[Avodah] Ikkarim redux

[Meir Shinnar]

RTK

> As RMS has stated several times that there is no universal  
> acceptance  of the
> 13 ikkarim in our sources, I wonder a) which of the 13 are not   
> universally
> accepted as binding and b) which of the 13 he personally does not   
> believe.
> Also I wonder when he says that the ArtScroll's acceptance of the   
> 13 ikkarim is
> a "minhag taut" -- I wonder what exactly is the taus that   
> ArtScroll has
> made, in his opinion?
>

I am surprised at RTK, normally a close reader -
a) I have never said anything about my personal belief - I think  
reducing it to the personal is problematic - so I wonder where she  
got the idea.  If she wants to know, I believe in 14 ikkarim - the  
thirteenth + ibn ezra's vehamalach ben ha'adam ve'elokav hu sichlo   
(or, to rephrase, ani ma'amin be'emunah shlema shehatora lo machricha  
lih'yot shoteh) - something I am sure the rambam would have fully  
agreed with (and is also relevant to other threads - such as  
understanding vashti's tail)

b)I have never said anything about Artscroll and the Ikkarim - I was  
talking about the acceptance of the artscroll siddur by the community 
(again, please read what I said), and, as said there, I don't think  
this is an appropriate forum for the discussion of artscroll.

c) What we have been talking about is something else.

   1) RM Schapiro documented that there wasn't universal acceptance  
of the 13 ikkarim - not merely not acceptance of them as defining the  
ikkare emunah, but people who were cholek on their validity - this is  
in his article and book.

No one has mounted a serious refutation of that point - but instead,  
people have argued that that diversity of opinion, while recognized  
as having existed, is halachically irrelevant - because every posek  
today uses them - and the discussion was over the truth  and  
implications of that assertion.

However, no one, post RM Schapiro, has seriously denied the point  
that there wasn't universal acceptance of the ikkarim.
If RTK wishes to mount a challenge to this assertion, let her...

  2)  Even if one says that the 13 ikkarim are binding, few people  
hold that they are binding in their initial form and meaning - There  
are very few who truly hold that the 13 ikkarim (available in every  
Orthodox siddur, as another poster wished to remind those of us so  
ignorant as to question what they mean...) are truly binding as  
written - in that they would write out those who disagree.... one  
example that most are modeh to is the issue of prayers to mal'achim -  
but there are many other issues (eg, a mekubal who holds that the ari  
reached a greater understanding of the chochma haelokit than moshe  
rabbenu, or someone who holds kipshuto of an opinion in the gmara  
that the last eight psukim of the torah were written by yehoshua -  
there are relatively few who would say that they have the status of  
kofer - and there are many others  - and so people have talked about  
a loose variant of the ikkarim that is binding - while no one has  
actually been able to formulate the precise variant - that would  
include everyone that they want to include - which the whole concept  
rather strange.

This has been compared to saying that the shulchan aruch is binding -  
true, but not quite, as we frequently follow other opinions - but  
saying this about dogma changes the whole notion of dogma...
Of course, RTK may be able to formulate a linguistically precise  
universally accepted version, but, unless one defines the universe  
quite narrowly, that is quite an endeavor.....

Meir Shinnar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20070306/b81d0712/attachment-0002.htm>