Avodah Mailing List

Volume 31: Number 21

Thu, 07 Feb 2013

• 1. A question for the chevre (Moshe Zeldman)
• 2. Re: A question for the chevre (Rich, Joel)
• 3. Is Panentheism Heresy (David Riceman)
• 4. Re: Is Panentheism Heresy (Micha Berger)
• 5. tfilat haderech and birchat hagomel (David Riceman)
• 6. Re: Is Panentheism Heresy (Zev Sero)
• 7. Keri'ah and berikha (Arie Folger)
• 8. Re: Maharal - MeValey Olam, SeVara etc. (Micha Berger)

Hi- I'm new here. Please excuse me if this type of question has been
covered. I was having a discussion recently with a noted talmid chacham,
where he posed the following question:
You have a secular Jew who's on his way to Africa for the rest of his life,
and you have an opportunity to teach him one mitzva that he'll keep until
he dies. He has no opportunity there to continue his growth there and will
never go beyond just keeping this one mitzva. Do you teach him: a) to love
Hashem, or b) not to take bones out of a fish on Shabbos?
To emphasize, the question here is not a kiruv/chinuch strategy question--
it won't lead to more mitzvos. It's a question of priorities in halacha. To
this Rav, it was pashut that you teach him about borer. Thoughts?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-a
ishdas.org/attachments/20130205/4f9c9b4c/attachment.html>

> You have a secular Jew who's on his way to Africa for the rest of his
> life, and you have an opportunity to teach him one mitzva that he'll keep
> until he dies. ... Do you teach him: a) to love Hashem, or b) not to
> take bones out of a fish on Shabbos?

> To emphasize, the question here is not a kiruv/chinuch strategy question
> -- it won't lead to more mitzvos. It's a question of priorities
> in halacha. To this Rav, it was pashut that you teach him about
> borer. Thoughts?

Did he say why? Given that Ahavat Hashem is a mitzvah as well, I would
have thought that it might get the nod based on a hashkafic point of
mitzvoth aseih being love of HKB"H vs. prohibitions being fear (Ramban
I think) which would explain why aseih docheh lo taaseh.

KT 
Joel Rich 

RMB:

<<To my mind the next discontinuity, where a new idea is published 
rather than details and develops added to an existing system, is by the 
Ari.>>

Where would you put the Rokeah (R Elazar MiVormiza) or R. Avraham Abulafiah?

David Riceman

On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:58:08PM -0500, David Riceman wrote:
> Where would you put the Rokeah (R Elazar MiVormiza) or R. Avraham Abulafiah?

Rabbanim whose opinions I don't know enough about to comment upon. Do
they introduce a plethora of entirely new concepts, the way the Bahir
and the Ari do?

My point was more that the Bahir's worldview is pretty much the
Zohar's. The Zohar (based largely on 2nd-hand description) adds more on
the level of a lot of detail to the Bahir's metaphysics than new concepts.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It is harder to eat the day before Yom Kippur
mi...@aishdas.org        with the proper intent than to fast on Yom
http://www.aishdas.org   Kippur with that intent.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       - Rav Yisrael Salanter

RCL:

<<Yes, it seems to me that RYBS, because he identifies a pasuk as behind 
this particular statement of tan du, therefore is giving tan du a status 
of an existential truth about human nature - over and above any other 
chazaka>>

Actually I think the pasuk is part of the excuse.  IIRC he said that if 
one were to deny the presumption of "tav l'meisav ..." then vast areas 
of halacha would be rendered moot.  My impression is that that was his 
actual reason for disagreeing with Rabbi Rackman (my memory is fuzzy - - 
I may not have the names correct).

David Riceman

On 5/02/2013 12:58 PM, David Riceman wrote:
> RMB:
>
> <<To my mind the next discontinuity, where a new idea is
> published rather than details and develops added to an existing
> system, is by the Ari.>>
>
> Where would you put the Rokeah (R Elazar MiVormiza) or R. Avraham Abulafiah?

Did they experience revelation?

What about Shu"t Min Hashomayim?


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
z...@sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan

Dear Ovedim,

The Midrash Rabba Bereishit 39:12 includes a discussion about bowing during
the 'amidah, and concludes with a reference to two stories:
Rabbi Chiya Rabba her'a kheri'ah lifnei Rebbi venitrape; uvar Sissi her'a
verikha lifnei Rebbi venifsach velo nitrape.

Question: what was the likely nature of their injuries? Why was R' Sissi's
injury worse?

PS: I sm not asking for questions of theodicy. A reason why the latter was
punished is cited by commentaries, but since this story is brought to
explain how we bow, it should be informed by our knowledge of anatomy.

Kol tuv,
--
mit freundlichen Gr??en,
with kind regards,
Arie Folger

visit my blog at http://ariefolger.wordpress.com/
sent from my mobile device
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avod
ah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130205/62735d58/attachment-0001.htm>

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 09:44:32AM +1100, Meir Rabi wrote:
: I ask a simple question - Does the Maharal say that CORRECT decisions are
: not Torah [and destroy the world] when there is no Talmud  behind them?

Before I do, I want to share this quote from the MB's intro, as translated
by RMJbroyde in his recent article on the MB's methodology
<https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwgoR9DvCEi_cldhVWl1azBDNUk/edit>:
    The Shulhan Arukh also with learning the Tur along with it, is an
    obscure book, since when the Bet Yosef ordered the Shulhan Arukh his
    intention was that one would first learn the essential laws and their
    sources from the Tur and the Bet Yosef, in order to understand the
    ruling, each one according to its reasoning. Since the Tur and the
    Bet Yosef bring numerous differing opinions for each law, he thus
    decided to write the Shulhan Arukh to make known the ruling in
    practice for each law. It was not his intention, however, that we
    would learn it alone, since the law is not able to sit well with a
    person unless he understands the reasoning behind it.

The article has much to say that's relevent, as RMJB gives his opinion
of how the various codes (Rif, Rambam, Tur, SA, etc...) differ, and the
how those differences reflect the philosophy and goals of their authors.
But back to the Maharal himself...

Nesivos Olam cheileq 1, Nesiv haTorah, pereq 15, I'm focusing on pg 68
<http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14202&;pgnum=71> col 2, the
paragraph that starts "VE'OD sham: Hatana'im mavlei olam", through the
end of the pereq on pg 69.

The Maharal is shifting topic from who is an am ha'aretz (discussed
before the marker I just pointed to) to "hatana'im mavlei olam". He
opens by saying that although someone who was not meshameish a talmid
chakham may be an am ha'aretz, a bur, a kuti, etc... he isn't out there
destroying the world. That's reserved for someone who doesn't do shimush
and doesn't even engage in talmud. Someone who is so out of touch with
how halakhah works, they only study case law.

These people destroy the world because the world stands on Torah. This
isn't a statement about halakhah and how one should decide to do things
lemaaseh. It's saying that someone who doesn't engage in talmud isn't
performing talmud Torah, "ve'al zeh ha'olam omeid" -- as the Maharal
puts it, quoting (without citation) Avos 1:2, "Al shelosheh devarim
ha'olam omeid, al haTorah..."

For this reason, the Maharal rejects Rashi's explanation of this quote.
Rashi says that tana'im mavlei olam because trying to pasqen by only
knowing already decided case law is bound to be error-prone. However
the Maharal objects that if this were true, Chazal wouldn't continue
with "shemorin halakhah mitokh mishnasan", but "shemorin hora'os
ta'us".

(Pg 69)

It is appropriate for halakhah lemaaseh to come from Torah which is
sikhlis. (I think it is this line that RMR builds his understanding
around.) However, he does continue that WRT to pesaq, rather than neglect
of talmud Torah, case law would be sufficient because it's the reishis
letalmud vehaschalah eilav. Now that there is a gemara, the case law in
the mishnah has tinges of talmud.

Notice also we aren't speaking of the masses. He is discusing how we are
"posqin halakhah".

Then the Maharal claims that the Rambam and the Tur didn't write their
codes for people to pasqen from without using them as tools for further
study. RMJBroyde's article points out stylisticly that this is true for
the Tur. But for the Maharal to say this of the Yad requires acknowledging
that he is speaking to posqim, not people trying to figure out their own
lives. Because the Rambam is quite clear in the haqdamah that he expected
the hoi palloi to use his Mishneh Torah as their text for learning TSBP,
and if they lack more time -- their ONLY such text.

The Maharal doesn't mention the SA, but historically we know he was very
much against the popularization of the SA as *THE* legal code, a process
going on in his lifetime. And I do not think it's possible to read this
section about codes without realizing that he has polemical points to
make in that regard.

He refers back to the topic of shimush and amei ha'aretz (and all the
other negative titles), saying that clearly creating such people wasn't
the intent of the Rambam or the Tur. (Notice, though, that he thereby
limits the discussion to people who were meshamshim talmidei chakhamim.)

So, I read the conclusion differently than RMR does... LAD, he is saying
that we need talmud Torah more than we need pesaq halakah. He would still
call those errors "hora'as ta'us", not "halakhah".

And none of this touches on using the Yad when you aren't going to be
a moreh halakhah either way, or (as I put it in my first post) someone
who relies on the QSA. Just not to pasqen! Pesaq needs shimush, talmud,
because otherwise there is no halakhah-creating talmud Torah to keep
the universe up.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's never too late
mi...@aishdas.org        to become the person
http://www.aishdas.org   you might have been.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                      - George Elliot


------------------------------


Avodah mailing list
Avo...@lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 21
**************************************

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
	avodah@lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	avodah-owner@lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."


A list of common acronyms is available at at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)