Avodah Mailing List

Volume 10 : Number 103

Friday, February 14 2003

• Re: rambam yisachar zevulun
• rambam discussion
• Re: sanhedrin
• Re: manipulating the pshat
• Re: Mussar schools
• Re: Fanaticalness
• Re: Fanaticalness
• Re: History, Truth, Memory: Nemonus of Baalei Mesorah
• RE: History, Truth, Memory: Nemonus of Baalei Mesorah
• Re: Sefardi sefer torah
• Re: Malachim singing shira by yam suf
• Re: Mishenich'nas Adar is not in SA
• talking/tfillin
• Re: Avodah V10 #101
• Tefillah Tips
• Fwd: Re: Torah difficulty
• Re: Hebrew grammatical question
• Re: Philosophy of RSRH, and MM & Philosophy of Mitzvos
• Re: Avodah V10 #101

gofman wrote:
>  He permits payment of obvious opportunity cost
> Could you specify exactly where the Rambam says this?

Avoth 4:7. In Kafih's translation it's page 289 around footnote 60.
You might also want to read p.291 the first complete paragraph in
column 1. The absence of Yissachar-Zevulun is striking.

> See Rambam in hilchos tshuva 9:1, 10:1 where he states repeatedly that
> olam haba is a composite reward for mitzvos and knowledge of torah.

A general principle of Rambam is that he gives details in one place
and general summaries elsewhere (see R. Benedict's book HaRambam L'lo
Stiyah Min HaTalmud for many examples). In this case the details are
in H. Yesodei HaTorah 4:9 and 4:13.

David Riceman

I would like to bring to light an interesting phenomenon: While the
opinion of the Rambam re. taking money for talmud torah is widely and
sometimes heatedly discussed, few seem to be bothered by the similar
halachic problems of doctors taking money for medical services. The
Ramban in Toras Ha'adam (pg. 44 in Kisvei Ramban of Mossad HaRav Kook)
states that a doctor may receive compensation for his time (i.e., he
could been engaged in his "real job") and for s'char tircha, i.e. the
labor value of his services, but he may not demand payment for s'char
limud, i.e. his expertise, since healing is a mitzvah.

Why does the talmud torah issue interest us so much more?

   syr

In a message dated 2/9/2003 10:48:34 AM EST, kennethgmiller@juno.com writes:
> Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan (The Handbook of Jewish Thought 10:20) writes that "if
> a member becomes very old or sexually maimed, he must be replaced". He
> cites seven sources for this in his notes, and one dissenting view. I
> think that it is reasonable to presume that according to the view that
> a an elderly or maimed dayan must be replaced, the same would apply to
> someone who developed other pesulim, such as becoming a kofer.

It also says befeirush lo yihyeh lecha elohim acheirim, according to
this logic no Israelites worshipped Avodah Zoro!

IOW Granted you might be right that this IS the Halachah!
But your assumptoin that this Halachah was observed legabi Yochan Kohein
Gadol is unlikely. And I dare say there may have been many tadukkim that
slipped into A or THE Sanhedrin, or Prushim that went off the derech
afterwards and still remained.

Kol Tuv - Best Regards
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

In a message dated 2/10/2003 10:24:59 PM EST, mgofman@zahav.net.il writes:
> Are you essentially saying that the meforshim are manipulating the text?
> This assertion reminds me of the commonly heard claim "The rabbis could
> be matir any aguna or any womens' minyan if they so desired." Is that
> your conclusion?

Manipulating the text is changing what the text SAYS

Putting a sping on the text is changing what the text MEANS!

If you are accusing me of sayin that rabbis put a spin on what the text
means, you are probably correct.

if you say pshat in gmara X to match the psaht in gmara Y you are spinning
the pshat

If you are melameid zchus by saying the Rambam cannot possibly mean
literally what he says about taking money for teachinbg Torah then you
are spining the pshat

Any time you bring anohter text in to modify pshat , you are defacto
spinning the pshat.

Emending the text itself is different

Defining the text to mean WHAT YOU THINK IT OUGHT TO MEAN instead of
what it says is a spin.

Question: are you bodeik chometz OR do you bodeik your HOUSE forChametz?

The mishnah says bodkim chametz. If that were true boeik lettuce would
be soemthing to be destroyed! BUT AFAIK bodiek elimnates the BUGS not
the let tuce. So what is pshat bodeik chametz?

Kahatti and others make it simple. They "ktiv" Bodeik but they "krei"
mechapeis. That is a spin on pshat, but a necesarry one! Otherwise we
would be inspecting the chametz in order to find something in it!

Many are so used to these spins that they presume their presence
unconcsiously.

Remember in the Targum Shiv'im they had to change Breishis Bara Elokim
so as not to be read that A thing called Breishis created Elokim C"V!
but what was the hava amina to say such apikorsus in the 1st place?
the hava amina is that Chazal KNEW how to read things w/o any resorting
to lamdus, and saw the possible pitfalls built in.

Kol Tuv - Best Regards
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

From: Micha Berger <micha@aishdas.org>
>> 1- That mussar's focus on yir'as H' is to produce someone who is
>> hunched over, quaking in fear. To quote RYGB's translation of
>> RAKE's Be'ikvos haYir'ah:
>>    Yir'ah is not anguish, not pain, not bitter anxiety. To what may

In a message dated 1/24/2003 1:30:33 PM EST, jjbaker@panix.com writes:
> That was apparently not a settled definition; vide infra.

AIUI Yir'ah means AWE
but AISI, it really means REVERANCE

You Revere Hashem and your parents and your melamdim etc.

Eima, fachad, cnad Charadah are more the emtions of FEAR. Yir'ah is
what you have from your Moreh, your instructor, the AWE and Revenerance
accorded to a Master.

Ahava is affection. I like you I love you I care about you that is
Ahava Yir'ah is reverance. You are great. You are awesome. You are
outstanding. You are the tops. You are incredible. That is Yir'ah.
yir'ah is whs a young basketball fan has for Michael Jordan.

Yir'ah is what you feel looking at the Grand Canyon or Niagra Falls or
how Rabbiner Hirsch probably felt looking at the Alps, etc.

Of course Yir'ah that is overhwelming might overlap with Fear but that
is not its essence. Fear is usually seen as a negative. Yir'ah is
almost always construed as a positive.

Kol Tuv - Best Regards
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

At 04:26 PM 2/11/03 +0000, Micha Berger wrote:
>: I think that Fanaticalness is identical to the Frumkeit that R' Shlomo
>: Wolbe excoriates.

>I would have thought they were opposites.

>RSW's "frumkeit" is observance through culture, an unthinking knee-jerk
>observance. Mitzvos anashim meilumada. A dirth of fanaticism, not an
>over-abundance.

>Unless you believe that the fanatic is one who is overcompensating for
>an underlying vacuum of passion...

RSW's frumkeit is an inner drive that is excessively uncritical and
overly enthusiastic. This dovetails neatly with many religiously fervent
phenomena, including many forms of stringencies on the one hand and new
forms of worship on the other. It does not seem to me to be at all in
the category of mitzvas anashim melumadah as you seem to indicate.

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org  or  ygb@yerusalmionline.org
essays, tapes and seforim at: www.aishdas.org;
on-line Yerushalmi shiurim at www.yerushalmionline.org

On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 08:02:28PM -0500, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer wrote:
: RSW's frumkeit is an inner drive that is excessively uncritical and
: overly enthusiastic. This dovetails neatly with many religiously fervent
: phenomena, including many forms of stringencies on the one hand and new
: forms of worship on the other. It does not seem to me to be at all in
: the category of mitzvas anashim melumadah as you seem to indicate.

I got my definition from that bit of Alei Shur we learned in preparation
for the ve'adim program. Cheileq II, "Limud Mussar", pereq 2.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                 "The most prevalent illness of our generation is
micha@aishdas.org            excessive anxiety....  Emunah decreases anxiety:
http://www.aishdas.org       'The Almighty is my source of salvation;  I will
Fax: (413) 403-9905          trust and not be afraid.'" (Isa 12) -Shalhevesya

On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 01:21:47PM -0500, Michael Frankel wrote:
: But what about the issue of "ne'emonus ish mippi ish" -- who would dare
: say that our chakhomim are not trustworthy individuals? Well -- what
: are we trusting them to do? convey factoids about which they had neither
: interest or concern and didn't "matter"? ...

:                                          why he thinks that an oral
: transmission -- which has overlayed all this moral pruning the additional
: facet of message corruption known to every school child who has ever
: played a game of "telephone" -- has much factoidal ne'emonus is quite
: beyond me. So you will understand why I don't take the argument that these
: great men have."ish mippi ish" transmitted the facts etc very seriously.

Playing "telephone" merely shows that if the channel of communication is
narrow, errors accumulate. (And that kids almost intentionally introduce
interesting errors.)

With national revelation and transmission, random errors could be
averaged out.

The reason why the reliability differs is because our ba'alei mesorah
didn't care, and therefore didn't cross-check the communication. I would
go further than RMF and argue that not only is this something they
weren't interested in, but something they'd transmit even if known to
be false on the literal level.

BTW, another source for not taking aggadic stories literally: the Gra on
Mishlei 1:6. The Gra contrasts mashal, with chidos chachamim. A mashal
is when you understand both mashal and nimshal. Chidos are riddles, the
metaphor can't be understood at face value and only makes sense on the
message's level. The Gra is not only calling these stories metaphoric,
but metaphors that can't work at face value!

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Time flies...
micha@aishdas.org                        ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (413) 403-9905          

I wrote:
> My impression is that the opponents of history (as opposed to newspaper
> reporting) are not motivated primarily by a fear of gossip. 
> Rather they are afraid that their world view will be challenged. 
<snip>
> Alternatively, what if it turns out
> that what R Schwab considered "inadequacies and  contradictions" are such
> only from a charedi perspective--i.e., the gedolim (such R YY 
> Weinberg) weren't as charedi as their talmidim have made them out to be?<<<

From: mgofman@zahav.net.il:
> Who crowned historians with the laurel of objectivity? More often
> than not, any particular historian is attempting the forward his
> own interpretation of events. Under the guise of "historic truth," he
> attempts to prove justify and uphold his own philosophies. 
> Your argument could equally be reversed. Perhaps those who are seeking to 
> show that our gedolim were "less charedi than we think" are seeking to find
> a haskama for their own lifestyles through history. 

Absolutely! There is no question that historians often have an agenda.
But that doesn't mean that history should not be written or studied.
Rather, it means that students of history must vigorously investigate
these issues. Debate should be encouraged, not stifled.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 07:02:36PM +0200, Akiva Atwood wrote:
:> This is, however, a matter of debate because of the way yuds are written.
:> According to Ashkenazi pesak, Sephardi yuds are passul. 

: HaAri k'sav is possul too, because of the Tzaddi.

And Vellish has a ches that is a vav+zayin.  Etc...

But since my kid would correctly identify the letter, is it a pesul?

-mi

On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 04:01:30PM -0500, Brown, Charles.F wrote:
:: Perhaps the "regular" cycle of daily shira as commemoration
:: must be initiated by BN"Y - since no new break from teva occurred, man
:: must initiate the movement toward greater ruchniyus. However, by shira
:: on a nes as it occurs, by definition there already has been an impetus
:: to break teva, so this would bring malachim to sing as well.

: Mi: Are you suggesting that one is IdT, the other IdE?

: Lav davka. Man must usually initiate singing shira - exactly what
: motivates man, whether IdT or IdE, is immaterial (for this).

Then I misunderstood.

I thought that anything initiated by man is IdT, and anything
initiated by Shamayim that man is to respond to is IdE.

It's all in who (or Who) initiates the man-G-d encounter. For
example, man creates the calendar, and therefore the yamim
tovim, but HQBH sets Shabbos and man responds to the day.

Which is pretty much what you're describing.

So, could someone clear up the terms, again?

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Time flies...
micha@aishdas.org                        ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (413) 403-9905          

In a message dated 2/2/2003 10:07:57 AM EST, dannyschoemann@hotmail.com writes:
> I was looking at the most famous "halocho" of Adar.

> Strangely enough it seems that even though it's in the gemora, (Taanis
> 29a/b) "just as we decrease simcha as Av begins, so we increase it when
> Adar begins" and the Rosh, Ran and Tur bring it, I couldn't find it in
> Shulchan Oruch.
...
> 1. Any ideas why it's not brought down in the SA

[RRW: -mi]
: Question - is this mentioned in the Beis Yosef?

Here's a synopsis of what I spoke about:
Mishenichnas Adar Marbim BeSimcha (MAMBS) has its source in Taanis 29.:
as "just as when Av comes in we diminish simcha, so too MAMBS"

MAMBS is brought down in the Rosh and Rif, but the SA and Rambam leave
it out. The MA mentions it. The Mishna Brura mentions it followed by
[gemoro]. The Kitzur and Oruch Hashulchan bring it.

The Chasam Sofer was asked why the SA left it out, and answers in SHU"T
OC 160 in 2 ways.

1. In Megila 30: Tosefos (1st on the omud) clearly states that we don't
pasken like Rav that the entire month of Av is in diminished happiness.
Since it's Rav who says MAMBS -- and correlates it to Av (using a hekesh
with Chodesh) -- so we don't pasken either months like Rav. Av is not
a sad month, Adar is not a happy one.
So why does the SA pasken Mishenichans Av? This is mainly for the end
of the memra that says one should be aware of going to court with a goy
during Av. Because of "sakono" the SA mentions it.

2. MAMBS is followed with "therefore one should (not) go to court with a
goy in (Av)/Adar because our mazal is (not) good". Since we pasken that
"ein mazal leYisroel" hence MAMBS is not lehalocho. But since in Av it
may be that the goyim's mazal is good, so the SA warns us about going
to court during Av.

The Sefas Emes has another angle. He says that just like in Av we're
sad for the churban, so Adar is a "building" month. Starting with the
yearly collection of shekolim, and also being the month the mishkan
inauguration was started (and the 2nd bayis was built) so in contrast
to the Av churban, Adar is month we celebrate the building. Also not
applicable nowadays.

Adar can actually be seen as "A-Dar" -- Hashem dwells (within us),
and Teruma is always read in Adar.

This brought me to the follow up topic of whether we will fulfill the
mitzvah brought in Teruma of building the 3rd bayis, as Hashem will
build it by fire.

If there's an interest I can post the various answers to this also.

-- Danny

The trumat hadeshen based on the gemorah menuachot 36a holds that even
on chol hamoed if you put on tfillin without a bracha you still can't
talk between putting on the shel yad and rosh. Does anyone know if this
is the generally accepted rule? Would it apply if you put on tfillin
before the zman in the AM?

KT
Joel

> On 7 Feb 2003 at 14:06, RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com wrote:
> >In a message dated 1/23/2003 10:34:31 PM EST, cmsherer@fandz.com
> >writes:
> >>That makes sense. How many of us are marbitzei Torah in chu"l on Rav
> >>Shachter's level? Leaving aside the question of whether there may be
> >>other valid reasons for staying in chu"l....
> 
> >Bepasthus to me
> >Echad ha'marbeh v'Echad ha'mam'it - uvilvad sheyechavein es libo
> >lesheim shamayim.
> 
> I don't think that applies when it's being used as an excuse to avoid 
> the performance of other mitzvos aseh, especially when the one you're 
> (ostensibly) doing could also be done in EY.

Rav Lichtenstein tells a story that he was on a panel with rabbis
of different denominations and one of them used the above Gemara as
an excuse for differering levels of observance seen in the different
denominations. He said that he couldn't sit back and let this Gemara be
perverted. This Gemara (in Menachos and Brachos) refers to differing types
of mincha offerings - based on one's financial ability to donate. Some
could spend more on a shlamim and others could only give a very basic
flour/oil offering. It doesn't mean that I can choose to neglect certain
mitzvos b/c my heart is in the right place.

R' Ephraim Epstein's Tefillah Tips
http://www.ou.org/torah/tefillah/archives.htm

Gil Student

Would like to share this:

>At 10:01 PM 2/12/03 +0100, wrote:
>>Rabbi Bechhofer,
>>
>>I have really gotten a lot out of your tapes that are available on 613.org. I
>>love the way that you explain concepts that are basic, that you never really
>>hear much about, like the age of the universe.  I also appreciate the fact
>>that you aren't afraid of controversy.
>>
>>I have a serious difficulty for which I have not found an answer.  I am hoping
>>that you can help me clear this up.  It has bothered me for a long time, so I
>>appreciate any help you can offer.
>>
>>Here is the question.  In the war with Midian in Parashat Mattot we are
>>instructed to kill all of the males including infants and any female over the
>>age of three.  Why was this necessary?  Why did the children need to die and
>>why did we need to kill them.  Granted, this is not a mitzvah that applies to
>>day, but it does seem very cruel.
>>
>>In addition, the mitzvah of killing Amalek would apply today. As I understand
>>the mitzvah, if I were to come across a baby whom I knew to be an Amalekite,
>>I would be obligated to kill her.
>>
>>Chazal say that "Hakol biday Shamayim chutz miyirat Shamayim."  So can it
>>really be that some people are inherently evil?  We also have the Gemara that
>>says that the descendants of Haman learned Torah in B'nai B'rak.  So somehow
>>if we miss an Amaleki, and he grows up he can convert.
>>
>>What bothers me more than anything is that I have only found one commentary
>>that is bothered by these cases of infanticide.  I have looked in the Mikraot
>>Gedolot, Rav Hirsch, Me'am Loez.  None of them address this question.
>>Someone did point out a Rabbeinu Bechayeh on Devarim 20:10., but his basic
>>answer is that "b'vadai" they would grow up and follow in the footsteps of
>>their fathers.  How could he be so sure?
>>
>>I think that the mitzvah of killing off the inhabitants of the Land in
>>Yehoshua's conquest would also fit in this question.
>>
>>I think I may have an answer, but I'd like to hear your thoughts 
>>first.  Thank you very much for your time.

>Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 09:17:51 -0500
>To: @juno.com
>From: "Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer" <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
>Subject: Re: Torah difficulty

>Thank you very much for the kind words.
>
>There are some very good essays on the difficult questions you raise, but 
>they are in Hebrew. I can check if they are available in PDF or can fax 
>them to you.
>
>There are actually two separate issues here; the historical issue and the 
>ongoing one.
>
>The historical issue has to do with episodes in Tanach.
>
>We can only peculate as to why such commands were given; it is generally 
>accepted that the spiritual wars - that were occurring on a concurrent 
>higher level at the same time as their physical counterparts here below - 
>were major, cataclysmic upheavals, rooted in the emergence of the Jewish 
>nation, and that singularities were involved. This is not an explanation 
>per se, but a framework.
>
>As to the ongoing issue, it is not accurate that we are commanded to kill 
>individual Amalekites, nor individual members of the Seven Nations. There 
>are varying opinions on the matter, but the consensus is codified in the 
>Rambam, Hilchos Melachim (the last section of the Code) 6:1-4, that we do 
>not wage war on any nation until we first offer them peace and the right 
>to live in harmony under us while fulfilling their Seven Noahide Laws.
>
>This is true concerning Amalek and the Seven Nations as well; the 
>difference between them is that the war against the Seven Nations was not 
>contingent upon the appointment of a King; the war against Amalek required 
>the appointment of a King (thus, the first formal offensive war on Amalek 
>only occurred after the appointment of King Shaul. It is only if these 
>eight nations do not submit to our peaceful offer that the unique mitzvah 
>of annihilation follows.
>
>I have two additional points to make on this that are personal surmises:
>
>1. The innocents amongst these eight nations who are willing to accept the 
>seven laws are not to be killed. This surmise is based on a comment by 
>Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchik of Brisk I recently saw. The Rambam rules that 
>even women and children who were not part of the group judged guilty in an 
>"Ir ha'Nidachas" (the city  that was idolatrous) are put to death. Reb 
>Chaim says that it is impossible to accept that utterly innocent 
>individuals are executed. Rather, this refers to individuals who were 
>idolatrous, but were not properly forewarned. This means that if the 
>majority of the city's males were properly forewarned and testimony 
>against them met all parameters, then other guilty parties against whom 
>not all the parameters of testimony may exist are included in the penalty 
>- but not innocents.
>
>2. These laws are generally not relevant for the past 2000 or so years. 
>This surmise is based on a comment by the Chazon Ish that is relatively 
>well known in which he says the rule that one may bring about the death of 
>a heretic no longer applies. He explains that to be a real heretic one 
>would have to have witnessed the awe-inspiring divinity of the Temple and 
>the Sages and still have stubbornly resisted truth. Without these clear 
>indications of the truth of Judaism and its tenets, a heretic is not a 
>true heretic. Similarly, the expectation that nations submit to our 
>leadership is only realistic when such conditions prevail.
>
>Hope this is helpful.
>
>As Rabbi Hirsch note at the end of his commentary to psalm 83, we hope the 
>ultimate outcome of wars is not destruction and annihilation, but the 
>construction and education of a society of nations committed to G-d's 
>ideals. This is also manifest in the second paragraph of Aleynu.
>
>Kol Tuv,
>YGB
>ygb@aishdas.org  or  ygb@yerusalmionline.org
>essays, tapes and seforim at: www.aishdas.org;
>on-line Yerushalmi shiurim at www.yerushalmionline.org

In a message dated 1/22/2003 9:10:20 PM EST, micha@aishdas.org writes:
> : "The angel who redeems me from all evil will bless the children . . ." has 
> : the identical meaning to "The angel, the one who redeems me from all evil, 
>: he will bless the children . . .," and in addition does not suffer from an
>: extra pronoun ...

> Fine, still a noun clause -- as it means the same as my more explicit
> version. You turned "hago'el osi mikol ra" into an adjective.

How about the word "haba'im" in Shmos 1:1?

Kol Tuv - Best Regards
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

In a message dated 1/22/2003 9:09:48 PM EST, michaeljfrankel@hotmail.com writes:
> His key chidush was that Judaism was not a set of revealed
> beliefs, but rather a set of revealed laws, i.e. ceremonial laws
> peculiar to the Jewish religion. E.g. shatnez or hanofas ho'omer. As
> for the necessary religious beliefs (e.g. unity of god, immortality of
> the soul,...etc.) those were available to Jews not through the sinaitic
> revelation per se, but rather through rational analysis. But of course
> rational analysis is available to all humanity, and so true religion
> is universal and equally available to all mankind. But Jews have this
> extra ceremonial stuff -- not religion at all really but peculiar laws
> -- which they have to also execute because God told them to do it. (go
> figure). So, if true religion is available to all and that's what's
> really important, what purpose is there for Jews to carry out their
> peculiar ceremonial laws? MM's answer was that executing such ceremonial
> duties had an educative vector, performing mitzvos have symbolic meanings
> and values which made it much more likely that the Jews were going to
> properly ratiocinate their way to the true religion that was in theory
> open to all. The non-Jews, without this "cheat sheet" were less likely
> to reason their way to home plate....

IIRC, Dayan Grunfeld's hakdamah to Horeb says something similar.
Jews need mitzvos as a Mamleches Kohanim v'goy kadosh
Gentiles need few mitzvos, just 7.  

AISI and interpret this, there is a core universal religion and Judaism
is build on that basic structure, in that we are the priests who are
held to a higher standard of performance etc.

Practical impact: While "mishpatim bal yadaum" holds that we should not
teach the specifics of mitzvos, OTOH we are OBLIGED To teach the core
religion of 7 Mitavos etc. And this was probably true of Avarahm Avinu.
He taught the core religion of Elokei hashamayim v'eilkoe ha'aretz but
he himself observed "mitzvosai chuykosai v'sorosai.".

The fact that Xtians adopted Tanach is OK insofar as it may teach them
to follow 7 Mitzvos {whether they DO or DON'T is another debate} Point
is that they are at least POTENTIALLY on the derech to being a Ben Noach
Ger Toshav observer of this core universal religion.

Internally observance of and education in ALL mitzvos is key Externally,
education in the principles embodied in al kein nekaveh is key. We do
not promote "goy sheshavas" but we do promote Universal loyalty to HKBH
and honesty etc.

Reforms key failure is to shed the Israelite Coventant and to fall back
to a Noahide antinomian covenent.

Paul did the same in that he eschewed Shmiras Hmitazvos. The question is
did he espouse his antinomian hashkafa to Jews or to Gentiles? And the
next question is do we hold like the Rambam that even after Moshiach
Mitzvos still apply or perhaps after the genuine Moshiach comes that
we all only need to do the 7 mitzvos and that Pauls' one key ta'us was
in assuming that Moshaich had indeed arrived. {IIRC Shabtai Zvi reduced
mitzvos to 18...)

I think MM, RSRH, Grunfeld all agree on this basic idea of a 2-level
commitment towards Avodas Hashem, with sub-categories. E.g. even within
Am Yisrael we have at least a 3-tiered Koehin Levi Yisrael hierarchy.
Similarly Benai Noach may have several tiers or levels such as Ger Toshav,
Eved Kna'ani etc.

In the post-ghetto age, we have a real opportunity to work both internally
on our own Avodah as well as to bring about greater Noahide observance
w/o actually proseletyzing people to become Yehudim.

Kol Tuv - Best Regards
Richard Wolpoe
RabbiRichWolpoe@aol.com

In a message dated 2/14/03 7:10:19 AM EST, Rebelkrim@aol.com writes:
> Rav Lichtenstein tells a story that he was on a panel with rabbis
> of different denominations and one of them used the above Gemara as
> an excuse for differering levels of observance seen in the different
> denominations. He said that he couldn't sit back and let this Gemara be
> perverted. This Gemara (in Menachos and Brachos) refers to differing types
> of mincha offerings - based on one's financial ability to donate. Some
> could spend more on a shlamim and others could only give a very basic
> flour/oil offering. It doesn't mean that I can choose to neglect certain
> mitzvos b/c my heart is in the right place.

He can't help being a Halachist!

The gemara at the beginning of Brochos with the sick amora has the healthy 
amora using the same line in a non-korban avodas Hashem context.

Raphael

**********************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]