We have concluded the likelihood of an Oral Law that accompanied the Written Law. Yet there remains the obvious question of why these laws weren’t included with the Written text. This is what we will address here.
There is indication that in ancient times, law was much more dependant on oral traditions than it was on the text. Even in cases where a text existed dictating the Law, for example the Code of Hammurabi – it wasn’t the source of the Law. Rather the common Law of the lands were clearly in the form of oral traditions and the text was just recording some of those laws or the basic outline of those laws.[i]
The same can be said about the Torah. The oral laws weren’t written down because there was no need for it. It was a living Law – just like all civil law at the time. The religious Jews would keep Shabbat on a weekly basis, so there was no need to write the specific laws governing the Shabbat. Same with all the other Oral Laws; they were practiced regularly and were therefore a part of the living oral tradition. Much of it was written in the Torah as a recording of the history of the Exodus, the Wilderness, and the laws that God gave to Moses. It’s more of a historical record than a court guidebook.[1] The Court would follow the living Law that was much broader than the Written Law alone. See “An Oral Law at Sinai” for a larger discussion on this topic.
Most of the Oral Law are laws that developed much later as new circumstances arose (see “Rabbinic Enactments“) and as the Jewish community by and large became more and more religious (see “Did the Sages Overdo Judaism”). These laws, of course, couldn’t have been written in the Written Torah that predated it.
Dor Revii, written by Rabbi Glasner, a great-grandchild of the famed Chasam Sofer, brings up a fascinating point about the writing of the Oral Law:
“Any matter which is transmitted orally will naturally be subject to change in interpretation…for everyone injects into it something of his own understanding . . . The reason the interpretation of the Torah was transmitted orally and forbidden to be written down was [so as] not to make [the Oral Torah] unchanging, and not to tie the hands of the rabbis of every generation from interpreting Scripture according to their understanding. Only in this way can the eternity of Written Torah be understood [properly], for the changes in the generations and their opinions, situation, and material and moral conditions require changes in their laws, decrees and improvements.”
Traditional sources give a more inspiring-style of an answer. The Christians and Muslims, a majority of Gentile nations, stole the Jewish nation’s Written Torah. If our Oral Torah would have been in complete written format in the days when Egyptian Ptolemy II compelled our sages to translate our Torah into Greek,[ii] they would steal our Oral Torah as well. How would we then feel different and distinguished as the Chosen Nation?![iii]
___________________
[1] Many elements in Torah express its intention as a historical record. One glaring example is the genealogy of Esau’s descendants (Gen. 36)– which has zero application for the Jewish Law and belief.
[i] Dr. Joshua Berman in his book ani maamin p. 142-143 and in his book inconsistency in the Torah p. 145-146; Myths of the Archaic State by by Norman Yoffee p. 104.
[ii] Megillah 9a-b, http://hamodia.com/2013/12/10/translation-changed-history/
[iii] Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 14:10, s.v. “On the Eleventh Day.” Tosafos on Gittin 60.
