Context and the concept of Progressive Revelation

Does Judaism believe in Progressive Revelation? The idea that Revelation is ongoing and that new discoveries can trump the old received truths, dates back to the ideologues of the Protestant Reformation who invoked it to justify their schism from Catholicism. From there it eventually made its way to the Conservative Jewish thinkers of the 20th century. Quite clearly, traditional Judaism does not accept this idea, for our Torah is Toras Moshe and its legitimacy derives from the Revelation at Sinai. We can, perhaps, discover in it new insights but these must be harmonized with the traditional understanding to be valid. Rejection of Progressive Revelation does, however, present a theological difficulty for in addition to Moshe's Torah we possess a large body of inspired literature, the Tanach, that must have something new to say, or else why have it at all. Was Tanach new revelation? If so, there may e some validity to the idea of Progressive Revelation. However, Chazal said - NO. They have addressed this question in a variety of ways. Some of the most explicit statements which present the traditionl approach to this question are the following:

Had Israel not sinned, the Jews would be left with but with the Chumash and the Book of Joshua (Nedarim 22b).
Prophecy that was needed for generations was written down and prophecy which was not needed for generations was not written down (Megila 14a).
There is nothing which is found in Prophets and Ketuvim which is not hinted to in the Chumash (Taanit 9a).

The cumulative import of these and other statements is that other books of the Bible were given to us because there was a need to rebuke, to exhort or to guide the Jewish people to repentance from sin. They served a certain purpose which was dependent on the historical developments and the needs of the succeeding generations. The function of Tanach is to bring out, explain and elaborate that which is already implicitly present in the Chumash but never to change or contradict it. Thus - no progressive revelation. Instead, we have progressive explication. The books of Tanach reveal to us how to intepret the Torah text, nothing more, but still very important.

The idea that books of Tanach interpret the Chumash and also each other is now a staple of academic dogma[1]. These days it is fashionable to speak of intertextuality, in itself a concept that reaches beyond mere interpretation for it stems from literary theory and criticism. As always with ideas that come out of approaches other than Talmud Torah, such ideas must be sifted and examined a thousand times[2] before they can be accepted fully or partially. It is, however, to my mind, incontrovertible that Chazal reviewed and considered the entire range of our sacred literature as a standard interpretative technique. An example is found in this week's parsha.

The laws of Tsaraas, seem, at first glance, to belong solely to the realm of Tumah and Taharah. They do not come with any introduction; in fact, they appear to in no way be connected or dependant on the moral sphere or that of isur and heter. Sandwiched between the laws of Yoledes and Zav, they are introduced in a matter of fact way that implies that tsaraas is something that just happens to people. "When the plague of leprosy befalls a man...(Vayikra 13,9)", as if this was a natural occurrence, not an outcome of moral failing.

Although local context demands such an interpretation, it is inconsistent with distant context. In other words, since we find that elsewhere in Tanach tsaraas is represented as wages of sin, our understanding of the original Chumash passage must necessarily be adjusted to incorporate that reality. This is exactly what Chazal did.

...Afflictions (of tsaraas) do not come except for evil speech as it says " Take heed in the plague of leprosy, that thou observe diligently, and do according to all that priests and Levites shall teach you... Remember what L-rd, your G-d did to Miriam ... (Devarim 24, 8-9)". How are the two related? To teach that this happens because of evil speech...R. Shimon ben Eliezer says: Also for prideful spirit plagues come, for so we find by Uziah: And when he was strong, his heart was lifted up... and he went into the Temple of the L-rd to burn incense... the leprosy rose up in his forehead... (Chronicles II, 26, 16-19 (Toras Kihanim Metsorah 5,7)[3].

Tanach teaches that both evil speech and pride lead to tsaraas. The Midrash Tanchuma ( quoted by Rashi) is accordingly induced to find this fact in the Chumash purification ceremony itself.

...And the priest shall command to take for him... two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood and red thread of worm (derived coloring) and hyssop (Vayikra 14,4). Birds - since plagues come for evil speech and birds constantly chatter they were required for his purification. Cedar - because tsaraas comes for haughty spirit. Hyssop - what should he do and be healed? He should lower himself like worm and hyssop.

Thus, here as in many other places, we find Chazal sifting, correlating and collating the entire range of Biblical literature (and often also the Oral Law and worldly wisdom) in order to establish the correct understanding of verses, concepts and ideas. This methodology is one of the outstanding defining features that distinguishes Rabbinic interpretation from other interpretative traditions, both within Judaism and without[4].

---

1 This idea is sometimes expressed as an assertion that midrash as a method of interpretation has not started with the Rabbis but can already be seen to be present in parallel passages of different Biblical books that treat of same events. It is claimed that later books, such as Chronicles, serve as a Midrash on earlier books, such as Samuel. While this idea has a certain appeal and occasional usefulness, it endangers the basic principle of the existence of Oral Law. It is more faithful to the tradition to see both passages as reflecting the underlying oral tradition then to see one as interpretation of another. The approach taken in this lesson explores methodology and should not in any way, G-d forbid, lead to lessening of our faith in this basic principle of Judaism.

2 Intertextuality as a concept and as an interpretative tool deserves a separate tratment and we, please God will deal with it at more length in the future.

3.The 11 things that cause tsaraas to come are listed and derived in the rest of the passage, see also Erachin 15.

4 Certainly it is also a feature of later medieval and modern Jewish exegesis, but not as fundamentally and relentlessly.

Comments

[atlanta real estate agents]

I love your blog.. very nice colors & theme. Did you create this website yourself or did you hire someone to do it for you? Plz respond as I'm looking to design my own blog and would like to find out where u got this from. thanks

[Food Love]

It's awesome in favor of me to have a web page, which is helpful for my experience. thanks admin

[lose fat]

Hi there, just became alert to your blog through Google, and found that it is really informative. I am going to watch out for brussels. I'll appreciate if you continue this in future. A lot of people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

[viagra]

Hi, all the time i used to check web site posts here in the early hours in the morning, as i like to learn more and more.

[program do rozliczania pit 2013]

My partner and I stumbled over here coming from a different web page and thought I may as well check things out. I like what I see so i am just following you. Look forward to checking out your web page for a second time.|

[Darnell]

I've been browsing online more than 3 hours today, yet I never found any interesting article like yours. It's pretty worth enough for me. In my view, if all website owners and bloggers made good content as you did, the net will be much more useful than ever before.

[Kristin]

I used to be able to find good advice from your blog posts.

[pc repair]

There's certainly a lot to know about this topic. I love all of the points you made.