The Reform Jew and the Talmud:

A Radical Suggestion
Edmond H. Weiss, Ph.D.
Moses received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, and Joshua to the Elders, the Elders to
the Prophets, and the Prophets transmitted it to the men of the Sanhedrin . . .
Avoth:1

Idolizing the Torah

Although Reform Jews do not officially believe that the Five Books of Moses come directly from
God, they often act otherwise. In even the most modern Reform synagogue (many of whose
members started out life as Orthodox and Conservative), the Torah Scroll is still treated with a
reverence that borders on idolatry. It has to be a kosher scroll, purchased from a Jerusalem
scribe who probably regards Reform Jews with contempt. It is dressed in jeweled ornaments
and handled as though dropping it would cause a natural calamity. No matter how enlightened
or skeptical the congregants, they cant wait to touch it or kiss italthough, God forbid, not
directly with ones skin.
This sort of carrying on makes sense if we are in the presence of the transcribed words of God.
But it makes far less sense if we are in the presence of a multi-source document, containing not
only history and wisdom but also error, contradiction, and superstition. It also encourages
people to believe that all the great literature and ideas of the Jewish people are captured in this
one text.
Among my Reform Jewish associates, there is no shortage of Torah ignorance. But the most
ironic ignorance is that most think there is much more in the Torah Scroll than is actually there.
Partly this is because rabbis usually do not identify clearly the sources of their remarks. Such
expressions as our sages teach us or according to our tradition tend to keep modern Jews
ignorant of the map of Jewish resources. Many are surprised to learn that Abrahams breaking
of his fathers idols is not in the Torah. (Its a midrash.) Nor is the story of Joshua in Jerico or
David and Bathsheba. (Theyre in the Prophets.) And the whole story of the Maccabees and
Chanuka doesnt appear in the Hebrew Scriptures at all. The rules for what one may do not do
on Shabbat and not eat during Passover are not there. (Babylonian Talmud: Tractates Shabbat
and Pesach)

In short, this idolization of the Torah Scroll, I fear, distracts many of us from the rest of the
Jewish Bible and the larger library of Jewish genius. Therefore, to help my Jewish friends better
experience the full pleasure and fascination of the Jewish mind, I suggest that Reform Jews
should learn to love Torah a little less and Talmud a good bit more.
Does mean that they should curtail their already meager Torah study? Hardly. But it does mean
that there might be much more to be gained from studying II Samuel or Ecclesiastes or Tractate
Sanhedrin than, say, Leviticus. It means that they should find time for that greatest of all Jewish
monumentsgrander than the pyramids and more awesome than the cathedral at Chartres
the Babylonian Talmud.
The Great Jewish Schism
The main dispute between liberal and traditional Jews is over the provenance of the Torah. The
traditional Jew says that the Torah is mshmayim, from heaven. That all of it was communicated
directly to Moses by God, every syllable and letter (including the misspellings, which, therefore,
have divine significance). Moreover, the particular version of that document currently
ensconced in our sanctuariesdressed in velvet and silver is the correct version. Maimonides
Eighth Article is: I believe with perfect faith that whole Law (Torah), now in our possession, is the same
that was given to Moses our teacher, peace be unto him.
With the Orthodox, there is no room for debate on this matter. The introduction to the Stone
Chumash (Artscroll) makes it clear. If one questions the Divine origin of even a single letter or
traditionally accepted interpretation of the Torah, it is tantamount to denial of the entire Torah. .
. for if a critic can take it upon himself to deny the provenance of one verse or letter of the
Torah, what is to stop him from discarding any part that displeases him?
This fundamentalist recalcitrance both annoys and amuses the modern Jew. We know that, even
if one allows for some wondrous and unexplainable event at Sinai, it is absurd to believe that
Moses wrote a single sentence of the document currently in our possession; Moses, indeed,
probably did not speak Hebrew and, raised as an Egyptian prince, was also probably illiterate.
Further, even if Moses had written some or most of it, we know that the compilation of these
words, eight or nine hundred years after the events at Sinai, could not be faithful to the letter.
(We also note some whopping errors in the Torah that would not have been made by the author
of nature. For example, the earth, with day and night cycles, exists three days before the
creation of the sun! Certainly the creator of the universe would not have communicated such a
blunder to Moses or anyone else.)
The Reform Movement, although it has always allowedalbeit in vague and figurative
languagefor Gods participation in the writing of the Torah, has never asserted the divine

perfection of any sentence in the document. In a wonderfully radical and brave

pronouncement, the Pittsburgh Platform of 1885 declares:
The Bible reflect[s] the primitive ideas of its own age and at times clothing its conception
of divine providence and justice dealing with man in miraculous narratives.
The essence of Reform thinking has been the freedom to evaluate the materials in context and
adapt them to the current periodjust as its original scribes, priests, and redactors did. The Centenary
Perspective (1976) puts it succinctly:
Within each area of Jewish observance Reform Jews are called upon to confront the
claims of Jewish tradition, however differently perceived, and to exercise their
individual autonomy, choosing and creating on the basis of commitment and
knowledge.
To the modern Jew, the claim that every letter of the Torah Scroll (or Written Torah or Five
Books of Moses or Pentateuch or Chumash) is divine is, depending on ones mood, a charming
eccentricity, an impressive show of irrational faith, or an embarrassing superstition. And an
enlightened Jew judges the current practice of finding hidden prophecies in the Torah (the
Torah Codes) to be nothing more than an amusing parlor trick.
Imagine the amazement and horror of this same Jew when he or she learns that the Orthodox
believe that not only is every letter of the 300,000 words of the Pentateuch divine but also
several other million words as well: the rest of the Tanach (or Bible), the Midrash, and Mishna,
and the entire library of commentaries known as the Talmud.
As Milton Steinberg put it in Basic Judaism:
...But revelation, according to the traditionalists, does not exhaust itself in the Torahbook. It suffuses the writings of the prophets after Moses, overflows into the rest of
Scripture, thence into classical Talmudic literature; thence again, though in diminishing
degree, into later rabbinic writings. In other words, the mainstream of the Tradition
everywhere possess something of the authority of the Torah-Bookmuch in the same
fashion as inferences in logic, carry over, if only they be drawn accurately, the authority
and certainty of the premises from which they are drawn. Or to put the point as the
Talmud does itself: Whatsoever any earnest scholar will innovate in the future, lo this
was already spoken at Sinai.
In short, the theological gap between the traditional and modern Jew is even vaster, far vaster, than the
modern Jew thinks.

I have often heard Jew-haters assert with righteous indignation that the Jews dont really follow
their own Bible, but instead take their religion from the Talmud. They take particular glee in
this revelation because they believe that the Talmud is, in fact, one of those vast secret plans
whereby Jews will achieve world domination. There are even several neo-Nazi sites on the
Internet devoted to exposing the secrets of the Talmud.
But this criticism overlooks a central truth about traditional Judaism, lost not only on the Jewhater but on many Jews as well. To the traditional Jew, the Torah, Tanach, Midrash, and
Talmud are all parts of the Torah received by Moses. A Shavuot Primer from the Chabad
(Lubavitcher) organization puts it clearly:
The Torah is composed of two parts: the written law and the oral law. The written Torah
contains the five books of Moses, The Prophets and the Writings. Together with the
written Torah, Moses was also given the oral law which explains and clarifies the
written law. It was transmitted orally from generation to generation and eventually
transcribed in the Talmud and Midrash.
Again, the Stone Chumash asserts that [It] is clear beyond a doubt: there is a companion to the
Written Torah, an Oral Law without which the Written Torah can be twisted and
misinterpreted beyond recognition, as indeed it has been by the ignorant down through the
centuries. . .
The Orthodox and traditional Jew believes that, during a forty-day bivouac on Mt. Sinai, Moses
received not only every letter of the Books of Moses but also a second set of laws, which,
instead of writing, he communicated orally to Joshua, who in turn whispered down the lane
until the oral law was written down in the second century of the common era, or about sixteen
hundred years after Moses allegedly heard it. And this belief, as they see it, is the heart of
Judaism.
An illustration: Because of my interest in the Talmud, one day I crashed a Hadassah leadership
meeting in New York where Adin Steinsaltz was the featured speaker. Steinsaltz is perhaps the
best known Talmudist in the world and his name has become a household word in the many
middle-class Jewish American families that are buying his Hebrew/English edition, one or two
volumes at a time. These beautiful books, with gilt-edge pages, include Hebrew with vowel
pointings as well as English translations that are dramatically better than the Brooklyn English
of the Soncino English translation.
(Historian Norman Cantor is amused by the Steinsaltz Talmud phenomenon. In his words:
The Talmud has become a coffee-table book for suburban Jewish America! And perhaps a few
hundred of its bourgeois purchasers have perused a few of its difficult talismanic pages.)

The rabbi introducing Steinsaltz commented on the curious resurgence of Talmudic enthusiasm
among non-Orthodox Jews and gave Steinsaltz much of the credit. But he also posed a
question: What should he say to those of his students who could accept that the so-called
Written Law had been received by Moses but who seriously doubted that the Mishna (the Oral
Torah) was similarly communicated? Steinsaltz replied at once: Well, either you believe in the
Jewish religion, or you dont!
Steinsaltz was cheerful and whimsical, but his answer reveals the same intolerance as heard
from those who claim that the non-Orthodox forms of Judaism are a different religion. To
practice the Jewish religion, as they see it, one must not only accept the yoke of the
commandments listed in the Books of Moses but also those in the Oral Law, as traditionally
interpreted by the Rabbis and Sages.
The perversity of this position is hard to appreciate unless one has actually studied the
Talmudwhich is a combination of the Oral Law (Mishna) along with several generations of
commentary and interpretation. Here, to illustrate, is a Mishna from the tractate on Sabbath
laws, from the section discussing what objects one may carry on Shabbat:
[IF ONE CARRIES OUT] EARTH [A KIND OF CLAY], [THE STANDARD IS] AS
MUCH AS IS REQUIRED FOR A SEAL ON PACKING BAGS; THIS R. AKIBAS VIEW.
BUT THE SAGES SAY AS MUCH AS IS REQUIRED FOR THE SEAL ON LETTERS.
[FOR] MANURE OR THIN SAND, [THE STANDARD IS] AS MUCH AS IS REQUIRED
FOR FERTILIZING A CABBAGE STALK . . .
Including this passage is not meant to ridicule the Talmud. Quite the contrary, I urge every Jew
to study every word in Tractate Shabbat; like every other part of the Talmud it is a treasure.
What I wish to ridicule is the preposterous claim that the words printed above (in the Hebrew
original) were communicated by God to Moses, who then set into motion the chain of events
that led to their becoming central to Sabbath observance.
The salient theological problem for the rabbis of the Second Commonwealth who compiled this
oral material is that all this is, of course, added to the Written Torah, even though the Written
Torah forbids adding anything to it. (Deuteronomy 12:32 You must diligently observe everything
that I command you; do not add to it or take anything from it.) Thus, as a theological necessity, there
had to be A Second Torah. As Rabbi Daniel Jeremy Silver (zl) put it: Once a tradition
enshrines a scripture, it discovers that it needs a second scripture. (For the Christians, Canon
Law; for the Muslims the Shariyah.)
The Talmud: A One-Minute Official History
The Talmud emanated from the work of the Scribes and Pharisees of ancient Jerusalem. These
men were the most learned in their community and their central job was interpreting Jewish

scriptures as the basis for making civil and criminal legal decisions. Until the destruction of the
Second Temple in Jerusalem (70 CE), these scholar judges were secondary in influence to the
priests of the Temple; after the destruction, the Pharisees became the leadership of
Judaismthe Rabbisin the Diaspora, replacing the central Temple with a network of
academies and synagogues.
In their teaching and in their legal judgments they were guided by many unwritten texts not
captured in the scrolls of the Hebrew Bible. A huge part of this material became known as the
Oral Law, retained in the memories of the scholars and taught by repetitionmishna means
repeatto their disciples. For various reasons, mainly having to do with the effects of the
dispersion from Jerusalem, the leaders of this epoch, led by Yehuda HaNassi, decided to
compile and edit this oral material into what became called the Mishna.
As is the case with all law, these new written materials generated questions and controversy;
they spawned a second oral tradition of commentary upon the Mishna, which led to a second
round of compilations and commentariesmany in the form of rancorous debatescalled the
Gemara. Strictly speaking, these two texts, compiled between 148 and 475 CE, (the latter by Ashi
and Ravina II) comprise the Talmud.
In addition, the books nowadays called the Talmud contain much more: elaborate
commentaries by the Rabbi called Rashi (12th century) and ten generations of his followers, the
Tosafot; later editions added references and links to other compilations based on the Talmud.
Note that the first printed-book realizations of the Talmud were from the Gutenberg erathe
Mishna in 1492, the Mishna and Gemara in 1523 (both published in Italy).
What the Talmud Is . . . Really.
Let us speak the unspeakable. Not only are the Five Books of Moses the work of mere mortals,
they are also quite flawed and problematical. They are elliptical (leaving out much exposition
and explanation), frequently contradictory, ambiguous in Hebrew or English, and incomplete.
They even contain numerous misspelled words and pronouns in the wrong genderall of
which are explained away by the faithful as paradoxes or hidden messages.
If one were to try live every moment of life by the Written Law, one would discover whole
domains of activity unaddressed by the scriptures. And especially if one were to apply the
Written Law to all criminal and civil cases, one would be forced to deal with imprecise
categories, as well as draconian punishment schemes.
This last issue may be most important in understanding the impetus behind the second law.
The Torah is, by modern standards, excessive to the point of barbarism in applying several
forms of grisly capital punishment for such moderate crimes as adultery and disobedience to
ones parents. Even the lesser penalties, like whiplashes, offend the modern sensibility. But

what the modern Jew should realize is that they also offended the ancient sensibility as well. The
Oral Law, before it became the written Mishna, rose to prominence in the last century BCE, at
which time the compilation of the Books of Moses was already over five hundred years old. That
is, even before the fall of the Second Temple, even before the Jews were scattered into the
diaspora for two thousand years . . . even then the Torah was already inadequate and out of
date for the modern Jews of the era. (For example, the Written Law sanctioned polygamy in
an era when it was already growing unacceptable.)
Although any traditional Jew will allow the Talmud to be characterized as a clarification, or
interpretation, or even a completion of the Written Torah, the additional truth is that the
Talmud is in many ways a library of amendments and nullifications of the Written Torah. The
Mishna and associated commentaries were the first large scale attempt to adapt the Written
Torah to modern times. The claim that the Oral Law was also received by Moses was an elegant
casuistry made necessary when the Pharisees so often contradicted or superseded the
impractical and outdated laws of Moses. The compilers of the Talmud were, in effect, Reform Jews.
Even the basic claim among Talmudists that, in a conflict, the Written Law should take
precedence over the Oral, is not altogether true. The celebration of Passover for eight days, for
example, is the Talmudic overruling of the Torah, which calls for seven days. And the Talmud
says that tfillim should be worn above the hairline, contradicting the famous Torah injunction
to put them between thine eyes. And although it does not outlaw polygamy, the Oral Law
introduces the idea of a husbands sexual obligation to his wife, thereby making polygamy
considerably less feasible.
But even more important is the underlying attitude of the Mishna against widespread use of capital
punishment and the unjustifiable overuse of this penalty in the Books of Moses. In passage after
passage, Tractate Sanhendrin raises so many barriers to a capital conviction that the laws of the
Written Torah are virtually overruled. Consider that according to the Talmud, if a person
accused of a capital offense is judged guilty, unanimously, by every member of the court, he is
to be acquitted! (The reasoning is that he could not have received an adequate defense if no one
thought him innocent.)
The Talmud is a Captured Conversation
The Talmud is not dogma. It is a small library of Jewish law and literature that began as an oral
traditionjust as the written Torah didand eventually manifested itself as documentation
of the thinking and intellectual growth of the Jewish intelligentsia in the diaspora. It is less a law
book or narrative than a 2.5 million word database of commentaries, analyses, arguments,
interpretations, legal opinions, legends, parables, proverbs, technical problems and solutions,
and anecdotes. It is, by turns, fascinating, dull, funny, and insightful. While often brilliant and
logical, it is also stuffed with specious reasoning, materials cited out of context, and more than a
few incompetent opinions about health and science.

It is not only often obscure and contradictory, but also utterly pluralistic, offering far-left and
far-right positions with equal cogency, and then warning against the dangers of extremism.
Indeed, the Talmud, more than anything else is an endless, characteristically Jewish, debate of the
intentions of God. And it is a monument to the principle of majority rule. The content of the
Talmud is conversation, not sermon. Louis Ginzberg points out that Of the 523 chapters
contained in the Mishna only six are free from disagreement between authorities. And Morris
Adler characterizes the Gemara (the first layer of comment on the Mishna) as:
. . .a full-scale transcript of the give and take of the discussion in the academies. . . Its apparent
discursiveness and its hospitality to the extraneous and incidental enable it to mirror the life of
the centuries during which it grew, in an infinitely more comprehensive way than it could have
possibly done if it had hewn strictly to a rigid line of legal discussion and interpretation.The
Talmud, then, with its unique organization of its pages, is an attempt to distill passionate
conversation; to read it you join in.
The Radical Suggestion
For those who believe that the Five Books of Moses were spoken verbatim to Moses by God, it is
exceedingly difficult to believe that the Mishna, with their quirky, cryptic discussions of matters
sacred and pedestrian, were also communicated to him. Throughout Jewish history there have
been major and minor factionsincluding the Temple priests in Jerusalem, probably the Essene
authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and many otherswho looked askance at the claim that the
oral tradition of the Pharisees (later the Rabbis) was of the same provenance as the Books of
Moses.
But this should not be an issue for Reform Jews, who have never believed that the Written
Torah was from heaven (except in a figurative sense) and who therefore should have no problem
treating the Talmud as equal to, or even greater than, the Written Torah. In other words, if one
believes that none of our sacred books is divine, then all of our sacred books are equally
deserving of respect, study, and even reverence.
Like an Orthodox Jew, I insist that it is a fundamental error, an un-Jewish way of looking at the
world, to study the Torah, or even the Tanach (Bible), without considering it part of a larger
library whose texts are essential to a Jewish understanding of each other. Also like an Orthodox
Jew, I believe that all of the Tanach, and Midrash, and Talmud are equally divine. But in my
case that is because none is, except in a figurative sense, divine at all. Therefore, I have no basis
for singling out or preferring the words of Devarim (Deuteronomy) over those of Tractate
Ketubot (Talmud) or even Kohelet Rabbah (Midrash).

Thus, it seems to me, that it is in the best interests of Reform and liberal Jews, essential to their
intellectual and ethical development, to love Torah a little less and love Talmud a little more.
This may seem an ironic proposal. Certainly, the average non-Orthodox Jew needs to know the
contents of the Books of Moses a far better than now. But, even so, I repeat the suggestion that
we should revere this part of our tradition a little less.
This suggestion is radical because even the most casual Jews (some of whom were Orthodox
and traditional in their childhood) still act as though the scroll in the ark of the synagogue is a
magic object. No matter what a Jews current theology, no matter how estranged from the
tradition, he or she will always shudder a bit when the ark is opened.
Of course, there is nothing objectionable in treating the scrolls with affection. The procession of
the scrolls is a highlight of the Shabbat service and the lifting of the Torah by the rabbi is a
moving moment of religious theater. (If one were petty, one might object that the money spent
on silver ornaments for the Torah should properly be spent on tzedaka. Similarly, one might also
suggest that, instead of spending huge sums to acquire kosher scrolls from Jerusalem scribes
who do not even consider Reform Jews to be Jewish, Reform synagogues might instead use the
money to lower synagogue dues or hire more distinguished Friday night speakers.)
But that is not my main objection. Rather, I am concerned that this veneration of the object
obscures our assessment of the content. Turning a book into a religious artifact (turning script
into scripture, as Harold Bloom put it), prevents it from being read intelligently. And, more
important, it stops us from seeing that the Five Books of Moses are merely the first component
of a library in which other components are equallyor even moredeserving of study and
reflection.
All that distinguishes the Pentateuch from other Jewish writings is its age. As magnificent and
moving as its content may beand Rabbi Silver also points out that first scriptures tend to be
more poetic and literary than second scriptures it is only one part of the Jewish heritage, and
not even necessarily the most interesting part. The enlightened, liberal view of the Jewish
tradition is that somewhere in the 7th century BCE, the Jewish people began to compile their
memories and mythology into a series of books. By the 16th century CE, the work was virtually
done. To study Torah, then, one must study a collection of books that begin with Moses and end
with the Shulcan Aruch, a digest of Talmudic legal opinions, compiled in 1550.
(Technically, the process of writing and compiling continues up to this moment, through
responsa and other supplements to this classic library. But the truth is that, after the 17th
century, the finest Jewish minds were drawn away from religion and toward science, law,
government, art and other secular fields. The greatest Jewish thinkers of the past two centuries
have, for the most part, been uninterested in Judaism.)

The Rewards of Talmud Study

But why should people with so much to do find a few hours a week for the Talmud, especially
since they do not feel obliged to follow the laws and pronouncements to be found there? There
are several potential rewards:
First, even a few months of Talmud study will overcome the Reform/Liberal Jews inferiority
complex. Although it takes a lifetime to master the Talmud, it takes only a few weeks of reading
and studying to learn its structure and style, and then to begin to absorb it, part by part.
One need not go directly to the imposing documents themselves. There are dozens of orienting
introductions and scores of anthologies and digests. Any Jewish community will be offering, at
any given moment, countless courses, seminars, lectures, and discussions, for persons at every
level of preparation. Also, the Internet is filled with Talmud instruction, some of which can be
arranged to reach your computer as E-mail. There is even versions of the Talmud that permit
you to search for key words and phrases, enabling you to perform research feats that were, until
recently, the province of only the greatest scholars.
Talmud is not so impossibly difficult as most people think. (Remember that the Orthodox teach
it to teen-agers!) Two hours with the right teacher will enable anyone to overcome the imposing
difficulties of the Talmud page and start one on the voyage of discovery.
Second, after only a few months of Talmud study, you need no longer feel intimidated in your
discussions with Orthodox and traditional Jews. Reform Jews should remember that most
Orthodox Jews are not Talmudic scholars; they learned most of their Talmud as youngsters and
dont remember very much. For many, they retained about as much of their instruction as the
average American retains of High School French. In contrast, Talmud learned by an adult,
especially an adult with a good education in law or science or the humanities, especially one
who is not indoctrinated with its divinity, especially someone who knows what the Talmud
really is and why it needed to be written . . . such Talmud learning may be far superior to that
learned by rote by Orthodox teenagers frightened of their teachers.
Third, Talmud study demonstrates that Reform Judaism, with its constant questioning of
tradition and regulation, is far closer to the spirit of the early Rabbis than is Orthodox
Judaism whose members, with blind faith, refuse to see that the Oral Law is to a large extent a
legal fiction needed to amend and nullify portions of the Written Law.
It is ironic that todays self-appointed keepers of the Talmud, those who apparently know it
best, should be so unaware of its true function in advancing the ethical and social development
of the Jewish people. No Jews in our history have ever been more willing than the Pharisees and
Rabbis who prepared the mishna to confront the claims of Jewish tradition and revise them to
fit modern requirements.

It is in the nature of orthodoxy to be a-historical or anti-historical. (The Hasidim believe that

Abraham laid tfillim every day!) This bizarre conceit, that all of human history is one instant
governed by one version of the truth, gives orthodox believers their unusual energy and focus.
But it also leaves them ill-equipped for life in the larger world. Why, most Orthodox Jews still
desire a restoration of the Jerusalem Temple and a return to animal sacrifices! But the first
compilers of the Talmud were already well beyond animal sacrifice and, while still wishing a
return to Jerusalem, would have regretted the reinstatement of Jewish leadership to the Temple
Priests, who, by the way, rejected the innovations of the mishna the way todays Orthodox Jews
reject the new ways of the liberal movements.
In short, Talmud study dramatizes the authenticity of liberal Judaism.
Fourth, Talmud study is just thrilling and bracing. To join this conversation with our ancestors
teaches us that every Jew is born with an inheritance far more valuable than bagels and
dreidels. We each have a family tree filled with wise, funny, and weird ancestors, who were
kind enough to leave us documentation of their minds.
For men and women with good analytical brains, Talmud study is a perfect arena for what
Plato called the romance of the free intelligence, a pleasant exploration of who the Jewish
people have been, and what would be the most appropriate direction for us to follow.
Every text that has been handed down to us by our sages is part of Torah. There may not be a
single divine syllable in the lot, and there is more than a little nonsense and superstition. But
every sentence is inherently interesting and potentially fascinating. And to be utterly fascinated
by a bit of our texts is, perhaps, the most authentically Jewish feeling of all.