[Aspaqlaria] Aspaqlaria

[Aspaqlaria]

Aspaqlaria

///////////////////////////////////////////
תשעה באב

Posted: 30 Jul 2009 09:51 AM PDT
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Aspaqlaria/~3/xeyKhDCDbh0/9beav.shtml



אמא! אמא!



///////////////////////////////////////////
Tanakh and Allegory

Posted: 29 Jul 2009 01:45 PM PDT
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Aspaqlaria/~3/D2u0CagY4vg/tanakh-and-allegory.shtml


Someone on scjm asked the following question:

Mainly for those who think some of the tanach is parable

Tanach parable or historical?

How much is parable & how much is historical?

all parable?

parable up to exodus?

parable to david & goliath?

up to Samson & Delilah?

Discovery of the lost scrolls?

A somewhat remedial question, but one I think worthy of having a  
thought-through canonical answer. Here is a polished version of my reply:

My own opinion, one Orthodox  opinion among a wide variety:

All of it, from In the beginning is historical. Much of that history may  
also be parable; G-d orchestrating an event to teach a lesson.

But.

The story of creation, as it actually occurred, is incomprehensible (to  
anyone less than G-d). The historical layer of the text is therefore  
inaccessible to us. I can therefore take whatever I do glean from it and  
treat it as though it were allegorical, because thats all of it that I can  
understand.

To my mind this is entirely true for Genesis ch. 1, ch 2 (the Garden of  
Eden and the forbidden fruit) is somewhat more comprehensible but still too  
alien to our post-fruit experience to be entirely taken at face value.

And of course, the visions actually described by the prophets (including  
but not limited to the Throne vision in Exodus, and the Chariot visions of  
Ezekiel and Jeremiah) are historical descriptions of visions actually seen,  
but the visions themselves are allegorical constructions.

(Whether G-d constructs the allegory, or the persons own intellect wraps  
the alien into the usual matter of sensory experience, I leave open.)

Last, there is an opinion in the talmud that Job was a parable written by  
Moses to teach about providence, justice and suffering.

I know many O Jews who would consider my view on Genesis 1 to be too  
liberal, whether Young Earther omphalists [the universe was created with  
the illusion of age] or believers in a history before this world [invoking  
Bereishis Rabba]. I also know a few on the left edge who would consider  
everything up to Abraham as allegory.

Technically, the only bit that definitionally being Orthodox requires you  
to believe is historical is the exodus; the events commemorated in the  
holidays and we are commanded to remember daily; or the books of Exodus  
through Deuteronomy  and Im not even sure every detail of those. There are  
only 13 mandatory beliefs, and the historicity of Abraham isnt actually one  
of them. But I never encountered an Orthodox-affiliated Jew whose beliefs  
are anywhere close to that level of minimalism, and most of us would  
consider him very misguided (or mistakenly brand him a heretic).

Then there are iffy bits, like Maimonides belief that the three angels  
visiting Abraham, Bilaams donkey, and any other story in which an angel is  
seen or heard, must be prophecy. (Angels arent physical, so how can they be  
seen or heard outside of prophecy?) Not that many O Jews know of his  
opinion, but those that do cant consider its rejection mandatory.

One last omission from the discussion: Idiom isnt metaphor. G-ds Hand is an  
diomatic expression about His Might. The anger of His Nostrils is an idiom  
based on the human response of flaring nostrils when angry; not a parable.



///////////////////////////////////////////
Qitzur Shulchan Arukh 62:2

Posted: 29 Jul 2009 12:21 PM PDT
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Aspaqlaria/~3/ky2DffSN7cM/qsa-62-1.shtml

ב: כשם שיש אסור אונאה במשא ומתן, כך יש אסור אונאה בשכירות ובקבלנות ובחילוף  
מטבע

Just as there is a prohibition of cheating in buying and selling, so too  
there is a prohibition of cheating in hiring, contract work, or money  
exchange.

I think this required spelling out because of the definition of onaah. By  
default, the relevant value of a business deal is the value of the item.  
When we speak of unlawfully overcharging or underpaying, we mean by more  
than 1/6 of the items market value.

This applies to goods. Extending it to services, which are not objects  
holding inherent value, required an explicit statement.



--
You are subscribed to email updates from "Aspaqlaria."
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now:  
http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailunsubscribe?k=PRZnYwkoA8PVlUjrunqKh3NSA-E

Email delivery powered by Google.
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/aspaqlaria-aishdas.org/attachments/20090730/785ce08f/attachment-0002.htm>