The Significance of Avraham Avinu’s Performance of the Mitzvot

The Significance of Avraham Avinu’s Performance of the Mitzvot

By Michael Landy

Perfection for a Jew can only be realized through the performance of the mitzvot [commandments] of the Torah, which were given from G-d to Moshe on Sinai [Matan Torah]. Since man is finite, his thinking and understanding is limited and constrained to factors of time and space. Man is not capable, and it is beyond his intellectual reach, to calculate a finite system that can relate to the infinite ruchaniyut world—existence beyond time and space. Man needed a revelation from G-d that would give him such a system whereby in the physical world man could affect and achieve perfection in the ruchaniyut existence. Torah is this system given by G-d to the Klal Yisroel, and its function is realized through the performance of the mitzvot.[1] The mitzvot are an “interface” from finite physical existence to the ruchaniyut existence. It is our emunah [belief], and a rational deduction, that only through the performance of the mitzvot, given from G-d to Moshe on Sinai, that a Jew can reach completeness and perfection in this world and in his ruchaniyut existence.

The Talmud in Yoma 28b[2] states: אמר רב קיים אברהם אבינו כל התורה כולה שנאמר עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקולי וגו’ – Avraham Avinu (performed and) fulfilled all the commandments of the Torah.[3] In a responsum, the Rema (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) writes that this statement of the Talmud refers only to Avraham, to the exclusion of Yitzchak and Yaakov.[4] What is the overall intent of the Talmud stating and proving that Avraham kept the mitzvot? Since Avraham lived before Matan Torah, what would be the implication if Avraham did not observe all the mitzvot? Additionally, why is the emphasis on Avraham to the exclusion of Yitzchak and Yaakov

Early church theology dealt with a dilemma as to the status of Divine Law—Torah: the function of the mitzvot [commandments] as written in the Torah.[5] Historically, in order to counter judaization of the Galatian Church, then comprised of pagan converts to Christianity, and, as a general attack on Jewish converts who still kept to traditional Jewish observance of the mitzvot, Paul declared that belief in[6] ישוע הנוצרי [Jesus of Nazareth, the historical central figure in Christianity] alone was sufficient for man’s perfection.[7] As a consequence of this supposition, the observance and performance of Divine Law—the mitzvot of the Torah—would no longer be necessary for a person’s completeness or perfection.

The fundamental proof for this assertion was the Torah’s description of Avraham who lived prior to Matan Torah.[8] Avraham referred to as righteous (Bereshit 15:6) and his attainment to the level of navi [prophet] (Bereshit 20:7), all occurring before Matan Torah, were used as proofs that performance of the mitzvot was not essential and not necessary for man’s perfection. In their view, Matan Torah with the requirement of the performance of mitzvot, was a temporary necessity only for the generation exiting Egypt into a wilderness and for a number of subsequent generations, culminating with the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and with the introduction of Jesus of Nazareth [יש”ו]. They postulated: with the appearance of Jesus of Nazareth, Torah Law and mitzvot became obsolete and were no longer necessary for a Jew’s performance. The basic requirement for a man’s completeness and perfection was only a type of identification with Jesus of Nazareth.

The Torah is completely opposed to this outlook. As stated above, perfection for a Jew can only be realized through the performance of the mitzvot [commandments], which were given from G-d to Moshe on Sinai [Matan Torah], and defined in the Torah she-ba’al peh. This is one of the main ramifications of Matan Torah for the world, that only through the performance (or non-performance) of mitzvot can a Jew’s ruchaniyut existence be affected. Any pronouncement of such a system existing outside the realm of the Torah and the function of its mitzvot is avodah zarah (עבודה זרה). (Therefore, the Chassidic legend that by whistling during Yom Kippur prayers the “gates of heaven” opened, and the prayers were elevated and accepted,[9] is in concept avodah zarah. The Torah gave man a mitzvah of Tefilla, and Chazal defined its structure and system.) Before Matan Torah one’s perfection was realized through observance of the seven Noahide commandments. According to the Talmud, the seven Noahide commandments were G-d given,[10] and before Matan Torah were communicated to mankind through a type of prophecy to specific individuals. What the Greeks and others refer to as Natural Law (or sometimes referred to in our literature as nemusi’im [נימוסים]) is in reality the seven Noahide commandments. Non-Torah philosophers throughout history have erred by denying the necessity that the seven Noahide laws also had to be G-d given.[11]

This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement “All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you” Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: עקב אשר שמע אברהם בקלי וישמור משמרתי מצותי חקותי ו [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham’s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.¹⁴ Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham’s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud’s statement as to Avraham’s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching.

[1] [HaRav] Dr. Chaim Zimmerman, Torah and Reason: Insiders and Outsiders of Torah (Jerusalem: Tvuno, 1979), 20.

[2] This statement of the Talmud is also found at the end of a Mishnah in Kiddushin 82a, with a text variant. Yoma: Avraham קיים the whole Torah. Kiddushin: Avraham עשה the whole Torah. Rabbi Shmuel Eliezer Eidlisz [מהרש”א] in Yoma unites the two texts: קיים refers to fulfillment of the negative commandments, and, עשה refers to performance of the positive commandments. Therefore, Avraham performed and fulfilled all 613 commandments of the Torah—positive and negative commandments—including the Torah she ba’al peh (תורה שבעל פה).

[3] The author of the Yoma 28b statement is Rav, or רב אבא בר איבו. There is no mention in Yoma of this statement having a Mishnaic source, even though it is referenced and included in the Mishnah in Kiddushin 82a. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (גליון הש”ס קדושין שם) references Perush Kuntarus at the end of Tractate Kinim stating that sometimes a baraita [ברייתא] will be inserted at the end of a Mishnah. Rav is referred to in some places in the Talmud with the status of a Tanna: רב תנא הוא ופליג. Rabbi Aaron Hyman in Toldoth Tannaim Ve’Amoraim [תולדות תנאיים ואמוראיים] (I:17) quotes Rabbenu Hai Gaon that there are three baraitot [ברייתות] that should be attributed to Rav.

[4] שאלות ותשבות הרמ”א סימן י’

[5] Antinomianism (Epistles: Gal 3; Rom 4).

[6] This Hebrew spelling is in accordance with the Rambam (משנה תורה הלכות עבודה זרה פרק י’ והלכות מלכים פרק י”א). There are examples in rabbinic literature where the spelling has been changed to יש”ו. These authors probably follow the Talmud dictum לעולם ישנה אדם לתלמידו דרך קצרה [one should teach in the most concise language] (Pesachim 3b) and Megillah 25b.

[7] Samuel Sandmel, A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1956), 69, 91.

[8] Sandmel, A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament, 89.

[9] See Shmuel Agnon, Ya’mim Nora’im (Jerusalem; Tel Aviv: Schocken Publishing, 1968), 369.

[10] Sanhedrin 56b

[11] See Rambam, Mishneh Torah: Hilchot M’lachim 8:11. According to what is written here, the text does not necessarily have to be amended. The correct text can be: “and NOT from their scholars” (ולא מחכמיהם).

[12] See also Alexander Altmann, “Maimonides and Thomas Aquinas: Natural or Divine Prophecy?” AJS Review 3 (1978): 1-19, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1486419.

[13] Concerning the specific level of prophecy of Avraham, the Ramban in his commentary on Bereishit 26:5 uses the term ruach ha-kodesh (רוח הקדש). The Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim 2:39 uses the term chazon (חזון). The Abarbanel in his commentary to Shmot 20 uses the term nevuah (נבואה).

[14] As seen by its explicit inclusion in Gal 3; Rom 4.