[Avodah] literalism

[Yitzhak Grossman]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:02:49 -0400
Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 09:18:49PM -0400, Yitzhak Grossman wrote:
> :> When speaking of nevu'ah, nevu'ah is through chazon -- metaphor is the
> :> stock of trade. And when giving tokhachah, which nevi'im did more than
> 
> : Rambam [0] maintains that due to the superior level of Moshe's
> : prophecy, it was literal and not through "moshol" as were those of all
> : other prophets,  which clearly implies that prophetic literalism is
> : superior to prophetic metaphor.
> 
> Nu, and Moshe Rabbeinu's nevu'ah isn't primarily tokhakhah. Halakhah and
> metaphor don't mix well. Nor halakhah and guzma. Nevuah that is in images
> has value -- when that's the best mode of xommunication; not when it's used
> only because it's the most the navi can reached.

The Rambam obviously understands that the distinction between Moshe and
other prophets with regard to metaphor is due to the former's superior
prophetic level and not, as you seem to be suggesting, to the
difference in the natures of their respective messages. 

> However, your deduction doesn't hold. We are discussing the nature of the
> communication from navi to masses, not from HQBH to navi.

You wrote (above) "nevu'ah is through chazon"; did you mean that the
prophet's public rhetoric, as opposed to God's message to him, utilized
metaphor? Anyway, the Rambam seems to assume that the metaphors
mentioned in the prophecies occurred in the Divine messages themselves,
and were not introduced by the prophets as pedagogical or rhetorical
devices, so I don't understand what you mean.

> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat