[Avodah] Lying to protect the simple of faith

[Zev Sero]

Micha Berger wrote:

> It is not so clear the IE believed in multiple authorship of the Torah.
> He refers a number of times to the "secret of the 12", each time at a
> point where the Torah refers to something from a perspective later than
> the settling of Israel. E.g. "and the Kenaani was then in the land". The
> Tzofnas Paneiach assumes this refers to later additions to the Torah.
> 
> It should be pointed out, though, that there are Chassidim who agree
> that the TzP is saying the IE believed in real multiple authorship --
> but they therefore don't learn IE. IOW, the belief that there were no
> inserted verses, even contextual ones within a naarative, with no nafqa
> mina elmaaseh, was (until this generation's LW) held stronger than the
> belief that the IE is on the list of "real rishonim".

They agree that this is what the TzP says IE believed, or they agree
with the TzP that IE indeed believed this?  It's easy to do the first
without the second.  IE is generally accepted as a kosher source, but
honestly, who on earth was the TzP (Tov-Elem)?  Since when is *he*
accepted as an authority?  Why does anyone have a problem with the
idea that Tov-Elem was a kofer, and therefore falsely ascribed his
kefira to IE?


>> 1) When Rambam says the Torah we have is the same as given by Moshe,
>> Rambam cannot possibly believe that this is literally true, for Rambam
>> was extensively involved in textual study of different texts, and even
>> advocated certain Masoretic texts (ben Asher I believe) over
>> others....

I don't understand this claim.  Of course there exist bad copies of the
Torah; any balkore can tell you that!  But where does the Rambam accept
that there's any doubt over the correct text?  On the contrary, he
doesn't even seem to consider the idea, that I can recall.


> IOW, denying "Higher Criticism" doesn't mean denying "Lower Criticism"
> or R' Meir's statement that we lost the true list of chaseiros and
> yeseiros.

Does the Rambam accept R Meir's statement lehalacha?  IIRC he seems to
hold that Ben Asher's text is 100% correct.   A simple way to reconcile
that with the gemara is to assume that Ben Asher and his predecessors
successfully reconstructed the original text, and eliminated all the
mistakes that existed in R Meir's time.




-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev at sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas