Introduction:
The midrash rabba and the halakhic midrashism are critical elements found within the study of the midrash. At their most basic level, the midrash rabba and the halakhic midrashism can be identified as genres of religions study. These two types of midrash are approaches through which the Scriptures and the holy texts can be examined. There are specific traits embedded within the halakhic midrashism and the midrash rabba which make them easy to identify for the religious scholar. This paper shall illustrate the major differenced which emerge in the study of the halakhic midrashism and the midrash rabba.
The Halakhic Midrashim:
The halakhic midrashim are a specific genre of midrash texts. They correspond to the midrash of principle interpretations of the Scripture. The origin of halakhic midrashim is from the Tanakh. There are several principle forms of halakhic midrashim, and are consolidated on the texts of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. However, the most important of the halakhic midrashim are those which are found concerning the Book of Exodus. The strategy used in assessing all halakhic midrashim is that of exegetical strategy, or a critical and explanatory method through which to approach the original holy texts.
The principle function of the halakhic midrashim is to identify and promote a concept of law based upon the content of the Scripture. In reading a text through the methods and strategies consolidated within halakhic midrashim, it is assumed that the reader is seeking to identify the concepts of law and social order that are contained within the original text. This is the principle reason as to why the teachings of Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy are so important within the halakhic midrashim: These three books of the bible tend to contain a significant number of legal and social commentaries which can be examined through exegetical practices and their meaning interpreted. A secondary function of the halakhic midrashim was to document the exegesis of the Jews. The emphasis on the exodus suggests embedded cultural, social, and legal norms for the Jewish people. The study of the exodus and the early travels of the Jews thus is believed in halakhic midrashim to characterize a series of norms which convey acceptable behaviors.
As a genre of midrash, all halakhic midrashim tend to have emerged around 400 CE. Theologists identify the emergence of the halakhic midrashim as a strategy through which the rabbis were able to ensure communication of Jewish law to Jews. This was an important concept within Judaism, after the Jews were removed from their homeland, for there was no appropriate centralized system of laws. The creation of the halakhic midrashim served as both a literal translation of meaning from the Scriptures, and also helped encompass a set of “hermeneutic” laws or rules. It has been argued that all investigation of the Torah helps serve this purpose to some extent, for the study of the holy texts and the Scripture should automatically convey a sense of behavioral law to the reader. In this sense, there are traditional halakhic midrashim and there are, potentially, a general form of halakhic midrashim which emerges from the study of texts other than Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. This perspective on halakhic midrashim has created a classification between Soferim halakhic midrashim and Tannaim halakhic midrashim, and a more moderns of the halakhic midrashim. The latter forms of halakhic midrashim are, however, subject to significant debate and it is extremely unlikely that there is any realistic closure or conclusions which will enter Jewish halakhic midrashim cannon through the modern interpretation of events.
The Midrash Rabba:
The midrash rabba (also spelled as the midrash raba and midrash rabbah) is a record of the social and the historical events which occurred in the lives of the Jewish people. Kugel (no date) writes that “in exile, and all the more so afterward, the divine word was increasingly a text, and became the more hallowed the more the parchment yellowed and turned brown and cracked” (Kugel, no date, 135). This created an emphasis on the authority of the texts as self-explanatory, rather than rationalized in any way, shape, or form. Some of the texts and their subsequent midrash became sacred for no other reason than the length of their existence. This, some theologians have stressed, has created problems with the interpretation of what is a sacred text and what texts are exist for the purpose of self-affirmation. Kugel suggests that there is a general emphasis on “a sense of consequentiality” among most midrash cannon (Ibid, 139). The emphasis on what occurs from the course of one’s initial actions cannot be overemphasized, he writes, and also suggests that there is a highly “linear” interpretation of how and why the midrash texts are explored (Ibid.). These facts suggest that there are norms which are conveyed to the reader through the holy texts. These norms, particularly social and cultural norms, are embedded in the midrash rabba.
Like the texts that comprise the halakhic midrashim cannon, the midrash rabba are dated to specific periods within Jewish history. Unlike the halakhic midrashim, however, there is an increasing emphasis on the patterns which emerge from explanations, interpretations, and expositions of the passages. The halakhic midrashim stresses an emphasis on the actuality of law, while the midrash rabba promote an awareness of the context in which meaning arises. This should not, however, suggest that the meaning contained within the midrash rabba is any less concise than that found within the halakhic midrashim for the scholar of Judaism. Long emphasis on the content of the texts stresses that there are patterns found in midrash rabba which demand specific behaviors from the individuals. Moreover, while the halakhic midrashim can be read sequentially and the content acquired from each successive passage, the midrash rabba can be integrated into each other on a continuous train of thought. Frequently, interpretations of the midrash rabba are achieved when the sum of the text is explored as opposed to the individual passages. For example, using a midrash rabba reading of the Book of Genesis, Neusner stresses that “it is not possible to view the whole as an artificial construct; it seems to me clear that it is a cogent and pointed statement, beginning middle, and end, even though bits and pieces of available material may have served the author [in creating the whole” (Neusner, no date, 4). Assessing the path of the midrash rabba is, in short, attempting to place the text within greater context. This is true on both levels of social and textual context.
The Differences Between the Texts:
Boyarin writes in “Towards a New Theory of Midrash” that the debate over the interpretations of holy text is complicated because there is no inherent validity present within the text which transcends the cultural interpretations of the reader. He writes that “reality is always represented through the texts that refer to other texts, through language that is a construction of the historical, ideological, and social systems of a people” (Boyarin, no date, 14). The strategies embedded within interpreting the halakhic midrashism and the mishram rabbi thus are not only reflections of the social and legal codes which are embedded within the Scriptures, but are also means through which the early interpretations of the text stressed specific outcomes based upon the codes which the early authors thought were socially appropriate. For example, in “A Meditation on Parshat Lech Lecha,” a midrash rabba text, author Yakov Newman characterizes the rules set forth by the early interpretation as curbing the highly accepting behavior of the readers. The passage of the initial Scripture reads "Lech lecha el haarets asher areka” which is translated according to the midrash rabba as “Go, for you, to the land which I will show you,” (Newman, 2003, Online source). Newman continues in noting that:
These words of the Lord don't specify a distinct locale, but the phrase, "for you" implies an existential journey that is determinate: "Go to yourself, for yourself." Doing such, however, will involve a radical changing of physical context. In order to get there. It is all the matrix of reality, but being caught only in one part of it is what we sense as physical determinism; the win-lose jungle.
Get into a different ecosytem. Break the fixation that makes it impossible to change the script. Those who love me most, most demand that I play my learned role. So they can play theirs. In this script, winners and losers, lose.
Newman’s theme in interpreting these passages is that there is a general acceptance in the Scripture to the will of God, and that God needs to continuously break this pattern to encourage social change within His people. If this does not occur, there is a general tendency to accept the wide range of conditions which occur in one’s life, despite any likely negative impact that the individual or their community would experience. There is thus a desire to shake up the existing system within the midrash rabba, identifying human behavior as willing to engage in what is easy and commonplace because they believe that this process is expected of them. In this, it is clear that there is an emphasis on how, why, and to what extent the midrash rabba were used to contextualize the status of the text as opposed to isolating it and dictating policy and law, as occurs within the study of the halakhic midrashim.
Conclusion:
The traits embedded within the halakhic midrashim and the midrash rabba stress different purposes for these two interpretations of holy text and Scripture. Both are strategies through which the holy texts and Scripture can be applied to the lives of the average individual. However, while the midrash rabba is less restrictive in terms of dictating law than the halakhic midrashim, both interpretations are grounded heavily within perceptual expectations. These expectations and designed to evoke order from the Jewish population.
The differences between the halakhic midrashim and the midrash rabba are clear. The historical setting of both texts creates an atmosphere of authority for these two modes of interpretation. Stressing the age and the authenticity of the texts is designed to promote the authority of the texts, but the halakhic midrashim and the midrash rabba methods use the texts differently. The major differences in the texts are in terms of their interpretation and their application. The halakhic midrashim is a system of laws, which spill into social order and social norms at some points in the process. In contrast, the midrash rabba stresses the social order within a broad context. These interpretations can be combined to help create a general overview of how and why the behavior of the Jews has been dictated through Scripture and holy texts.
Works Cited:
Boyarin, D. (No date) Intertextuality and the Reading of Midrash. Inianapolis, IN.: Indiana University Press.
Kugel, James. “Two Introductions to Midrash.”
Neusner, J. (No date.) Genesis Rabbah: The Judaic Commentary to the Book of Genesis a New American Translation. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press.
Newman, Yakov. (2003) “Teshuva III: Working Through the World.” Acquired 15 February 2005 at by Yakov Newman http://www.danishgrove.com/newman/writings/2002-11-04-teshuva3.html
