proving judaism

Widely accepted seforim are verifiable.Others require verification(example:Women and Kabbalah)

youre 1 step away from being a tzadoki

“Is there any concrete proof that everything the Meforshim and Mussar Seforim say is directly from the Torah? “

No.

In fact, one can seriously argue that there is disproof because different Meforshim often explictly and emphatically disagree with one another. For example Rashi and Ramban can’t both be right about the sequence of the Torah narrative.

That doesn’t mean that we don’t take all of them seriously, even the inconvenient ones.

No there is no concrete proof, as such. There is emunah that what they said was Divinely inspired. But as was pointed out there are shivim panim laTorah and two meforshim who are diametrically opposed to each other cannot both be correct, if one says black and the other says white. The idea is what lessons we learn from their peirushim, not whether or not those peirushim are the absolute emes, because their is an emesdigkeit in their meaning, if not a factual accuracy. So it doesn’t matter to me whether Odom and Chava ate an esrog, a piece of wheat, a grape, or whatever the Eitz Hadaas was, as is argued amongst the meforshim. What matters is the global truth that Man can be given everything under the sun by the R”SHO, so what possible reason could he have for taking the one and only thing that is forbidden to him? Why is the Yetzer Hara that strong ?

Sacridlge: are you calling this one?

I agree with hudi. We might not be able to point to every single ethic and say with certainty that this was derived from that posuk or was passed down through this chain, but we know that the Rishonim were completely immersed in Torah. If we hear stories of later achronim who wouldn’t lift a pinky without some kavanh l’shem shamayim how much more so the earlier generations.

Also, I guess unsurprisingly, I disagree with charliehall and ItcheSrulik. Just because different meforshim disagree with each other and perhaps sometimes their opinions are mutually exclusive- doesn’t mean that one is wrong and one is right. Eilu v’Eilu divrei Elokim Chaim- ie. the machlokes on chanuka lighting with Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. We know that both are right and generally it is only because we can’t understand Beis Shammai because his understanding was on too high a level that we don’t abide by his opinion now.

Similarly, I once showed my Rosh Kollel in the Shomrei Emunim HaKadmon where he brings that at the end of the Rambam’s life he finally learned kabbalah and said that if he would have learned this before he wrote his seforim he would have changed certain things. My Rosh Kollel told me that this means we are left with a machlokes on the Rambam against the Rambam- and not that his first opinion on the subjects were void.

How can you prove to a non-believer that Krias Yam Suf really happened any more convincingly than proving J_ _ _ _ was a child of _ _ _? Answering that anything that has been handed down from generation to generation all these years has to be true, could be an answer to the question of “How do we know that J_ _ _ _ was a child of _ _ _?”.