Important Considerations on an Oral Tradition

There is very little we can know of ancient Israeliteism (I mean pre-post Assyrian and Babylonian exilic Israeliteism) and Saddoqim Israeliteism (circa 3 BC to formation of Qaraism) aside from what beliefs and customs we can find in the Miqra, archeaology and readings from non-Hebrew sources. Since we have this cultural and historical gap, to approach what we consider to be the most authentic practice of Israelitism, we must consider a proof-text for the case of Qaraism:

‘Now Moshe wrote down this Instruction and gave it to the priests, the sons of Levi, those carrying the coffer of the Covenant of YHWH, and to all the elders of Israel. And Moshe commanded them, saying: At the end of seven years, at the appointed-time of the Year of Release, on the pilgrimage- festival of Sukkot, when all Israel comes to be seen at the presence of YHWH your God, at the place that he chooses, you are to proclaim this Instruction in front of all Israel, in their ears…that they may hearken, in order that they may learn and have awe for YHWH your God…’ (Devarim 31: 9-11, 12).

The Torah was read to the Hebrews every seventh year. The Hebrews heard the words and subsequently understood the meaning of it from they heard. Therefore according to Qaraite principles, the 'peshat' or plain interpretation is considered to be the most accurate since this is what the average Israelite used to interpret Torah based on hearing it.

Another important proof-text for the case for Qaraism is Devarim 13:1:

'All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.'

This verse states that nothing is to be added to the Tora of YHWH and nothing should be removed from it. A strict, literal (one could even consider it hyper-peshat interpretation) implies that nothing is to be commanded to the Children of Israeyl that is considered binding and mandatory save that which was commanded by Moshe.

Problems

There are some obvious issues with the Qaraite peshat thesis.

Regarding the above proof texts (Devarim 31 and Devarim 13): While it is understandable and practical to consider that the ancient Israelites ‘heard’ Torah every seven years and interpreted according to what they heard, as modern day Qaraites, we are severely lacking in the depth and context of all interpretations simply because we have logic that we in this present day could glean the same meaning of the Torah as our ancestors did over 2500 years ago. Therefore Qaraism can never come to the truest conclusions of what Torah means though its methods seem to be the best way of doing so.

Another problem is that the Torah could not have just been read every seven years. It would seem logical that Israelites had access to the books or teachings from Kohanim, Levites and sages who lived amongst them. Rather than be in doubt on a matter and simply ask his/her neighbor for verification, the ancient Israelite would consult with a sage or representative of the tribe of Lewi. This leads us to the next issue, the concept of the Prophets and Judges.

And Moses said unto his father-in-law: 'Because the people come unto me to inquire of God; when they have a matter, it cometh unto me; and I judge between a man and his neighbour, and I make them know the statutes of God, and His laws'(Shemoth18: 15-16).

The establishment of the ‘sanhedrin’ or court of Judges was based on advice given from Moshe's father in law, Yithro. Moshe was the prophet and chief of the Hebrews. Thus the government of post-Egypt Israel was only Moshe. It was Moshe alone who made known the ways of God to Israel.

But since Moshe was a man and had to deal with the large population alone, he was counseled to delegate his authority to righteous men of Israeyl. Therefore, the creation of hierarchical court system occurred. Its duty? To judge matters of the people according to the Torah that YHWH commanded Moshe.

‘And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves’ (Shemoth 18: 26).

It is absolutely necessary that one understands the implications here. Moshe served as the legal and prophetic head of Israeyl and delegated his legal authority to the Judges. This means the Judges had the authority and responsibility to interpret the Torah and apply it to the various cases presented before them by the Israelite population. (To give those who are familiar with Nehemia Gordon's writings and the NT, the Judges figuratively sit in Moses' seat.) Note that the Judges did not have prophetic authority (that is, reveal the will of YHWH) unless of course they happened to be a prophet.

To repeat, the Judges, as a representative of Moshe's legal authority, were to interpret the Torah and apply it to various cases presented by the people. It is highly unlikely that peshat applied in every single verdict to every single case presented to the Judges. In cases of great difficulty, the Judge brought his case before the ‘Chief Justice and Prophet,’ Moshe. Moshe would inquire of God on the manner. Later on, the matter would be ultimately presented to the High Priest, who would inquire of God’s will on the matter via the mysterious and solely-sanctioned divinatory device called the Urim w’Tumim (Exodus 28:30).

Let’s ask the question, if the Torah could easily be interpreted according to its peshat, why would difficult cases be brought before Moshe and later the High Priest for God’s inquiry? The answer is that while the Torah forms the solid foundation for Israelites life, it does not apply to every single situation based solely off a peshat interpretation. The proof is the hierarchical system of Judges,  the Urim w’Thumim device and the Prophets.

The Prophets of Israeyl filled the gap between Israel (including the priesthood) and YHWH. Sefer Shmueyl indicates that these 'men of Elohim' were once called 'Seers' before they were called Prophet.

‘…that the LORD would put His spirit upon them’ (Numbers 11:29).

What is a prophet? It is one upon whom God has put His Spirit. Simple as that. Though the duties of the Prophet are not outlined anywhere in Miqra, the legitimacy of a prophet lies in his ability to correctly declare the future (Dev. 13:2-6). The role of a Prophet can be seen throughout the Miqra. In some cases, the Judges of Israeyl were prophets. Such Judge-Prophets (e.g., Samueyl) served as the ‘Commander in Chief and Chief Justice/CEO’ over all of Israeyl. During the Monarchy, prophets served as advisors to the king and people. They foretold of the consequences to disobedience God. Most importantly, the Prophets always pointed back to the Torah.

The question on everyone’s mind is, can the Prophets add or take away from the Torah. The answer is ‘no.’ However, just like the Judges of the Sanhedrin, the prophets have the right and obligation to interpret the Torah and apply it according to new circumstances as they arise. They also have the power to declare Fast Days and Days of Celebration. More on this later. Therefore, while the Qaraite concept of ‘peshat-first’ is commendable, to deny that the Torah existed alone without interpretations that were born out from the fruit of further inquiry and application to circumstances on part of the Sanhedrin and Prophets is ludicrous. The fact that Qaraites have an oral tradition of sorts (Sevel Hayyerushah) is of course a testimony to this.

Binding practices upon Israeyl which were not commanded by Moshe are found in the Israelite religion:

“Behold the foundations upon which our holy religion stands are three, namely, Scripture, Inference [Hekesh], and Inherited Tradition [Sevel Hayerushah]. This third one is also known by two other names, which are Tradition [Kabalah] and Transmission [Ha‘atakah]. All three of these [terms] refer to the same thing, since “tradition” is “transmitted” from the fathers through the “inheritance” of the sons, as it is written, “Moses commanded for us a Torah, an inheritance for the congregation of Jacob” (Dt 33:4)… Inherited Tradition refers to anything that is not explicitly written in the Torah, nor is it similar to that which is written in the Torah, but is a simple custom (minhag) that we practice which continues from our fathers and holy Rabbis, of blessed memory, generation after generation. Or [it continues] from before the giving of the Torah, such as the marriage ceremony, slaughtering, and others. Or it is a decree of the elders and great sages (of blessed memory) such as the four fasts, the days of Purim, and others. We are obligated by these the same as by that which is actually written in the Torah. No man has the right to change them or to do away with them even though they are not written in the Torah. This sort of obligation, although it is not written explicitly in the Torah, is nevertheless recorded in the Prophets or Writings written through prophecy or divine inspiration, or at the very least hinted at in one of the twenty-four holy books [of the Tanach]. Regarding this, Rabbi Toviah the Translator… said: “Anyone who says that there is a tradition that does not have support from Scripture, it is only because of his lack of intelligence when it comes to that commandment.” (Shlomoh Afedah, Yeriot Shlomoh, pages 111–112)” (Three Historic Karaite Approaches to Tradition by Nehemia Gordon, page 3).

It must be explained that the neo-Qaraite movement of our day, composed of former Rabbanite Jews and converts, stress the ‘Exclusivist’ concept of peshat-first and Torah only. The position is understandable but unreasonable in the face of the aforementioned concepts. It is important to understand that the previous quote states that we are bound to the customs of the ‘Four Fasts’ and ‘Days of Purim’ and the prohibition of buying and sellling on Shabbath simply because they are in the Tanakh though they are not commanded in the Torah. To me this seems way too contradictory: if the Torah cannot be added to or subtracted from, how is it that a Qaraite can accept certain customs as binding when they do not come from the Torah? 

The resolution here is to accept the obvious. The Prophets ordained customs and practices which the people took as binding. Likewise, all verdicts determined by the Judges of the Sanhedrin were binding to the extent as if they were Torah law simply because Moshe delegated his authority to these Judges.

If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, even matters of controversy within thy gates; then shalt thou arise, and get thee up unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose. And thou shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days; and thou shalt inquire; and they shall declare unto thee the sentence of judgment. And thou shalt do according to the tenor of the sentence, which they shall declare unto thee from that place which the LORD shall choose; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall teach thee. According to the law (ha-torah) which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. And the man that doeth presumptuously, in not hearkening unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the LORD thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die; and thou shalt exterminate the evil from Israel (Dev. 17:8-12).

At this point in Devarim we see that the Priesthood is established. Any person with an issue comes before the Priesthood and Judges to inquire of an issue. That/those person(s) must abide by their rule on the matter on pain of death. Folks, it is clear here that delegation of authority and power to interpret Torah and execute judgments were placed in the hands of the priesthood and Sanhedrin. These interpretations and judgments based on extrapolations of the Torah text are considered to be oral torahs/traditions that must be followed exactly as prescribed.  (Thus-- legally and religious binding oral torahs!)

Now let’s move forward to the times of the Maccabees and first century Judeans. These people definitely had a canonization of Scripture different than ours. They had practices and customs that do not exist today. There had to be prophets and judges amongst them who sanctioned such actions. The question arises however on the nature of the Sanhedrin at this time. At a point, the Pharisees took over the Sanhedrin and the Hellenistic Sadducees controlled the Priesthood. The Pharisees used the ‘traditions of the fathers’ to (quite obviously) direct the course of the religion of Israeyl in a way that benefited them and their sect. It was claimed that their interpretations and beliefs were given to Moshe by God at Sinai. This, according to our sources, was the reason why their authority and oral traditions were rejected on part of the Opposition Sadducees and the Hellenistic Sadducees.  Because sources are silent or missing regarding prophets, this doesn't discount the possiblity of there being Prophets (the Judah the Maccabee certainly might have been one).  The Maccabees or their designees had to act as Judges since an Israelite kingdom is mandated by Torah to have Judges. Afterall, how could the entire people consent to the 8-day festival of Hanuka celebrated every year as a mandate had not some Mosaic/Judicial authority existed amongst the Maccabees. They certainly had to have taken the mantle of the Judges in some manner. Additionally is certainly a lot that we don't know and to discount the possibly simply because there is no 'recorded' existence of a prophet would be presumptuous.

Saddoq's logical conclusion: It must have been understood by both Sadducee factions that although oral traditions existed, they did so under the pretext of the Prophets and righteous, non-accomodationist Sanhedrin before them and were subsequently ‘grand-fathered’ by these authorities insomuch that those traditions had a sense (if not mandate) of legitimacy. I believe that this is the position on the concept of ‘Oral Tradition/Custom’ that Qaraites need to adopt in order to better make their beliefs understood by both themselves and the Rabbanites. This conclusion may not satisfy purists, but surely it must answer some important questions and concerns that many Qaraite have. Once again, traditions existed that were sanctioned by the Prophets and Judges either based off mass-cultural appeal and significance (such as Purim or Fasts/Hanukka) or by necessary decree (buying and selling on Shabbath). How else could such practices be considered not adding to Torah if not ordained by some persons with Mosaic authority (ie Judges or Prophets?). Clearly these things are contra Devarim 13 and add to Torah. But once we read of the authority of the Judges in Devarim, then we can clearly say that they alone had the ability to command and the people to follow even on pain of death.  The problem is not with Devarim 13 but our own imperfect understanding of the circumstances as allowed by the cultural and historical gap between ourselves and ancestors. 

Finally, let’s get real. If Qaraism was the cure to the present degraded state of Israeyl, surely its ‘non-binding tradition, anti-Talmud’ stance would have marked it in some way, shape or form before YHWH as highly favourable. The Qaraim would be placed in some special position than that of the Rabbinic Jews. Interestingly, Qaraites have not been exempt from the anti-Semitic persecutions that are characteristic of the Curse found in Devarim. I don’t presume to know the mind of God but it seems that no matter what Israeyl does, it must suffer the Curse together, regardless of sect and belief.  And what of all of this fuss about binding oral traditions and adding/subtracting to the Torah?—what to make of it? Is it really the source for Israeyl’s present troubles? Besides, the condemnations of the Prophets do not focus on additions and subtractions to the Torah (save one mention of it in Isaiah). The complaints of the Prophets mainly lie in the issue of 1) practice of sacrifices without piety, 2) injustice toward the widow, orphan and convert, and 3) adoption of pagan practices such as idol worship. These were the reasons for the first Exile. But what was the reason for the second exile? It’s difficult to say without a complete understanding of that time period. Unfortunately, most information we have is limited to the biased texts of the Talmud and anti-Semitic Catholic scholars. 

Finally

I just want to make it absolutely clear where Qaraism stands: the Four Fasts, Purim and enactments on the Shabbath are additions to the Torah. They in fact should not, based on Dev. 13, be practiced. If this is the peshat then that is how Qaraism ought to interpret it- period without excuses.
 
But the fact that Qaraites use the 'it exists in the Prophets and is therefore permissible' claim is clearly against their own principles. For in this case, the argument of peshat-only in Devarim 13 is dropped in lieu of the mere acceptance of the Canon of the prophetic works in which the aforementioned customs exist; thus Dv 13 is therefore dropped in lieu of SECTARIAN convenience). This means the Qaraites uphold additions to Torah so long as they appear in the Prophets and Writings. This is ridiculous and contradictory.
 
Karaites must accept the notion that the Judges had Mosaic authority to command interpretations of Torah (buying selling on shabbath), sanction communal festivities of great importance (Purim, Fasts) thereby creating judicial precedents/traditions/customs. The best term used to describe these things is the same used by Rabbanites- teqanoth/enactments. Devarim makes it appear that only the judicial rulings for domestic matters were punishable on pain of death. But what of customs?--  if a person did not conform to the Fasts or days of Purim they were probably ostracised as a anti-nationalist or something similar. Imagine refusing to celebrate Hanuka during the lives of the Maccabees! So its hard to say what enactments were/were not punishable and in what way, shape or form.
 
I think the Karaites got nervous and had to make an account for the reasons why they follow the customs not mentioned in Torah. They might have though that if they could not prove their case, they would have had to actually follow the Rabbanites. But it is clear that even the Rabbanites are not the Court (as no court exists!). As Yerusha pointed out yesterday, the moral requirements of being a Judge were definitely not reflective of the Pharisees, for Shemoth 18:21 states: 'Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating unjust gain.' It would make sense then that only a true Prophet could appoint a court of Judges for only God alone knows the heart of a man.

In conclusion: The Qaraite permission of customs based in the Prophets though the matter stands contradictory to Dv 13 is at best sectarian convenience and at worse purely hypocritical.

So to conclude, what can Qaraism do to further improve itself?

1. Form organizations to better unify all the various aspects of Qaraism. If your organisation claims to accept diversity of opinion then for the love of God act like it!
2. Confess that oral traditions existed and do exist and are permissible in certain extents
3. Cease the notion that Qaraism is ‘race’ specific (i.e. Egyptian, Eastern European, etc)
4. Cease the notion that Qaraism is ‘peshat’ specific- ousting all others who do not conform to this concept
5. Urge your communities to refer to themselves as Israelites. Afterall this is the true label for ourselves and religion.