First of all, did Rabbi Akiva come up with the story about himself? Was it a dream? Was it his own justification?
Also why would Moshe be appeased and placated if he sees that he is misquoted and misinterpretated. The Rabbanim, Zichronim Le'bracha, use Moshe's name, to reinterpret Moshe-yet Moshe is satisfied to realized that he is quoted and misunderstood. Conversely he should be even more frustrated.
This response reminds me of the "Nitzchunee Banai" story with "Torah lo Mishemayim Hee" but there must be a limit. And if Rabbi Akiva recognized that he was interpretating something that was not meant to be interpretated, why didn't he stop?
Also, why don't we take reinterpretating the Torah to the extreme, and have a whole new book-like the New Testament? If we recognize, as Menachot 29b seems to imply, that the Rabbanim knew they were writing something Moshe had not originally intended, than what is wrong with having an entirely New Testament?
In response, we have another guest post by Rabbi Kenneth Schiowitz, Rabbi of Congregation Shaare Tefillah of Teaneck:
On the first question, I do not know, but in the Talmud, the story is not told by Rebbe Akiva himself, but by a later rabbi, Rav. If anyone had an agenda in making up the story, it was probably to explain the whole assumption and basis of the process of Torah Shebaal Pe. Rebbe Akiva was not the only one to ever introduce a new idea that may not have been known to Moshe.
I agree with Mrs. Block that this gemarah is very relevant to this issue. I would add by expanding on the significance of the end of that story, that Rebbe Akiva attributed his teaching to "halacha leMoshe miSinia". Rebbe Akiva's work represented the dynamic and evolving nature of Torah and halacha. Nevertheless, they are all rooted in the tradition from Sinai, and evolved through the application of the principles that God taught Moshe. There is a limit, and there is a reason why we cannot make a whole new book. Because God taught Moshe rules and principles that he, and later Jews, will use in order to interpret the Torah. This is a dynamic process, but we are expected to be creative and innovative within the parameters that God told Moshe. Indeed, every novelty of Rebbe Akiva is based on the information and rules that were given to Moshe at Sinai. They do not represent misinterpretation but rather further development. Apparently, even Moshe did not anticipate all the wisdom that would be built upon the information that he transmitted to God and to the Jewish people, but ultimately felt nachat when seeing it.
It is as if a great 18th century scientist would be shown a vision of the first spaceship to travel to the moon in the 1960's. This is a possibility that was probably a wild dream in the 1700's. Imagine if he would discover in that vision that the ability for this to take place was all based on his discoveries from the 18th century. That would not be called a misinterpretation, but the application, and the building upon his own ideas. That would be great nachat!
Rebbe Akiva did interpret things the way that they were supposed to be interpreted, but maybe not by Moshe, but only by God. Yes, there is a limit. Innovation is the essence of the Torah Shebaal Pe, but they must be developed within the limits of the rules that were told at Sinai and that have been developed over the generations.
Interestingly, the gemarah of "nitzchuni banai" that you have referred to opens up another issue - that perhaps God Himself has created a system where more than one interpretation can be offered, within the limits of the rules. And incredibly, God left if for use to choose the interpretation to be followed in the halacha (through the rule of majority), even if it is not what He had in mind. Apparently, it is more important to God that this would become a human process than it be most accurate. If He sought perfection in the halacha, then He probably would have written the whole thing Himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment