[Avodah] Loving Israel while in Chutz

[Micha Berger]

On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 02:57:38PM +0300, Michael Makovi wrote:
: > But how do you know "aretz" here is physical?

: I'm taking it as p'shat - inheriting the land = just that; physically
: living on it. Applied to Olam haBa, it means living on the land
: forever, after techiat hameitim.

However, all references to olam haneshamos are beremez. Assuming that a
havtachah must refer to physical aretz presumes your conclusion.

I am also not sure the distinction really is about peshat. More frequent
vs more rare translation, perhaps.

: The Kehati mishna brings this interpretation, that "kol yisrael yesh
: lahem chelek l'olam haba"
: refers to after techiat hameitim; I believe it is b'shmo Bartenura.

And not Peirush haMishnayos lehaRambam. See the introduction to pereq
Cheileq. You should have the time now. <g>

All you showed is that in the machloqes between the Rambam/Ran/Ikkarim
and the Ramban, the Barenura holds like the latter. It doesn't prove one
side over the other. (Nor is it likely to -- it would mean you found
something the Rambam didn't. Unlikely.)

...
: Yes, Rambam does say that techiat hameitim is only temporary, but this
: is a very strange idea IMHO - why would it even occur to Rambam that
: we'd be resurrected only to die again? ...

But the Rambam himself explains why: Because justice requires the soul
reside again in a body when judged, otherwise the defendent isn't present
as his own trial. The Ikkarim gives a different answer: This life is
to master avodas Hashem in a limited universe, the next time around is
level 2: all the limitations are our own.

: (*) Lest anyone be astounded at my insinuation that Rambam based his
: philosophy on Aristotle, Rav Hirsch already came before me in
: declaring that Rambam interpreted
: Judaism's philosophy according to alien standards...

However, you don't dismiss the Rambam altogether on all aggadic issues,
so you really aren't being consistent in invoking this idea now. You
also shouldn't abdicate from the job of needing to understand the Rambam,
rather than only looking at formulating your preferred answer. It might
just change your preference.

The Rambam is compelled not by Aristo, but by the fact that our bodies
and their senses are distractions. They provide desires other than
that for the ultimate -- experiencing the A-lmighty, leihanos miziv
haShechinah. And thus, a distraction diminishing ultimate reward. It's
Aristotilian of him to think that's about comprehending Hashem rather
than some other aspect of experience. But the concept that bodies just
get in the way of ultimate reward really isn't specifically Ariso.

In fact, Aristo has little to say on afterlife that is usable by a Jew.
His definition of soul, "first actuality of an organic living body"
(De Anima II. 1) seems to preclude the entire concept of a soul not
ending at death.

: (**) It was pointed out to me that I am using "okimta" in a
: Conservative sense. Granted, the traditional understanding will simply
: be that Chazal were teaching the true original intent of the Mishna,
: that was hidden simply due to its brevity...

But the Rambam didn't "okimta techiyas hameisim away". He made it an
ikkar emunah. A move that wasn't compelled by the sources; it was
within his worldiew that ThM is central to defining Judaism!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 46th day, which is
micha at aishdas.org        6 weeks and 4 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Netzach sheb'Malchus: How can some forms of
Fax: (270) 514-1507                         "unity" be over domineering?