish


The prayer can only be dated back to c.900 CE, and its first use as a mourner's prayer was in the 13th century. As such, it has little force even in terms of Rabbinic halacha.

Its contents do not mention the dead, but the living. The word “Kaddish” comes from the opening line - יִתְגַּדַּל וְיִתְקַדַּשׁ שְׁמֵהּ רַבָּא.    This calls to sanctify the great Name of God.  It is rather ironic, since the Name YHWH  has been banned from use by the rabbi, even though it is a commandment for all Israel to call on this Name.

What is even more surprising is the extra section known as the Kaddish D’Rabbanan or Al Yisrael. This extra section is read in the synagogue service after a recital of a Talmudic passage.  However, it does not itself refer to the Talmud, but calls for blessings of al Israel, including the rabbis and their students.  There is a caveat:

וְעַל כָּל מָאן דְּעָסְקִין בְּאוֹרַיְתָא.”

This refers to those who study “Orayta”, which is the Aramaic word for Torah (written). This is agreeable, since it does not actually ask for blessings for people who study Talmud.  We must encourage the rabbis and their students to study only the Written Torah.  So perhaps the composer of this prayer was an undercover Karaite, after all.



Monday 12 January 2015

Unknown to Moses





  


From the Torah’s own narrative, we can derive certain facts about the scope of Torah Law, and who were the true successors to Moses.  Of course, any Tom, Dick, or Harry can claim to be the heir to Moses’ Torah, and also to have in possession some books or laws unknown to Moses himself.

We see in Deut 31 some very precise statements regarding the scope of the Torah law, and its rightful guardians:

9 And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, that bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and unto all the elders of Israel.
10 And Moses commanded them, saying: 'At the end of every seven years, in the set time of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles,
11 when all Israel is come to appear before the LORD thy God in the place which He shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their hearing.
12 Assemble the people, the men and the women and the little ones, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the LORD your God, and observe to do all the words of this law;
13 and that their children, who have not known, may hear, and learn to fear the LORD your God, as long as ye live in the land whither ye go over the Jordan to possess it.'


V.9 Is a clear and pure disproof of any claims to additional legal works, be they the Mishnah, the New Testament, or the Koran.  Moses wrote this Torah in question.  If there was a dual or parallel part of the Torah, the oral law, as claimed by the rabbis, why is not mentioned here? And why is it not mentioned that he handed it to certain successors in oral form?   Furthermore, we see that the Law was entrusted to the Kohanim and the Levites.  This is quite an embarrassment for the Rabbis, since they opposed both the Kohanim and the Levites, who upheld the Written Law. 
See http://tanakhemet.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/destruction-of-levites-rationale-of.html


V.11-12 teach us the Hakhel gathering, every 7 years, when the whole written Torah is read.   The people will learn from this to fear God and also to keep the Torah.  It specifically states “and observe to do all the words of this law”.    In other words, the purpose of the Hakhel is to bring people to observe the Written law, as it is written, not anything other than this. The oral law is contradictory to the written law.   When I raised this point to an Orthodox rabbi he claimed this is only to get people to fear God.  This is necessary, but not sufficient, since the  Torah says it is specifically to observe the written law.

We see further on, again, that the Torah was completed in writing:

24 And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished,
25 that Moses commanded the Levites, that bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying
26 'Take this book of the law, and put it by the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

Again, no additional law could exist or be separate from this law.  The witness function of the Torah will reject something that is not Torah – and the oral law is outside of the Torah.
As already said, anyone can claim that Moses also gave another law to another group of people, but this is fictional, and precluded by these verses.   The oral law was unknown to Moses.  The rabbis themselves hint at this, in one of their fantasy stories about  rabbi Akiva (Menachot 29b), who allegedly was foreseen by Moses, teaching things that Moses did not know.  This single aspect of the myth is in accordance with my analysis above – namely that the oral law was unknown to Moses.









Saturday 10 January 2015

The Science of Talmud – What's at Stake?




 Transgenic mouse, conceptual artwork




Within the orthodox rabbinic world, there is an ongoing debate around the statements made in the Talmudic literature about science. Many of the Talmudic statements are outdated and/or false, and reflect ideas that were floating around millennia ago.
The modern Orthodox tend to view these statements as plain wrong, and argue that the Talmud is only there for Torah matters, not scientific. The Ultra-Orthodox are fundamentalists, and claim that every statement in the Talmud is true, and hence the science of today must be wrong if it contradicts the talmud.

One such claim appears in the Talmud and the Mishnah, and is about spontaneous generation, of lice, mice, and salamanders. A very modernist thinker, Rabbi Slifkin, has written extensively on these matters, and suffered the wrath of his Hareidi brethren.


Theories of spontaneous generation have long been dismissed and disproven by scientists. See for example http://www.microbiologytext.com/index.php?module=Book&func=displayarticle&art_id=27


So why are the hareidi rabbis taking an atavistic step back and making this into a new fundamentalism?

I would suggest several reasons.

1) Science is a threat to talmudism, since the acquisition of scientific knowledge can do away with reliance on rabbis, and hence they will lose adherents and income.

2) There is an internal political interest here as well. Despite earlier generations of rabbis such as Maimonides and Ibn Ezra, who were not fundamentalist on scientific claims of the Talmud, the ultra-orthodox of today wish to insulate themselves from both the outside world, and from the modern orthodox. Part of this is simple rivalry. If modern orthodox is “correct”, then big earning concepts such as Glatt Kosher (where food can be twice the price or more of regular kosher food) can also be questioned.

3) From a Karaite point of view, and this maybe of fundamental importance to the rabbis – if part of the Mishnah (and Talmud) is proven to be false, then their claim that the whole oral law was “divine” will collapse. Thus they have to retort to obscurantism and fallacious arguments, in order to avoid reaching such a conclusion.

The fact is that many or all of the pseudo-scientific statements made by the Talmudic rabbis had their origins in the theories of their contemporary neighbours, whether Greek, Roman, Babylonian, Hindu etc. Admitting this will not help their claims for their oral testament.