[Avodah] Fwd: ikkarim redux

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, February 28, 2007 6:09 pm, R Meir Shinnar wrote:
: They were aware that the raavad was willing to defend those believing in
: hagshama.  You are well aware that the standard yeshivish take on the raavad
: is that there weren't any real rabbanim of stature who actually held in
: hagshama.  There is a difference in taking a position that everyone of
: stature holds is wrong, but some argue doesn't rise to kfira, and saying it
: is kfira - and taking a position that someone of stature held and declaring
: that to be kfira.  That's where Marc Schapiro come is - that he shows that
: many people who are normally considered bar samcha held positions that the
: ikkarim crowd would declare kfira - didn't merely defend those holding them
: as being wrong but held them themselves...

RMShapiro gives historical evidence. That only has an implication on the din
if you are to argue that the poseqim, not the hoi paloi, made a decision based
on a false understanding or ignorance of those facts.

The truth is that we do not have many beqiim in aggadita and machashavah
today. But to say that there is no one in the pyramid of rabbis who do rely on
the ikkarim lemaaseh who knows the late acceptance of the ikkarim is beyond
me. Simple example: R' Aryeh Kaplan wasn't duped into believing the centrality
of the ikkarim by ignorance over the historical debate.

But either way, at this point we've moved the discussion into a realm I find
more productive. Not the history of the ikkarim, but analyzing their halachic
import in light of halachic methodology.

...
: My point is different - yes, the rambam is quite willing to pasken  hilchot
: deot,  and  doesn't quite care about his opposition, and whom he
: classifies.  All the paytanim with prayers to  malachim, even possibly the
: sefirot...
: However, today's psak process is quite different, not just in hilchot deot -
: and in general, we are loathe to declare someone wrong - even if we pasken
: against him (as in all the diyukim leshitato etc..) - and the psak you
: presuppose would exactly do this - because you can't argue leshitato and elu
: ve'elu in kfira...

I'm missing why the Rambam's opinion of the limits of his ikarim are any more
relevent than the historical question of their dispute.

We're talking about whether there is a core underlying the ikkarim as per
Peirush haMishnayos, Ani Maamin and Yigdal that is used to define lehalakhah
who is a kofeir. Not whether the Rambam would be happy with current pesaq, nor
whether the Radvaz or Raavad would.

: let me give a related fact - well known psak of rav  moshe that  the  perush
: attributed to rav yehuda hachasid was a forgery - because the plain meaning
: violates the eighth ikkar - and we now have enough evidence that it wasn't a
: forgery.  (rav moshe wasn't willing to say nu, rav yehuda hachasid held in
: kfira, as some are..) - now that it isn't a forgery, how do we deal with it?

Nothing. Any more than we would overturn precedent and pasqen like a Me'iri.
In fact, RMF's inability to believe shows how tightly held the ikkarim are by
poseqim.

...
:>: yes, as a sociological statement they enjoy an acceptance...

:> You say "yes" and then miscast what I said. I'm talking about pesaq.
:> Halachically speaking, they enjoy an acceptance. It's what most poseqim
:> rely upon.

: I am arguing that the acceptance is more sociological than halachic - the
: basis of it is more that everyone in our community clearly accepts it and
: there is no controversy - rather than an actual halachic argument...

First, "every one our community clearly accepts it" has halachic import.

Second, the basis of it is that "all of our dayanim, poseqim, and kashrus
agencies" accept it. The question then becomes your opinion of the quality of
their knowledge of the issues. I think I already sufficiently showed that they
certainly knew and know enough to know the basic problem, if not every source
dug up by RMShapiro -- the Raavad takes care of that question. And I also
argued that the acceptance is not limited to the gedolei haposeqim who skip
over the aggaditos.

The Meshech Chokhmah may have had what we today call a mainsteam hashkafah,
but RMShKmD certianly knew his rishonim on aggaditos. It can't simply be cast
in terms of questioning the quality of current leadership, the acceptance at
this point goes back centuries.

...
: I would just point out that in the entire discussion of Marc Schapiro's
: book, over many threads and years, no one has ever mentioned any posek who
: has seriously discussed the issues raised in the book - nor pointed to any
: psak that has such a discussion - it has merely been, well, poskim ignore
: his book, they use ikkarim,they have used ikkarim for hundreds of years, so
: his book is irrelevant....

This is an interesting complaint. If his book is insufficient to reopen the
halachic question, why would their ignoring the book be the least bit
indicative?

:                           Furthermore, normally psak does require strict
: parameters (I sort of keep shabbat would not cut it with most...) - and it
: is of interest that no one has been able to define exactly what variant of
: the ikkarim is actually universally accepted....

Normally the edges of pesaq are subject to machloqes, and they are here too.
The Besht and the Gra debated the limits of the 5th ikkar. Kayadua, the Gra's
position goes so far as to assur the third verse of Shalom Aleikhem, whereas
Chassidim make baqashos of a deceased rebbe at his qever. The concluding
tefillos said after Rav Nachman's Tiqun Kelali was eye opening to me -- and,
frankly, made me very uncomfortable.

So there is a core that is agreed upon, but machloqes over the details. Kind
of like "sort of keep[ing] Shabbos" when making tea on Shabbos...

:   Remember, the whole contention was that while the truth of statements
: might be up to debate, poskim have used certain criteria for halachic
: determination on the status of the individual - and the radbaz undermines
: that contention - by arguing, in essence, that the halachic issue of kfira
: is determined by the process and motivation of the individual, rather than
: the fact content of the statement - so the halachic process doesn't have to
: deal with the truth of a given statement....

Yes it does. It has to deal with BOTH issues -- a kofeir is someone who
believes in kefirah because of a rebellion against normative Torah.

: It therefore dramatically widens the range of those who are welcome in the
: community - even though I have a certain conception of the truth that they
: don't .  The entire notion of normative beliefs is therefore quite different

I am not disputing who we should welcome in the community. I am a big believer
in a broad tent, and think we should include mechalelei Shabbos befarhesia in
our definition of O -- as long as they believe the Torah they aren't observing
calls for shemiras Shabbos. There is no other camp that would allow them to
retain this unmassaged definition of Torah, so we make them at home in ours.

A short while later, at 6:53 pm, he wrote:
: 1.  The issue whether kfira as a halachic criteria, rather than as a
: philosophic one, is one properly addressed by halachic criteria - or that
: one should be quite leery of such labels - is not answered by the fact that
: some poskim do - the main point of my post....

During "shalashudis" in shul, I asked R' Jack Love what he thinks. RJL is a
poseiq, and what may be of interest to this chevrah, he teaches responsa
literature and the art of pesaq at YCT. He is also far from ignorant of the
issues raised in RMS's book or of the full variety of O (and non-O) hashkafah
-- in fact, he read both the article and the book, R' Parnes's reply, etc...

Lehalakhah, he does require belief in something that can be kvetched into the
13 ikkarim for geirus and would in theory for wine as well. However, he thinks
that lemaaseh anyone who believes in the Ikkarim's 3 ikkarim probably
qualifies too, hand-waving (this was a conversation, not sitting down with
texts) over a mapping similar to the one I give in
<http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2006/01/ikkarei-emunah.shtml>.

That said, RJL was loathe to apply such criteria except when required for a
decision lema'aseh. If there is no reason to brand someone a kofeir, why
bother? Even if a geirus seemed "iffy", he didn't think one should revisit it
until someone was looking to marry the person (or her child).

If would seem that the criteria, while valid lehalakhah, are divorced from
finger pointing and tzitzis checking. Or deciding who we should welcome to our
community.

:                                                   While radbaz is not a
: contemporary posek, he is a very major posek who rejects the halachic
: approach endorsed by RMB - and he is someone, from a halachic perspective
: (if one does want to use halachic criteria) one can be somech on (and see
: later about the CI)

True. Someone today could rely on another rishon about what is normative and
how much rebellion is kefirah. That doesn't make the dominant pesaq wrong, or
any less truly the pesaq of pretty much everyone.

: 2) The issue of gerut is quite different than the issue of kfira -
: the criteria that bet din uses in order to accept one into
: the club are not necessarily the same as the ones that one would use to
: define kfira in other halachic circumstances.

And wineries?

But about geirus, that's only true lechat-chilah. What about someone who they
notice is a mechalel Shabbos, and now her daughter found a nice boy and wants
to get married. If I could afford to be a betting man and still pay tuition, I
would put money down on: Shabbos, kashrus, taharas hamishpachah, and the 13
ikkarim.

And I include rabbanim who know the Raavad and thus that the Rambam's ikkarim
weren't universally believed in his day.

: 3) The other main issues where kfira may have a halachic role are ones where
: there are actually few tshuvot, especially by major poskim, to justify RMB's
: position.  eg, a kofer can't be counted in a minyan - but, AFAIK, most
: poskim don't have a problem counting people who do not believe in the ikkarim
: and are therefore, according to people here, kofrim....

Umm... Tinoqos shenishbe'u. You're the one who raised the difference between
believing in kefirah and being a kofeir by mentioning the Radvaz. But again,
he doesn't eliminate the need for defining kefirah as a shiur for when
contrarianism is considered true rebellion.

Tir'u baTov!
-mi

-- 
Micha Berger             Spirituality is like a bird: if you tighten
micha at aishdas.org        your grip on it, it chokes; slacken your grip,
http://www.aishdas.org   and it flies away.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                            - Rav Yisrael Salanter