Sheep’s Fat Tail and Other mysteries - Unfinished Debate with Mesora Rabbi Ben Chaim

Below is a copy of an email thread, of a discussion with a rationalist rabbi (in blue).

I start off by attacking his claim that Orthodox Judaism is the original form:

 

Dear Rabbi Ben Chaim

In your article on Conservative , you claim the following:

"This original, Orthodox Judaism received by
Moses and transmitted throughout the millennia
went unchallenged, precisely because of
those mass witnesses, and because literally all
Rabbis understood Torah as that one, identical
system."

However, this is a false statement. The very people you claim were the recipients of the Torah, were in fact its challengers.  The Pharisees / Rabbis challenged the Written Torah, and the Priests who ministered in the Temple.  They were the first reform movement, the writers of the mishna and talmud. In many things they contradict what is written in the Torah, eg the formula for the Shemen Hamaschit; the prohibition to wear shatnez (the rabbis claim the Cohanim must wear shatnez, with no basis in the Torah!)

Indeed, the physical destruction of the Temple was preceded by its spiritual destruction, an act carried out by none other than the Pharisee traitor, YBZ.  This was a campaign to defile the Temple, and wrest authority from the Holy Priests bnei Tzadok. Hence, he brought into the Temple  the impurity of the dead, perverted the meaning of the Torah, and abolished the important rituals such as the bitter waters. Such a vile "rabbi" ends up selling the temple and the Jewish people to the Romans, in order to start up his new testament/oral law in Yavne. And yes, the persistence of this has kept us in an unprecedented exile of 2000 years.

For you information, the Torah tells us NOT to follow the majority to do evil. You can chop and change anything you like,  by removing important words in a commandment.  It is like claiming the Torah tells us to eat pork, and steal, and conveniently forget the word "Not".

I am not conservative, but the rabbinical orthodoxy you profess is the source of all reform movements!

Kind regards

Why do you feel Maimonides did view Moses' Torah as the
same as his own...as orthodox?

Thank you for your reply, except I do not follow your question about Maimonides. If you are asking why Rambam was Orthodox, I would say it is because he was raised that way.  The only place where I have seen him take issue with the Talmudic Rabbis is in the areas of Astrology and Astronomy, and even there he finds a minority opinion, which he uses as normative.

But one can read Maimonides and find areas where he was not objective or rational, since he defers to the authority of the Sages. In fact, I haven't seen a single rational argument of his against the Tsaddokim, because it is easier to just insult them. The logical meaning of the Torah is at odds with its rabbinical interpretation.

Kind regards

How old are you? Did you attend yeshiva?

Moshe Ben-Chaim

Shalom Rabbi Ben Moshe

I am XX

I have been to a couple of yeshiva programs, when I was at university

Thanks

You must take more time before suggesting what you
had....years.....and study with a Rabbi. You will
eventually be very impressed with Rambam's genius, and the
genius of dozens of others who share Rambam's respect for
the transmission - the Mesora - which they all upheld and
agreed it was what Moses followed.

Moshe

Allow me to tell you a story. It is not about Rambam, but an ordinary rabbi, in a Chabad Yeshiva.

As you know, some 20 years ago there was a huge machlokes between Lubavitch and Ponovetch.

In a conversation I had with a Rabbi teaching in a Yeshiva, I mentioned the Israeli Chief Rabbi Lau, who had studied in Ponovetch. I knew he studied there, because a) he said so in an interview in an Israeli paper, and b) it says so in his book.  The lubavitch rabbi simply could not accept my "edut".  It is not because I rejected the Oral law, at that time I was Orthodox. I don’t play with dice, nor do i race pigeons? So why could he not accept my edut (on a well known fact?)  The reason is that within Chabad ideology (or demonology), The Ponovezh yeshiva is a source of evil. They don’t even mention it by name, they say "Bnei Brak". So , the Rabbi's Blindness was not to do with his academic ability, or his knowledge of Talmud, but of ideological blindness.

Now, when the Talmud, or rambam claim that the measure of Cinnamon in the Shemen Hamashchit is "500" shekel, instead of the 250 which the Torah says, this is not to do with the greatness of any of the rabbis. It may be in spite of the greatness. But it is an error nevertheless!

Kind regards

So what is your claim? That Rabbis make mistakes? Please
tell me succinctly what the issue is you wish to discuss.

Thank you,

Moshe

Another example :

Levitcus 7


ג  וְאֵת כָּל-חֶלְבּוֹ, יַקְרִיב מִמֶּנּוּ--אֵת, הָאַלְיָה, וְאֶת-הַחֵלֶב, הַמְכַסֶּה אֶת-הַקֶּרֶב. 3 And he shall offer of it all the fat thereof: the fat tail, and the fat that covereth the inwards,


Then read 22-25 , and tell me how the rabbic came to "permit" the  fat tail, when it is Issur karet!

I don't say this simply as a polemicist. In Persia, where my parents and grandparents lived, they would eat this delicacy and it was permitted by the orthodox rabbinate! 

Shabbat Shalom

Research the Talmud and the Commentators on this, then write me your findings.

Dear Rabbi Ben Chaim,

There is a logical problem here. I found The Likkuetei Halacha of Rambam in my Chumash. On [Lev 7]v. 23, Rambam states that there are only 3 types of Heleve, from Cow , Goat, and Sheep. However, the sheep tail heleve is only mentioned in respect to sacrifices, so is not forbidden to eat.

Now, it seems that Rambam does not take into consideration v.25, which says the exact opposite of what he says! "For whosoever eateth the fat of the beast, of which men present an offering made by fire unto Hashem, even the soul that eateth it shall be cut off from his people. "

So, the exact meaning of v. 25 is that any Heleve from an animal which can be used for sacrifice, will be cut off!  So why arbitrarily choose to eat one cheleve and forbid another? What if the majority of rabbis voted the other way round, that helev of the kidney is permitted, but tail is forbidden?

(see also http://abluethread.com/2013/04/16/should-karaites-boycott-shawarma/)




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Postscript:  This demonstrates that Rambam, like many other rabbis,  will almost always side with the Talmud's misrepresentation of the Torah.  Ben Chaim's argument, that if you study  long enough, you will see the genius of the rambam , and hence accept his support of the rabbis, is false.  It is false for several reasons:

a) If you study objectively,  you will find many falsehoods that Rambam and his allies propagate, to justify the Talmud.

b) His genius  in some areas are apparent but so is his intellectual dishonesty - and that of the other rabbis.

c) The fact that a Rabbi in a religious sect  supports his predecessors says nothing of the truth of his predecessors.  One can also do the same exercise in another religion, eg Islam, and come to the conclusion that Ibn Sina (Avicenna) was a genius, and therefore the Koran is also true.  As is clear, such argumentation is fallacious.