Subject: Parashat Shemini 5758 - "The Accuracy of our Written Tor
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 23:33:46 +0000
To: "Parasha-Page List"<heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>
From: Mordecai Kornfeld <kornfeld@netvision.net.il>
To: Intriguing glimpses into the weekly Torah reading and Jewish holidays
<parasha-page@virtual.co.il>
Subject: Parashat Shemini 5758 - "The Accuracy of our Written Torah"
X-To: parasha-page@virtual.co.il, fern@jen.co.il, ALTMANB@anz.com,
MMeyer@SANWA.com.au, avisfeld@netvision.net.il, <judith@virtual.co.il>
The Weekly Internet
P * A * R * A * S * H * A - P * A * G * E
--- ---
by Mordecai Kornfeld
of Har Nof, Jerusalem
(kornfeld@virtual.co.il)
============================================================
This week's publication has been dedicated by Avy Reichman of Queens, N.Y.,
to the Zechus of his father, Dovid Ben Avroham, whose Yahrzeit is 23 Nisan.
Our mailings will center on the *Diaspora* Torah portion until Shavuot.
Discussions of the Israeli portion, when available, will be posted before
Shabbat at www.shemayisrael.co.il/parsha/kornfeld/israel .
============================================================
PARASHAT SHEMINI 5758
(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-
This week it is my privilege to share with you a truly amazing essay on a
"hot" contemporary topic, prepared exclusively for the Parasha-Page by a
good friend of mine, Rabbi Dovid Lichtman <Dlichtman@Aish.edu>. Rabbi
Lichtman former Rabbi of the Orthodox congregation in Calgary, Alberta
(Canada), presently lives in Kiryat Sefer, Israel, and lectures at the Aish
Hatorah Discovery Seminar. He welcomes your comments on this article.
(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-(-)-
THE ACCURACY OF OUR WRITTEN TORAH
Our Torah scroll is perhaps our most revered physical possession
today. The honor and respect with which we handle our Torah in synagogue
results from our knowledge that it contains the words of Hashem as dictated
to Moshe over 3300 years ago.
Meticulous care has been taken to insure the proper transmission of
the Torah. There are many factors which collectively contribute to the
wholeness of the Torah, but perhaps the single most important factor is the
orthography, or proper spelling of each word. In fact, the orthography of
the Torah is considered so important that the scribe is instructed to "be
careful with your task, for it is sacred work; if you add or subtract even
a single letter, [it is as if] you have destroyed the entire world!"
(Eruvin 13a). The Rambam writes (Hil. Sefer Torah 7:11) that if one letter
is added to or missing from a Torah, it is invalidated and is not conferred
the sanctity of a Torah scroll. Special mechanisms were established by the
Sages to ensure its accurate transmission through the generations (see, for
example, Megilah 18b; YD #274).
(From the wording of the Rambam, it appears that this is true even
if the wanton letter does not affect the meaning of the word. This is also
the ruling of the Tikunei ha'Zohar (#25), Ramban end of Introduction to the
Torah, Magen Avraham and Vilna Gaon OC 143:4, Sha'agat Aryeh (#36), Chatam
Sofer (OC #52), in contrast to Minchat Chinuch's ruling (#613) that a
missing or additional letter does not invalidate a Torah scroll unless it
affects either a word's pronunciation or its literal or exegetical
meaning.)
Originally, the Torah was so well preserved that every letter was
counted (Kiddushin 30a), which is why the early scribes were given the
title "Soferim" ("Counters/Scribes"). Thousands of traditions were handed
down specifying orthographic details. One of the more well-known is that
the letter 'Vav' of the word 'Gachon' in this week's Parasha (Vayikra
11:42) is the middle letter of the Torah (Kiddushin, ibid. -- refer to
Rabbi Kornfeld's "Torah from the Internet" p. 122 for an in-depth
discussion of this and similar traditions.)
Indeed, the text of today's Torah scrolls the world over are
uniform, with very few exceptions. As we will demonstrate, the Mesorah
(transmitted tradition) of our text was well tended to; its margin of error
appears to be less than .00004, and to involve only insignificant letters
at that. However, upon investigation it is evident that there existed many
variants among older Torah scrolls. This prompts us to ask a number of
questions:
(a) First, one must ask how it came to be that there existed such diverse
texts. Did they derive from individual copyists' errors, or were there
differing Mesorot?
(b) Second, one must ask how we came to accept at present one text as
"correct" from among the many that once existed.
(c) Third, can we have any degree of certainty that the present day unified
text is the accurate text of the Torah as transmitted to and transcribed by
Moshe? In this essay, we will attempt to address these questions.
II
Originally, it was easy to attend to the Mesorah of the Torah text.
A Torah scroll written in Moshe's own hand was kept in or near the Holy Ark
in the Holy of Holies (Bava Batra 14a). This text, which apparently was
accessible to the Kohanim (Rashi Bava Batra 14b s.v. Sefer; see also
Tosefot, Bava Batra 14a s.v. Shelo), undoubtedly served as the proof text
for all other texts. The scroll which each Jewish king was required to
write and bear at all times was likewise copied from this scroll (Rambam,
Hil. Sefer Torah 7:2, based on Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 2:6). The kingly
scrolls, in turn, served as proof texts after their owner's death.
The destruction of the first Beit ha'Mikdash most likely brought
with it the destruction of these proof texts. Ezra the Scribe, who led the
people back to Eretz Yisrael and began to rebuild the Beit ha'Mikdash, set
to reestablishing a proof text. At this point, a defining event occurred.
According to the Talmud Yerushalmi (Ta'anit 4:2), three ancient scrolls
were found in the Temple confines which had slightly variant texts.
(Although the Yerushalmi does not specify when this occurred, other sources
relate that it happened in the days of Ezra and according to some versions,
it was Ezra himself who found the scrolls -- see Torah Sheleimah, Shemot
24:25.) The Yerushalmi then relates that the correct version of the Torah
was determined by virtue of a majority of 2 against 1.
Throughout the period of the Second Beit ha'Mikdash, a scroll
referred to as 'Sefer Ezra' or 'Sefer Ha'azarah' (Moed Katan 18b) served as
the standard for all others. Sefer Ha'azarah was either the very scroll
that was written by Ezra the Scribe or one that was copied from it (Rashi,
ibid.). Professional Soferim were employed at the Beit ha'Mikdash to
correct private scrolls based on this scroll (Ketuvot 106a; Shekalim 10b).
These highly accurate scrolls and their copies remained the
standard until well after the destruction of the second Beit ha'Mikdash.
The Talmud in Kiddushim (30a) establishes that the accurate counting of the
letters of the Torah was preserved at least until Tanaitic times (2nd
century CE).
III
A century or so later, in the times of the Amora'im, Rav Yosef
commented that this accuracy was already somewhat diluted. Such a lack of
accuracy can only have been made apparent by the existence of divergent
texts. The Gemara makes it clear that even this dilution of accuracy was
only with regard to Malei and Chaser. (Malei and Chaser refer to
unpronounced letters, such as 'Vav' and 'Yud,' which lend added accent to
vowels. Their presence or absence does not affect the meaning of a word).
Nor does the Gemara state in how many instances doubts arose regarding
orthography. It is possible that these uncertainties were limited to a very
few instances. In fact, nowhere in the Talmud or Midrashic sources is there
recorded a dispute over the orthography of a specific Malei or Chaser,
either before or after the time of Rav Yosef. (It should be pointed out
that according to some, Rav Yosef was merely stating that *he* could not
determine the exact number of letters in the Torah, since he himself was
blind and could not count them by heart and he was not willing to rely on
another person's count -- see Rav Reuvain Margulies in "HaMikra
V'HaMesorah," #4).
Due to the dispersal of the Jewish people and the lack of a central
supervising authority, variations in scrolls continued. Authorities in
Israel and Bavel, independently, undertook to produce one highly accurate
text. These authorities, called the Masorites, thrived and produced such
works between the 8th and 10th centuries. Their methodology, which was
based on the system described by the Yerushalmi Ta'anit (above, section
II), may be called the "eclectic process," or majority rule.
Simply stated, this process involves surveying a great variety of
Torah scrolls whereby each letter of the text is compared and contrasted.
The correct orthography is determined based on the majority of texts, and
hence errors are weeded out. For example, if in a survey of 200 Sifrei
Torah, 198 were found to have in one particular place a spelling of
`honour' and 2 were found to have the spelling as `honor', it may be
assumed that the former is the correct orthography, while the latter were
introduced by careless scribes. (Of course, the eclectic process can only
be employed using older texts of good standing to some degree. This is
evident from the fact that only the three scrolls found in the Temple
confines were considered for the process, in the time of Ezra. After all,
certainly hundreds of scrolls were in existence at the time.)
The crowning jewel of the master texts produced in this manner was
the one produced in Teveryah by Aharon ben Moshe ben Asher (known simply as
"Ben Asher") of the late 10th century. The Rambam extols his text as being
extremely accurate and it was adopted by the Rambam and many others as the
standard (Rambam, Hil. Sefer Torah, beginning of 8:4). In the Rambam's
time, this Torah was known to be in Alexandria, Egypt. (Traditionally, the
"Keter Aram Tzova," or Aleppo Codex, presently in Yerushalayim, is
purported to be the Ben Asher manuscript. Unfortunately, only the Nevi'im
and Ketuvim sections of this manuscript remain intact, as virtually the
entire Torah section of the manuscript was lost to fire a few decades ago.)
Today, the Teimani (Yemenite) Torah scrolls are very likely exact
copies of this text. It is well known that the Yemenite Jews adhered firmly
to the Rambam's rulings in every matter of Halachah. The limited size and
dispersion of their community throughout the generations made it much
easier for them to preserve their Mesorah. Indeed, there is no variance
among Teimani scrolls today.
Despite the Rambam's efforts to ensure the perpetuation of one
standardized text, divergent scrolls began to propagate once again. A
contemporary of the Ramban, the RaMaH (Rav Meir Halevi Abulafia -- early
13th century), undertook to reestablish a text of exceptional accuracy. The
RaMaH again used the eclectic process, surveying hundreds of old and
reputable scrolls. (RaMaH did not have the Ben Asher manuscript at his
disposal.) The resultant text was published in his work "Mesores Seyag
la'Torah." Given the great effort that RaMaH invested in this project and
his standing as a leading Halachic authority, his work became the
definitive standard until today, certainly with regard to orthography (see
Ohr Torah, Minchat Shai and Keset ha'Sofer).
We have thus answered the first two of our questions:
(a) Since a standard, approved Mesorah for the Torah text existed
throughout much of our history, in all probability the variant texts of
early Torahs may be attributed to sloppy copyists, who did not carefully
compare their work with the Masoretic proof-text of the times, or were not
able to do so.
(b) The manner in which the mistaken texts were weeded out from the correct
ones was the eclectic process of the Yerushalmi in Ta'anit, which has been
employed regularly since the time of Chazal in order to ensure proper
transmission of the Torah.
IV
(c) However, we have not yet addressed our third question: Can it be
scientifically demonstrated that our text is indeed the correct one (i.e.,
that the eclectic process worked)?
Halachically, we are secure in our reliance on the eclectic process
(Teshuvot Ginat Veradim 1:2:6). This does not mean, though, that our
Mesorah is 100% in agreement with the original text that was handed to us
by Moshe. It only means that we are doing our best and are following the
dictates of Halachah in determining how to write our Torahs. In fact, many
authorities write that our texts may very well not match up with the true
Mosaic text (authorities in OC 143:4, Sha'agat Aryeh. Chatam Sofer and
Minchat Chinuch cited at the beginning of section I, see Hagaon Rav Moshe
Sternbuch in "Mitzvat ha'Yom," pp. 32-43, who discusses the Halachic
aspects of this statement in detail.).
But does that mean that our texts may be *wildly inaccurate*, or
that *one or two* discrepancies may exist? Or, returning to our first
question, can it be proven that enough attention was given to preserving
the Mesorah and that copyists' errors were usually nipped in the bud before
assuming the part of "Mesorah?" Or did too long a time pass between
Masoretic overhauls, and many errors became independent Mesorahs over the
years? (This theoretical question has been brought to the forefront in
recent years by the great Torah Codes debate.) An exercise regarding this
very question has been conducted by Dr. Mordechai Breuer of Yerushalayim,
with fascinating results.
In his work, "The Aleppo Codex and the Accepted Text of the Torah,"
Dr. Breuer describes his years of meticulous research and discusses his
conclusions in attempting to demonstrate the scientific usefulness of the
eclectic process. In fact, Dr. Breuer's purpose was to demonstrate that a
single Mesorah already existed in the years prior to the RaMaH, even though
the RaMaH did not have such a Mesorah at his disposal. (The existence of
such a single Mesorah is flatly rejected by many academicians.)
Dr. Breuer began by selecting four texts of ancient origin to
compare and contrast in his study. Each of these texts predate the RaMaH.
The texts were all of the type written by the Tiberian Masorites (as
opposed to the Babylonian Masorites) yet clearly differed from each other
in certain significant formatting areas, indicating that they were not
copied from an immediate common source. In addition, he included the text
of the Mikra'ot Gedolot of Yaakov ben Chaim, printed in Venice, 1525. (It
should be noted that the orthography of these 5 texts differed widely from
one another, in one case by more than 200 letters from the others.)
Using the eclectic process, he suggested that if a broad majority
of 4 out of 5 texts (and not just 3 of the 5) agreed with each other, it
could be assumed that the fifth, inconsistent text was a copyists' error.
His results were startling. There are 304,805 letters in the Torah. All
five texts were in *total* agreement in all but about 220 letters. Of
these, all but *20* were resolved by a majority of at least 4 texts against
1! Of the 20 remaining conflicts, Dr. Breuer was able to clarify all but
*6* by applying another Masorite method, that of carefully studying
thousands of early Masoretic notes (a broader topic similar in style to the
eclectic process). These final 6 he was not able to clarify because three
of the Torahs presented one spelling, while the remaining *two* presented
another. It was apparent that nearly all of the inconsistencies between the
Torahs were caused by copyists errors, and not by Masoretic uncertainties.
Next, the resultant `eclectic' text was compared with the RaMaH's
text (i.e., our present text). It was found that the RaMaH differed in but
*6* places from the eclectic. That is, the margin of uncertainty of our
Torah scrolls is probably not more than 12 (out of 304,805!) letters -- the
6 indeterminate ones, plus the six in which the RaMaH's text differed from
Dr. Breuer's eclectic! When he compared the results of his experiment with
the Teimani text (which, as we mentioned, is probably identical to that of
Ben Asher), the results were even more startling. The texts were in perfect
agreement! Their margin of uncertainty may be no more than 6 letters!
Equally amazing is that *all* the above mentioned differences involve Vavs
and Yuds, which do not affect the meaning of the word at all.
(As for the remaining six uncertainties in Dr. Breuer's eclectic
survey, in three of the instances the RaMaH and Teimani texts agreed with
the 3-against-2 majority text. In the other three cases, the RaMaH and
Teimani texts were themselves split over the same variant spellings as were
the pre-RaMaH texts. In total, that means that the Teimani text differs
from the RaMaH's text in but *9* letters -- see endnotes for details.)
In conclusion, the transmission of our Torah text has been well
tended to and well preserved. The methods of Chazal have proudly withstood
the tests of time. Such demonstrations of the strength of our Mesorah are
indeed a Kiddush Hashem.
The author welcomes your comments on the above article:
<Dlichtman@Aish.edu>
ENDNOTES: Torah variants of Dr. Breuer's results, as compared to our
(=RaMaH's) Torahs, in order of appearance (E=eclectic; T=Teimani):
(1) Bereishit 4:13 "Mineso" (E&T w/o Vav); (2)Bereishit 7:11 "Ma'ayanos
(E&T w/o Vav); (3)Bereishit 9:29 "Vayehi" (E&T Vayiheyu); (4) Bereishit
46:13 "v'Shimron" (E with Vav); (5)Shemot 14:22 "Chomah" (E w/o Vav); (6)
Shemot 25:31 "Te'aseh" (E&T w/o Yud); (7)Shemot 28:26 "ha'Efod" (E&T w/o
Vav); (8)Bamidbar 1:17 "b'Shemot" (T w/o Vav); (9)Bamidbar 10:10
"Chodsheichem" (T with Yud); (10)Bamidbar 22:5 "Be'or" (T w/o Vav); (11)
Bamidbar 33:52 "Bamotam" (E w/o Vav); (12)Devarim 23:2 "Daka" (E&T with
Alef instead of Heh. Lubavitch Chassidic texts are in agreement with T in
this matter).
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
To subscribe to the weekly Parasha-Page or cancel a subscription, write to:
listproc@virtual.co.il
and put in as your message body the following line *only*:
sub parasha-page Your Name
or: signoff parasha-page
"TORAH FROM THE INTERNET," by RABBI MORDECAI KORNFELD, is available now
at a HEBREW BOOKSTORE near you, or from the publisher JUDAICAPR@AOL.COM
To receive the fax edition, *worldwide*, fax/call me at 972 2 6522-633.
Parasha-Page Homepage:
http://www.virtual.co.il/depts/torah/rkornfeld/parsha.htm
Parasha-Page Archives: http://www.shemayisrael.co.il/parsha/kornfeld
Automated monthly archives can also be found at http://www.reference.com
/cgi-bin/pn/go.py?choice=authorprofile&email=kornfeld@netmedia.net.il
(Yes, that's all one long URL!)
DAFYOMI LEARNERS! SEE RABBI KORNFELD'S *D*AFYOMI *A*DVANCEMENT *F*ORUM
HOMEPAGE - http://www.shemayisrael.co.il/dafyomi2/
----------------------------------------------
Mordecai Kornfeld |Email: kornfeld@virtual.co.il| Tl/Fx(02)6522633
6/12 Katzenelbogen St. | kornfeld@netvision.net.il| US:(718)520-0210
Har Nof, Jerusalem,ISRAEL| kornfeld@shemayisrael.co.il| POB:43087, Jrslm
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtual Jerusalem, the Jewish World from the Heart of Israel
http://www.virtualjerusalem.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
***********************************************************************