Behukosai-Novel Interpretation of the Torah

Concerning novel insights in regards to the study of Torah, it is within an acceptable realm of analysis through study to present various novel perspectives that have not necessarily been voiced by previous scholars. However, there are certain conditions that need to be adhered to when one is engaged in such analysis.

Rabbi Chaim Ben Atar writes that, in fact, novel Biblical interpretation is sanctioned.
“You should know, therefore, that God has granted permission to interpret the meaning of verses by our using our intelligence in order to do research, even if, on occasion the conclusion we arrive at seems to contradict the traditional interpretations of the mental giants of earlier generations.

This is the meaning of the rule that there are seventy ways to interpret the Torah. (Bamidbar Rabbah, Nasso 13:16) As long as our interpretations do not result in Halakchik rulings which run counter to our traditions we are perfectly within our rights to pursue our own path, etc.”

(Translation of Or Hachaim rendered by Rabbi Eliahu Munk, vol. 1 page 10).

He again repeats this idea in Parshas Bechukosai adding the conditions upon which such endeavors are sanctioned.

“An experienced scholar will elicit new insights through studying the text repeatedly in accordance with his mental capacity…As long as the purpose of Torah study is to lead to performance of God’s commandments the Torah encourages pursuit of diverse paths of study. Under no circumstances must the pursuit of novel ways of Biblical exegesis result in what our Sages call ‘revelation of aspects of Torah which conflict with traditional rulings.’’’

(ibid, Leviticus 26:3, the fifth interpretation)

On the one hand, one is free to interpret the text as one wishes. On the other hand those interpretations must not contradict the rulings of the Sages. The reason for this is that the Rambam writes that the rulings of the Babylonian Talmud are binding on all Jews.

(Maimonides’ Mishnah Torah, Introduction)

One who decides to veer from these rulings of the Talmud is not following the Oral Law given to Moshe at Mt. Sinai 3319 years ago.

This idea of Rabbi Atar is repeated by Rabbi YomTov Lipman Heller in regards to interpreting the Mishnah.

“Even though (this Mishnah) is not interpreted in the Talmud this way, since, as far as the law is concerned it is immaterial, permission is granted to explain (in any manner). I do not see a distinction between the explanations of the Mishnah and the explanations of the Torah that permission is granted…”

(Tosfos Yom Tov, Tractate Nazir 5:5)

It seems to me that the spirit of this requirement that one is allowed to interpret the text on the condition that ones does not contradict the law of the Sages communicates another message. That is that one surely cannot interpret the text in such a way that it contradicts the fundamentals of Judaism such as that there is only one God

(see Maimionides Commentary of the Mishnah, Introduction, Sanhedrin chapter 10, for elucidation of the fundementals of Judaism)

If one breaks with tradition by disputing the law of the Sages one certainly breaks with tradition when one disputes one of the fundamentals of Judaism.