Christianity in Talmud and Midrash by R. Travers Herford
Mat 5:21-2 "You heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder,' and whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.
"But I say to you that whoever is wroth with his brother without a cause shall be liable to judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raka!' shall be liable to the Sanhedrin. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be liable to fire of Gehenna
“How could new teaching find a place in a system based exclusively on tradition?” The Torah as given to Moses, and by him handed down, was regarded as containing the whole of divine truth, not merely so much as might at any given time have been discarded, but all that in all future ages might be brought to light. This divine truth was partly explicit, partly implicit. That which was explicit was stated in Scripture, more particularly in the Mosaic laws, and also in that oral tradition which furnished the interpretation and application of the Scripture. That which was implicit was the further, as yet undiscovered, meaning contained in the torah. And the whole task of Rabbinism was to render that explicit which had been implicit, to discover and unfold more and more of the divine truth contained in the Torah, so as to make it available for the perfecting of the religious life. When, therefore, a Rabbi taught some new application of a religious precept, what was new was the application; the precept was old. (Jerusalem Talmud Hag. I.8.76c: “Even that which an acute disciple shall teach in the presence of his Rabbi has already been said to Moses on Sinai.” He was not adding to the Torah, but showing for the first time some hitherto unknown contents of it. The sum total of Torah was unaltered; but part of it had been transformed from implicit to explicit. Thus a new teaching could not rest upon Tradition, because it was merely the unfolding into greater clearness of meaning what the Torah had all along contained. And it was only new, in so far as such and such a Rabbi had been the first to declare that development of the original principle. Rabbinism never did, because it never could, reach the logical end of its own method; but the complicated and minute legislation embodied in the Talmud, is, on the Rabbinical theory, merely the unfolding of what was contained in the original Torah- rendered explicit instead of implicit. Thus it appears that even in that department of the Rabbinical system where the principle of Tradition was most strictly maintained, there was ample room for the expansion and adaptation of the original principle to the varying needs of practical religious life.
Mat 5:21-2 "You heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder,' and whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.
"But I say to you that whoever is wroth with his brother without a cause shall be liable to judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raka!' shall be liable to the Sanhedrin. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be liable to fire of Gehenna
“How could new teaching find a place in a system based exclusively on tradition?” The Torah as given to Moses, and by him handed down, was regarded as containing the whole of divine truth, not merely so much as might at any given time have been discarded, but all that in all future ages might be brought to light. This divine truth was partly explicit, partly implicit. That which was explicit was stated in Scripture, more particularly in the Mosaic laws, and also in that oral tradition which furnished the interpretation and application of the Scripture. That which was implicit was the further, as yet undiscovered, meaning contained in the torah. And the whole task of Rabbinism was to render that explicit which had been implicit, to discover and unfold more and more of the divine truth contained in the Torah, so as to make it available for the perfecting of the religious life. When, therefore, a Rabbi taught some new application of a religious precept, what was new was the application; the precept was old. (Jerusalem Talmud Hag. I.8.76c: “Even that which an acute disciple shall teach in the presence of his Rabbi has already been said to Moses on Sinai.” He was not adding to the Torah, but showing for the first time some hitherto unknown contents of it. The sum total of Torah was unaltered; but part of it had been transformed from implicit to explicit. Thus a new teaching could not rest upon Tradition, because it was merely the unfolding into greater clearness of meaning what the Torah had all along contained. And it was only new, in so far as such and such a Rabbi had been the first to declare that development of the original principle. Rabbinism never did, because it never could, reach the logical end of its own method; but the complicated and minute legislation embodied in the Talmud, is, on the Rabbinical theory, merely the unfolding of what was contained in the original Torah- rendered explicit instead of implicit. Thus it appears that even in that department of the Rabbinical system where the principle of Tradition was most strictly maintained, there was ample room for the expansion and adaptation of the original principle to the varying needs of practical religious life.
