Wednesday, June 11, 2008

The Existance or Non-Existance of Demons (Mazikin): Midrash Tanchumah Naso, sif 23

There is a debate whether or not demons exist or existed. Not to get into the huge topic too much (since I don't know all the sources and one could write a whole book on the subject) but I came across a Midrash Tanchumah (MT) which I have not heard before, so here it is:

The MT in parashas Naso, sif 23 states:

"...on the day the Mishkon was erected, the demons were eliminated from the world. Before it was erected, the demons were commonly found in the world."

The Midrash then proceeds to cite proof-texts as well as some descriptions of various demons and then concludes "the day the Miskon was erected they were eliminated."

Now from what I remember, the RamBam and Meiri (along with some others) say that demons do not exist. The question some raise, is that are they saying the demons never existed at all? Or that they simply do not exist today? From this Midrash, we can surmise (possibly) that they did indeed exist at one point, but were eliminated form the world after the Mishkon was finished.

Therefore, when a reshon states that demons do not exist, it could be that they are speaking only of the present and future.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

What would Judaism look like if there was no Oral Law? Ask this guy!

I came across this fascinating video of a talk given by an author who tried to live life for a year following the Bible literally. To do so, he read through the whole Bible (and the Christian Bible), and came up with about 700 rules to live by.

It is pretty interesting how he tries to fulfill everything, and it is very insightful about how important the Oral Law really is. For instance, he tries to stone adulterers (with pebbles), does Kapparah to simulate a sacrifice, grows a huge beard, doesn't mix fabrics (of any kind), etc.

What is really interesting are the things he found the most difficult, such as refraining from Lashon Hara, lying, etc. He is a secular Jew, and joined a reform temple after his experiment. Although he does not espouse a Torah viewpoint in this interview, it is still very worthwhile to watch in my opinion, as he does find that by practicing the commandments and praying, that he experienced some kind of connection to Hashem, and how the acts of the commandments changed him for the better.

Monday, February 25, 2008

Why the Oral Law Was Not Written Down - Midrash Tanchuma: Ki Sisa: sif 34

The question that many BTs like myself have asked is "Why wasn't the Oral Law written down when it was given at Sinai?" I have heard a few answers to this question, one saying that the Oral Law constantly changes to decide how the Halachah is followed with each era's circumstances, and therefore it would be too huge (and prophetic) to write down, and another saying that not writing the Oral Law ensured that one would have to learn from a Rebbe who learned from a Rebbe etc. and make us toil in the Torah.

However, I just came a across an explanation in the Midrash Tanchumah, and since it is one that I never heard before, I thought I'd post it. (The translation is from Metsudah):

Rabbi Yehudah bar Shallum said: When the Holy One, Blessed is He, said to Moshe, "Write for yourself," Moshe asked that Mishnah should be written down. But because the Holy One, Blessed is He, foresaw that the nations of the world were going to translate the Torah and read it in Greek, and they would then claim "We are Yisroel," and until now the balances have been equal. The Holy One Blessed is He, said to the nations, "You claim that you are My sons. I know only that the ones who possess My mysteries are My sons. And what is that? That is Mishnah that was transmitted orally, and it is all for you to expound."

Rabbi Yehudah bar Shallum said: The Holy One, Blessed is He, said to Moshe, "What do you want? That Mishnah should be written down? What would then be the difference between Yisroel and the nations?" ... So give them the Scripture written down and the Mishnah orally.



Now my thoughts (which may be off):

Quite interesting! If one thinks about it, both Christianity and Islam use the Tanach as a basis point, but they interpret it in their own way. The Tanach has become wide spread in the world, but only the written law, not the oral. If young Christianity had had the oral law as part of their "translation" then it would become quite hard indeed to tell the difference between a Jew and a Gentile.

Thus we see, that the reason (according to the Tanchumah) that the Oral Law was not written is so that when the Torah would be spread throughout the world, it would be in a way that would allow a clear distinction between Jew and Gentile during the exile.

Sunday, February 10, 2008

New blog

Hello, this will now by my Torah thoughts page. I figured that it would be a very long time before I could post any Torah thoughts (due to my ignorence) so instead, I decided to start posting interesting statements from my learning, and maybe a quick blurb about why I think it is interesting. The idea is to share sources and statements that may be unknown to many, or easily forgotten, that I feel are interesting and many times usfull to know. We shall see how it goes!