[Avodah] Torah Study vs. other contributions to soCIETY

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, May 14, 2007 7:25 pm, Doron Beckerman wrote:
: RMB says:
:>> In any case, a statement about interrupting a mitzvah can't be
:>> taken to be one about prioritization. <<
:
: That wasn't the source quoted for this discussion. The source was the
: Gemara in Megillah which states that Talmud Torah is indeed greater
: than Hatzalas Nefashos as a choice of prioritization. This is what
: the Chafetz Chaim was talking about.

The gemara, Megillah 16b, was discussed back in v13n43. See RAM's post
at <http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol13/v13n043.shtml#03> and
responses. I was running with a different one raised later. But the
gemara in question is about Mordechai giving up kavod haTorah for
hatzalas nefashos. Which he held was the right choice. Nor did they
tell him it was the wrong choice. Just the one that left him lesser
(in the relevant way).

:>> To never leave the "ivory towers" of talmud Torah to apply that
:>> Torah beguf and to the real world would be form with no substance,
:>> empty and without embodiment.

: What of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai and his group, who are granted Toraso
: Umanuso exemptions from Mitzvos Ma'asiyos?

... and whose talmidim didn't succeed and we are told not to follow?

:> Second, as I said on top, the mishnah calls on us to have equal
:> zehirus for all mitzvos -- even ones that are qalos in some ways
:> compared to others! So how can we then take talmud torah keneged
:> kulam as proof to give it more zehirus?

: As above, that isn't the source that proves this. And, who is
: advocating less Zehirus in other Mitzvos?

Isn't that what one is saying when one asserts that being available
for talmud Torah whenever one's kishronos are up to it is a priority
over those other mitzvos. A justified lack of zehirus, being
sacrificed for what is deemed a higher priority -- talmud Torah.

So I reiterate my question -- how does this notion of focussing on one
mitzvah not violate the mishnah of havi zahir, which seems to me to
advocate as broad of a focus on mitzvos as possible?

On Tue, May 15, 2007 3:48 pm, David Riceman wrote:
: Samuel Svarc wrote:
:> No one thinks learning subjects that will help you in Torah is
:> prohibited.

: As you keep telling me, we're not talking about permitted, we're
: talking about preference. If it's inappropriate to study Aristotle,
: rather than studying Torah full time, why did the Rama do it?...

This argument isn't TuM, it's Gra-style "100 yadim of Torah for 1 yad
of other chokhmos". The original question was whether a TuM-nick would
question the Gra's decision to learn full time. On these grounds, the
Gra himself would. And it has nothing to do with TuM philosophy.

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