The Primacy of the Written Text or Oral Tradition

 There seems to be a fascinating debate between two commentators on this week's Torah portion, Rashi and the Ramban. Rashi goes hand in hand with the medrash, otherwise known as exegesis or rabbinic biblical interpretation. 

What's impressive though, is that the Ramban seems to say, "The buck stops here," refusing to accept rabbinic interpretation when it seems to contravene his simple understanding of the text, which is why, more than any other rabbi, the Ramban is the founder, crafter, and mastermind of modern day Jewish thought. 

Whoever has read the Ramban on the Torah, perhaps all the more so through his attacks on Rashi, done with the greatest of deference and respect, sees that the Ramban refuses to accept the primacy of the medrash over what he would deem common sense. He worshipped the mind over tradition, seeing in his human and humane ability to understand a text something far greater than conforming to the tradition imparted by his predecessors. 

And a stark example. Whoever reads the opening text of this week's parsha sees that intermingled in Yehuda's pleas to Joseph for Binyamin's freedom is a tinge of resentment, and even aggression. "For you are like Pharaoh!," Yehuda says to Joseph. Rashi writes, "The some way I'd slaughter Pharaoh on the spot, you're next!" Likewise, in relation to Joseph's promise that he would "place a watchful eye on Binyamin," Yehuda harangues Joseph, "This is what you call a watchful eye! Threatening him with lifetime in prison." 

A Chareidi friend used a new expression in a conversation we had very recently: "Mochrim lanu lukshim." Just now I looked up the word - it means trickery, knavery, deceit - but at the time he used it, I thought he meant lukshen kugel. Back to our point, as for the Ramban one could say, "Hu lo koneh lukshim," or in other words, "He simply doesn't buy it!"

The Ramban knew the medrash as well as Rashi, but says in no uncertain terms, "that makes no sense." If someone is accused of stealing the prized possession of the viceroy of the world superpower, is the latter beholden to the promise to treat Binyamin with silk gloves?!

Therefore, the Ramban utterly rejects Rashi's interpretation, stating, in keeping with what would seem to be the simple meaning of the text: Yehuda was apologizing for dillydallying in bringing over Binyamin - and were Joseph to say, "How did you bring him over now if you were so concerned for your father?," Yehuda's response was, "Our father himself entreated us to come down for otherwise," he added, "we would die." 

As I said before, the rabbi who has possibly had the most far-reaching impact on modern thought, and how we see ourselves as empowered individuals, is the Ramban. He taught us that we are entitled to think about we hear, to examine it, to scrutinize it, to reject it if it doesn't jibe with what we see as simple commonsense: "Don't let anyone sell you lukshim!"