You Shall Not Add Nor Take Away: False Prophecy, Rabbinism, and Authority

(15) A prophet will the LORD thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; (16) according to all that thou didst desire of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying: ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.’ (17) And the LORD said unto me: ‘They have well said that which they have spoken. (18) I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. (19) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him. (20) But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ (21) And if thou say in thy heart: ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?’ (22) When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken; the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.

(1) It is obvious, and also explained by the Torah, that the commandments were established forever and ever. They are not to be changed, and should not be added to or diminished, as it says "All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it." (Deut 13:1); and it says "What is revealed is for us and our children forever, to carry out all the words of this Torah." This teaches that we are commanded to fulfill all the Torah's directives forever. It is also said: "It is an everlasting statute for all your generations," and [Deuteronomy 30:12] states: "It is not in the heavens." This teaches that a prophet can no longer add a new precept [to the Torah]. Therefore, if a person will arise, either from Israel or from the nations, and perform a sign or wonder and say that God sent him to: add a mitzvah, withdraw a mitzvah, explain a mitzvah in a manner which different than explained by Moses, or if he says that the mitzvot commanded to the Jews are not forever, but rather were given for only that time, he is a false prophet. He comes to oppose the Moses' prophesy and should be executed by strangling, because he intentionally spoke in God's name what God didn't command. The One Whose Name is Blessed commanded Moses that "this commandment is for us and our children forever", and, "[God] is not man that He lies".

When a prophet - who has already proven himself to be a prophet - instructs us to violate one of the mitzvot of the Torah or many mitzvot, whether they be of a severe or light nature, for a limited amount of time, it is a mitzvah to listen to him.

The Sages of the early generation taught as part of the oral tradition: If a prophet tells you to violate the precepts of the Torah as Elijah did on Mount Carmel, listen to him with regard to all things except the worship of false gods. This applies when his command is temporary in nature.

For example, on Mount Carmel, Elijah offered a sacrifice outside [the Temple's premises], even though Jerusalem was chosen for such [service], and one who offers a sacrifice outside [the Temple's premises] is liable for karet. Since he was [already established as] a prophet, it was a mitzvah to listen to him. The commandment, "Listen to him," applies in these circumstances as well.

If they would have asked Elijah: How can we violate the Torah's command [Deuteronomy 12:13]: "[Be careful...] lest you offer your burnt offerings everywhere"?, he would have told them: We should not say anything, but anyone who offers a sacrifice outside [the Temple premises] is liable for karet,as Moses said. [The present instance,] however, [is an exception]. I am offering a sacrifice today outside [the Temple] at God's command in order to disprove the prophets of Ba'al.

Similarly, if any [other] prophet commands us to transgress for a limited time, it is a mitzvah to listen to him. If, however, he says that the mitzvah has been nullified forever, he is liable for execution by strangulation, for the Torah has told us: "[It is] for us and our children forever."

(8) If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, ... (9) And thou shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days; and thou shalt inquire; and they shall declare unto thee the sentence of judgment. (10) And thou shalt do according to the tenor of the sentence, which they shall declare unto thee from that place which the LORD shall choose; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall teach thee. (11) According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, to the right hand, nor to the left.

Left or Right - Even if they say to you that the left is right and the right is left, and all the moreso if they tell you that the right is right and the left is left.

(3) This [law of the Rebellious Elder] is more severe with respect to the words of the Sages than to the words of the Torah: One who says, there is no such thing as tefillin, in order to transgress the words of the Torah, is exempt [from punishment]. [But one who says] there are five compartments, [in tefillin] in order to add to the words of the Sages, is liable.

A court has the authority to issue a decree and forbid something which is permitted and have its decree perpetuated for generations to come. Similarly, it has the authority - as a temporary measure - to release the Torah's prohibitions. What then is the meaning of the Scriptural prohibition: (Deut. 13:1) "Do not add to it and do not detract from it"?

The intent is that they do not have the authority to add to the words of the Torah or to detract from them, establishing a matter forever as part of Scriptural Law. This applies both to the Written Law and the Oral Law.

What is implied? The Torah states: (Ex. 23:19) "Do not cook a kid in its mother's milk." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that the Torah forbade both the cooking and eating of milk and meat, whether the meat of a domesticated animal or the meat of a wild beast. The meat of fowl, by contrast, is permitted to be cooked in milk according to Scriptural Law. Now if a court will come and permit partaking of the meat of a wild animal cooked in milk, it is detracting from the Torah. And if it forbids the meat of fowl cooked in milk saying that this is included in "the kid" forbidden by the Scriptural Law, it is adding to the Torah.

If, however, the court says: "The meat of fowl cooked in milk is permitted according to Scriptural Law. We, however, are prohibiting it and publicizing the prohibition as a decree, lest the matter lead to a detriment and people say: 'Eating the meat of fowl cooked in meat is permitted, because it is not explicitly forbidden by the Torah. Similarly, the meat of a wild animal cooked in milk is permitted, because it is also not explicitly forbidden.' "And another may come and say: 'Even the meat of a domesticated animal cooked in milk is permitted with the exception of a goat.' And another will come and say: 'Even the meat of a goat is permitted when cooked in the milk of a cow or a sheep. For the verse mentions only "its mother," i.e., an animal from the same species.' And still another will come and say: 'Even the meat of a goat is permitted when cooked in goat's milk as long the milk is not from the kid's mother, for the verse says: "its mother."' For these reasons, we will forbid all meat cooked in milk, even meat from fowl."

Such an approach is not adding to the Torah. Instead, it is creating safeguards for the Torah. Similar concepts apply in all analogous situations.

(40) Al Khazari: How could this be made to agree with the verse: 'Thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it?' (Deuteronomy 8:1). (41) The Rabbi: This was only said to the masses, that they should not conjecture and theorize, and contrive laws according to their own conception, as the Karaites do. They were recommended to listen to the post-Mosaic prophets, the priests and judges, as it is written: 'I will raise them up a prophet . . . and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him' (Deut. 18:18). With regard to the priests and judges it is said that their decisions are binding. The words: 'You shall not add,' etc., refer to 'that which I commanded you through Moses' and any 'prophet from among thy brethren' who fulfils the conditions of a prophet. They further refer to regulations laid down in common by priests and judges 'from the place which thy Lord shall choose.' For they have divine assistance, and would never, on account of their large number, concur in anything which contradicts the Law. Much less likelihood was there of erroneous views, because they had inherited vast learning, for the reception of which they were naturally endowed. The members of the Sanhedrin, as is known by tradition, had to possess a thorough acquaintance with all branches of science. Prophecy had scarcely ceased, or the Heavenly Voice, which took its place. [Here, the text goes into a lengthy discussion on the difference between when the Karaites and Rabbinic Jews start counting the Omer, and the text concludes as follows about the Rabbinic interpretation:] Perhaps this was done under the influence of divine inspiration. It is quite possible, and it saves us from the confusion of those who endeavour to cause confusion.