The midrash says that our holy ancestors kept the entire Torah before it was given. How is that possible? How could they know about matzah when the exodus from Mitzrayim was far in the future? The basic answer is that the prohibition of eating chameitz at Pesach time is something built into the fabric of reality. The exodus gave us an historical event to which to tie that prohibition, but the prohibition itself existed since the six days of Creation.
But there's more: the midrash says that the Avos also kept all of the rabbinic decrees, such as muktzeh, eiruvim and even Chanuka candles. How are we do understand that? Rabbinic decrees are, after all, the product of human debate and thought, as clearly documented in the gemara. Now what?
There are two approaches to Jewish observance, that broadly can be categorized as "misnagid" or "yekish" on the one hand, and "chasidish" on the other. The easiest way to find where you fall is to consider your reaction to learning (Sukkah 28a) that when Yonatan b. Uzziel studied Torah, he generated such intense spiritual fire that if a bird flew overhead it would be incinerated. If your first thought is, "Wow... what k'dusha!", then you are in the chasidish camp. If, on the other hand, you wonder, "Hmm... is he obligated to pay for damages?", then you are firmly a minagid. Of course it's a spectrum, though I am quite obviously pegged on the misnagid side.
There is a parallel in the surrounding cultures. During the renaissance, as intellectual pursuits became once again fashionable in the non-Jewish world, the field of philosophy exploded. So much so, that a there was a break off that started as "natural philosophy" and then eventually morphed into what we now call physics. In the 1600s, though, the two camps were still closely aligned the distinctions were more like misnagid (physics) vs chasid (philosophy). Among the giants, were two particular stars: Newton on the natural philosophy side and Leibniz on the more traditional side. They both invented a new branch of mathematics known today as calculus. There is a long standing debate as to whom should the credit be given. In fact, though, the both invented it independently.
Who cares? Here's the thing. Newton needed a way to precisely describe the motion of physical objects that could be used equally well for baseballs and arrows as for planets and stars. Leibniz, on the other hand, wanted to prove that this is the best of all possible worlds. Consider well. Mathematics is clearly a human invention, and these two geniuses could not have had more different agendas. Yet, yet... the logical structure of mathematics when exercised by intellectual giants can only yield a single result. Calculus is calculus, whether you want to study race cars or galaxies.
The Ramchal in Derech HaShem says that there is no fundamental difference between d'oraisos and d'rabanan's. They were both given by the same Creator. The d'oraisos were given in written and oral form to the Jewish nation at Mt. Sinai. The d'rabanan's were given via the intense debate and intellectual investigations of our Sages. In practice, also, questions of doubt on d'oraisos are resolved to the strict side, whereas questions of doubt on d'rabanan's are resolved to the lenient side.
The medrash that tells us that the Avos kept even the rabbinic decrees really brings out two points. One, that those decrees are also built into the fabric of reality. Two, the greatness of the Avos who were able to see into Creation with such clarity.
But there's more: the midrash says that the Avos also kept all of the rabbinic decrees, such as muktzeh, eiruvim and even Chanuka candles. How are we do understand that? Rabbinic decrees are, after all, the product of human debate and thought, as clearly documented in the gemara. Now what?
There are two approaches to Jewish observance, that broadly can be categorized as "misnagid" or "yekish" on the one hand, and "chasidish" on the other. The easiest way to find where you fall is to consider your reaction to learning (Sukkah 28a) that when Yonatan b. Uzziel studied Torah, he generated such intense spiritual fire that if a bird flew overhead it would be incinerated. If your first thought is, "Wow... what k'dusha!", then you are in the chasidish camp. If, on the other hand, you wonder, "Hmm... is he obligated to pay for damages?", then you are firmly a minagid. Of course it's a spectrum, though I am quite obviously pegged on the misnagid side.
There is a parallel in the surrounding cultures. During the renaissance, as intellectual pursuits became once again fashionable in the non-Jewish world, the field of philosophy exploded. So much so, that a there was a break off that started as "natural philosophy" and then eventually morphed into what we now call physics. In the 1600s, though, the two camps were still closely aligned the distinctions were more like misnagid (physics) vs chasid (philosophy). Among the giants, were two particular stars: Newton on the natural philosophy side and Leibniz on the more traditional side. They both invented a new branch of mathematics known today as calculus. There is a long standing debate as to whom should the credit be given. In fact, though, the both invented it independently.
Who cares? Here's the thing. Newton needed a way to precisely describe the motion of physical objects that could be used equally well for baseballs and arrows as for planets and stars. Leibniz, on the other hand, wanted to prove that this is the best of all possible worlds. Consider well. Mathematics is clearly a human invention, and these two geniuses could not have had more different agendas. Yet, yet... the logical structure of mathematics when exercised by intellectual giants can only yield a single result. Calculus is calculus, whether you want to study race cars or galaxies.
The Ramchal in Derech HaShem says that there is no fundamental difference between d'oraisos and d'rabanan's. They were both given by the same Creator. The d'oraisos were given in written and oral form to the Jewish nation at Mt. Sinai. The d'rabanan's were given via the intense debate and intellectual investigations of our Sages. In practice, also, questions of doubt on d'oraisos are resolved to the strict side, whereas questions of doubt on d'rabanan's are resolved to the lenient side.
The medrash that tells us that the Avos kept even the rabbinic decrees really brings out two points. One, that those decrees are also built into the fabric of reality. Two, the greatness of the Avos who were able to see into Creation with such clarity.
Comments