[Avodah] Cave or desert island

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, February 11, 2008 1:08 pm, Michael Makovi wrote:
:> 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.

So you say, but you do not address the wealth of baalei mesorah who
explain mitzvos primarily in personal impact (deveiqus, sheleimus,
TIDE's ennoblement, Ramchal's preparation for olam haba, Rambam's
yedi'as haBorei, etc, etc, etc...)

This is aggadita, there is no requirement that one must conform to
precedent. But to convince someone, you have to at least provide
motivation for looking at things a new way.

:>> 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.

As per RSRH, although his take on the maamar Chazal about fallen
bricks vs fallen people isn't the only one. But of course I agree. I
never thought you would say that the beris Sinai is totalitarian, and
wasn't arguing about that.

The example of the person in a cave or desert island is one where a
Jew has opportunities to perform most of the mitzvos. Let's even say
he is in contact with other people -- but they are all non-Jews. This
gives him access to numerous more mitzvos bein adam lachaveiro.
However, he isn't operating as part of the Jewish people.

:> 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.

You're begging the question. Given that the Torah is a beris with a
nation, that fact that he is a Jew isn't what obligates him, it's his
participation in that nation. And thus, the cave dweller in question
isn't doing anything of meaning. Not even as a "davar shelo misqavein"
-- not that I know what DSM would mean when speaking of HQBH.

I gave cases where the mitzvah in question was  in contradiction to
the beris he inherited from Noach, which still has full meaning. So,
you state the conclusion, being Jewish trumps. You do not explain what
I asked -- for what possible reason?

However, if one follows the more common tack of explaining mitzvos in
terms of the individual, you have no question to address.

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
micha at aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org     - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507