[Avodah] a troubling halacha

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 01:17:14PM +0000, kennethgmiller at juno.com wrote:
: So it seems to me that this halacha is quite old, quite authoritative,
: and uncontested. What I'm looking for is some sort of explanation of why
: we presume that the potential avel would prefer not to know about the
: death. Or at least an exception, that if one would happen to know that
: the potential avel does want to know, that we *should* inform him/her.

I was extrapolating even further out along those lines. Perhaps, as
RAM's hava amina here, the SA is giving a default assumption which
wouldn't hold if you knew the aveil enough to not have to presume. And
if so, perhaps we could further assert that in most modern cultures,
the metzi'us has changed sufficiently for the SA's pesaq not to apply
even if you don't know the aveil.

IOW, the SA means "if you have reason to assume they would be happier
not knowing, don't tell them".

It still doesn't address RZS's citation of the Chazal (Bereishis Rabba,
quoted by Rashi Ber' 37:35, "vayima'ein lehisnacheim". Here's the Chazal:
    Ein adam meqabel tachanumin
    al hachai vesavur shemeis.

    Sh'eal hameis
    nigzerah gezeirah
    shetishtakach min haleiv
    velo al hachai.

RZS summarized the BR as my rebbe did when he taught me the Rashi (I
presume, I just mean as I "always" understood it). Yaaqov never got
nechamah during Yoseif's absence, and had Yoseif actually been niftar,
Yaaqov avinu's pain would have faded. Borrowing a phrase from the physics
community, RZS used the phrase "spooky action at a distance" (one thing
impacting another with no physical medium transferring the influence)
to describe this gezeirah.

I have a problem with this Chazal as it's not born out (IMHO as well
as RET's testimony) by experience. I also prefer to minimize the role
of non-physical causality that isn't a matter of sechar va'onesh. So,
I started seeking an explanation of this gezeira that makes it a more
rationalistic law.

Perhaps the medrash is describing the difference between an MIA and
someone who was buried; there is no "closure", no certainty. This requires
reading "vesavur" (in "hachai vesavur shemeis") as being a lower level of
confidence. Perhaps in contrast to the more expected "venechashav she-".

In which case, BR wouldn't be discussing someone about whom there is no
reason to wonder, worry, and hope-against-hope.

(BTW, another shitah in the medrash is that Yaaqov was mourning the
beris, which he felt Yoseif's alleged petirah proved had ended. Not
Yoseif himself. Yaaqov avinu figured that perhaps he violated his side
of the deal by marrying two sisters or getting hana'ah from Lavan's
not-so-appropriately gained goods.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nearly all men can stand adversity,
micha at aishdas.org        but if you want to test a man's character,
http://www.aishdas.org   give him power.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                      -Abraham Lincoln