[Avodah] Essay by R' Aaron Lichtenstein re: Must We Agree with the Torah

[Nachum Binyamin Klafter, MD]

I think that everyone is indeed focusing on the correct passage:  "A person should not say 'I have no desire for pork, or to wear shatnez'..."  The Rambam in the Shemona Perakim Chapter 6 clarifies that this only applies to the chukim, but not to the rational commandments.  (Actually, he states that this commandments should not be referred to as 'sichliyos', but that is not relevant to our topic.)

However, I think that it is easy to take the Rambam's words too concretely here.  I was inspired by the words of Rabbi Aaron Lichtenstein's words on this topic:  ("By His Light, pp. 57-59")
  Does this mean that we should all be burning with a lust for bacon and ham, but simply be restrained because it says in the Shulchan Aruch that you shouldn't eat it? Is it really an ideal that we should always pit ourselves against G-d and then let G-d win, or pit, if you will, the biological part of ourselves against our moral and spiritual selves? Should we encourage this sort of constant conflict? I find it inconceivable that this is the way we are supposed to live.

  Ultimately, the ideal for a person should be that, if the Shulchan Aruch says don't eat ham, then I should feel revulsion for ham. But the question is: What is the basis of that revulsion? If a person feels revulsion towards shrimp or lobster because of some aesthetic consideration therefore he doesn't eat it, then his not eating it is simply a part of the aesthete in him. However, if a person feels that on aesthetic grounds he could eat it, but now he has reached a point where his revulsion is due to the fact that G-d has forbidden it – how can I want something that G-d forbids? - then he has reached a level for which a person should strive.

  If one keeps mitzvot because they happen to coincide with his instincts and intuitions, then it is all part of self-fulfillment and not part of avodat Hashem. Avodat Hashem means to serve G-d for His sake. But once you identify with what G-d wants, you can then bring your own self-fulfillment to be part of your avodat Hashem. Kant believed that a person must always act against his inclination, but we do not subscribe to this position. Judaism does not want a person to feel like a shmatte(rag) all his life, constantly fighting himself, as if the whole of spiritual existence is to be realized through inner tension and struggle.

  Certainly, it is both psychologically and religiously beneficial for a person to find happiness and self-fulfillment in what he does. But we grant this on one condition: that the content and direction of that which makes you feel fulfilled did not start with you. It started with G-d, and through a process which admittedly is difficult, you have gradually been able to shape your own inner spiritual being in such a way that now there is consonance between what G-d wants and what you want...
--
Nachum Klafter, MD 
נחום בנימין קלאפטער
7502 State Road, Suite 2280
Cincinnati, OH 45255
(513)474-8900 FAX(513)233-6693
doctorklafter at cinci.rr.com

-----Original Message----- 
From: avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org 
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 1:43 PM 
To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org 
Subject: Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 143 

Send Avodah mailing list submissions to
avodah at lists.aishdas.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
avodah-owner at lists.aishdas.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Avodah digest..."


A list of common acronyms is available at
        http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/acronyms.cgi
(They are also visible in the web archive copy of each digest.)


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Synthetic Meat (Kenneth Miller)
   2. Synthetic Meat (Richard Wolberg)
   3. Re: Synthetic Meat (Ben Waxman)
   4. Must we agree with the Torah? (shalomyitz at comcast.net)
   5. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Micha Berger)
   6. Synthetic Meat (cantorwolberg at cox.net)
   7. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Lisa Liel)
   8. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Zev Sero)
   9. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Lisa Liel)
  10. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Zev Sero)
  11. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Lisa Liel)
  12. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Lisa Liel)
  13. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Zev Sero)
  14. Re: on orthopraxy (Micha Berger)
  15. Re: Must we agree with the Torah? (Micha Berger)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 00:24:40 GMT
From: "Kenneth Miller" <kennethgmiller at juno.com>
To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Synthetic Meat
Message-ID: <20130806.202440.2795.0 at webmail06.vgs.untd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Just to clarify this layman's understanding of some comments made by others:

R' Zev Sero wrote:

> A BP is meat.  This is a sort of fungus.  If we were to scan a
> piece of bacon down to the molecular level and then synthesize
> a molecule-for-molecule copy using raw materials gathered from
> mineral sources, it would surely be kosher and parev, and have
> no connection to a BP.

R' Nachum Binyamin Klafter, MD wrote:

> The synthetic meat was never a cow and does not resemble meat
> in any manner.  Synthetic meat looks like white pieces of
> tofu. There's no blood in it.  It doesn't not resemble real
> meat in any way.  The meat of a ben paku'ah looks just like
> veal.  But more fundamentally, the sages did not make the
> gezeira of ben paku'ah on synthetic meat.  They made the
> gezeira on a fetal calf.

To those who fear that this synthetic meat is similar to real meat, I ask them to consider: Not only does it lack blood (as RNBK wrote) but it also lacks fat, veins, cartilage, and the like. Or so I would imagine, based on the idea that the culture began with some sort of muscle cell. Even if it began with a stem cell,  I suspect that it would then grow into a messy mass of muscle cells, and not a nicely grained steak.

Akiva Miller
____________________________________________________________
One Weird Trick
Could add $1,000s to Your Social Security Checks! See if you Qualify&#8230
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/520193f37758a13f30b38st02vuc


------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2013 22:15:11 -0400
From: Richard Wolberg <cantorwolberg at cox.net>
To: "avodah at lists.aishdas.org" <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: [Avodah] Synthetic Meat
Message-ID: <427446A7-DF6C-4B2C-9885-271FC8F9F311 at cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Wouldn't this be just as "bad" as poultry in terms of resembling meat,
and thus subject to an issur de-rabanan?
Why would it be? We had the same thing with beef fry when it first came out reassembling bacon. Or any of the synthetic hamburgers. There is no prohibition with them. So why should there be an issur with the synthetic meat?
Sent from my iPhone

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 05:36:00 +0300
From: Ben Waxman <ben1456 at zahav.net.il>
To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Synthetic Meat
Message-ID: <5201B290.9080104 at zahav.net.il>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Hence at the taste test, the testers basically said that the "meat" was 
awful.

Ben

On 8/7/2013 3:24 AM, Kenneth Miller wrote:
>
> To those who fear that this synthetic meat is similar to real meat, I ask them to consider: Not only does it lack blood (as RNBK wrote) but it also lacks fat, veins, cartilage, and the like.



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 16:32:19 +0000 (UTC)
From: shalomyitz at comcast.net
To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
Subject: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID:
<1826058700.1916066.1375979539138.JavaMail.root at sz0120a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"


OK. I deliberately made my subject header provocative... Of course we have 
to agree with the Torah in the sense that we have to obey the Torah. However, 
I want to know if we have to be happy about everything that HaShem commands 
us (or, at least try to). I may wish that I could eat bacon ; obviously I can't do it, but 
is it a problem if I want to and wish the Torah made bacon kosher? 

It seems to me that we are at least obligated to accept that HaShem has some reason 
for all of His mitzvot -- but that doesn't necessarily imply that we can understand those 
reasons and so it may be that from our perspective we would want to do something that 
He tells us we can't/shouldn't. 

I'd appreciate your thoughts and especially sources ... 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130808/faa9d5d9/attachment-0001.htm>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 16:51:23 -0400
From: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <20130808205123.GA19362 at aishdas.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 04:32:19PM +0000, shalomyitz at comcast.net wrote:
: I want to know if we have to be happy about everything that HaShem commands 
: us (or, at least try to)...

RMYG and I discussed this in Jun 2010
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=L#LO%20SACHMOD>
and I'm pretty sure we've had other iterations.

RMYG opened asking about lo sachmod eishes rei'ekha:
> Ibn Ezra famously gives a parable of a villager seeing a princess, and
> it not even occurring to him to desire her, as she is so far above his
> station that it does not even enter his mind as a possibility; so, too,
> he says, we must consider something which is forbidden to us as so beyond
> the realm of possibly being ours, that we refrain from even desiring it.

> I was thinking about this, and I think that the society we live in
> conspires to make this Mitzvah much harder to keep. The American Dream
> is all about upwards mobility...

> Also, how does the Ibn Ezra jive with the Sifra (Kedoshim) that says that
> R' EBA

R' Elazar ben Azarya

>         sad that a person should not say, "I don't want to wear Shaatnez,"
> rather he should say, "I want to, but my father in heaven decreed upon
> me that I can not!"?

I replied:
: What does R' Yisrael Salanter do? He makes a chiluq between kibush hayeitzer,
: doing the right thing despite taavos otherwise, and tiqun hayeitzer, which
: is getting the taavos in line. (And primarily a consequence of the hergel
: set up by kibush).

: The Rambam is usually explained as making a chiluq between mitzvos sichlios
: and shim'iyos. IOW, the Sifrei bedavqa applies to shaatnez or maachalos
: asuros, but not to something people have a native understanding of, like
: arayos.

In a later post, in reply to a question about seeing RYS inside, I quote
Immanuel Etkes's translation of a snippet from Kisvei RYS, pg 165 (taken
from his "R Israel Salanter", pg 294):

    There are two kinds of [character] transmutation: one, in which man
    turns the powers of his soul to the good, so that the power of evil
    is totally uprooted and not seen at all. To accomplish this, it is
    insufficient for man to improve his general will, to long for the
    good and to despise evil, but he must seek the means of correcting
    each individual trait of his soul. This is required in the case of
    the rational [ethically self-evident] commandments, pertaining to
    man and his fellow.... The second way involves the "transmutation"
    of his general will, to love and to heed that which comes out from
    the mouth of God in the traditional commandments [ritual or ceremonial
    law reflecting arbitrary, Divine will] known to us by revelation, and
    to seek out and reduce the power of the appetite in each detail....

I also encountered the idea more than once when learning Or Yisrael, but
(as I noted back in 2010) I couldn't find them again for the discussion.
(I don't know of a searchable copy of OY.)

RMYG refuted my attempt to answer his question:
> that your p'shat won't answer my question as the Sifra specifically uses
> these three examples: 1) Shaatnez 2) Chazir 3) _Lavo Al Ha'ervah_. You can
> see for yourself here, Perek 9, Halachah 10:
> http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14026&pgnum=222

Which leaves us stuck, in that the usual understanding of the
Rambamidoesn't fit the Sifra.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The waste of time is the most extravagant
micha at aishdas.org        of all expense.
http://www.aishdas.org                           -Theophrastus
Fax: (270) 514-1507


------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 12:26:42 -0400
From: cantorwolberg at cox.net
To: avodah at lists.aishdas.org
Subject: [Avodah] Synthetic Meat
Message-ID: <5446D1A0-BB8E-4E79-9B23-014C99A7793B at cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp1255"

The following link is very apropos regarding synthetic meat:
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2293219/jewish/Is-the-Lab-Created-Burger-Kosher.htm

[or <http://j.mp/17a38Le>]

-- 
Years wrinkle the face, but to lose hope wrinkles the soul.  


------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 16:50:54 -0500
From: Lisa Liel <lisa at starways.net>
To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Cc: shalomyitz at comcast.net
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <520412BE.8050309 at starways.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

On 8/8/2013 11:32 AM, shalomyitz at comcast.net wrote:
>
> OK.  I deliberately made my subject header provocative... Of course we 
> have
> to agree with the Torah in the sense that we have to obey the Torah.  
> However,
> I want to know if we have to be happy about everything that HaShem 
> commands
> us (or, at least try to).  I may wish that I could eat bacon; 
> obviously I can't do it, but
> is it a problem if I want to and wish the Torah made bacon kosher?

Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah says "From where do we see that a man should 
not say 'Pork disgusts me; therefore I won't eat it', but rather, 'I 
want it, but what can I do, seeing that my Father in Heaven has decreed 
against it'?"

Lisa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130808/5402536d/attachment-0001.htm>

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 18:20:25 -0400
From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <520419A9.6020703 at sero.name>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

On 8/08/2013 5:50 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> On 8/8/2013 11:32 AM, shalomyitz at comcast.net wrote:
>>
>> OK.  I deliberately made my subject header provocative... Of course we have
>> to agree with the Torah in the sense that we have to obey the Torah. However,
>> I want to know if we have to be happy about everything that HaShem commands
>> us (or, at least try to).  I may wish that I could eat bacon; obviously I can't do it, but
>> is it a problem if I want to and wish the Torah made bacon kosher?
>
> Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah says "From where do we see that a man should not say 'Pork disgusts me; therefore I won't eat it', but rather, 'I want it, but what can I do, seeing that my Father in Heaven has decreed against it'?"


I don't think that answers the question.  What REBA seems to be saying is
that one shouldn't say that I wouldn't want pork, and even if it were
permitted I wouldn't eat it, so the prohibition is no burden on me.  But
I think the question here is, now that it *is* prohibited, is it proper to
want it anyway, but to dutifully avoid it, or is it proper to say that
although it's probably tasty, and if I didn't know that Hashem doesn't
like it I'd probably eat it, but since I do know that I no longer want it.


-- 
Zev Sero               A citizen may not be required to offer a 'good and
zev at sero.name          substantial reason' why he should be permitted to
                        exercise his rights. The right's existence is all
                        the reason he needs.
                            - Judge Benson E. Legg, Woollard v. Sheridan


------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 21:18:33 -0500
From: Lisa Liel <lisa at starways.net>
To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <52045179.4090306 at starways.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

On 8/8/2013 5:20 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
> I don't think that answers the question.  What REBA seems to be saying is
> that one shouldn't say that I wouldn't want pork, and even if it were
> permitted I wouldn't eat it, so the prohibition is no burden on me.  But
> I think the question here is, now that it *is* prohibited, is it
> proper to
> want it anyway, but to dutifully avoid it, or is it proper to say that
> although it's probably tasty, and if I didn't know that Hashem doesn't
> like it I'd probably eat it, but since I do know that I no longer want
> it.

I think that's overthinking things a bit.  I *want* to be able to eat 
baby back ribs.  My favorite food in the world.  If I were to find out 
tomorrow that I wasn't really Jewish, that'd be the first thing I do. 
If they ever come out with a kosher food that tastes the same, I'll be 
eating it.

So... I want to eat pork ribs, but I don't want to eat something assur. 
  What does that mean?  It means that I wish pork ribs weren't assur. 
Should I pretend not to want what I want just because Hashem says so?  I 
don't think so, and I don't think Hashem wants that of us.  There's a 
reason why it's called kabbalat ol.  We aren't always going to be 
gung-ho cheerleaders for what Hashem commands us, but we bend our will 
(not our desires; our will) to Him.

IMRHO, anyway.

Lisa


------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 22:01:53 -0400
From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
To: Lisa Liel <lisa at starways.net>
Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <52044D91.8070100 at sero.name>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp1255"; format="flowed"

On 8/08/2013 9:40 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> So... I want to eat pork ribs, but I don't want to eat something
> assur. What does that mean?  It means that I wish pork ribs weren't
> assur. Should I pretend not to want what I want just because Hashem
> says so?  I don't think so, and I don't think Hashem wants that of
> us.  There's a reason why it's called kabbalat ol.  We aren't always
> going to be gung-ho cheerleaders for what Hashem commands us, but we
> bend our will (not our desires; our will) to Him.

I think that's precisely what the question is, and I'm not so sure that
your answer is correct. It's one tzad, of course, but perhaps, now that
you know Hashem says they're bad, it would be proper, a midas chassidus,
not to *pretend* not to like them, but to develop a genuine distaste
for them. Perhaps now that you know He doesn't like them you ought to try
to become like Him by not liking them either. It's a plausible position,
and the memra that you quoted doesn't contradict it.

-- 
Zev Sero
zev at sero.name


------------------------------

Message: 11
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 21:25:04 -0500
From: Lisa Liel <lisa at starways.net>
To: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <52045300.2090209 at starways.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp1255"; format="flowed"

On 8/8/2013 9:01 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
> I think that's precisely what the question is, and I'm not so sure 
> that your answer is correct.  It's one tzad, of course, but perhaps, 
> now that you know Hashem says they're bad, it would be proper, a midas 
> chassidus, not to *pretend* not to like them, but to develop a genuine 
> distaste for them. Perhaps now that you know He doesn't like them you 
> ought to try to become like Him by not liking them either.  It's a 
> plausible position, and the memra that you quoted doesn't contradict it.

I think you're assigning feelings to Hashem that aren't justifiable.
Is it your contention that everything Hashem says is forbidden to us is
"bad"? If pork is "bad", why would a merciful God permit it to non-Jews?
I think that what REBA is saying is specifically that the important
thing is to obey Him, and not necessarily to clamp down on our feelings
about it. That, in fact, it's more praiseworthy to refrain out of
obedience to Hashem than it is to refrain out of one's own tastes.

And in Pirkei Avot, it says "asei retzonach retzono". Not "asei taamach
taamo" or "asei cheshkeich cheshkav".

Lisa


------------------------------

Message: 12
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 22:38:58 -0500
From: Lisa Liel <lisa at starways.net>
To: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <52046452.7090201 at starways.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp1255"; format="flowed"

On 8/8/2013 9:43 PM, Zev Sero wrote:
> Yes.  I don't think the mitzvos are arbitrary.  Hashem *could* have 
> given us meaningless commandments, and we would have obeyed them 
> willingly anyway, but He chose not to do that.  This isn't muchrach, 
> but I think it's been the consensus view in pretty much every set of 
> sources you care to look at.

I didn't say "meaningless".  That's a false dichotomy.  There may have 
been a utilitarian reason that carries no judgment of "bad" with it.

Lisa



------------------------------

Message: 13
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 22:43:46 -0400
From: Zev Sero <zev at sero.name>
To: Lisa Liel <lisa at starways.net>
Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <52045762.9010602 at sero.name>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp1255"; format="flowed"

On 8/08/2013 10:25 PM, Lisa Liel wrote:
> Is it your contention that everything Hashem says is forbidden to us
> is "bad"?

Yes.  I don't think the mitzvos are arbitrary.  Hashem *could* have given
us meaningless commandments, and we would have obeyed them willingly anyway,
but He chose not to do that.  This isn't muchrach, but I think it's been the
consensus view in pretty much every set of sources you care to look at.


> If pork is "bad", why would a merciful God permit it to non-Jews?

I believe the standard answer is that because of their coarser nature
they're not sensitive to it.  Of course one could also suppose that He
warned us off it and not them, because He loves us more.

This goes also into the area of whether the positive mitzvos have inherent
value, and that is why He gave us them, or whether they're inherently
worthless and their value comes only from His having arbitrarily picked
them.  Which goes to the question of how one understands "ilu nitztavinu
lachtov eitzim".  I was taught that it means if we had been commanded to
chop wood, *and it remained an essentially worthless activity* (beyond the
obvious benefits of exercise and firewood), we would still willingly do it
just because He told us to.  This supposes that the actual mitzvos are
*not* "chopping wood", and for that we are grateful.

Another implication of this chiluk is whether mitzvos have an inherent
reward that is the natural consequence of keeping them, in *addition* to
the reward Hashem gives us for them.  If they have no inherent value, then
the only sechar is that which Hashem gives us.

-- 
Zev Sero
zev at sero.name


------------------------------

Message: 14
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 12:40:15 -0400
From: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
To: Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at aishdas.org>
Cc: saul newman <newman400 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] on orthopraxy
Message-ID: <20130809164015.GB26369 at aishdas.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 08:28:29AM -0700, R Saul Newman wrote to Areivim:
: http://www.jewishjournal.com/morethodoxy/item/i_have_not_been_troubled_by_them_another_angle_on_the_question_du_jour

: question--if one became convinced that tora was NOT mishamayim [r'l],
: would the proper response to become orthopraxic , or to drop everything?

If one found observance to be redemptive, then it would make sense to
become Orthopraxic. Some variant of C philosophy would leave gaps in
one's worldview that may be small enough to ignore.

However, if one did experience the depth of shemiras hamitzvos, why/how
could they be convinced Torah is not miShamayim? The halachic process
which gave them this version of halakhah presumes that the text is
sufficiently Divine to find mounds of halakhos in the very tagin of the
letters. (Even assuming that's guzma.) If the text has imperfections
due to the human hand, then what does that say of derashos, etc...?

There are also philosophies close to O, or even within O, that accept
the data that led to Document Theories within O assumptions. (Not that
I personally think the evidence is sound, but we are talking about
alternatives for RSN's hypothetical nebich-a-kofer.) I posted about this
not that long ago.

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If a person does not recognize one's own worth,
micha at aishdas.org        how can he appreciate the worth of another?
http://www.aishdas.org             - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye,
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef


------------------------------

Message: 15
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 13:43:40 -0400
From: Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org>
To: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>
Subject: Re: [Avodah] Must we agree with the Torah?
Message-ID: <20130809174340.GC26369 at aishdas.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 10:38:58PM -0500, Lisa Liel wrote:
>> Yes.  I don't think the mitzvos are arbitrary.  Hashem *could* have  
>> given us meaningless commandments, and we would have obeyed them  
>> willingly anyway, but He chose not to do that.  This isn't muchrach,  
>> but I think it's been the consensus view in pretty much every set of  
>> sources you care to look at.

> I didn't say "meaningless".  That's a false dichotomy.  There may have  
> been a utilitarian reason that carries no judgment of "bad" with it.

To phrase this idea differently, at least I /think/ it's the same idea
in a different framework:

It could be a hypothetical imperative rather than a categorical one. IOW,
X is bad for someone trying to... rather than X is bad. In this case,
ribis is bad between people in a nation that has a clan/family identity,
but not bad when dealing outside that community. It's morally bad,
but only in one context but not the other.

Similarly, there are things that are destructive for a priest caste
("mamlekhes kohanim") to do because our being priests means the actions
will be received differently. Or because they get in the way of our
ministry and the world needs us as priests.


Getting back to the original topic...

Asei Retzono retzonkha means that we should want to do something simply
because Hashem "wants" it. Regardless of whether or not we know why He
"wants" it, or even whether we can know all that much about the why.

That's a different discussion than belief that no mitzvah is arbitrary.

(Side-point: When we speak of the mitzvos being arbitrary, we mean
they serve no function in the universe(s) as created. However, if
histakeil beOraisa uvarei alma, then the question isn't whether the
mitzvos serve a function in the universe, but whether our souls and
the universe were made such that the proper effects happen from the
mitzvos. And the mitzvos could well have been arbitrary. But really,
IMHO, the mitzvah-creation unit is a single decision -- after all,
He is Absolutely One -- and arbitrariness would only be in relation
to the pair, not the mitzvos given the universe nor the universe given
the mitzvos. Just Creation given His Unknowable Essence.)

There are different reasons why our desires could be aligned with His,
and ahavas Hashem or yir'as haRomemus are only one/two of them. Two other
possibilities are (1) the one Zev and Lisa are discussing: agreeing with
His decision on the topic, and (2) simply aesthetic.

R' Elazar ben Azarya (Sifra Qedoshim 10:22, Weiss ed. Bar Ilan web)
asks where we learn that a person should not say, "Ee ifshi lilvosh
sha'atnez", "... le'ekhol besar chazir", or "... lavo al ha'erva". That
a person should instead say, "Ifshi. Mah a'aseh, vaAvi shebashamayim
gazar alai kakh?"

Then he give his source, "Va'avil eskhem mikol ha'amim, lihyos Li...".
Therefore, he concludes that a person should separate from aveirah and
accept malkhus Shamayim.

The choice REBA presents is between "i ifshi" (wrong) and "gazar" or
"malkhus Shamayim" (right).

REBA is clearly ruling out the aesthetic -- "i ifshi" refers to not
being able to bring myself to do something. Pork is just gross, I would
never touch that! But it's unclear to me that malkhus Shamayim necessarily
means a blind "ana avda deQBH" or if it also includes agreeing with what
we understand of His Reasons for making that gezeira.

Last, "naaseh venishma" could mean that we should expect that that
understanding of elements of His Reasons is a consequence of, not
a cause for, performing mitzvos. So it could be a position somewhere
between "because He said so" and "because it makes sense" -- "because
I trust that whatever He says does make sense."

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man can aspire to spiritual-moral greatness
micha at aishdas.org        which is seldom fully achieved and easily lost
http://www.aishdas.org   again. Fulfillment lies not in a final goal,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      but in an eternal striving for perfection. -RSRH


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Avodah mailing list
Avodah at lists.aishdas.org
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah
http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org


End of Avodah Digest, Vol 31, Issue 143
***************************************


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2242 / Virus Database: 3209/6063 - Release Date: 08/09/13
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20130810/6c913879/attachment-0001.htm>