Shalom David,

I read your question a few times, and I'm not sure I understood you. Are you suggesting that the Torah use more metaphors and we will know its meaning from the Oral Torah, or are you asking why the Torah doesn't use fewer metaphors?

In any case, the words "Bein Einecha" in Parshas Shema Yisrael, and "Bein Eineichem" in Parashas v'Hayah Im Shamo'a, both refer to the location of the Tefilin, and I do not find a metaphorical style in them. The only thing that is not clear is whether the Tefilin are supposed to be right between the eyes or on the forehead parallel to the place that is between the eyes, and through the Oral Torah we learn (on Daf 37a) from the Isur of "Karchah la'Mes" that just as the Isur there applies only to the place where there is hair and yet is still called "Bein Eineichem," so also for the Tefilin the location is the place where there is hair but is still "Bein Eineichem." This is known not from a Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai but from a Gezeirah Shavah.

There is no doubt that the Torah uses metaphors, but I have not seen any fundamental difficulty in identifying when the Torah does so. When a person is told to keep the Torah as his eyelid or on the tablet of his heart, it is clear that it is not intended that he should put the words of the Torah inside his eye, or place them on his heart, since there is no sense in this, so it is clear that it is meant as a parable or a metaphor. But when talking about the technical details of a Mitzvah such as Tefilin, like the physical location on the head, why would this be a metaphor?

It is interesting to note that there is a verse in Parshas Kadesh Li that begins with the physical location of the Tefilin, "Bein Einecha," but continues and ends with a metaphor of the type you mentioned, "l'Ma'an Tiheyeh Toras Hash-m b'Ficha."

I hope this helps,

Aharon Steiner

Hi again David,

Thank you very much for the excellent question. I Hope I understood the question well this time.

You ask specifically about the example of tefillin, and I don't know if I am qualified to explain the particular example why the Torah used metaphors, but it is better to preface more general things as a correct way to think about your question.

The topic you raise is related to an earlier question, why the Torah was given in a dual form, in writing and orally, and what is the sense in giving a Torah that is not fully understood, and it needs an oral Torah to explain many of the mitzvot, so that, for example, the Mitzvah of Shabbat is written in a vigorous abbreviated form, and Chazal learned Thirty Nine Melachos Although there is not even a hint in the Torah of almost all the Melachos. The punishment for not doing a Mitzvas Lo Taase, the punishment of Malkos, is written in the Torah in a very indirect way, that when flogging the sinner in court, it is forbidden to add Malkos to the number he deserves.

R' Yosef Albo (Sefer ha'Ikarim 3:23) lays the rational foundation for this. He explains that it is not possible to write in text, a series of imperatives that will fit every situation that will ever arise. That's why the Torah speaks in hints, and the Chachamim in later generations can derive the correct meaning in any situation according to a series of rules given to Moshe meױSinai. In fact, oral Torah is not a corpus of rules, but rather a method of understanding the words of the written Torah in a clear way.

There are various Midrashim that express one idea, that the goal is to deliver the Torah in such a way that the written Torah is written with hints, and Chachamim expanded and clarified it with the oral Torah, that in this way it is important for the Chachmei Yisrael who were given the authority to interpret the Torah according to the rules of thumb given meױSinai. This also prevents falsifications of the Torah by non-Jews, because the interpretation given to the sages is called the secrets and mysteries of Hash-m, and he gave these secrets to Yisrael alone.

There is much to extend and think about the implications of these ideas. It is easy to see that this system of written Torah and allusions, and an oral Torah that is busy explaining those allusions, leaves endless room for fruitful and interesting interpretation and study. The Jewish bookcase is mainly composed of the expansions of the Oral Torah to the abridgement of the written Torah. The richness of the Beis Midrash, the possibility of innovation and debate, and in fact, the very essence of learning and innovation throughout the generations, is made possible by the margin that the written Torah leaves for interpretation and innovation.

I allow myself to say without a source, that a major part of giving the Torah to Yisrael and bringing the Torah down to this world, is the opportunity to be part of the growth and expansion of the Torah by studying and demanding its details and grammar, which is the only way the Torah was really given to Yisrael.

We allude to such an idea in the Birkas haױTorah ve'Chayei Olam Nota beױSocheinu. We talk about the eternal life that has been planted within us, and end the blessing with the words Baruch Ata Hash-m Nosen haױTorah, since the eternal life was granted us at Matan Torah as we continue to expand and deepen the Torah by learning the oral Torah which has no limit.

Best Regards,

Aharon Steiner

Hi again David,

I understand your point regarding Tefillin. There is something to it, that there is more metaphorical language regarding Tefillin, but some of it is because the specialty of Tefillin as one of the most basic Mitvos, that combine the remembrance of Yetsiatz MitzraÕim, Emunah and learning Torah and other basic building stones of Judaism all folded, physically and metaphorically into the Tefillin boxes. It is common to find these metaphors when speaking about essential Mitzvos that are given to us as a physical action, binding the deep ideas of Emunah with a metaphysical bind. This is the core idea of Tefillin and maybe the reason of the binding of Pshat and metaphors together.

Thank you for sharing your interesting thoughts!

Aharon Steiner