The following is a logical analysis of what Maimonides wrote in his halachic Magnum Opus – the so-called Mishnah Torah. My arguments will not be accepted by Rabbis, because a) they are unable to think logically, and b) they presume the truth of their beliefs as being facts, and cannot accept any challenge to them. Howeve,r a logical analysis brings us to some strange conclusions – first the text:
Maimonides Hilchot Teshuvah - Chapter Three
8)
Three individuals are described as Epicursim [heretics, with no place in the next world]
a) one who denies the existence of prophecy and maintains that there is no knowledge communicated from God to the hearts of men;
b) one who disputes the prophecy of Moses, our teacher;'
c) one who maintains that the Creator is not aware of the deeds of men.
Each of these three individuals is an Epicurus.
There are three individuals who are considered as one "who denies the Torah": [do not have a portion in the world to come.]
a) one who says Torah, even one verse or one word, is not from God. If he says: "Moses made these statements independently," he is denying the Torah.
b) one who denies the Torah's interpretation, the oral law, or disputes [the authority of] its spokesmen as did Tzadok and Beitus.
c) one who says that though the Torah came from God, the Creator has replaced one mitzvah with another one and nullified the original Torah, like the Arabs [and the Christians].
Each of these three individuals is considered as one who denies the Torah.
This section of CH 8 deals with various types of heretics , according to Rabbinic thought. The “heretics” lose their share in the next world, according to this system. What is interesting is that some of these heresies, if looked at logically and applied to rabbinic /Talmudic approach to the Torah, fall back on themselves. It is no surprise that that they claim the Sadducees to be heretics for denying the Oral Law and the Rabbinic interpretation of the Torah. And this is clause b) of his “deniers of Torah” category, underlined in the above quotation.
However, Maimonides had verbalised, and in fact put to paper a problem, which affects no only him, but all his rabbinic brethren who base themselves on the Talmud’s interpretation of the Torah.
Firstly, he states that “one who disputes the prophecy of Moses” is an epicurean – heretic. But the mainstream Talmud disputes a large portion of the Torah, giving it an interpretation contrary to the plain, obvious meaning.
For example, Moses clearly says we must count the Omer from the day after Shabbat – namely a “Sunday”. He say we must not add. He says we must follow the Kohanim. And many other things which I have attempted to show in this blog.
Then , in definition c) of deniers of Torah (Kofrim) , he attacks those who have replaced the Torah with a new testament i.e. a replacement mitzvah / commandment system which does away with the original Torah. This is what the Talmud does. There are many laws which are non existent in the Torah, and there are others which have been replaced , either by definition, or by changes – eg spices used in the Temple, when to count the omer, the laws of Sukkot (especially the Water Libation), ritual impurity and implementation of the Red heifer ashes – are all replacement mitzvoth which go against the original Torah instructed by Moses.
Thus, Rambam has embarked - unwittingly, on a suicide mission. Whilst he casts 1 so-called heresy category at the Sadducees, he has unleashed 2 more at himself.
