From: Shoshanna Walker[Steve Miller]
Romans is not the word of G-d, it doesn't even allege that.
The idea that there is an oral law equally as authoritative as the
written law is highly dubious to me. You say that this prevents
mistranslation, but it allows the importation of every kind of merely
human idea and even perversion of God's word. God warns against adding
to his word, and a proposed "oral law" does just that. It presents
something as having the same authority as the written word, from what
you say, and thereby adds to God's word.
However, Shoshanna's interpretation of Rashi and Midrash as part of this
oral law is not shared by all Jews. It is an extreme interpretation that
essentially says that Rashi or the Rabbis of the Midrash whom he often
quotes was not a great scholar but simply a scribe who wrote something
handed down to him from the days of Moses. While that may describe
much of his work (much of Rashi is effectively quotes from the Midrash),
he was also a great scholar and a true understanding of Rashi can only
be achieved by seeing all his quoted sources (which are many!) and
identifying which parts he chose to quote, which he chose not to quote,
what he chose to add of his own, and answering why he chose to do what
he did.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.