View Single Post
  #14  
Old 07-04-2022, 2:37 AM
mtenenhaus mtenenhaus is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,437
iTrader: 23 / 100%
Default

What a great question. I of course do not know if i'm correct or have the right to direct others.... but as i try to reason out the question i have at least for myself come to what i hope is a rational conclusion.

When reading law....i read it and abide to it in the here and now. That doesn't mean that it's not open to discussion, challenge, revision etc. That's why ideally we have established our judicial system.

When studying and reading scripture as well as historical or religious law, i read it as it portends to forever...and as a result I am instructed and committed to try to understand the intent of the text not only from then but for now and the future....hence the message becomes ever more broad and pertinent. The process is sine que non to Jewish educational system (no multiple guess, no parroting of answers etc.).

I'm not however, dogmatic in my view or understanding of the process. For me Judaism and it's legal structure remains as Rabbi Hillel taught (copied from the internet): fundamentally the expression of the ethic of reciprocity, or the "Golden Rule": "That which is hateful to you, do not do unto your fellow." That is the whole Torah; the rest is commentary; now go and learn." and "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? And being only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?"

I don't consider each and every presentation, story and allegory to be fact....but rather as lessons to be communicated, discussed, considered, argued, challenged and learned from. For example, i don't take as fact that burning bushes spoke etc.

Just my thoughts
Reply With Quote