Did Paul EVER suggest we ignore Torah?

It would seem Christianity is a religion that is based more upon the much-misunderstood writings of Paul, than on what YHWH commanded and what Y'shua actually taught. Case in point, 1 Corinthians 9:19-22 from the NIV reveals how this passage was twisted by Christian theologians attempting to show that Paul negated Torah:

Paul's Use of His Freedom

1 Corinthians 9: 19 Though I am free(A) and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone,(B) to win as many as possible.(C) 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews.(D) To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law),(E) so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law(F) (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law),(G) so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak.(H) I have become all things to all people(I) so that by all possible means I might save some.

The Aramaic English New Testament reveals what Paul actually said:

1 Corinthians 9: 19. Being free from them all, I have made myself servant to every man; that I might gain many: 20. And with the Jews, I was as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; and with those under Torah, I was as under Torah, that I might gain them who are under Torah; 21. And to those who have not Torah, I was as without Torah, (although I am not without Torah to Elohim, but subject to the Torah of the Mashiyach,) that I might gain them that are without Torah. 22. I was with the weak, as weak, that I might gain the weak: I was all things to all men, that I might restore every one. (AENT)

[1] "Under Torah" refers to religious (halachic) traditions of how Torah is to be observed!

[2] When Rav Shaul talks about "as being without Torah" he clarifies by saying that he is "not without the Torah of Elohim, but subject to the Torah of Mashiyach." Rav Shaul rejects Rabbinical interpretations of Torah and extra unscriptural fences around Torah that he knows Y'shua does not endorse....

He has, by being "subject," transferred his allegiance from the Rabbis he trained under, to Y'shua as final arbiter. If Y'shua and the Rabbis agreed, which they often did, then there was no problem. But if they disagreed, Y'shua's interpretation always overruled. This was no small admission at the time. The Netzarim community began with very small numbers. The idea that even one Rabbi could outdo all others was revolutionary, as the Talmud records the opposite scenario:

"My son! Be careful concerning rabbinical decrees even more than the Torah…the Torah contains prohibitions…But anyone who violates a rabbinic decree is worthy of death," (Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, 21b).

In another place, Rambam's Introduction to the Mishnah says: "If there are 1000 prophets, all of them of the stature of Eliyah and Elisha, giving a certain interpretation, and 1001 rabbis giving the opposite interpretation, you shall incline after the majority and the instruction according to the 1001 rabbis, not according to the 1000 prophets…Elohim did not permit us to learn from the prophets, only from the rabbis who are men of logic and reason."

So we see that even if Y'shua was thought of as a prophet, rabbinic rules would still discount him and put traditions over what he teaches. And as the first, and more ancient quote shows, to have that disagreement in the first place was and is a dangerous business!