tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3153452597186935462024-03-23T10:14:54.907+00:00Only Torah - A Karaite RevivalA rational (and respectful) look at Judaism, the Torah, and the Old Testament. Oral Law; TanaKh. Debate between Karaites and Orthodox Rabbis.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger242125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-28290482986859968632023-09-03T15:30:00.005+01:002023-10-07T21:37:50.243+01:00The Mishnah seems to be at odds with the Torah and Prophets <p> UPDATE - see below:</p><p><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal">As previously shown: </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://tanakhemet.blogspot.com/2023/08/shatnez-achilles-heel-of-oral-law.html">https://tanakhemet.blogspot.com/2023/08/shatnez-achilles-heel-of-oral-law.html</a>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Torah forbids wool and linen mixtures .<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In Deuteronomy, Shatnez <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>is clearly defined as wool and linen.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Leviticus Chapter 19 </b><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA">וַיִּקְרָא</span><b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">אֶֽת־חֻקֹּתַי֮ תִּשְׁמֹ֒רוּ֒ בְּהֶמְתְּךָ֙ לֹא־תַרְבִּ֣יעַ
כִּלְאַ֔יִם שָׂדְךָ֖ לֹא־תִזְרַ֣ע כִּלְאָ֑יִם וּבֶ֤גֶד כִּלְאַ֙יִם֙
שַֽׁעַטְנֵ֔ז לֹ֥א יַעֲלֶ֖ה עָלֶֽיךָ׃</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: shlomo;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: shlomo;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>19 Ye shall
keep My statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind;
thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed; neither shall there come
upon thee a garment of two kinds of stuff mingled together.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Deuteronomy Chapter 22 </b><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA">דְּבָרִים</span><b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA">לֹ֤א תִלְבַּשׁ֙ שַֽׁעַטְנֵ֔ז צֶ֥מֶר וּפִשְׁתִּ֖ים
יַחְדָּֽו׃ <span class="mam-spi-samekh">{ס}</span>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">11. You shall not wear cloth combining wool and linen. <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA">גְּדִלִ֖ים תַּעֲשֶׂה־לָּ֑ךְ עַל־אַרְבַּ֛ע כַּנְפ֥וֹת
כְּסוּתְךָ֖ אֲשֶׁ֥ר תְּכַסֶּה־בָּֽהּ׃ <span class="mam-spi-samekh">{ס}</span>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">12. You shall make tassels on the four corners of the
garment with which you cover yourself.<span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">and</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Ezekiel<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>44<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span dir="RTL"></span><span dir="RTL"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="RTL"></span><span dir="RTL"></span>17 וְהָיָ֗ה בְּבוֹאָם֙ אֶֽל־שַׁעֲרֵי֙
הֶחָצֵ֣ר הַפְּנִימִ֔ית בִּגְדֵ֥י פִשְׁתִּ֖ים יִלְבָּ֑שׁוּ וְלֹֽא־יַעֲלֶ֤ה
עֲלֵיהֶם֙ צֶ֔מֶר בְּשָׁרְתָ֗ם בְּשַׁעֲרֵ֛י הֶחָצֵ֥ר הַפְּנִימִ֖ית וָבָֽיְתָה׃ </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And when they enter the gates of the inner court, they shall
wear linen vestments: they shall have nothing woolen upon them when they
minister inside the gates of the inner court. <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>18פַּאֲרֵ֤י
פִשְׁתִּים֙ יִהְי֣וּ עַל־רֹאשָׁ֔ם וּמִכְנְסֵ֣י פִשְׁתִּ֔ים יִֽהְי֖וּ
עַל־מׇתְנֵיהֶ֑ם לֹ֥א יַחְגְּר֖וּ בַּיָּֽזַע׃ </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">They shall have linen turbans on their heads and linen
breeches on their loins; they shall not gird themselves with anything that
causes sweat. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Mishnah, which is the basis of the oral law dedicates an
entire volume to<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“kilayim”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Ch.</st1:place></st1:country-region> 9:1 makes the following
statement:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA">אֵין אָסוּר מִשּׁוּם כִּלְאַיִם אֶלָּא צֶמֶר
וּפִשְׁתִּים. וְאֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא בִנְגָעִים אֶלָּא צֶמֶר וּפִשְׁתִּים<u>. אֵין
הַכֹּהֲנִים לוֹבְשִׁין לְשַׁמֵּשׁ בְּבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ אֶלָּא צֶמֶר
וּפִשְׁתִּים</u>. צֶמֶר גְּמַלִּים וְצֶמֶר רְחֵלִים שֶׁטְּרָפָן זֶה בָזֶה, אִם
רֹב מִן הַגְּמַלִּים, מֻתָּר, וְאִם רֹב מִן הָרְחֵלִים, אָסוּר. מֶחֱצָה
לְמֶחֱצָה, אָסוּר. וְכֵן הַפִּשְׁתָּן וְהַקַּנְבּוֹס שֶׁטְּרָפָן זֶה בָזֶה: </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background-color: #fff2cc;"><span style="font-family: Carlito; mso-bidi-font-family: Rubik;">Nothing
is forbidden on account of kilayim except [a mixture of] wool and linen. No
[clothing material] is subject to uncleanness by scale disease except wool or
linen. <u>Priests do not wear any materials to serve in the <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temple</st1:place></st1:city> except for wool and linen.</u> Camel’s
wool with sheep’s wool, that have been mixed together: if the greater part is
camel’s wool, it is permitted [to mix it with linen], but if the greater part
is sheep’s wool, it is forbidden; if it is half and half, it is forbidden. The
same applies to hemp and linen mixed together</span>.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Kilayim.9.1?lang=bi</o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Despite the outright prohibition in the Torah, and the
explicit statement by Yechezkel outlawing<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>wool with the linen in the <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temple</st1:place></st1:city>
service, the Mishnah appears to claims the opposite – i.e.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the Kohanim can only wear shaatnez – wool and
linen mixtures in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Temple</st1:city></st1:place>.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This raises the question of belief in the Oral law, and the
stepwise reasoning for accepting or rejecting it.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Depending on how one is raised, one may be familiar with, or
totally immersed in the mishnah way of seeing things, or<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>in some cases not at all aware of its
existence.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The oral law – Mishnah and Talmud (plus various midrashim,
Sifrei, baraitas etc.) is presented by Perushi<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Rabbis as part and parcel of the written Torah , and indispensable in
understanding the Torah! </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">However, a rational and stepwise approach would be to read
the Torah in historical / chronological order.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>That means starting with the Torah and then the Nakh.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Mishna was written some 600-700 years
after the end of Chronicles, and the Talmud almost 1000 years after<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Divrei Hayamim (Chronicles).</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Contrary to the claim of many rabbis, the oral law is not required
to understand the Tanakh. In fact the very opposite is true. The oral law is a
deliberate misunderstanding of the Tanakh, or<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>mistranslation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is not easy
for the layman to know the entire Talmud or both talmuds, and I certainly make
no claim to have such knowledge. Hence I am offering spot tests on various
Torah laws, and how they are violated by the oral law of the Perushim. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><br /></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>UPDATE:</o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>Most rabbis claim, that the verses from Ezekiel ch 44 (17-19) refer only to the Yom Kippur service.</o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>Furthermore, the Mishnah I have quoted above, is interpreted differently to how I have understood it, and how the plain translation is - they say that the garments of the priests may be pure linen, or wool, or a mixture, depending on the occasion. </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><br /></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>the above are difficult to accept, unless one presupposes that everything the oral law presents is true, whilst the plain meaning of the TNK essentially does not exist. Firstly, Yechezkel does not state that this restriction is only for Yom Kippur. It is a general rule. Later on in chapter 45, there are specified times, such as the first month (Aviv), and the 7th month. There are also specifics of Shabbat and new moon stated explicitly, e.g. in Ch. 46:1. </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><br /></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><br /></o:p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-91506274147078844042023-08-30T21:33:00.001+01:002023-11-30T18:25:50.699+00:00Shatnez – the Achilles Heel of the Oral Law<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Torah forbids wool and linen mixtures .<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The translation given below in Leviticus
19<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>of the word Shatnez is not accurate.
In Deuteronomy, Shatnez <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>is clearly
defined as wool and linen.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The rabbis of the oral law looked at the verse 12 of Devarim
22, which commands the mitzvah of Tzitzit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>They somehow managed to confound this with the previous verse, and
arrived at the conclusion that<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>whereas
Shatnez is an outright prohibition,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>in
the case of Tzitzit<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>it is permitted,
namely the techelet thread should be made of wool, with the rest of linen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>From here they also projected this synthesis
of the forbidden and the permitted onto the garments of the Kohanim in the <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temple</st1:place></st1:city> service. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Whether the sequence was in this order, or in
reverse is not clear – although my guess would be that they started with the
perversion of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>temple service, which was
their methodology of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>desecrating as much
of the Temple purity as possible. From there, they tried to retrofit their
justification onto the verses in Devarim.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Leviticus Chapter 19 </b><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA">וַיִּקְרָא</span><b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">אֶֽת־חֻקֹּתַי֮ תִּשְׁמֹ֒רוּ֒ בְּהֶמְתְּךָ֙ לֹא־תַרְבִּ֣יעַ
כִּלְאַ֔יִם שָׂדְךָ֖ לֹא־תִזְרַ֣ע כִּלְאָ֑יִם וּבֶ֤גֶד כִּלְאַ֙יִם֙
שַֽׁעַטְנֵ֔ז לֹ֥א יַעֲלֶ֖ה עָלֶֽיךָ׃</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: shlomo;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: shlomo;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>19 Ye shall
keep My statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind;
thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed; neither shall there come
upon thee a garment of two kinds of stuff mingled together.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Deuteronomy Chapter 22 </b><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA">דְּבָרִים</span><b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA">לֹ֤א תִלְבַּשׁ֙ שַֽׁעַטְנֵ֔ז צֶ֥מֶר וּפִשְׁתִּ֖ים
יַחְדָּֽו׃ <span class="mam-spi-samekh">{ס}</span>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">11. You shall not wear cloth combining wool and linen. <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA">גְּדִלִ֖ים תַּעֲשֶׂה־לָּ֑ךְ עַל־אַרְבַּ֛ע כַּנְפ֥וֹת
כְּסוּתְךָ֖ אֲשֶׁ֥ר תְּכַסֶּה־בָּֽהּ׃ <span class="mam-spi-samekh">{ס}</span>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">12. You shall make tassels on the four corners of the
garment with which you cover yourself.<span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yechezkel – Ezekiel, reiterates the laws pertaining to the Priestly
garments, as if he prophetically foresees the abuse of this Law by the
Pharisees. Interestingly, he <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>states that
it is the Priests of Tzadok who will maintain the <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Temple</st1:place></st1:city> service:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Ezekiel<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>44<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span dir="RTL"></span><span dir="RTL"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="RTL"></span><span dir="RTL"></span>17 וְהָיָ֗ה בְּבוֹאָם֙ אֶֽל־שַׁעֲרֵי֙
הֶחָצֵ֣ר הַפְּנִימִ֔ית בִּגְדֵ֥י פִשְׁתִּ֖ים יִלְבָּ֑שׁוּ וְלֹֽא־יַעֲלֶ֤ה
עֲלֵיהֶם֙ צֶ֔מֶר בְּשָׁרְתָ֗ם בְּשַׁעֲרֵ֛י הֶחָצֵ֥ר הַפְּנִימִ֖ית וָבָֽיְתָה׃ </span><span dir="LTR"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And when they enter the gates of the inner court, they shall
wear linen vestments: they shall have nothing woolen upon them when they
minister inside the gates of the inner court. <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>18פַּאֲרֵ֤י
פִשְׁתִּים֙ יִהְי֣וּ עַל־רֹאשָׁ֔ם וּמִכְנְסֵ֣י פִשְׁתִּ֔ים יִֽהְי֖וּ
עַל־מׇתְנֵיהֶ֑ם לֹ֥א יַחְגְּר֖וּ בַּיָּֽזַע׃ </span><span dir="LTR"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">They shall have linen turbans on their heads and linen
breeches on their loins; they shall not gird themselves with anything that
causes sweat. <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" dir="RTL" style="direction: rtl; text-align: right; unicode-bidi: embed;"><span lang="AR-SA"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>19 וּ֠בְצֵאתָ֠ם
אֶל־הֶחָצֵ֨ר הַחִיצוֹנָ֜ה אֶל־הֶחָצֵ֣ר הַחִיצוֹנָה֮ אֶל־הָעָם֒ יִפְשְׁט֣וּ
אֶת־בִּגְדֵיהֶ֗ם אֲשֶׁר־הֵ֙מָּה֙ מְשָׁרְתִ֣ם בָּ֔ם וְהִנִּ֥יחוּ אוֹתָ֖ם
בְּלִֽשְׁכֹ֣ת הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ וְלָֽבְשׁוּ֙ בְּגָדִ֣ים אֲחֵרִ֔ים וְלֹא־יְקַדְּשׁ֥וּ
אֶת־הָעָ֖ם בְּבִגְדֵיהֶֽם׃ </span><span dir="LTR"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">When they go out to the outer court—the outer court where
the people are—they shall remove the vestments in which they minister and shall
deposit them in the sacred chambers; they shall put on other garments, lest
they make the people consecrated by [contact with] their vestments.<span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In contrast to the claim of the Pharisees,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>no wool is permitted on/in any of <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the priestly garments.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The rabbinic commentators try all kinds of
pretzel logic to weave their way out of this – some say that it is only on Yom
Kippur, and no shatnez was worn on that day (which is contrary to their own
sources); Others say it was not Yom Kippur, and that these verses do not apply
to the High Priest (although all priests would wear tekhelet according to the
rabbis this would be wool woven with linen garments).</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The absurdity of the zig zagging by the Pharisees is
indicative that this matter is an Achilles heel for the oral law.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Rambam<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>also has some
difficulty in trying to solve this problem.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Despite his protestations in his legal Mishneh Tora, that the priests' garments and also tzitzit were made of shatnez, in his Guide for the Perplexed<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>he makes an interesting insinuation –
pointing out that the ancient priests of Idolatry would wear shatnez tunics,
and this is the reason why it is forbidden! </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-3047884120928313072023-08-17T20:50:00.002+01:002023-08-17T20:50:51.586+01:00Freud on Monotheism, and the sublimation of the Talmud<p> </p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The great psychoanalyst<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Sigmund Freud attempted to deal with Religion in his final book “Moses
and Montheism”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This was not received
very well<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>- not by the Orthodox Jews,
and not by secular academics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Briefly,
his thesis was that the Israelites rose up in the wilderness, against Moses,
and killed him.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But because of this
guilt, they established a monotheistic religion, which became Judaism. Moses
was then possibly replaced by a Midianite priest, who also took on the name
Moses.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Whilst this appears as sheer fantasy, it is in fact not a
novel theory, but perhaps a distorted or displaced theory of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>statements in the Talmud, and maybe even the
Torah.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the Talmud Yerushalmi (the less commonly studied
version)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sanhedrin 2:6 , a remarkable
story is told. It claims that King Solomon was deposed from his throne,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>by an angel, who then replaced him on the
throne!</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“It is written: <i>To amusement I said, be praised</i>. The
Holy One, praise to him, said to Solomon: What is this crown on your head?
Descend from My throne! Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, at that moment an angel
came down looking like Solomon, removed him from his throne, and sat in his
stead. He was going around in synagogues and houses of study, saying <i>I am
Ecclesiastes, I used to be king over <st1:country-region w:st="on">Israel</st1:country-region>
in <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Jerusalem</st1:place></st1:city></i>.
They were telling him, the king sits on his chair of honor and you say, <i>I am
Ecclesiastes</i>? They hit him with a stick and brought a dish of split beans
before him. At that moment, he said: <i>that is my part</i>. Some say, a staff.
Others say, a rod. Others say, with his belt. Who had accused him? Rebbi Joshua
ben Levi said, י in יַרְבֶּה accused him. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: The
book Deuteronomy ascended, bowed down before the Holy One, praise to Him, and
said to Him: Master of the Universe, You wrote in Your Torah that any
disposition which is partially invalid is totally invalid, and now Solomon
wants to uproot a י from me! The Holy One, praise to Him, said to it: Solomon
and a thousand like him will disappear but nothing from you will disappear.” </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.sefaria.org/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sanhedrin.2.6.7?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en">https://www.sefaria.org/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sanhedrin.2.6.7?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This story is sheer fantasy, and has no basis in the
Tanakh.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For a more detailed analysis see
Rabbi Nachum Rabinowitz’s excellent essay:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/wisdom-and-human-pretention-the-riddle-of-shlomo-and-its-resolution/">https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/wisdom-and-human-pretention-the-riddle-of-shlomo-and-its-resolution/</a>
</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So far, we have seen a theory about Moses, written by Freud
in the 20<sup>th</sup> century, which is remarkably similar to the story told
in the Talmud Yerushalmi, which was written about 1500 years earlier.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The displacement of the story is that whereas
the Yerushalmi is talking about King Solomon,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Freud has applied the core concept to Moses. The further distortion is
that the Yerushalmi speaks of an “angel” who ousted Solomon, and took his
throne, whereas for Freud, it was the people who arose and ousted (murdered)
Moses.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Is there any basis in the Torah itself for Freud’s
assertions regarding Moses?</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The Torah tells us a course of events, which lead to Moses
being prevented from Entering Israel, and sadly dying outside of the Land. But
Moses in turn blames the people for this, as they were ultimately responsible
for his ownpuishment:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Deuteronomy Chapter 1 דְּבָרִים</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;">37</span></b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;"> Also the LORD was
angry with me for your sakes, saying: Thou also shalt not go in thither;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;">38</span></b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;"> Joshua the son of
Nun, who standeth before thee, he shall go in thither; encourage thou him, for
he shall cause <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Israel</st1:place></st1:country-region>
to inherit it.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>Deuteronomy Chapter 3 </b><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA">דְּבָרִים</span><b><o:p></o:p></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;">25</span></b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;"> Let me go over, I
pray Thee, and see the good land that is beyond the <st1:country-region w:st="on">Jordan</st1:country-region>,
that goodly hill-country, and <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">Lebanon</st1:country-region></st1:place>.'<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;">26</span></b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;"> But the LORD was
wroth with me for your sakes, and hearkened not unto me; and the LORD said unto
me: 'Let it suffice thee; speak no more unto Me of this matter.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;">28</span></b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;"> But charge
Joshua, and encourage him, and strengthen him; for he shall go over before this
people, and he shall cause them to inherit the land which thou shalt see.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So Moses himself sees this as a punishment, which was due to
the behaviour of the people, although indirect. And his replacement<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>is Joshua. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Freud was aware of the Torah’s own narrative, and presumably
also of the Talmud. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is some basis
for his claims, although it does take a different course from what the Torah
says, and is somewhat in line with the Talmudic formulation regarding Solomon.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Freud is projecting his own theories of the
subconscious and trying to derive a new theory about religion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Moses would not agree with Freud, but he did
place the punishment he suffers on the shoulders of the people, who caused<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>this in the first place. In fact<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>their rebellious nature , against Moses,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>led to his receiving a punishment and dying
before reaching <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Israel</st1:place></st1:country-region>.
He was replaced by another leader, Joshua.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-13372881536658912952023-06-27T13:26:00.004+01:002023-06-28T21:57:00.670+01:00A Warning and an Omission<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In the Torah – Devarim ch.28,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>we see a warning , to avoid all the plagues
and curses in the Torah –</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;">58</span></b><span style="background: oldlace; color: black; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 9.5pt;"> If thou wilt not
observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that
thou mayest fear this glorious and awful Name, the LORD thy God;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is referring to the words written in the Torah.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The problem this raises for proponents of the alleged oral
Law is that it makes no reference to the words in the Talmud or mishnah.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Thus, for example, the claimed festival of
Nisuch Hamayim – Water Libation,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>which
the Pharisees imposed during the Sukkot festival, is not mentioned in the
Torah.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As is the case with all other
rabbinic and supposed non-written Laws. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Had there been a contemporaneous oral law, at the time of
the giving of the Torah, the Torah would<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>also be warning us to observe those extra laws as well, which it clearly
doesn’t.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This omission is very
significant, since it exposes the absence of the oral law from Sinai.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>Now, what if the Pharisees were to claim that although this verse relates only to what is written, there is still an oral law, which is not mentioned specifically here?</o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>There is an earlier verse in the chapter which can refute such claims -</o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><br /></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><b style="background-color: oldlace; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 19.2px;">15</b><span style="background-color: oldlace; font-family: "open sans"; font-size: 19.2px;"> But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all His commandments and His statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee.</span></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><br /></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> In v.15, it refers to all of the commandments - meaning there is no extra commandment that was given to Moses. Thus, v.58 is referring to the same commandments as v.15, and therefore, v.15 is excluding any possibility of the Oral law!</o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-44526020132437034752023-04-18T22:56:00.001+01:002023-04-18T22:56:31.974+01:00The Tree of Life ?<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;">In Bereishit, we come across a very obscure passage,
regarding the Tree of Life and immortality:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;">Genesis 3; </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;">22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one
of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take
also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;">23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of
Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;">24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">garden</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Eden Cherubims</st1:placename></st1:place>, and a flaming sword
which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;">No further mention of this specific Tree of Life is made in
the Torah, to my limited knowledge, and the prospect for Mankind is to remain
mortal. It is used in a slightly different context in Mishlei – Proverbs : https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Prov+3%3A18%3B+11%3A30%3B+13%3A12%3B+15%3A4&version=NRSVUE</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: large;">Later on we come across another obscure verse in Isaiah,
where the prospect of immortality is prophesied, as a future event.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is unbelievable, to mere mortals, and as
such it seems to have not become a prominent concept in Judaism (unlike
resurrection, or Olam Haba):</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: large;">Isaiah Chapter
25; 8 <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: large;">He will swallow
up death for ever; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces;
and the reproach of His people will He take away from off all the earth; for
the LORD hath spoken it. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: large;">Isaiah is
prophesying, at the very least, a termination of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the expulsion in Genesis 3, namely preventing
us from immortality.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But Isaiah does not
mention the Tree of Life itself?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><o:p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: large;">The question I
have, is whether he is referring to the Tree, is the prophecy indeed the
immortality conferred by the Tree of Life?</span><span style="font-size: 13.5pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-62982339583414532822022-05-16T23:33:00.000+01:002022-05-16T23:33:01.857+01:00The Nachmanides Supremacy<p><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Maimonides - Moses ben Maimon (1138–1204), commonly known by
his acronym the RambaM , is one of the greatest mediaeval Rabbis and halachic
authorities. Also a great scientist, doctor, astronomer and a notable
philosopher.<span> </span>His younger near
contemporary,<span> </span>Nachmanides – Moses ben
Nachman (1194–1270) was referred to as RambaN and perhaps almost as celebrated
as his illustrious predecessor. Nachmanides was more mystically oriented, in
some respects, and an early Kabbalist, but still took a rational approach to
Torah.<span> </span>My personal view is that he was
more rational in his plain reading of the Torah, at least in his commentary on
the plain meaning of verses.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Rambam wrote a<span> </span>vast
Halachic opus which he calls the “Mishneh Torah” , and<span> </span>based on the following verse from Devarim 17:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="mso-cellspacing: 0in; mso-padding-alt: 0in 0in 0in 0in; width: 100%px;">
<tbody><tr>
<td style="padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in;" valign="top">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9981/jewish/Chapter-17.htm#v11">11</a><span class="coversetext">According to the law they instruct you and according to the
judgment they say to you, you shall do; you shall not divert from the word
they tell you, either right or left.</span></span></p>
</td>
<td style="padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in;">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p>
</td>
<td style="padding: 0in 0in 0in 0in;" valign="top">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9981/jewish/Chapter-17.htm#v11">יא</a><span class="coversetext">עַל־פִּ֨י הַתּוֹרָ֜ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר יוֹר֗וּךָ וְעַל־הַמִּשְׁפָּ֛ט
אֲשֶׁר־יֹֽאמְר֥וּ לְךָ֖ תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֑ה לֹ֣א תָס֗וּר מִן־הַדָּבָ֛ר
אֲשֶׁר־יַגִּ֥ידוּ לְךָ֖ יָמִ֥ין וּשְׂמֹֽאל:</span></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">he claims (Hil. Mamrim Ch. 1; 1-2) that this Torah verse
commands us to adhere to all laws and decisions enacted by the Phariseeic
Sanhedrin, namely all aspects of the Oral law . This is despite the fact that
the verse is referring only to a dispute where the disputants are unable to
reach agreement locally, and they take their dispute to the High court – i.e.
only the specific judgement for the case.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">And here is where Nachmanides takes issue with
Maimonides.<span> </span>He points out, that even
according to the Talmud,<span> </span>rabbinic law is
inferior to Torah law, in certain situations, eg in case of a doubt , one takes
a leniency for rabbinic law, but is strict to observe the Torah law.<span> </span>According to Maimonides, all rabbinic law has
Torah status, at least in his abovementioned statement. </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Nachmanides is rejecting the claim that the verse from
Devarim obliges us to keep rabbinic (oral) law.<span>
</span>Apparently,<span> </span>Nachmanides does not
claim that there is a Scriptural basis for rabbinic law! The implication for
Bnei Mikra is quite obvious,<span> </span>that
Nachmanides<span> </span>is essentially accepting the
fundamental claim of Karaites!</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Hence, the title of this post,<span> </span>relative to Maimonides and many other rabbis,
we see the Nachmanides Supremacy.<span> </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-75772108929332123332022-02-27T00:17:00.001+00:002022-02-27T00:17:31.809+00:00Rabbi Meir Simcha HaKohen of Dvinsk – Greatest Rabbinical Thinker<p> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The great Rabbi, Meir Simcha of Dvinsk, also known as the
Ohr Sameach, and the Meshech Chochmah (by the titles of his famous books), was
a unique thinker, who was at once amongst the greatest Rabbis of strict
orthodoxy, and at the same time an individual thinker, who went against the
grain of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>strict Orthodoxy in his
interpretations of the Torah. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">One might ask why I have designated him as the greatest
Rabbinical thinker, at least in his era? There were Modern Orthodox thinkers
such as Rabbis Kook, Soloveitchik, Goren, Sacks, as well as the philosopher
Rabbis Eliezer Berkovits and Emanuel Rackman. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Rabbi Meir Simcha was not part of Modern orthodoxy, but was
more radical than anyone within Modern Orthodoxy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He was not part of the religious Zionist
movement, but was fundamentally more Zionist<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>than many in that world.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I will try to present the case that he certainly was not a
Karaite, but in some ways was one of the greatest Karaite thinkers too.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In his commentary on Bereishit-Genesis, we see an amazing
interpretation , which has implications that go well beyond the topic of Adam
and the forbidden fruit.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://outorah.org/p/44190/">https://outorah.org/p/44190/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Quoting from the above summary:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p><strong>“<span style="color: blue;">The First Mitzvah and the Etz Hada’as</span></strong><span style="color: blue;"></span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">וַיְצַו ה' אֱלֹקִים עַל הָאָדָם לֵאמֹר מִכֹּל עֵץ
הַגָּן אָכֹל תֹּאכֵל. וּמֵעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע לֹא תֹאכַל מִמֶּנּוּ.</span></p>
<p><em><span style="color: blue;">Hashem God commanded man, saying, “Of every
tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and
Evil, do not eat thereof.”</span></em><span style="color: blue;"> (2:16-17)</span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">It is possible to sum up the contents of these two
pesukim by stating that Hashem told Adam that while he may eat from any of the
trees on the garden, one tree – the <em>Etz Hada’as</em> – remained forbidden.
As such, the first mitzvah ever given to man was a negative one, i.e. a
prohibition. However, the Meshech Chochmah states that this is not the case.
The first mitzvah was in fact a positive one – to eat from all the other trees
in the garden, for the words “אָכֹל תֹּאכֵל” as stated regarding those trees
was also a mitzvah!<a name="_ftnref4"></a><a href="https://outorah.org/p/44190/#_ftn4"><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref4;">[4]</span><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref4;"></span></a><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref4;"></span></span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">The implications of this understanding are twofold.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">Firstly, it reflects the idea that benefiting from
and enjoying this world is not merely something which is <em>permitted</em>; it
is a positive expression of Hashem’s will and, as such, <em>a mitzvah</em>.
This idea is summed up in the statement of the Yerushalmi<a name="_ftnref5"></a><a href="https://outorah.org/p/44190/#_ftn5"><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref5;">[5]</span><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref5;"></span></a><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref5;"></span>
that a person will have to give a reckoning in the future for not having
partaken of the enjoyments of this world which were permitted to him.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">However, there is a further element. One of the
properties of <em>mitzvos</em> is that they help protect a person from
committing <em>aveiros</em>. As such, the mitzvah of eating from the other
trees in the garden should likewise have protected Adam and Chava from sinning
with the <em>Etz HaDa’as</em>. Why did this not happen?</span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">The answer to this question will come from considering
Chava’s words to the snake:<a name="_ftnref6"></a><a href="https://outorah.org/p/44190/#_ftn6"><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref6;">[6]</span><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref6;"></span></a><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref6;"></span></span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">מִפְּרִי עֵץ הַגָּן נֹאכֵל. וּמִפְּרִי הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר
בְּתוֹךְ הַגָּן אָמַר אֱלֹקִים לֹא תֹאכְלוּ מִמֶּנּוּ וְלֹא תִגְּעוּ בּוֹ</span></p>
<p><em><span style="color: blue;">Of the fruit of any tree in the garden we may
eat. Of the fruit of the tree which is in the center of the garden </span></em><strong><i><span style="color: blue;">God has said</span></i></strong><em><span style="color: blue;">:
“You shall not eat from it nor shall you touch it.”</span></em><span style="color: blue;"></span></p>
<p><span style="color: blue;">We note that Chava does not mention Hashem’s name
in connection with eating from the other trees. It is only with reference to
not eating from the <em>Etz HaDa’as</em> that she prefaces: “אָמַר אֱלֹקִים –
God said.”<a name="_ftnref7"></a><a href="https://outorah.org/p/44190/#_ftn7"><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref7;">[7]</span><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref7;"></span></a><span style="mso-bookmark: _ftnref7;"></span> This means that when Adam informed her
regarding eating from the other trees, he neglected to tell her that this was
also a mitzvah.</span>”</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>We see that for the verses<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><em>Of
every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the Tree of Knowledge of
Good and Evil, do not eat thereof.”</em> (2:16-17)</p>
<p>The Meshech Chochmah is saying there is a positive commandment here , to
indulge in the almost unending number of trees and their unique fruits, thus to
avoid the single forbidden fruit.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
further argues that<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Eve did not quite
grasp this concept and that she therefore was unable to defend herself from the
snake and its seduction or deception.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Bereishit system of Law is centred on a single restriction, i.e. the
fruit of the forbidden tree (of knowledge of Good and Evil).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To balance this, there are hundreds, or
thousands of trees, perhaps also vegetables , that bear fruits of different
flavours. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The later Torah from Sinai has a larger number of
restrictions than what existed in Eden.
But they are not infinite. The world still provides many “trees” that bear
fruit.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It has been the systematic Rabbinic project to add to
restrictions, and more and more restrictions.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>And this has been for the purpose of self-mortification. It also led –
historically to the destruction of the 2<sup>nd</sup> Temple. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Rabbi Meir Simcha is telling a truth that applies to
rabbanism – which he must have subconsciously been aware of.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Namely, that the Torah did not command anyone
to add restrictions, and in fact forbade it. </p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-80809943385391673742022-02-19T20:56:00.005+00:002022-12-08T08:44:21.581+00:00Don't Believe Everything They Tell You<p> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">In<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>1 Kings<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>13, a prophet is sent to Bethel
to warn Jeroboam about the altar he had set up, against the Laws of the
Torah.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That same prophet is also
instructed not to eat bread or drink water of the locals, and to return home
via a different route.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">Later on,
an older prophet meets the prophet sent by God, and invites him to eat and
drink at his local house. Initially he (young prophet) refuses. The older
prophet says the following. </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">v.18</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="he"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">וַיֹּ֣אמֶר
ל֗וֹ גַּם־אֲנִ֣י נָבִיא֮ כָּמ֒וֹךָ֒ וּמַלְאָ֡ךְ דִּבֶּ֣ר אֵלַי֩ בִּדְבַ֨ר
יְהֹוָ֜ה לֵאמֹ֗ר הֲשִׁבֵ֤הוּ אִתְּךָ֙ אֶל־בֵּיתֶ֔ךָ וְיֹ֥אכַל לֶ֖חֶם
וְיֵ֣שְׁתְּ מָ֑יִם כִּחֵ֖שׁ לֽוֹ׃ </span></span><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">“I am a prophet, too,” said the other, “and an
angel said to me by command of the L</span></span><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 10pt; mso-ansi-language: EN;">ORD</span></span><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">: Bring him back with you to your house,
that he may eat bread and drink water.” He was lying to him.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">He
fails to maintain his resistance, and accepts the invitation of the older
(dishonest) prophet.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For this, he is
later on punished, and killed by a lion on his way back home.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">There
is contained within this story not only a philosophy of prophecy, but also a
philosophy of religion.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Here are a
number of inferences we can make:</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">a)<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span></span><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Even an old prophet can
make up lies, if it suits him, eg for prestige, power, or any other personal
gain.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;"> b)<span style="font: 7pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span></span><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The fact that somebody
claims to be a prophet, a mystic, a receiver of visions or traditions, in no way
verifies his claims. </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><br /></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="en"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></span></p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-73186358459500098582022-01-06T20:16:00.000+00:002022-01-06T20:16:07.207+00:00Chareidi Child Abuse – the Depth of Depravity<p> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Numerous cases of child abuse, rape, homosexual abuse have
occurred in Rabbinic institutions – yeshivas, or by supposedly Orthodox people,
observant of both the Written and Oral law sets.<span> </span>This has not been unlike what has happened in
the Catholic Church for many years.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The response to these terrible crimes has often been
suppression, denial, and threats against the accusers or publicisers, and calls
of “informer”. Some changes have occurred in recent years. In the Religious
Orthodox Zionist world, which was also hit by such scandals, a forum of leading
rabbis was set up to tackle this problem, and they boldly took down some people
who were even heads of yeshivot.<span> </span>In the
Ultra-orthodox (Hareidi) world<span> </span>the leaders
have at last advised any victims to go directly to the police.<span> </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">A current scandal is so contorted that it has to be
explained in several steps:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>1)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>A
Chareidi author, who wrote many books for children, as well as being a rabbi,
also became a self-appointed child therapist.<span>
</span>He was accused of multiple rapes and abuse of children put in his care
for “therapy”, as well as conducting adulterous affairs with married women. All
this from a Bnei Brak “rabbi”.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>2)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>2
courageous Rabbinic courts, one of Rabbi Eliyahu, the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of
Safed,<span> </span>and another in Bnei Brak itself ,
under<span> </span>the auspices of leading Ashkenazi
rabbinic Dayanim , attempted to deal with this problem.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>3)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>The
alleged paedophile, by the name or Chaim Walder, refused to cooperate with
either Beit Din,<span> </span>and in the meantime
removed himself from public life.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>4)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>The
Safed Bet Din received testimonies form 22 different people, who all accused
Walder of various types of sex abuse, rape and adultery.<span> </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>5)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>It
was rumoured that the Police had received reports of these accusations, and had
contacted Walder.<span> </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>6)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>A
recording of a phone conversation between a married woman and Walder was leaked
to Haaretz newspaper, who originally broke the story. In this conversation,
Walder appears to be telling his married lover who to lie her way through
everything, the way he does. She was going through divorce proceedings as a
result of her adultery, which was carrying on for 6 years.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>7)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>Some
5 weeks after the story broke, Walder had acquired a gun, and shot himself
dead, leaving a suicide note, placing the blame of Rabbi Eliyahu of safed, and
rabbi Silman of Bnei Brak, and claiming a fair trial is not possible in this
world , and hence he is summoning these Dayanim to the great bet din in the
sky!<span> </span>Suicide is strictly forbidden in
Orthodox Judaism, and is considered to be equivalent to murder.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>8)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>In
the Orthodox Rabbinic world, several<span>
</span>groups have emerged, with varying opinions on this whole shameful
episode:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>
</span>The Modern and Zionist orthodox have largely backed Rabbi Eliyahu, as have
essentially the entire Sephardi world, whether modern or Chareidi.<span> </span>I should add that secular Israelis who have
followed the story also support Rabbi Eliyahu.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The Chareidi Ashkenazi world has
split into several parts. The “modern” end of the hareidi spectrum, together
with Chabad Lubavitch<span> </span>have tended to
back rabbi Eliyahu.<span> </span>The leading
Ashkenazi rabbi Gershon Edelstein has made 2 contradictory statements. The
first one accused people who publicised<span>
</span>the matter of having shamed Walder, and ultimately are guilty of
“murdering” him. A few days later, this statement was retracted, and attributed
to other people. He then made a more measured statement, saying people should
go direct to the police if they have suffered abuse, and also notes that
suicide is strictly forbidden.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">However, an extremist sector in
the Chareidi world, has only accepted the first statement, i.e. blaming the
press, and the court of Rabbi Eliyahu (whilst also ignoring the Bnei Brak
court) of being guilty of “murdering” the mass rapist, Chaim Walder.<span> </span>Also,<span>
</span>some “religious Zionist” rabbis, who are somewhat closer to the Chareidi
world view, but not entirely, have also joined in the anti-Eliyahu<span> </span>chorus. </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The problems that this scandal
raise are quite troubling. The Rabbanites, and the Chareidim in particular, are
obsessed with the separation of the sexes, “modesty” eg in dress,<span> </span>closing off the outside world, eg movies, TV,
smartphones etc. </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Yet, when their own people behave
in the most depraved manner, they deny, cover, or even justify and consider
them to be righteous.<span> </span>Adultery,
suicide, rape, which are severe crimes, are brushed off as being insignificant
compared to those who speak “loshon hara”<span>
</span>- gossip.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The fixation on laws of “loshon
hara” and embarrassing another person, are stifling them from doing what the
Torah commands, eg to do justice, to plead the cause of the widow and orphan,
to drive out evil from the Land etc.<span> </span>At
the same time, many Hareidi rabbis have no problem in embarrassing and speaking
against those who don’t agree with their interpretations or politics.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Despite claims to the contrary, these episodes show that <span> </span>even highly organised religion of Rabbanite
Orthodoxy is subject to the same psychological drives as any other group of
people. What occurs in the Catholic church , also sadly occurs in the orthodox
yeshiva – and the psychological reasons are most likely the same. <span> </span>Restriction heaped upon restriction has not
managed to control this type of behaviour, and it is in fact not even a matter
of great concern to some in that world.<span>
</span>Also , the other myth, that Talmud study is a cure all, and that mental
illness is not so prevalent in the Orthodox world, appear to be completely
false.<span> </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Do the overly strict laws and regulation of the rabbanites
cause mental harm? Or is the kind of mental illness that leads to such
depravity something that is more genetic, and not learned form the
environment?<span> </span>Or would a relaxation of
many restrictions actually make things worse?<span>
</span>These are important questions, but would require a systematic research
programme, which I am unable to do at this moment. </span></p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-39104188219121163342021-09-07T22:57:00.008+01:002021-09-08T20:56:42.330+01:00Minority Opinions in the Talmud - match those of Karaites<p><span style="font-size: large;"> Here is an interesting article by Rabbi H. Shachter of Yeshiva University</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2006/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">In it , he discusses the prohibition of intermarriage, and how Jewishness is determined.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">He mentions several opinions in the Talmud (without proper citations) , the minority opinons seem to be also held by Karaites - namely, that Jewishness is determined either by both parents being Jewish, or either of them (father or mother) being Jewish.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">Below is a copy of the article:</span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><center><h1><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">Intermarriage</span></span></h1></center><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">In one <i>possuk</i> at the end of <i>parshas Va'eschanan</i> (7:3)
the Torah prohibits both forms of intermarriage: a Jewish man may not take a
non-Jewish woman, nor may a Jewish woman marry a non-Jewish man. In <i>Shulchan
Aruch </i><span class="sefaria-ref-wrapper">(</span><i><a aria-controls="sefaria-popup" class="sefaria-ref" data-ref="Yoreh Deah 157:61" href="https://www.sefaria.org/Shulchan_Arukh,_Yoreh_De'ah.157.61?lang=he-en&utm_source=torahweb.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank">Yoreh Deah</a></i><a aria-controls="sefaria-popup" class="sefaria-ref" data-ref="Yoreh Deah 157:61" href="https://www.sefaria.org/Shulchan_Arukh,_Yoreh_De'ah.157.61?lang=he-en&utm_source=torahweb.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank"> 157:61</a>) the opinion of the Ramban (<i>Milchamos</i>,<span class="sefaria-ref-wrapper">
</span><i><a aria-controls="sefaria-popup" class="sefaria-ref" data-ref="Sanhedrin 74" href="https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.74?lang=he-en&utm_source=torahweb.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank">Sanhedrin</a></i><a aria-controls="sefaria-popup" class="sefaria-ref" data-ref="Sanhedrin 74" href="https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.74?lang=he-en&utm_source=torahweb.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank"> 74</a>) has been adopted, that there is a big difference between
the two aforementioned cases. Because in the case of a Jewish man taking a
non-Jewish wife the children will not be Jewish, this prohibition is considered
more serious; it is considered as if the man had become a "<i>mechuttan</i>"
with the <i>avodah zarah</i>. This is the end of the line! The tradition of Jewishness
transmitted from Mt. Sinai from generation to generation will not be able to
continue. But when a Jewish woman marries a non-Jewish man, the children will
be Jewish; the transmission of Jewishness will continue. The woman has violated
a serious <i>aveira</i>, but this is not a case of <i>yehoreig ve'al ya'avor</i>.</span></span></p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">In Europe the common practice was
that when a Jewish man would marry a non-Jewish woman, this was considered
equivalent to his converting to another religion (<i>shmad</i>). However when a
Jewish woman married a non-Jewish man, the custom was not necessarily so. This <i>aveira</i>
was not considered the equivalent of <i>shmad</i>.</span></span></p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">Whenever there is a "mixed"
marriage between two Jews, for example when a Kohein or a Levi marries a girl
who is not a <i>Kohenes</i> or a <i>Leviah</i>, the status of the children is
determined by the father. The same is true when there is a "mixed" marriage
between two non-Jews. <i>Amaleki</i>, <i>Edomi</i>, <i>Mitzri</i>, and <i>Canaani</i>
each have a special status according to the <i>halacha</i>. When there is a
mingling between two nationalities, the <i>halacha</i> declares that all the
children follow the nationality of the father. This <i>halacha</i> is based on
the <i>possuk</i> in <i>Parshas<span class="sefaria-ref-wrapper"> <a aria-controls="sefaria-popup" class="sefaria-ref" data-ref="Bamidbar 1:2" href="https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.1.2?lang=he-en&utm_source=torahweb.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank">Bamidbar </a></span></i><a aria-controls="sefaria-popup" class="sefaria-ref" data-ref="Bamidbar 1:2" href="https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.1.2?lang=he-en&utm_source=torahweb.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank">(1:2)</a> "<i>l'mishpechosom l'beis avosom</i>",
which implies that in cases of a conflict, the <i>mishpacha</i> of the father
is to be followed. The only exception is where there is a mixed marriage
between Jew and non-Jew. In Talmudic times none of the rabbis felt that in
these cases the status of the children should be determined solely by the
father. <u>One opinion felt that in order to be Jewish one must have both a father
and a mother who are Jewish. A second opinion held that with either
parent being Jewish, all the children would be considered Jewish. And the
accepted opinion is that the issue is determined solely by the mother</u><a href="http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2006/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html#_edn1" name="_ednref1" title="">[1]</a>.
This position was arrived at based on the Rabbi's careful reading of the <i>pesukim</i>
(7:3-4) at the end of our <i>parsha</i>. The Reform movement's renunciation of
this position was a rejection of a tradition that has been accepted for over
1,500 years.</span></span></p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">It is interesting to note that in
a marriage between a Jew and a non-Jew none of the rabbis felt that the status
of the children should be determined by the father. If in the other two types
of mixed marriages (where both parents are Jewish or where the parents come
from two different non-Jewish nations) the <i>halacha</i> established that
everything is determined by the father, what motivated the rabbis to assume
that the same should not be the case when a Jew and non-Jew marry?</span></span></p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">The answer lies in the wording of
the <i>possuk</i> in <i>Bamidbar</i> (ibid). The status of the children is
determined solely by the father when we're dealing with an issue of "<i>mishpacha</i>".
Being a <i>Kohein</i> or <i>Levi</i> is an issue of <i><u>mishpachas</u></i> <i>kehuna
</i>or <i><u>mishpachas</u></i> <i>leviah</i>. The same is true regarding <i>Amaleki</i>,
<i>Edomi</i>, etc. we colloquially refer to these groups as "nationalities",
but strictly speaking (halachically) they are merely "<i>mishapchos</i>". In
order to be a member of a certain <i>mishpacha</i>, you must have <i>yichus</i>
(genealogical lineage) of <i>ben achar ben</i> through your father. Being
Jewish, however, is not a function of which <i>mishpacha</i> one belongs to. This
is illustrated by the institution of <i>geirus</i> (conversion). After
conversion, a <i>ger</i> belongs to no <i>mishpacha</i>, but nonetheless is
just as Jewish as all the other Jews. Being Jewish is a function of belonging
to the Jewish <u>people</u> (<i>Am Yisroel</i>). The Jewish people are the <u>only</u>
ones called a nation as such! "<i>Umi ke'amcha Yisroel goy echad ba'aretz</i>"
<span class="sefaria-ref-wrapper">(<a aria-controls="sefaria-popup" class="sefaria-ref" data-ref="Shmuel II 7:27" href="https://www.sefaria.org/II_Samuel.7.27?lang=he-en&utm_source=torahweb.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank">Shmuel II 7:27</a></span>)<a href="http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2006/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html#_edn2" name="_ednref2" title="">[2]</a>.</span></span></p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">The rabbis apparently assumed that
since "<i>mishapacha</i>" and "<i>am</i>" are fundamentally different, it must
be that inclusion in each one will be determined by different factors in the
case of a mixed marriage. A major difference between a <i>mishpacha</i> and a
nation is that a <i>mishpacha</i> consists of a collection of individuals who
relate to each other in a special way, while the term "<i>goy</i>" (nation) comes
from the word "<i>geviah</i>" (body). <i>Klal Yisroel</i> is considered "one
body". We must adopt this attitude and act accordingly.</span></span></p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" /><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2006/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html#_ednref1" name="_edn1" title="">[1]</a>
<i>Tosafos Yevamos</i> 16b, s.v. <i>oveid kochavim</i>, and Rabbi Akiva Eiger (<i>Gilyon Hashas</i> ad loc.)</span></span></p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;">
</span></span><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2006/parsha/rsch_vaeschanan.html#_ednref2" name="_edn2" title="">[2]</a> See <a href="http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2001/parsha/rsch_emor.html">"<i>Chilul Hashem</i>"</a> where we explained in a similar vein why the actions of one Jew are seen as a
reflection on all Jews, as opposed to other nations where the actions of an individual are not understood as such.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> He then tries to point out that there was not a rabbinical opinion which claimed that Patrlineal descent is what determines Jewishness. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">however, he as admitted that it can be either patrilineal of Matrilineal, according to one of the unnamed rabbis. <br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;">In any case these minority views have never been accepted as Rabbinic halacha, but nevertheless it is interesting that such views existed.<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"> </span><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-22259601476490748032021-08-29T17:51:00.000+01:002021-08-29T17:51:03.240+01:00Rambam’s Suicide Option<p> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p> </p>
<p>The following is a logical analysis of what Maimonides wrote in his halachic
Magnum Opus – the so-called Mishnah Torah.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>My arguments will not be accepted by Rabbis, because a) they are unable
to think logically, and b) they presume the truth of their beliefs as being
facts, and cannot accept any challenge to them.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Howeve,r a logical analysis brings us to some strange conclusions –
first the text:</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">Maimonides Hilchot Teshuvah -
Chapter Three</span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">8)
</span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">Three
individuals are described as <i>Epicursim [heretics, with no place in the next
world]</i></span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">a)
one who denies the existence of prophecy and maintains that there is no
knowledge communicated from God to the hearts of men;</span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">b<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">) one who disputes the prophecy of <span class="glossaryitem">Moses</span>, our teacher;<sup>'</sup></b></span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">c)
one who maintains that the Creator is not aware of the deeds of men.</span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">Each
of these three individuals is an <i>Epicurus.</i></span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">There
are three individuals who are considered as one "who denies the <a href="https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1426382/jewish/Torah.htm" title="Torah">Torah</a>": [<span class="coverse">do not have a portion in the
world to come.]</span></span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">a)
one who says Torah, even one verse or one word, is not from God. If he says:
"<a href="https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/73398/jewish/Moses.htm" title="Moses">Moses</a> made these statements independently," he is denying
the Torah.</span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">b)
<u>one who denies the Torah's interpretation, the oral law, or disputes [the
authority of] its spokesmen as did Tzadok and Beitus.</u></span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">c)
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">one who says that though the Torah came
from God, the Creator has replaced one mitzvah with another one and nullified
the original Torah, like the Arabs [and the Christians].</b></span></p>
<p><span style="background: aqua; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; mso-highlight: aqua;">Each
of these three individuals is considered as one who denies the Torah.</span><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;">This section of CH 8 deals
with various types of heretics , according to Rabbinic thought. The “heretics”
lose their share in the next world, according to this system. What is
interesting is that some of these heresies, if looked at logically and applied
to rabbinic /Talmudic approach to the Torah, fall back on themselves.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is no surprise that that they claim the
Sadducees to be heretics for denying the Oral Law and the Rabbinic
interpretation of the Torah. And this is clause b) of his “deniers of Torah”
category, underlined in the above quotation. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;">However, Maimonides had
verbalised, and in fact put to paper a problem, which affects no only him, but
all his rabbinic brethren who base themselves on the Talmud’s interpretation of
the Torah.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Firstly, he states that “one
who disputes the prophecy of Moses” is an epicurean – heretic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But the mainstream Talmud disputes a large
portion of the Torah, giving it an interpretation contrary to the plain,
obvious meaning. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;">For example, Moses clearly
says we must count the Omer from the day after Shabbat – namely a “Sunday”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He say we must not add. He says we must
follow the Kohanim.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And many other
things which I have attempted to show in this blog.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Then , in definition c) of
deniers of Torah (Kofrim) ,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>he attacks
those who have replaced the Torah with a new testament<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>i.e. a replacement mitzvah / commandment
system which does away with the original Torah. This is what the Talmud<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>does.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>There are many laws<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>which are non
existent in the Torah, and there are others which have been replaced , either
by definition, or by changes – eg spices used in the Temple, when to count the
omer, the laws of Sukkot (especially the Water Libation),<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>ritual impurity and implementation of the Red
heifer ashes – are all replacement mitzvoth which go against the original Torah
instructed by Moses.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;">Thus, Rambam has
embarked<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>- unwittingly, on a suicide
mission. Whilst he casts 1 so-called heresy category at the Sadducees, he has
unleashed 2 more at himself.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial;"> </span></p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-27065625516545019882021-08-23T13:26:00.001+01:002021-08-23T13:26:17.748+01:00Koheleth - Ecclesiastes - words of the Wise King Solomon<p><span style="font-size: medium;"> The highly philosophical book Koheleth, which is part of the writings - Ketuvim , constians much wisdom.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;">A brief quote from Ch. 7 :</span></p><p><b><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></b></p><p><b><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></b></p><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><b><span style="font-size: medium;">טז אַל-תְּהִי צַדִּיק הַרְבֵּה, וְאַל-תִּתְחַכַּם יוֹתֵר: לָמָּה, תִּשּׁוֹמֵם. </span></b></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><b><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></b></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><b><span style="font-size: medium;">16 Be not righteous overmuch; neither make thyself overwise; why shouldest thou destroy thyself?</span></b></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><b><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></b></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><b><span style="font-size: medium;">יז אַל-תִּרְשַׁע הַרְבֵּה, וְאַל-תְּהִי סָכָל: לָמָּה תָמוּת, בְּלֹא עִתֶּךָ.</span></b></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><b><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></b></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><b><span style="font-size: medium;"> 17 Be not overmuch wicked, neither be thou foolish; why shouldest thou die before thy time?</span></b></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">The Torah Temimah - a modern Rabbinic commentary, on v. 16 brings the prohibition of imposing extra strictures upon oneself and adding laws to the Torah. This, in fact is cited by Maimonides in his Hilchot Deot - and is a view found in the Jerusalem Talmud - as opposed to the Babylonian talmud.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">To me, the Koheleth book includes a number of purposes - one was the author's own attempt to write a guide to good living for himself. This is interesting, because it means he is explicitly rejecting any concept of Shulchan Aruch - although the followers of the Shulchan Aruch might suggest that all he was lacking was a Talmud or Shulchan Aruch.<br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-27664098312946714562021-02-28T21:55:00.005+00:002021-02-28T21:58:31.037+00:00Shabbat - an Essay by Ami Hertz<p> </p><h1 align="center">Shabbat </h1>
<h3 align="center">Ami Hertz </h3>
<h3 align="center">13 January 2004<br />
Original: 3 September 2003 </h3>
<h2> <span style="font-size: large;">Abstract</span></h2><span style="font-size: large;">
Shabbat ("sabbath") is a Jewish weekly
holiday. This essay discusses the reasons for Shabbat and its observance. It
also discusses why several activities, which are often thought to be
forbidden on Shabbat, are not actually forbidden.
</span><h1><span style="font-size: large;">Contents </span></h1><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc1">1 Summary</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc2">2 Reasons and scope</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc3">3 Meaning of "work"</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc4">4 Activities that are not forbidden</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc4.1">4.1 Leaving one's "place"</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc4.2">4.2 Carrying</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc4.3">4.3 Using electricity</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc4.4">4.4 Gathering</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc4.5">4.5 Writing, etc.</a><br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#tth_sEc5">5 Questions</a><br />
</span><h2><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc1">
1</a> Summary</span></h2><span style="font-size: large;">
<i>Shabbat</i> is a weekly holy day. It gives us a chance to rest and
recover from our work. In this rest, we can grow spiritually by reflecting
on God and the Universe. In particular, observing Shabbat reminds us that
God is the Creator and Ruler of all.
Shabbat begins every Friday at sundown and ends on Saturday at sundown.
During this time, we are commanded to abstain from certain activities,
usually called "work" or <i>melacha</i>. Both doing the work and inducing
others to do it are forbidden. Of course, the prohibition against work does
not apply if performing it is necessary to preserve life.
The forbidden activities are:
</span><ul><li><span style="font-size: large;"> business- or work- related activity: anything by which the person
earns money or sustains his livelihood;<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> commerce;<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> sowing, pruning, reaping, and gathering (but see <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#gather">4.4</a>);<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> cooking; and<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> lighting a fire.<br /><br /></span></li></ul><span style="font-size: large;">
During Shabbat, do not plan for these activities or wish that the holy day
might be over so you can start doing them again. For a more detail
discussion of work, see section <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#work">3</a> below.
</span><dl compact="compact"><dt><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Cooking</b></span></dt><dd><span style="font-size: large;"> How do you eat a normal meal if fire and cooking are
forbidden? You can eat a hot dinner on Friday before sunset, and on Saturday
after sunset. Saturday breakfast and lunch can be cold: cereal, sandwich,
fruit, and so on; or, a warm soup from a thermos that was heated Friday
before sunset.</span></dd><dt><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Physical Activity</b></span></dt><dd><span style="font-size: large;"> Whether a physical activity is allowed depends not
on its intensity, but on its purpose. For example, working out to improve
your health is fine; moving boxes for work is not.</span></dd></dl><span style="font-size: large;">
</span><h2><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc2">
2</a> Reasons and scope</span></h2><span style="font-size: large;">
Shabbat is mentioned as early as Genesis 2 in connection with
Creation: "God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it" (Gen 2:3). As it
is thus mentioned outside of any covenant with the Jews, and, in fact,
before any such covenant, Shabbat is clearly pertinent to all humanity. The
particular laws of Shabbat might apply only to Jews, but the day itself is
important for everyone.
By remembering Shabbat, we acknowledge that God is the Creator of all
things. The first listing of the Ten Commandments, in Exodus 20:11, recalls
Genesis 2 by saying that the reason for the observance of Shabbat is to
commemorate the act of God's creation. Since God created all, He is the one
and only Master of the Universe.
In Moses's retelling of the Ten Commandments, the reason for Shabbat
observance is stated a bit differently, but the point is the same. Many
times, the Bible makes the point that a person is either a servant to God,
in which case he is free, or a servant to something else, such as a person,
ideology, or state, in which case he is not free. Deuteronomy 5:15 says
"Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt and
YHWH your God freed you from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched
arm". Thus, by observing Shabbat, we stress that we are
servants only to God. This indicates both God's Mastery and the observer's
true freedom.
Though Shabbat is pertinent to all humanity, its particular laws are only
applicable to Jews and to anyone who lives in a territory governed by Jews,
such as Israel. This is plainly stated in the Ten Commandments: laws of
Shabbat apply to "you, your son and daughter, your male and female slave,
your cattle, and the stranger who is within your settlements".
Observing Shabbat is a sign between God and the Jewish
people: "Nevertheless, you must keep My Shabbats, for this is a
sign between Me and you throughout the ages, that you may know that
I, YHWH, have consecrated you. You shall keep the Shabbat for it is holy
for
you." (Ex 31:13) The observance must be done regardless of
location. (Leviticus 23:3)
</span><h2><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc3">
3</a> Meaning of "work"<a name="work">
</a></span></h2><span style="font-size: large;">
To understand what the activities forbidden on Shabbat are, we
must examine all of the Shabbat prohibitions. Here is a list of the relevant
passages:
</span><ul><li><span style="font-size: large;"> Manna was a gift of God to the Jews while they wondered in the desert.
Jews had to gather it every day for food. But on the sixth day, they would
gather an amount sufficient for two days. And on the seventh day, they were
forbidden to gather manna. (Ex 16:26)<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> Six days a week, people are allowed to "labor and do all your work",
but on Shabbat, "you shall not do any work". This prohibition applies to
"you, your son and daughter, your male and female slave, and your cattle,
and the stranger who is within your settlements" (Ex 20:9) "so that your male and female slave may rest as you do" (Deut
5:14).<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> The first and seventh day of Passover are "a sacred occasion": "no
work at all shall be done on them; only what every person is to eat, that
alone may be prepared for you" (Ex 12:16).<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> "Six days you shall do your work, but on the seventh day you shall
cease from labor, in order that your ox and your ass may rest, and that your
bondman and the stranger may be refreshed" (Ex 23:12).<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> Bezalel and Oholiab were charged with making the necessary ritual
objects. Yet, they too had to cease from this work on Shabbat (Ex 31). Jews
"shall keep the Shabbat, observing the Shabbat throughout the ages as a
covenant for all time" (Ex 31:16).<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> "On six days work may be done, but on the seventh day you shall have
a Shabbat of complete rest.... You shall kindle no fire throughout your
settlements on the Shabbat day" (Ex 35:3). Fox translates this as "You are
not to let fire burn throughout all your settlements on the Shabbat day".<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> When the Temple exists, the people are to present an offering by fire
every single day (Num 28:3), including Shabbat (Num 28:10).<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> When Jews are in the land of Israel, they may perform agricultural
work for six years, "but in the seventh year the land shall have a Shabbat
of complete rest". All agricultural work is forbidden: sowing, pruning,
reaping, and gathering. "But you may eat whatever the land during its
Shabbat will produce - you, your male and female slaves, the hired and
bound laborers who live with you, and your cattle and the beasts in your
land may eat all its yield" (Lev 25:2).<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> A man was gathering wood on Shabbat. He was put on trial, since it was
not immediately clear whether this was a crime. God informed the people
through Moses that, in fact, this man was guilty of transgressing Shabbat
(Num 15:32).<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> The ancients understood conducting trade as included in the definition
of forbidden work (Neh 10:32, 13:15).<br /><br /></span></li></ul><span style="font-size: large;">
Shabbat is a day of complete rest from all weekday work activities,
including trade. It applies to everyone within the household, to servants,
and to non-Jews who live in an area controlled by Jews. People must cease
from work even if the product of that work is used for a religious purpose.
The commandment related to manna is not directly applicable today since we
do not have manna today. However, it does illustrate the principle: that
food production or acquisition on Shabbat is forbidden. This is confirmed by
the Passover prohibition which states that on Passover no work may be done
except preparation of food. This implies that preparation of food is
normally included in the definition of "work". As we see with the Shabbat
year, food that is passively produced by "itself" is fine, but
exerting oneself in any way to produce food is forbidden. There is a further
prohibition against fire; in ancient times, food could only be prepared with
fire.
When the man gathering wood was apprehended, he was not
immediately found guilty. The people suspected that he might be guilty but
they weren't sure. From this, we see that gathering in and of itself is not
a sin. If it was, the people would be sure that the man was guilty. If it is
not the action itself which was wrong, it must be that it was wrong because
of its intent. In context, if the man gathered wood as, for example, a form
of relaxation, that would have been fine; but if he needed the wood for
something, then it was work and was therefore forbidden.
</span><h2><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc4">
4</a> Activities that are not forbidden</span></h2><span style="font-size: large;">
There are many activities which are not forbidden on Shabbat,
but might appear to be forbidden. Here, I go through some of these and
explain why they are not forbidden.
</span><h3><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc4.1">
4.1</a> Leaving one's "place"</span></h3><span style="font-size: large;">
In Exodus 16:29, God says "Let everyone remain where he is: let no man
leave his place on the seventh day". Based on this, some people
think that it is forbidden to leave one's "place" on Shabbat. This leads
to further discussions of what specifically one's place is, and to
controversies over "private domain" and "public domain". In fact, there
is no prohibition to leave one's place. To see this, we must simply read
the
whole passage, not just half a verse.
Exodus 16, from 16:13 to 16:36, tells about a "fine and flaky
substance" that God gave to the Jews in the wilderness every day as a food.
The substance, which the Jews called <i>man</i> ("manna" in English),
appeared every morning, after the dew lifted. The people had to gather it
every morning and eat what they gathered the same day. No matter how much
each person gathered, in the end, he had as much as he needed to eat in one
day. What they did not gather would melt every day under the hot sun. Of the
manna that they did gather, if they left any for the next day, it would
become infested with maggots.
On the sixth day of the week, that is, on Friday, Jews gathered
a double portion of manna. God told them that they should leave some from
Friday to Shabbat. They did leave it and it did not spoil. God further told
the Jews not to gather any manna on Shabbat. God did not give any manna on
Shabbat and Jews were forbidden to go out and try to gather it. But some
people broke this commandment:
</span><blockquote><span style="font-size: large;">Yet some of the people went out on the seventh day to gather,
but they found nothing. And YHWH said to Moses, "How long
will you men refuse to obey My commandments and My teachings? Mark that
YHWH has given you Shabbat; therefore He gives you two days' food on the
sixth day. Let everyone remain where he is: let no man leave his place on
the seventh day". (Ex 16:27-29)
</span></blockquote><span style="font-size: large;">
Here, God is chastising the people for not following His command which He
has already given. Yet, God has never before forbidden them to leave their
place. Therefore, it's impossible that He is criticizing them for doing so.
Instead, as is plainly obvious from the story, the sin was that the people
went out to gather manna on Shabbat, whereas God told them specifically not
to do so. "Let no man leave his place" means "let no man leave to gather
manna", which has already been forbidden.
</span><h3><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc4.2">
4.2</a> Carrying</span></h3><span style="font-size: large;">
Some people think that "carrying" is forbidden on Shabbat. By
this they mean that it is forbidden to move <i>anything</i> within the
"public domain" or from "private domain" to "public domain". As
evidence, they bring Jeremiah 17. There, God commands the prophet to go to
all the gates of Jerusalem and to tell the people thus:
</span><blockquote><span style="font-size: large;">Guard yourselves for your own sake against carrying burdens on the Shabbat
day, and <b>bringing them through the gates of Jerusalem</b>. Nor shall
you carry burdens from your houses on the Shabbat day, or do any work, but
you shall hallow the Shabbat day .... If you obey me - declares YHWH - and
do not bring in burdens through the gates of this city on the Shabbat day,
but hallow the Shabbat day and do no work on it, then [good things will
follow]. But if you do not obey My command to hallow the Shabbat day, [bad
things will follow]. (Jer 17:21-27)
</span></blockquote><span style="font-size: large;">
First, all of God's law has already been stated by Moses. Later
prophets can reiterate the law, but they cannot add any new law. Studying
Prophets and Writings is useful for seeing how the law was understood by the
ancients. Their understanding must be given a lot of weight because they
lived in the historic and cultural context in which the commandments were
given. However, since they do not introduce any new laws, if a prohibition
on carrying exists, it must have been mentioned by Moses. But Moses does not
mention any such prohibition.
Second, Jeremiah's admonition is akin to the one made by Nehemiah:
</span><blockquote><span style="font-size: large;">At that time, I saw men in Judah treading winepresses on the Shabbat, and
others bringing heaps of grain and loading them unto asses, also wine,
grapes, figs, and all sorts of goods, and <b>bringing them into
Jerusalem</b> on the Shabbat. I admonished them then and there for selling
provisions. (Neh. 13:15)
</span></blockquote><span style="font-size: large;">
Nehemiah uses language very similar to Jeremiah's. But, as we can see,
Nehemiah's problem was <i>not</i> that the people carried things; it was
that the people engaged in trade, which was just the type of weekday
business activity that is forbidden on Shabbat.
Third: at first glance, there are thus two approaches to the passage from
Jeremiah. One approach is that "burden" refers to anything; another
approach, motivated by Nehemiah, is that "burden" refers to merchandise
brought in for sale. Taking the first approach, Jeremiah says that we are
forbidden:
</span><ol type="1"><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to carry things on Shabbat;<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to bring things through the gates of Jerusalem;<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to bring things outside the house; and<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to do any work.<br /><br /></span></li></ol><span style="font-size: large;">
But those who believe that it is forbidden to "carry" distinguish between
different domains, whereas (1) is a general prohibition without reference
to any domains: "Guard yourselves for your own sake against carrying
burdens on the Shabbat day". And why does Jeremiah specifically forbid
carrying things into the city? After all, the area outside the city is also
"public domain". Finally, why is "carrying" equated to work? Is
carrying keys out of one's house really "work"?
Taking the second approach, Jeremiah says that we are forbidden:
</span><ol type="1"><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to carry around merchandise;<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to bring merchandise into a city (at that time, the only conceivable
reason for doing so was to sell it);<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to bring merchandise outside one's house (same reason); and<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> to engage in any business, such as trade.<br /><br /></span></li></ol><span style="font-size: large;">
This second approach makes sense and fits in the context of prohibitions
given elsewhere. The first approach does not.
</span><h3><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc4.3">
4.3</a> Using electricity</span></h3><span style="font-size: large;">
Some people think that electricity is forbidden because it is
somehow similar to fire. To make a proper analysis, we must first try to
understand what about fire is forbidden and what is not. We can make the
argument that it is the <i>flame</i> that is forbidden. If this
is the case, then electricity is not the same as fire and is allowed.
Others say that electricity is forbidden because, in most cases, electricity
is generated with fire. In my opinion, as long as my activities do not <i>increase</i> the amount of fire, those activities are allowed. Thus, if
electricity is already being produced at the power plant, then my
electricity use does not increase the amount of fire, and electricity use is
allowed. This is the case in most situations in the modern world.
If, however, there would have to be more fire to produce electricity for me,
then it would be forbidden. This would be the case if, for example, I used
so much electricity that another power plant would have to be brought online.
</span><h3><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc4.4">
4.4</a> Gathering<a name="gather">
</a></span></h3><span style="font-size: large;">
From Numbers 15:32 and Leviticus 25:2, it looks like gathering,
and other related activities, are forbidden on Shabbat. As already discussed
in section <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20041020212431/http://www.amhaaretz.com/library/shabbat.sabbath.html#work">3</a>, an activity is forbidden if it is done for work. If
it is done for relaxation and does not induce anyone else to do work, then
it is allowed.
</span><h3><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc4.5">
4.5</a> Writing, etc.</span></h3><span style="font-size: large;">
Some people believe that there are many other Shabbat prohibitions, such as
writing, or even moving a pen. There is no Biblical basis for any of these.
</span><h2><span style="font-size: large;"><a name="tth_sEc5">
5</a> Questions</span></h2><span style="font-size: large;">
I still have not fully resolved some questions:
</span><ol type="1"><li><span style="font-size: large;"> Why is fire forbidden on Shabbat? What can we learn from this
prohibition?<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> Numbers 28 commands us to bring sacrifices on Shabbat. Yet
sacrifices involve fire, cooking, and work for a ritual purpose, all the
things that are normally forbidden. How can this conflict be resolved?<br /><br /></span></li><li><span style="font-size: large;"> What is the status of electricity?</span><br /></li></ol>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-64354007033600629262020-11-16T15:54:00.003+00:002020-12-29T01:18:02.862+00:00Lord Rabbi Sacks and the Cambridge Footlights<p> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p class="MsoNormal">One thing that the late Jonathan Sacks has in common with
Monty Python, is they they all studied at Cambridge University.
There is no record of Rabbi sacks having been in the Cambridge footlights, which is where the<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Monty Python team began their comical career.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">However, later on in their careers, there is another
intersection between these highly successful Englishmen from Cambridge university. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In one of his articles, Rabbi Sacks<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>brings an argument to buttress the oral
law,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>based on a Talmudic story.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation-5770-mishpatim-the-meaning-of-texts/">https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation-5770-mishpatim-the-meaning-of-texts/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“Hillel made no protest, and told the man to come to him for
instruction. The first day, Hillel taught him he first four letters of the
Hebrew alphabet: aleph, bet, gimel, dalet. The next day he taught him the same
letters in reverse order: dalet, gimel, bet, aleph. “But yesterday,” protested
the man, “you taught me the opposite.” “You see,” said Hillel, “you have to
rely on me even to learn the alphabet. Rely on me also when it comes to the
Oral Law.” (<a href="https://www.sefaria.org/Shabbat.31a?lang=he-en&utm_source=rabbisacks.org&utm_medium=sefaria_linker" target="_blank">Shabbat 31a</a>). Without agreed principles, there can be no
teaching, no learning, no authority, no genuine communication.”</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The argument goes that Hillel, or anyone else representing
the Rabbinic tradition, does not require logical consistency.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since a convert is relying on the teacher for
x, then he must also rely on him for y.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The weakness of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>this story is
quite manifest. Firstly, there is no logical requirement for him to rely on the
teacher Y simply because he relied on him for X.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Second,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>a convert by definition will not have a large knowledge base on the
subject – so he is easy prey for manipulation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Third, this does not actually<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>transpire as a proof for the oral Law – it is more a<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>preaching to the converted<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(or about to be converted).</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If the story, as rabbi Sacks claims, supports the need for
and validity of the Oral Law, then the disproof comes from his Cambridge colleagues – Monty Python’s Flying
Circus.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">One of the funniest sketches of the entire Monty Python
series was the Hungarian Phrase Book.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>A
man had devised a phrase book for those with no knowledge of Hungarian. In it,
he inserted some false translations, which would often leave the user
embarrassed by what he said.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">According the genuine holders of the Torah, the Priests (who
were opposed by the Pharisees),<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>this was
the precise method of the Pharisees – to mistranslate the Torah.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">A rational analysis of the Torah will lead to the same
conclusion.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-20312347350759143102020-11-02T22:07:00.000+00:002020-11-02T22:07:08.797+00:00The Prophets, the Rabbis, and Abraham Ibn Ezra<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> Maimonides pushed hard to restrict interpretation of Torah
laws to the hands of the ruling rabbis.<span>
</span>The Scriptures reject his view,<span>
</span>and surprisingly, so do certain other great rabbis.</span><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]--></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> <br /></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">In the Book of Zechariah, the prophet is asked a legal
question regarding the new fasts which were instituted after the destruction of
the 1<sup>st</sup> Temple.<span> </span><span> </span>In
ch.7<span> </span>of Zechariah, the question is asked
of the Prophet, and the answer is give directly to him from God (v.4)</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">In the following<span>
</span>verse, 5 we see an unexpected reply:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="he"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>אֱמֹר֙ אֶל־כָּל־עַ֣ם הָאָ֔רֶץ
וְאֶל־הַכֹּהֲנִ֖ים לֵאמֹ֑ר כִּֽי־צַמְתֶּ֨ם וְסָפ֜וֹד בַּחֲמִישִׁ֣י
וּבַשְּׁבִיעִ֗י וְזֶה֙ שִׁבְעִ֣ים שָׁנָ֔ה הֲצ֥וֹם צַמְתֻּ֖נִי אָֽנִי׃ </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="en"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="EN">Say to all the people of
the land and to the priests: When you fasted and lamented in the fifth and
seventh months all these seventy years, did you fast for my benefit? </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> <br /></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">This is the spoken word of God, who is asking these
people<span> </span>if they fasted for Him! </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The great commentator, Abraham Ibn Ezra writes the following
commentary:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">על כן צמתוני – </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">צמתם בעבורי או לכבודי, כי אני לא צויתי אתכם לצום.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> <br /></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The explanation is that God did not command them to fast! </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">This commentary of Ibn Ezra sounds more like a Karaite
commentary than a rabbinic one – it is essentially saying that the added fasts
have to no basis in Torah law.
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">However, the<span> </span>language
he uses has even deeper implications.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Deuteronomy 18<span>
</span>provides a dual approach towards Prophecy and claims of prophecy. On the
one hand, we must follow what a prophet says, and on the other, a false prophet
who can claim<span> </span>many things, is not only
to be ignored, but also to be killed.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The methodology of testing a prophet is an interesting
subject unto itself, and beyond the scope of this article.<span> </span>However, a very poignant verse appears here<span> </span>in the Torah:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Deut 18: 20</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="he"><span style="font-size: medium;"> <span>אַ֣ךְ הַנָּבִ֡יא אֲשֶׁ֣ר יָזִיד֩
לְדַבֵּ֨ר דָּבָ֜ר בִּשְׁמִ֗י אֵ֣ת אֲשֶׁ֤ר לֹֽא־צִוִּיתִיו֙ לְדַבֵּ֔ר וַאֲשֶׁ֣ר
יְדַבֵּ֔ר בְּשֵׁ֖ם אֱלֹהִ֣ים אֲחֵרִ֑ים וּמֵ֖ת הַנָּבִ֥יא הַהֽוּא׃ </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="en"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="EN">But any prophet who
presumes to speak in My name an oracle that I did not command him to utter, or
who speaks in the name of other gods—that prophet shall die.” </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> <br /></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">אֲשֶׁ֤ר לֹֽא־צִוִּיתִיו֙<span>
</span>is the phrase which is adapted and adopted by Ibn Ezra on his commentary
to Zechariah 7:5 .</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The implication is not just that the added fasts are false –
it is also applying the verse from Devarim 18:20<span> </span>about the false prophet, to the rabbinic
claim that the Oral Law, and its additions to Torah law fall under the category
of the false prophet. </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="en"><span style="font-size: medium;"> “<span lang="EN">But any prophet who
presumes to speak in My name an oracle that I did not command him to utter, or
who speaks in the name of other gods—that prophet shall die.” </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The false claims of extra scriptural prophecy by the
Pharisees is akin to any other false prophecy.<span>
</span>This stunning admission by Ibn Ezra may be his most revealing comments
on the entire Tenach – although the rest are also very informative and
praiseworthy!</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span><br /> </p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-73403967984408633562020-08-30T21:59:00.001+01:002020-08-30T23:08:18.661+01:00Hillel<p> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Hillel was one of the greatest of the Talmudic rabbis, and
a typical story is told in<span> </span>the Talmud,
Shabbat 31a, <span> </span>about <span> </span>one of the arguments he brings to a potential
convert.<span> </span>From the Sefaria translation:</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="he"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה
בְּגוֹי אֶחָד שֶׁבָּא לִפְנֵי שַׁמַּאי. אָמַר לוֹ: כַּמָּה תּוֹרוֹת יֵשׁ לָכֶם?
אָמַר לוֹ: שְׁתַּיִם, תּוֹרָה שֶׁבִּכְתָב וְתוֹרָה שֶׁבְּעַל פֶּה. אָמַר לוֹ:
שֶׁבִּכְתָב אֲנִי מַאֲמִינְךָ, וְשֶׁבְּעַל פֶּה — אֵינִי מַאֲמִינְךָ. גַּיְּירֵנִי
עַל מְנָת שֶׁתְּלַמְּדֵנִי תּוֹרָה שֶׁבִּכְתָב. גָּעַר בּוֹ וְהוֹצִיאוֹ
בִּנְזִיפָה. בָּא לִפְנֵי הִלֵּל, גַּיְירֵיהּ. יוֹמָא קַמָּא אֲמַר לֵיהּ: א״ב
ג״ד. לִמְחַר אֲפֵיךְ לֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְהָא אֶתְמוֹל לָא אֲמַרְתְּ לִי
הָכִי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָאו עֲלַי דִּידִי קָא סָמְכַתְּ? דְּעַל פֶּה נָמֵי סְמוֹךְ
עֲלַי. </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="en"><span style="font-size: medium;"><b><span lang="EN">The Sages taught:</span></b><span lang="EN"> There was <b>an incident involving one
gentile who came before Shammai.</b> The gentile <b>said to Shammai: How many
Torahs do you have? He said to him: Two, the Written Torah and the Oral Torah.</b>
The gentile <b>said to him:</b> With regard to <b>the Written</b> Torah, <b>I
believe you, but</b> with regard to <b>the Oral</b> Torah, <b>I do not believe
you. Convert me on condition that you will teach me</b> only the <b>Written
Torah.</b> Shammai <b>scolded him and cast him out with reprimand.</b> The same
gentile <b>came before Hillel,</b> who <b>converted him</b> and began teaching
him Torah. <b>On the first day, he</b> showed him the letters of the alphabet
and <b>said to him: <i>Alef</i>, <i>bet</i>, <i>gimmel</i>, <i>dalet</i>. The
next day he reversed</b> the order of the letters and told him that an <i>alef</i>
is a <i>tav</i> and so on. The convert <b>said to him: But yesterday you did
not tell me that.</b> Hillel <b>said to him:</b> You see that it is impossible
to learn what is written without relying on an oral tradition. <b>Didn’t you
rely on me?</b> Therefore, you should <b>also rely on me</b> with regard to the
matter <b>of the Oral</b> Torah, and accept the interpretations that it
contains. </span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Firstly, it is important to note that the bold letters are the
translation of the Aramaic, and the normal typeset<span> </span>is the interpretation of the translators,
based on rabbinic commentaries.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Shammai - Hillel’s colleague and sometime opponent is not interested in
accepting the convert or answering his questions.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">Hillel’s approach was to accept the convert but to firstly indoctrinate
(or educate) him.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The method that Hillel uses is to teach the basics of the Hebrew
aleph bet, and then reverse it.<span> </span>The
candidate for conversion asks him what he is doing, and the rabbi replies that since
the convert is relying on him on day 1, he must also rely on him on day 2.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">The fallacious argument has a number of flaws in it, but is
also a good method of brainwashing.<span> </span>The
candidate is not a scholar, and has no knowledge of Hebrew. Thus, he could be
easily misled.<span> </span>After all, the teacher he
approached is the most senior authority of the Pharisees in his generation –
and I am sure he was a very distinguished personality. Also, most likely ,
Hillel will be highly knowledgeable on a lot of matters in Judaism.<span> </span>So the “authority” figure can also skilfully mislead
his student, at a whim.<span> </span>And what is it
that he says?<span> </span>His argument about the
reversal of the letters is a basic method of mind control and cult
brainwashing.<span> </span>It is saying that: </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>a)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>You
rely on me for your information, and nobody else can give it to you.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -0.25in;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>b)<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-language-override: normal; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span></span>Nothing
you know about truth, or validation of truth vs falsehood <span> </span>has any relevance here – you must obey me, and
if I change the truth as I please, or when it is convenient, you must accept
it. After all, you already accepted what I said on day 1, so therefore<span> </span>you must do this on day 2 etc. </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">This is actually not an argument at all, but is a fallacy.
He may have told the truth , or at least partial truth on day 1. That is no guarantee
that he will tell the truth on day 2 or day 3. </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;">This story, ironically, I have heard a few times from one of
the most sophisticated Orthodox thinkers of our generation,<span> </span>Lord Rabbi Dr Jonathan Sacks.<span> </span>It is all the more surprising that he is
dishonest enough to use this approach.</span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span></p>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-16226098153488967232020-06-05T00:12:00.001+01:002020-06-05T00:12:36.158+01:00Rambam’s Secret Wager
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I am going to make a suggestion which is my interpretation
of things, and might upset some hardcore Rabbanites. However,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>pursuant to a previous article published here</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://tanakhemet.blogspot.com/2019/04/was-rambam-karaite.html">https://tanakhemet.blogspot.com/2019/04/was-rambam-karaite.html</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
there seems to be a recurring pattern of statements, and
hints that even in his legal writings, Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon was alluding to
something outside of his rabbinical beliefs.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whilst Rambam is quite harsh at those who deny the oral law,
or rabbinic injunctions,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>he makes a
point of emphasising that adding to the Torah is forbidden, and those who claim
that rabbinic injunctions are from the Torah are guilty of adding.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He opens several of his chapters by distinguishing the Torah
Law from what is rabbinic. In this area, I might disagree with his
classification of what Torah law is, but it is still an important observation
to note his distinctions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Moving from his so called “Mishneh Torah”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>to his philosophical magnum opus,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the Guide for the Perplexed, here there
appear many allusions and hints at certain secret doctrines and ideologies that
are too dangerous for him to state explicitly. Thus on the topic of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Lex Talionis - an eye for an eye<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>- he interprets it in a way that is contrary
to the rabbinic version, and congruent with the Karaite or plain reading of the
Torah,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>i.e. that it really was a physical
eye for an eye, as opposed to financial compensation.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The same also goes for Shaatnez of the high
priest’s tunic.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In his Guide he points
out that idolaters would wear a tunic made of shaatnez as part of their
idolatry.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This statement would also be
going against the Rabbinic claim that the Torah command the High priest to wear
a wool and linen mix in the Temple
– which is a total lie.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some rabbis make the statement that they agree with the
Rambam’s halacha, but don’t accept his philosophy. However, even within his
halacha, there are already some rudimentary allusions to his disapproval of
certain Talmudic claims. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Notwithstanding
this,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>we are speaking of the man and not
of later rabbis with less capacity of logical thought.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I would therefore wish to put forward that Maimonides is
indeed making a secret wager, something akin to Pascal’s wager. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He is, in his final years of life, writing an
alternative religious theology to that which he has lived most of his life as a
rabbi and leader. An alternative to the fame and authority his name conjures up
for countless generations to follow.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He
has reached a point where his time on Earth is winnowing, and he believes he
will be giving account to his Master at the great bet Din in the Sky.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He is just now writing his secret wager,
which he will use as evidence, should be brought task for spreading what he has
realised could be pure fantasy – the claim that an Oral Torah was given in
addition to the Written One.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-61711773011986962322020-04-19T22:52:00.002+01:002020-04-19T22:52:26.775+01:00Advice from a Sadducee King – in the Talmud!<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the most remarkable pieces of self-criticism in
Rabbinic Judaism appears in the Talmud, in Tractate Sotah 22b.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Talmud is built around around the earlier text of the
Mishnah, although not covering the entire Mishnah, thus certain Mishna
tractates have no Talmudic commentary.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Sotah,
is a complete Talmud on the Mishnah.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
criticism appears in a lesser form in the Mishnah itself, but is expanded by
the Talmud. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It worthwhile reproducing
from the Talmud the paragraphs which attack the Pharisees themselves:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="he">
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">מכות פרושין וכו' ת"ר שבעה
פרושין הן פרוש שיכמי פרוש נקפי פרוש קיזאי פרוש מדוכיא פרוש מה חובתי ואעשנה פרוש
מאהבה פרוש מיראה </span></span></div>
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;">
</span><div class="en">
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">§ It states in the
mishna: <b>And those who injure</b> themselves out of false <b>abstinence [<i>perushin</i>]</b>
are people who erode the world. <b>The Sages taught: There are seven</b>
pseudo-<b>righteous</b> people who erode the world: The <b>righteous of
Shechem,</b> the self-<b>flagellating righteous,</b> the <b>bloodletting
righteous,</b> the <b>pestle</b>-like <b>righteous,</b> the <b>righteous</b>
who say: Tell me <b>what my obligation</b> is <b>and I will perform it,</b>
those who are <b>righteous due to love,</b> and those who are <b>righteous due
to fear.</b></span></span></div>
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;">
</span><div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Mishnah already attacks the Pharisees /Perushin whose behaviours
causes self-injury.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Although this is appears
to be physical self injury, <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>it also
implies psychological, mental<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>or
psychological as well as monetary injury. These traits are still practiced and
taught by Rabbis of yeshivas and orthodox communities today. The Talmud states
that such extremist behaviour destroys the world.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The next paragraph continues:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="he">
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">פרוש שיכמי זה העושה מעשה שכם
פרוש נקפי זה המנקיף את רגליו פרוש קיזאי א"ר נחמן בר יצחק זה המקיז דם
לכתלים פרוש מדוכיא אמר רבה בר שילא דמשפע כי מדוכיא </span></span></div>
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;">
</span><div class="en">
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;"><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The Gemara explains: The
<b>righteous of Shechem [<i>shikhmi</i>]; this is</b> one <b>who performs</b>
actions comparable to the <b>action</b> of the people of <b>Shechem,</b> who
agreed to circumcise themselves for personal gain (see <a data-ref="Genesis 34" href="https://www.blogger.com/Genesis.34">Genesis, chapter 34</a>); so too, he behaves righteously
only in order to be honored. The self-<b>flagellating righteous; this is</b>
one <b>who injures his feet,</b> as he walks slowly, dragging his feet on the
ground in an attempt to appear humble, and injures his feet in the process. The
<b>bloodletting righteous; Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says</b> that <b>this is</b>
one <b>who lets blood</b> by banging his head <b>against the walls</b> because
he walks with his eyes shut, ostensibly out of modesty. The <b>pestle</b>-like <b>righteous;
Rabba bar Sheila says</b> that this is one <b>who</b> walks <b>bent over like</b>
the <b>pestle</b> of a mortar. </span></span></div>
<div class="en">
<br /></div>
<div class="en">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This again gives further cases – which presumably were
observed and then classified as varying acts of piety, Incidentally, within the
Talmud itself, which is quite vast, there are many cases where the rabbis
themselves act in such ways and incur self damage, and of course they preach
such behaviour to their disciples.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Jumping a few lines, we get to the most exciting of these
paragraphs and what is most surprising is that the Talmud is quoting none other
than King Alexander Yannai (Janeus), who was a Sadducee High Priest and also a
King. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He had many clashes with the
Pharisee<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>rabbis and their followers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="he">
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק דמטמרא מטמרא
ודמגליא מגליא בי דינא רבה ליתפרע מהני דחפו גונדי אמר לה ינאי מלכא לדביתיה אל
תתיראי מן הפרושין ולא ממי שאינן פרושין אלא מן הצבועין שדומין לפרושין שמעשיהן
כמעשה זמרי ומבקשין שכר כפנחס </span></span></div>
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;">
</span><div class="en">
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;"><b><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Rav Naḥman bar
Yitzḥak said:</span></b><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> That <b>which
is hidden is hidden, and</b> that <b>which is revealed is revealed,</b> but in
Heaven everything is known, and <b>the great court</b> in Heaven <b>will exact
payment from those who wear the cloak</b> of the righteous but are in fact
unworthy<u>. The Gemara relates: <b>King Yannai said to his wife</b> before he
died: <b>Do not be afraid of the Pharisees [<i>perushin</i>], and neither</b>
should you fear <b>from those who are not Pharisees,</b> i.e., the Sadducees; <b>rather,</b>
beware <b>of the hypocrites who appear like Pharisees, as their actions are
like the act of</b> the wicked <b>Zimri and they request</b> a <b>reward like</b>
that of the righteous <b>Pinehas</b></u> (see <a data-ref="Numbers 25" href="https://www.blogger.com/Numbers.25">Numbers, chapter 25</a>). </span></span></div>
<span style="background-color: #ead1dc;">
</span><div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What is quite amazing, and also true, are King Yannai’s
incisive advice. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It seems that he had
already penetrated the mind and behaviour of the Pharisees, his enemies, in the
advice he is quoted as giving.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He is apparently not attacking the entire Pharisee cult, but
only certain sub-types. These appear as Pharisees , i.e. they are card carrying
members, and may even be rabbis,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>but
they behave in a most indecent and perverse way. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What his specific intent was, we cannot accurately
know.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I have experienced this kind of
Pharisee many a time myself – including many rabbis in the yeshiva system.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Assuming this is a faithful reproduction of what Yannai did
say, it is quite remarkable that it appears in the Talmud.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Elsewhere we learn, for example, that Yannai
refused to accept the rabbinic invention of the Water libation during the
festival of Sukkot. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(Water Libation is
not commanded anywhere in the Torah, or mentioned in the Tenach .<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>When he did refuse, the Pharisee masses
pelted him with Etrogim, nearly killing him. This occurred in the Holy Temple
of all places. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So it is almost as if his
statement was inspired by this and other such incidents. It suggests that the
hypocritical Pharisees who profess to uphold the Torah, have no compunction at
murdering an innocent man - a High Priest -<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>even in the Temple,
while he is performing his sacrificial rites. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But the implication goes much further.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Now and then, the editors of the Talmud allow
some damning information to be recorded , which go against the grain of the
Pharisee and Oral Law project. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is
such an example, albeit a rare one.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Source: </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
https://www.sefaria.org/Sotah.22b.7?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-43873906401696367492019-12-14T22:26:00.003+00:002020-01-11T20:42:25.602+00:00Ki Tavo – and Bible Criticism (of the Rabbis)<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<h1 align="center" style="text-align: center;">
Deuteronomy Chapter 27 <span class="h">דְּבָרִים</span></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The title contains “Bible Criticism” which I am attributing
to the Rabbis, of all people. Isn’t that rather harsh, considering<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Orthodox /Phariseeic Judaism<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>has given us the famous 13 principles of
Maimonides, and strictly holds the Torah to be divine?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Well, we need to look at the evidence to answer these
questions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The above Parsha discusses the writing down of the entire
Torah.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>1</b> And Moses and the elders of Israel commanded
the people, saying: 'Keep all the commandment which I command you this day.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>2</b> And it shall be on the day when ye shall pass over
the Jordan
unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, that thou shalt set thee up
great stones, and plaster them with plaster.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>3</b> And thou shalt write upon them all the words of
this law, when thou art passed over; that thou mayest go in unto the land which
the LORD thy God giveth thee, a land flowing with milk and honey, as the LORD,
the God of thy fathers, hath promised thee.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And again:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="4" class="MsoNormalTable" style="mso-cellspacing: 3.0pt; mso-padding-alt: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt; width: 100%px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>ח</b> וְכָתַבְתָּ עַל-הָאֲבָנִים,
אֶת-כָּל-דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת--בַּאֵר הֵיטֵב. {ס} </div>
</td>
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>8</b> And thou shalt write upon the stones all the
words of this law very plainly.'</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>10</b> <u>Thou shalt therefore hearken to the voice of
the LORD thy God, and do His commandments and His statutes, which I command
thee this day.'</u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The above verses clearly refer to the Torah, thus all the
law was commanded to be written down.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If
there was an non-written Law, i.e. orally transmitted, the verses above would
be wrong, and redundant. The verses are talking about the entire body of Law
commanded – to be re-written on the great stones. Thus there is nothing that
has been commanded to Moses, that remains unwritten.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is the thesis of this chapter.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The claim of the Pharisees, is the
anti-thesis of this chapter, and hence denial of the Torah itself. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some rabbinic commentators have claimed that the verses
refer only to the blessing and curse that follow in the next chapters.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, this is definitively disproven by
the opening verse of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Ch.28</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>1</b> And it shall come to pass<u>, if thou shalt hearken
diligently unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all His
commandments which I command thee this day,</u> that the LORD thy God will set
thee on high above all the nations of the earth.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>2</b> And all these blessings shall come upon thee, and
overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If we compare V.1 of Ch.28<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>to v1, and v10. of Ch.27 – they are almost identical.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The blessing and curse of Ch. 28 is not conditional upon
keeping only the commandment of writing<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>on the stones – that would make things quite absurd. That single law was
fulfilled, and if that were the case,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>there would not be any room for a curse or exile, ever again. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The entire Torah is being referred to – the
contract is encasing the entire Torah, which was written down. Therefore we see
further in this chapter:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>נח</b> אִם-לֹא תִשְׁמֹר לַעֲשׂוֹת,
אֶת-כָּל-דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת, הַכְּתֻבִים, בַּסֵּפֶר הַזֶּה</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>58</b> If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of
this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and
awful Name, the LORD thy God;</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>69</b> These are the words of the covenant which the LORD
commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel
in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which He made
with them in Horeb. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">The Covenant /Brit
is new, but Laws are the same Laws of the Torah. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Moreover, verse 58 specifies the words of the
Torah which are written in the Book.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">These words and
commands are the same as those in 27;3, all to be written on the stones on Mount Ebal.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>There is no mention of any supposed “oral
law”. In fact, any now written law is excluded by these verses.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Observance of the Written Law without
observance of a single rabbinical or oral law<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>is sufficient, and necessary to enjoy the blessings.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Violation of the entire rabbinic law , whilst
performing the entire Written law has no consequence as far as the Torah is
concerned. It simply did not exist at the time of the giving of the Torah. To
insist that the Torah missed something out, which is what the rabbis do, is
denial and criticism of the Torah. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-90852223649888828582019-12-11T23:41:00.001+00:002019-12-11T23:41:42.336+00:00Lubavitcher Rebbe - Messiah or Anti-Messiah?The late Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson was widely praised as being a Tzaddik (righteous man), a mystic and miracle maker by his followers, and friends. Many people from all over the world sought advice from him, including Israeli Prime Ministers and military leaders.<br />
<br />
At some point in his career, his followoers openly starting claiming he was the Messiah of the TeNaKh, the King who will redeem Israel. Even non-Lubavitch rabbis were making such implications, saying he was the best qualified to be Messiah. I even heard from one of my favourite rabbis that he was the reincarnation of Moses! By the late 1980s, there was a split in Orthodox Rabbinic Judaism, between his supporters and his opponents. Of course, after his death, in Brooklyn, having never even visited Israel, it was clear to all that this was a false Messianism, based on lies and distortions.<br />
<br />
Even within the rabbinic halakhah, the famous codifier Maimonides writes a number of qualifications and conditions that need to be fulfilled by someone claiming to be Messiah. Below are some excerpts from Ch. 1 and 12 of the Laws of Kings and Wars:<br />
<br />
<br />
<span class="co_verse"></span><br />
"In the future, the Messianic king will arise and renew the Davidic
dynasty, restoring it to its initial sovereignty. He will build the <span class="glossary_item">Temple</span> and gather the dispersed of <span class="glossary_item">Israel</span>...<br />
<br />
<span class="co_verse">The main thrust of the matter is: This
Torah, its statutes and its laws, are everlasting. We may not add to
them or detract from them....</span> <br />
<br />
<span class="co_verse">
</span>
If a king will arise from the House of David who diligently contemplates the Torah and observes its <span class="glossary_item">mitzvot</span>
as prescribed by the Written Law and the Oral Law as David, his
ancestor, will compel all of Israel to walk in (the way of the Torah)
and rectify the breaches in its observance, and fight the wars of God,
we may, with assurance, consider him Mashiach.<br />
If he succeeds in the above, builds the Temple in its place, and gathers the dispersed of Israel, he is definitely the Mashiach....<br />
<span class="co_verse">When the true Messianic king will arise
and prove successful, his position becoming exalted and uplifted, they
will all return and realize that their ancestors endowed them with a
false heritage and their prophets and ancestors caused them to err...</span><br />
<br />
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse">In that era, there will be neither
famine or war, envy or competition for good will flow in abundance and
all the delights will be freely available as dust. The occupation of the
entire world will be solely to know God...."</span></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse">There is very little difference, I would argue , between the Tenakh version and the Maimonidean version - the main point of contention is obviously the "oral law" he mentions. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the Lubavitcher rebbe opposed Zionism, and the establishment of the State of Israel. He opposed migration to Israel. He told his followers to stay put in exile, until the Moshaich arrives! Thus the key events that did occur in the Zionist era - return to the Land of Israel, winning wars and Israeli territory, liberation of Jerusalem and Temple Mount - were all achieved outside of the Lubavitch framework. In fact, the very man who did fight to liberate jerusalem, Rabbi Shlomo Goren, was told by the Rebbe of Lubavitch to resign from the post of Chief rabbi (althouogh it wa said more respectfully than by other hareidi leaders). </span></span><br />
<br />
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse">The "believers" claimed that the Rebbe had single handedly brought back millions of Jews to Orthodox observance - even though in his own time there were only approximately 1 million Ultra-Orthodox Jews who were that way from birth. He never fired a single shot in any war, and did not enlist himself or his followers into the Israeli army. They claimed that the "wars" were spiritual wars, such as convincing people to wear tefillin (even though the Book of Wars by Maimonides focuses on military warfare).</span></span><br />
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse"><br /></span></span>
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse">IN sum, it is clear that Rabbi Schneerson was not the Messiah of the TeNakh, or of Maimonides. </span></span><br />
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse">The victories in Israel's wars were won by largely secular soldiers and generals, whose State and Army were opposoed by Lubavitch Hassidim in previous generations, and also by Schneerson himself. His instructions were the opposite of the requirements of messiah - i.e. to gather the exiles into Israel. he wanted to keep them in exile. This not only makes him a false messiah, but also an Anti-Messiah!</span></span><br />
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse"><br /></span></span>
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<span class="co_verse"><span class="co_verse"> </span> </span><br />
<span class="co_verse"> </span> <br />
<br /><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-52432464790830443192019-10-21T22:49:00.004+01:002019-11-03T21:18:31.197+00:00the Parah and the Red Heifer<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Red heifer rite is one of the most memorable in the
Torah, and has explicit instructions on how and by whom it is performed.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As we can see it was designated for the
priest (Kohen) to perform this ritual.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<h1 align="center" style="text-align: center;">
<span class="h"><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>19 בְּמִדְבַּר</span></span><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;"></span></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="4" class="MsoNormalTable" style="mso-cellspacing: 3.0pt; mso-padding-alt: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt; width: 100%px;">
<tbody>
<tr style="mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>ד</b> וְלָקַח אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן,
מִדָּמָהּ--בְּאֶצְבָּעוֹ; וְהִזָּה אֶל-נֹכַח פְּנֵי אֹהֶל-מוֹעֵד,
מִדָּמָהּ--שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים. </div>
</td>
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>4</b> And Eleazar the priest shall take of her blood
with his finger, and sprinkle of her blood toward the front of the tent of
meeting seven times. </div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="5"></a><b>ה</b> וְשָׂרַף אֶת-הַפָּרָה,
לְעֵינָיו: אֶת-עֹרָהּ וְאֶת-בְּשָׂרָהּ וְאֶת-דָּמָהּ, עַל-פִּרְשָׁהּ
יִשְׂרֹף. </div>
</td>
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>5</b> And the heifer shall be burnt in his sight; her
skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung, shall be burnt. </div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="6"></a><b>ו</b> וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן, עֵץ
אֶרֶז וְאֵזוֹב--וּשְׁנִי תוֹלָעַת; וְהִשְׁלִיךְ, אֶל-תּוֹךְ שְׂרֵפַת
הַפָּרָה. </div>
</td>
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>6</b> And the priest shall take cedar-wood, and hyssop,
and scarlet, and cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer. </div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="mso-yfti-irow: 3; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="7"></a><b>ז</b> וְכִבֶּס בְּגָדָיו
הַכֹּהֵן, וְרָחַץ בְּשָׂרוֹ בַּמַּיִם, וְאַחַר, יָבֹא אֶל-הַמַּחֲנֶה; וְטָמֵא
הַכֹּהֵן, עַד-הָעָרֶב. </div>
</td>
<td style="padding: 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt;"><div class="MsoNormal">
<b>7</b> Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he
shall bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he may come into the camp, and
the priest shall be unclean until the even. </div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In verse 7 we are told that the priest will launder his
clothes and bathe his flesh, but will remain unclean until evening.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The bathing process is done in daytime, but
he does not attain purity until evening.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>is quite
explicit, and was practiced by the Kohanim until the foreign interference of
the Rabbanites, who very likely<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>did not
have Jewish roots (many of the Pharisee rabbis were in fact foreign converts,
most notably<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Shemaya and Avtalyon).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This is also evidenced by the fact the
genuine Kohanim of<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the 2nd Temple era
were Sadducees, and the Pharisees<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>did
not have genuine Kohanim who would serve in the temple, Instead, they devised
false methods to tamper with the Priesthood, the rituals and the Torah.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Rabbinic body of literature has its first appearance in
the Mishnah, which recounts how they dealt with all sorts of issues, including
the Red Heifer.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The aptly named Mishna
“Parah”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>provides an account of how they
went about achieving their ends, and how they falsely interpreted the Torah.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In Parah 3:7 we see:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="he">
<span style="background: silver; mso-bidi-language: HE; mso-highlight: silver;">לֹא הָיְתָה פָרָה רוֹצָה לָצֵאת, אֵין מוֹצִיאִין עִמָּהּ שְׁחוֹרָה, שֶׁלֹּא
יֹאמְרוּ, שְׁחוֹרָה שָׁחֲטוּ. וְלֹא אֲדֻמָּה, שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמְרוּ, שְׁתַּיִם
שָׁחֲטוּ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, לֹא מִשּׁוּם זֶה, אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (<a href="https://www.blogger.com/Numbers.19">במדבר יט</a>), וְהוֹצִיא אֹתָהּ, לְבַדָּהּ. וְזִקְנֵי
יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיוּ מַקְדִּימִים בְּרַגְלֵיהֶם לְהַר הַמִּשְׁחָה, וּבֵית טְבִילָה
הָיָה שָׁם. וּמְטַמְּאִים הָיוּ אֶת הַכֹּהֵן הַשּׂוֹרֵף אֶת הַפָּרָה, מִפְּנֵי
הַצְּדוֹקִים, שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיוּ אוֹמְרִים, בִּמְעֹרְבֵי שֶׁמֶשׁ הָיְתָה
נַעֲשֵׂית: </span></div>
<div class="en">
<span lang="EN" style="background: silver; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-highlight: silver;">If the cow refused to go out, they may not take out with
it a black one lest people say, "They slaughtered a black cow" nor
another red [cow] lest people say, "They slaughtered two." Rabbi Yose
says: it was not for this reason but because it is said "And he shall
bring her out" by herself. The elders of Israel
used to go first by foot to the Mount of Olives,
where there was a place of immersion. <u>The priest that was to burn the cow
was (deliberately) made unclean on account of the Sadducees so that they should
not be able to say, "It can be done only by those on whom the sun has set</u>."</span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"> </span></div>
<div class="en">
<br /></div>
<div class="en">
<br /></div>
<div class="en">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">We learn that these
Pharisee “elders” would deliberately defile the Kohanim, and thus invalidate
them from the ritual.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This was to negate
the meaning of the Torah in Bamidbar 19:7, which says the priest will remain
unclean (impure) until sunset. The new interpretation of the Pharisees was that
the bathing itself will purify the Priest from the contact with the Heifer and
the burning process, and that the verse in the Torah is referring to an
unrelated form of impurity which does not invalidate him from the Red heifer
ritual!</span></div>
<div class="en">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">If one delves into this
claim of the Pharisees, one will layer by layer uncover the falsehood of their
methods, and the<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>cynical and sinister
nature of their political goals.</span></div>
<div class="en" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1)<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The
Torah is very clear and explicit in what it says. The verse is giving a
sequential prescription for the process of the Red heifer and the multi-stage<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>purification process. It states explicitly
that the bathing does not cause ritual purity on its own, and in fact it is the
sunset which<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>brings to an end that
impurity.</span></div>
<div class="en" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2)<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">To
claim – as the Pharisees do – that the sunset is not part of the process , is a
vile and cynical<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>attack on the torah
itself, rendering it illogical and rendering the verse a non-sequitur.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How exactly can they derive anything from the
verse if it is not logical?</span></div>
<div class="en" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3)<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">Instead,
they claim that there was all along an unwritten rule book which gave the true
meaning of the verses in the Torah, even when the clear and obvious meaning
goes against their beliefs.</span></div>
<div class="en" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4)<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span></span><span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">The
intention of the Pharisees was never to really comply with the Torah, it was to
undermine the true heirs of Moses and Aaron, the Kohanim, who also had the Temple to tend to.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Their intention was a coup, to take over from
the Priestly sadducees, and to own both the Temple
and the wealth of Israel.
Their destruction of Temple
purity resulted in the physical destruction of the temple. In this aspect, they
only had short term success followed by long term misery and exile of the
remaining Jewish people.</span></div>
<div class="en">
<br /></div>
<div class="en">
<span lang="EN" style="mso-ansi-language: EN;">However, their long term
success was in writing a new religion, a surrogate “Judaism” which undermines
the Torah and its teachings, and purports to be the “authentic” form of Judaism
to the undiscerning.</span></div>
<div class="en">
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-73146489562754158582019-08-24T22:49:00.002+01:002019-08-24T22:49:44.015+01:00How to be an Orthodox KaraiteRabbinic orthodoxy and Karaite Judaism are in many ways mutually exclusive, since they deny each other's view on the Oral law and the Written law.<br />
<br />
However, within the Oral Law/halachic system there is a method which does allow one to be a practicing Karaite.<br />
<br />
This method or mechanism is the distinction that rabbinic halacha makes between Torah Law (D'oraita in Aramaic) and rabbinic law (D'rabbanan in Aramaic). When there is a conflict between rabbinic law and Torah law, the mechanism allows the individual, or compels him, to violate the rabbinic law and uphold the Torah law. For example, embarrassing a person is a violation of Torah law, and hence a rabbinic law which will cause embarrasment can be discarded, so as not to embarass someone else (or even oneself). Another example is honoring one's parents. If a rabbinic law will violate this torah commandment, then the rabbinic law should be discarded.<br />
<br />
Now, the Karaite can learn to play this system (if necessary). There is a Torah commandment of Lo Tosifu - do not add! Rabbinic laws , by definition, will violate this Torah law. It is not only the Karaite's duty to discard rabbinic laws, it is also that of rabbinic Orthodoxy. Thus, even if a jew, whether orthododox or otherwise, consideres the possibilty of there being such a thing as "oral law" the oral law itself has a mechanism to reject the rabbinic law if it conflicts with the Torah.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-54118309941537238212019-04-11T12:43:00.002+01:002019-04-11T12:43:24.989+01:00Was Rambam a Karaite?<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="https://img1.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" />
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The ostensible answer to that question would be no.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He was the Rabbi and law maker <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">par excellence</i>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Indeed, he writes against the Sadducees and
Karaites, and also devotes many chapters to the strengthening of the oral law
and rabbinic laws/additions. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
However, there is a counter-current where he seems to be
saying the opposite of all his rabbinic notions. In his legal corpus, the
“Mishneh Torah”, a section known as “De’ot”, he writes<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the following:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ch.
3:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="coverse"><a href="https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/910343/jewish/Deot-Chapter-Three.htm#v1">1</a>
</span></div>
A person might say, "Since envy, desire, [the pursuit] of honor, and
the like, are a wrong path and drive a person from the world, I shall separate
from them to a very great degree and move away from them to the opposite
extreme." For example, he will not eat meat, nor drink wine, nor take a
wife, nor live in a pleasant home, nor wear fine clothing, but, rather, [wear]
sackcloth and coarse wool and the like - just as the pagan priests do.<br />
This, too, is a bad path and it is forbidden to walk upon it. Whoever
follows this path is called a sinner [as implied by <a href="https://www.chabad.org/9934#v11">Numbers 6:11</a>'s] statement concerning
a <span class="glossaryitem">nazarite</span>: "and he [the priest] shall
make an atonement for him, for his having sinned regarding [his] soul."
Our sages declared: If the nazarite who abstained only from wine requires
atonement, how much more so does one who abstains from everything.<br />
Therefore, our Sages directed man to abstain only from those things which
the <span class="glossaryitem">Torah</span> denies him and not to forbid himself
permitted things by <span class="glossaryitem">vows</span> and oaths [of
abstention]. Thus, our Sages stated: Are not those things which the Torah has
prohibited sufficient for you that you must forbid additional things to
yourself?<br />
This general statement also refers to those who fast constantly. They are
not following a good path, [for] our Sages have forbidden a man to mortify
himself by fasting. Of all the above, and their like, <span class="glossaryitem">Solomon</span>
directed and said: "Do not be overly righteous and do not be overly
clever; why make yourself desolate?" (<a href="https://www.chabad.org/16468#v16">Ecclesiastes 7:16)</a>.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="alternatehe"><span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;"><a href="https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/910343/jewish/Deot-Chapter-Three.htm#v1">א</a></span></span></div>
<span style="mso-bidi-language: HE;">שמא יאמר אדם הואיל והקנאה והתאוה והכבוד
וכיוצא בהם דרך רעה הן ומוציאין את האדם מן העולם אפרוש מהן ביותר ואתרחק לצד
האחרון עד שלא יאכל בשר ולא ישתה יין ולא ישא אשה ולא ישב בדירה נאה ולא ילבש
מלבוש נאה אלא השק והצמר הקשה וכיוצא בהן כגון כהני העובדי כוכבים גם זה דרך רעה
היא ואסור לילך בה המהלך בדרך זו נקרא חוטא שהרי הוא אומר בנזיר וכפר עליו מאשר
חטא על הנפש אמרו חכמים ומה אם נזיר שלא פירש אלא מן היין צריך כפרה המונע עצמו
מכל דבר ודבר על אחת כמה וכמה לפיכך צוו חכמים שלא ימנע אדם עצמו אלא מדברים
שמנעתו התורה בלבד ולא יהא אוסר עצמו בנדרים ובשבועות על דברים המותרים כך אמרו
חכמים לא דייך מה שאסרה תורה אלא שאתה אוסר עליך דברים אחרים ובכלל הזה אלו
שמתענין תמיד אינן בדרך טובה ואסרו חכמים שיהא אדם מסגף עצמו בתענית ועל כל הדברים
האלו וכיוצא בהן צוה שלמה ואמר אל תהי צדיק הרבה ואל תתחכם יותר למה תשומם: </span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Interesting is the counter-statement of the Jerusalem Talmudic Sages, which
opposes that of the Babylonian Talmud – “Are not those things which the Torah
has prohibited sufficient for you that you must forbid additional things to
yourself?” (<span class="glossaryitem">Jerusalem</span>
<span class="glossaryitem">Talmud</span>, <i>Nedarim</i> 9:1).<br />
<br />
The argument could be made that this is referring to personal vows, and that
what the Rabbis forced is valid. However, what applies to individuals also
applies to other individuals. The message of the Jerusalem Talmud is giving a
rationale to the Torah prohibition of adding.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>The violaters of this principle, say the reverse, to justify the adding
of laws and restrictions.<br />
Rambam wrote a compilation of halachic rabbinic Judaism from various
sources, and there is no guarantee that his writing is internally consistent
(after all the Talmud is not without contradiction).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is sufficient, however to take this point
of view into account, to show that even the Talmudic rabbis of the
Yerushalmi<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>had severe reservations about
the newish Testament of the oral law.<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-40722923134621242652018-09-13T12:31:00.002+01:002018-09-13T12:31:24.391+01:00The Talmud agrees with me!In an earlier post, http://tanakhemet.blogspot.com/2018/07/is-oral-law-good-idea.html<br />
<br />
I explained why the Oral Law is not a good idea. Questions of its authenticity aside, the method of oral transmission of a vast and complex legal system is definitely not a good idea.<br />
<br />
The Talmud (Temurah 16a-b) goes so far to say that when Moses died, 3000 laws were forgotten by the next generation , i.e. Joshua and his leadership.<br />
<br />
see: https://steinsaltz.org/daf/temurah-16a-b-forgetting-torah-laws/ <br />
<br />
These are supposed oral laws. Now this itself is an interesting topic of discussion, but in essence, the Talmud itself is providing evidence that supports my claim. If Joshua could forget 3000 laws which Moses allegedly taught him, then the oral law is a complete disaster.<br />
<br />
Again, this claim by the Talmud must be scrutinized, but that is for a later occasion. It is important to note that the system of oral law is so dysfunctional, that within the very first generation, according to the Talmud itself, it has already broken down.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-315345259718693546.post-67750805607702028612018-09-05T22:07:00.003+01:002018-09-05T22:07:56.185+01:00Rabbi David Segal (the TaZ)<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Rabbi Segal is widely known as the TaZ , after the name of
the commentary he wrote on the Shulchan Aruch – the rabbinical work of day to
day practical halacha.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Taz lived from 1586-1667<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span><a href="https://www.geni.com/people/Rabbi-David-Segal-the-TaZ/4950928906290042156">https://www.geni.com/people/Rabbi-David-Segal-the-TaZ/4950928906290042156</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
He was greatly respected and is still considered a major
Rabbinic authority.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is stated by tha Taz on several occasions that “although
the Sages have leeway to enact their own new prohibitions, they may not
prohibit something explicitly permitted by the Torah”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="mso-list: Ignore;">-<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";">
</span></span>source:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><a href="http://matzav.com/the-taz-hayaduah-bava-metzia-70/">http://matzav.com/the-taz-hayaduah-bava-metzia-70/</a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Indeed, this is itself derived from the Talmud.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If this is to be the case, and it appears to be quite widely
accepted, then he is essentially making the same argument as Karaites do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course there are endless examples,<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>but if we look at the prohibition of
consuming chicken with dairy products, which is purely rabbinical, it is quite
clear from the Torah that this is not forbidden.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It might be argued that not everything is
explicitly permitted, however, that is nitpicking. The principle is very
powerful, and can be applied to almost every case where Karaites would argue
against adding to the Torah.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This one idea of the Taz, repudiates the entire Oral law
thesis, the Talmud and the Shulchan Aruch which he comments upon.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2