Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The Holy One, Blessed be He, made a covenant with the Jewish people only for the sake of the matters that were transmitted orally [be’al peh], as it is stated: “For on the basis of [al pi] these matters I have made a covenant with you and with Israel” (Exodus 34:27).

"These are the statutes and the judgments and the teachings" ... "and the Toroth": This teaches us that two Toroth were given to Israel, one written, and one, oral... "which the L–rd set forth between Himself and the children of Israel": Moses merited becoming the messenger between Israel and their Father in heaven, (viz.) "on Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses": We are hereby taught that the (entire) Torah — its halachoth, inferences, and interpretations — was given by Moses at Sinai.

(1) Moses received the Torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly. They said three things: Be patient in [the administration of] justice, raise many disciples and make a fence round the Torah.

The Sages taught the following baraita: What was the order of teaching the Oral Law? How was the Oral Law first taught? Moses learned directly from the mouth of the Almighty. Aaron entered and sat before him, and Moses taught him his lesson as he had learned it from God. Aaron moved aside and sat to the left of Moses. Aaron’s sons entered, and Moses taught them their lesson while Aaron listened. Aaron’s sons moved aside; Elazar sat to the right of Moses and Itamar sat to the left of Aaron. Rabbi Yehuda disagreed with the first tanna with regard to the seating arrangements and said: Actually, Aaron would return to sit to the right of Moses. The elders entered and Moses taught them their lesson. The elders moved aside, and the entire nation entered and Moses taught them their lesson. Therefore, Aaron had heard the lesson four times, his sons heard it three times, the elders heard it twice, and the entire nation heard it once.Moses then departed to his tent, and Aaron taught the others his lesson as he had learned it from Moses. Aaron then departed and his sons taught the others their lesson. His sons then departed and the elders taught the rest of the people their lesson. Hence everyone, Aaron, his sons, the elders and all the people, heard the lesson taught by God four times.

Things [devarim] in the plural, it teaches at least two points. The addition of the definite article: The things [hadevarim], adds at least a third point. The numerological value of letters of the word eleh is thirty-six. “These are the things.” This alludes to the thirty-nine prohibited labors that were stated to Moses at Sinai.

(21) If the place where the LORD has chosen to establish His name is too far from you, you may slaughter any of the cattle or sheep that the LORD gives you, as I have instructed you; and you may eat to your heart’s content in your settlements.

TWho is the tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Elazar HaKappar and holds that the slaughter of a bird is obligatory by Torah law? It is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The Torah states: “And you shall slaughter of your herd and of your flock, which the Lord has given you, as I have commanded you” (Deuteronomy 12:21). This verse teaches that Moses was previously commanded about the halakhot of slaughter, even though they are not written explicitly in the Torah. He was commanded about cutting the gullet and about cutting the windpipe, and about the requirement to cut the majority of onesimanfor a bird, and the majority of twosimanimfor an animal.

(4) This mode of slaughtering, which is spoken of in the Torah indefinitely, must be explained, so as to know on what organ of the animal sheḥitah is performed; what is the extent of sheḥitah; with what instrument, when, where and how sheḥitah is executed; what things invalidate sheḥitah; and who may serve as a shoḥet. All these details are implied in the biblical command, which states: "You shall slaughter any of your cattle or sheep … as I have instructed you, and you may eat to your heart's content in your settlements." All these details were commanded orally, like the rest of the Oral Torah...

(1)Know that each commandment that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave to Moshe, our teacher – peace be upon him – was given to him with its explanation. He would say to him the commandment and afterward tell him its explanation and content; and [so too with] everything that is included in the Book of the Torah. And the manner of its teaching to Israel is as it is said (Eruvin 54b – in Chapter 5),

(2) Moshe would enter his tent, and Aharon would enter it first, and Moshe would tell him the commandment that was given to him, and teach him its explanation one time.

(24) And when he died, peace be upon him – since he bequeathed to Yehoshua that which was imbued to him of the explanation – Yehoshua and the people of his generation applied their wisdom and their thought to [the received Torah]. And everything that he received from Moshe – he or any of the elders – there is nothing to say about it; and no disagreement arose about it.

(25) And whoever did not hear an explanation from the mouth of the prophet, peace be upon him, about matters that derive from them, extrapolated laws by propositions from the thirteen [exegetical] principles through which the Torah is expounded, which were given at Mount Sinai. And among those laws that they derived, there are some things wherein no disagreement arose, but [rather] they agreed about them. And there were among them [those] wherein disagreements between two opinions did arise – this one says like this, and that one says like that; this one reasons according to his reasoning and becomes more sure of his opinion, and that one reasons according to his reasoning and becomes more sure of his opinion; as principles of analysis that are by way of argumentation will result in such a result.

(1)The first division are explanations transmitted from the mouth of Moshe and they have a hint in Scripture and it it possible to extrapolate them by way of reasoning. And about this there is no disagreement; if one says, "So has it been transmitted to me," there is nothing to say about it.

(1)The second division are the laws about which it is said, a 'law of Moshe from Sinai.' And there are no proofs about them as we have mentioned. Likewise here, none disagree with [such a law].

(1)The third division are the laws that they extrapolated by the ways of reasoning and a disagreement about them occurred, as we have mentioned – and the law was decided in them according to the majority. And this happens, when the investigation is given to divergence. And because of this, they say (Yevamot 76b), "If it is a [transmitted] law, we will accept it; but if it is a law [that is deduced], there is a rebuttal."

(2) Rather the disagreement and the investigation occurred about something that a [transmitted] law was not heard. And you will find in all of the Talmud that they are examining the basis of the reasoning that causes the disagreement between the disputants; and [so] they say, "About what do they differ," or "What is the basis of Rabbi x," or "What is [the difference] between them?"

(3) And they bring it about this matter in most places; and they mention the basis that causes the disagreement – for example, that they will say, "Rabbi x holds from claim z, and y holds from claim a," and similar to it.

(4) But one who would think that the laws about which they disagree are likewise transmitted from the mouth of Moshe and they think that a disagreement occurred by way of a mistake in the laws or because one of them received the true transmission and the other made a mistake in his transmission or he forgot or he did not hear from his teacher everything he was supposed to hear – and bring [as] a proof about this, that which they said (Sanhedrin 88b), "From when the students of Shammai and Hillel – who did not serve all that was required of them – multiplied, disagreement grew in Israel and the Torah was made to be like two Torahs"; this thing is very repugnant.

(5) And these are the words of one who has no intellect and does not have the fundamental principles in his hand and who disfigures the people from which the commandments were transmitted; and all of this is emptiness and naught. And what brought him to believe this faulty belief is his lack of cognition of the words of the sages that are found in the Talmud. As they found that all of the explanation that is transmitted from the mouth of Moshe is true, but they did not [take cognizance] of the difference between the transmitted fundamentals and the topical extensions that [the sages] extrapolated by investigation.

(6) But [as for] you, a doubt should not enter your heart [about] the disagreement of the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel; when they said (Berakhot 51b – Chapter 8), "We clean the room, and afterward rinse the hands" or "we rinse the hands, and afterward clean the room" – [that] you think that [the cause of this argument is that] one of these two things was not transmitted from the mouth of Moshe from Sinai.

(7) But [rather] the basis that causes them to disagree is what is mentioned in the Talmud (Berakhot 52b); that one of them forbids being served by an ignorant person and the other permits [it]. And so [too, with] all that is similar to these disagreements, that are the elaborations of elaborations.

(8) Rather, the matter of that which they said, "From when the students of Shammai and Hillel – who did not serve all that was required of them – multiplied, disagreement grew in Israel," is evident; in that when two people are of equal intellect and investigation and knowledge of the fundamentals from which reasonings extrapolate, no disagreement will occur in their reasonings in any way. And if it does occur, it will be minimal; as it is only found that Shammai and Hillel disagreed about isolated laws.

(9) And that is because the thoughts of the two of them were very close – one to the other – in everything that they extrapolated by way of reasoning. And, likewise, the fundamentals that were given to this one, were like the fundamentals given to that one.

(10) But when the diligence of the students towards wisdom slackened and their reasoning weakened – in comparison to the reasoning of Hillel and Shammai – disagreement occurred among them in the investigation of many things; as the reasoning of each and every one of them was according to his intellect and to what he had in hand of the fundamentals.

(11) And nonetheless, they should not be blamed; as we cannot force two sages that debate in investigation, to debate according to the intellect of Yehoshua and Pinchas. And, likewise, we have no doubt about that which they debated [just] because they are not like Shammai and Hillel or like those before them; as the Holy One, blessed be He, did not command His service in this manner.

(12) But [rather] He commanded us to listen to the sages of the generation, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 17:9), "to the judge that will be in those days."

(13) And it is through these ways that disagreement occurred; not because they erred in the laws, and one is saying truth and the other is saying falsehood. And how evident is this matter to all that give cognizance to it! And how precious and great is this fundamental principle about the commandments!

(1)And the fourth division are the ordinances that the prophets and the sages ordained in each and every generation, in order to make a fence around the Torah. And about them did the Holy One, blessed be He, command to do them, and it is what He said in the general statement (Leviticus 18:30), "And you will guard My guarding" – and the received tradition came [to explain] (Yevamot 21a), "Make a guarding around my guarding." And the sages called them ordinances.

(2) And sometimes a disagreement occurs about them, because one sage forbids this because of that, and another sage does not agree with him. And this is often [found] in the Talmud, that they say," Rabbi x decrees this because of this and that and Rabbi y did not decree [it]." And this is likewise one of the reasons for disagreement.

(3) As behold, chicken flesh with milk is a rabbinic ordinance [that is] in order to distance [us] from sin. And in the Torah, only the flesh of beasts and animals was forbidden, but the sages forbade chicken flesh in order to distance [us] from the [Torah] prohibition. And among them is one who does not ordain this ordinance; as Rabbi Yose [HaGalili] would permit chicken flesh with milk, and all the people of his city would eat it, as is made known by the Talmud (Shabbat 130a).

(4) And when there occurs agreement about one of the ordinances, none can disagree with it on any account. And when its prohibition spreads to all of Israel, we may not disagree with that ordinance – even the prophets, themselves, were not permitted to abrogate it. And so, they said in the Talmud (Avodah Zarah 36a) that Eliyahu, his memory should be for the good, was not able to abrogate one of the eighteen things that the House of Shammai and the House of Hilled decreed. And they brought a reason for this – that it is since their prohibitions spread to all of Israel.

(1)The fifth division are the laws that are made by way of investigation and consensus about things that occur among people – that do not have in them an addition to a commandment, nor a subtraction – or about things that are of benefit to people in matter of the Torah. And the sages called them decrees and practices.

(2) And it is forbidden to transgress them; and Shlomo, peace be upon him, already said (Ecclesiastes 10:8), "one who breaches a fence will be bitten by a snake." And these decrees are very numerous and are mentioned in the Talmud and in the Mishnah – some of them about what is prohibited and forbidden, and some of them about monetary issues.

(3) And there are some of them that are the decrees that the prophets decreed, like the decrees of Moshe and Yehoshua and Ezra, like they said (Megillah 4a – Chapter 1), "Moshe decreed for Israel that they should ask and expound about the laws of Pesach on Pesach." And they said (Berakhot 48b – Chapter 7), "Moshe decreed hazan (the first blessing in the grace) at the time that the manna fell for Israel." But the decrees of Yehoshua and Ezra are many.

(4) And there are some of them that are decrees attributed to individuals among the sages, as they said (Mishnah Sheviit 10:3), "Hillel decreed pruzbul," (Gittin 34b) "Rabban Gamliel the Elder decreed," (Beitzah 5a) "Yochanan ben Zakkai decreed," and in the Talmud [one frequently finds], "Rabbi x decreed, Rabbi y decreed."

(5) And there are some of them that are decrees attributed to the many sages, as they said (Ketuvot 49:), "In Usha, they decreed," or as it is said, "The sages decreed" or "It is a decree of the sages," and many that are similar to it.