[Avodah] Cave or desert island

[Michael Makovi]

>  Michael Makovi wrote:
> > I think we might have some confusion between a
> > national-only brit and
> > a -nation-as-a-collection-of-individuals brit.
> > I'm not saying the brit is national only; if it were so, then > > only the melech and the kohanim would have mitzvot,
> > and the individuals would just be there to do who knows
> > what.

> I meant national only in contrast to the notion of two
> berisim. One in Shemos, between Hashem and *each*
> Jew, and one in Devarim between Hashem
> and the Jewish People as a coporate entity.

I'll have to examine those two texts again. I was imaging both britim
as nation-as-a-collection-of-independent-individuals, not one brit of
nation and the other as individuals and put the two together and you
get...I was thinking two 0.5, not a 1 and a 0.

> IOW, not only do we need to build a society of perfected
> individuals, but each person needs to aspire for a higher
> goal than benei Noach to be individuals serving our
> common mission.

Certainly. In fact, I'd say that even a gentile ben Noach should
aspire to be more than a ben Noach. The 7 is the passing grade, but
who says one should settle for a D? Stop lashon hara and such and you
can get a C, B, or A.

> We are not only a holy nation, but each individual alone can > be a kohein to the world.

To some extent, yes. But to me, this seems to be secondary, a davar
she'eino mitkaven or psik reisha.

> > Rather, the brit is of the nation as a collection of
> > individuals. This is to say, the purpose of the Torah is not > > to perfect the individual, but rather to create a society of > > perfected individuals.

> I would still consider this a beris with the nation.

But surely you must hold that there is a difference between what I am
holding, and a notion of ONLY the corporate nation having importance,
and the individual being but a faceless replaceable cog in the machine
- this is Nimrod and the Tower.

> R' Micha
> Although your clarification of "a society of perfected
> individuals" does explain the overwhelming number of baalei > machshavah who explain mitzvos in terms of their effect on > the individual. I do not see resolutions to my other
> questions:
>
> Since there is a beris with the individual, his fulfilment of
> that beris will be redemptive no matter where he is. If the
> beris is with the nation, then his fulfilment depends on his
> participation in nationhood. You associated that with the
> Jewish people, and by mixing the Sifra into this, with the
> Jewish people in EY in particular. The individual alone
> on a Carribean island is not partipating in the "society of
> perfected individuals", so how does his observance help
> fulfill the goals of the beris?

As I said above, as an incidental davar she'eino mitkaven. To be sure,
Jewish values have spread throughout the world and drastically brought
geula closer. But this was via a bedieved route, and it was not the
original intent. The l'hatchila route is via national existence.

> You also did not address my lemaaseh questions: about
> how a practice qidushin or practice get have any chalos
> usable in Israel, or why they would permit violations of
> non-practice observance of beris Noach?

Because he's still a Jew. Because the Torah is still applicable. I
could ask you why you can't eat kitniyot on Pesach even when you KNOW
that there's no confusing it with wheat or having wheat mixed in, and
I can ask why the gadol hador can't have yichud with a woman. It's a
binding law that doesn't apply on specific cases to the contrary.
(Also, as Sifra says, so that the continuity of mitzvah observance is
not broken. If we behaved as Noachides, our kids would learn nothing
but Noachidism, and they'd have no idea how to keep Torah once they
returned to EY. The 613 must remain a living tradition.)

Mikha'el Makovi