[Avodah] Diberah Torah

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:51:50PM -0500, hlampel at koshernet.com wrote:
:> But still it doesn't make it broad enough to include many of the
:> things the phrase has been used to justify both here
:> and in print in the last few decades.

: Sorry, I must have missed the use you're
: referring to and discounting. Can you give some examples?
...
: RMB: And nothing about going beyond that
: meaning to hidden meanings. (If anything, it might
: imply the reverse!)
: 
: ZL: I've lost you, both reverse and forward.

I am simply saying that DTBBA doesn't open up the concept of "peshat"
to a free for all. Turning a narrative into an ahistorical allegory has
nothing to do with speaking as people do. In fact, it's quite the reverse:
atypical for daily speech.

Skipping back to the other half of the point (the "reverse"?):
: RMB: The idea is still to look at the meaning of
: a phrase, not the mechanics of the words used.

: ZL: "Mechanics of the words used"? I don't know what
: you mean. Sorry again if I entered the discussion out
: of context.

I opened this fork of the thread with the observation that in Chazal's
usage, DTBBA is used by R' Yishma'el to explain why his 13 middos are
based upon the meaning of clauses in the sentence. In contrast to R'
Aqiva, whose 19 middos are based on the words themselves. A critical
difference between ribui umi'ut (RA) and kelal uperat (RY) is that a ribui
would be something like the use of the word "es", a mi'ut -- "akh veraq".
Kelal uperate would compare the general category "beheimasekha" with
the following subcategories "tzon uvaqar".

Dibera Torah -- since HQBH wrote in biblical Hebrew, one should assume
He used the language the way people do. "Aseir ta'aseir" is a normal
turn of phrase; don't pare it down as a redundancy.

I originally stated that DTBBA only meant a rule about how to do
derashah. You/RZL proved that the Rambam felt even in Chazal's usage, it
was a principle than ran further that Rabbi Yishma'el was just showing
one consequence of. I concede that point, but it doesn't deminish my
rant against those who used it in the "mabul is allegory" thread.

RMM writes on motza"sh, Jan 26, 2008 at 07:23:23PM +0200:
: For one of the pesukim, Tosafot says we can simply say the Torah
: speaks in the language of man, and the pasuk isn't there to be
: drashed, but instead it is there for an ordinary literary purpose.

: Evidently, then, Tosafot understands this dictum to mean that the
: Torah sometimes includes a pasuk or parsha for the same reason as any
: human would.

However, this /is/ my original context of DTBBA being about the scope
of derashah. It doesn't prove how far Tosafos take the notion beyond
that topic. They could argue with the Rambam, or not. Either would fit
your memory. (Please get back to me if you find that Tosafos.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

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