[Avodah] Tinok Shenishbah today - opinion of Gedolei

[Micha Berger]

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 01:34:16PM +0300, Michael Makovi wrote:
: I accept this distinction, but I'd point out that many/most(?) Jews
: today, even if they aren't observant, still believe in G-d. So
: according to the above, many/most(?) could still be counted in a
: minyan.

Actually, my position wasn't a conclusion, but an aproach. I was
suggesting that TsN would make no difference if the pesul is in the
metzi'us, not the guilt. I didn't actually take that idea and apply it
to pesaqim to explain any of them.

But you raise a philosophical issue. When do two people describe the same
thing differently, and when are the differences so fundamental that they
are just using the same word to mean two different things? This is a hard
question in general, doubly so when dealing with HQBH. Because one can't
discuss Essence vs Attribute when it comes to G-d, is there any difference
at all that can't be considered the description of a different G-d?

Add to that halakhah's recognition that we can't read minds -- devarim
shebaleiv einam devarim.

Instead, we have rulings for what range of ideas about G-d are within
the fold. Those that compell the person in question to keep Shabbos. Or
the 13 ikkarim as commonly accepted. Or...

A C Jew whose beliefs only differ from Deism because he believes in
some loosely-defined concept Divine Inspiration -- is his god the same
as my G-d with just different appendant beliefs about Him? That's what
I called a difficult question. Is his beliefs outside the range of norm,
yes. To say they are outside to the point where his prayers mean something
different than the range allowed by halakhah, quite possibly.

It's a possible approach to splitting "counting for a minyan" or stam
yeinam from assuming the poseiq was assigning blame for their heresy.
Whether or not it holds up requires more research than I've done.

: Kal vachomer with stam yeinam; either these nonobservant Jews believe
: in Hashem (ati shapir), or they're atheists or agnostics. If the
: latter, we really don't have to be afraid that they'll sanctify their
: wine to another god!

As above, I disagree -- they could be monotheists who worship a Deist's
god, or Spinoza's god, or some other non-Torah notion of Deity. Second,
you assume that stam yeinam is necessarily adjunct to AZ, rather than
also excluding wine that might have been used for worship of Hashem but
bederekh Emori. I don't know if that's true.

Along the lines of your other thread, a test would be stam yeinam of
geirei toshav. Allowed, or not? Probably not, but I would guess only
because of the other reason for stam yeinam -- intermarriage.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It's never too late
micha at aishdas.org        to become the person
http://www.aishdas.org   you might have been.
Fax: (270) 514-1507      		- George Elliot