[Avodah] Torah Study vs. other contributions to soCIETY

[Samuel Svarc]

>From: David Riceman <driceman at att.net>
>
>You're changing your opinion again.  Originally it was Talmud Torah
>which takes priority, then it was kvius of Talmud Torah, then it was
>preparation for Talmud Torah, now it's preparation with the intent of
>enhancing Talmud Torah.  Is there a precise formulation of this
>preference somewhere?  It seems, l'havdil, more like Proteus than like a
>halacha.

WADR, for someone who has misunderstood almost every single point of the
original discussion it takes a certain level of misplaced confidence to
assert this. The odds are that you are misinterpreting what I said again. If
you will kindly point out, i.e. by bringing quotes instead of assertions,
which two posts of mine seem to you contradictory it would be my pleasure to
play Ariadne to your Theseus.

>> In the context of the original discussion, the training for
>> Zaka scenario was used as a stand-in for the exact opposite,
>> where one has the knowledge necessary for Torah but wants to
>> learn it's practical application as a means to save lives.
>>
>Why is that not also Talmud Torah?

How can that be termed TT? What is he learning? Even when he is learning
medical knowledge, such as anatomy, etc., that could be useful for TT, that
study is not called TT. Now, when he already has this knowledge and is
merely learning it's practical application for the purpose of saving lives,
lo kol sh'kein that it can't be called TT. 

>Don't you agree, for example, that
>learning the umanus of shehita counts as Talmud Torah?

No, I don't agree. The halachos of shechita, yes. Practical lessons on how
exactly to hold the knife, no. Pray tell, why do you think differently? Do
you have a source that leads you to this opinion?

KT,
MSS