[Avodah] ra-ah - da-ah

[Samuel Svarc]

> From: saul mashbaum <smash52 at netvision.net.il>
> 
> RZS responded to my homiletic explanation of the phrase "omedet b"Bavel
> v'roah
> n'veila B"eretz Yisrael" as describing people who live in chu"l and see
> only bad in EY.
> 
> >>
> The problem with this homiletics game is that it is just a game; the
> darshan is really giving his own view, not the gemara's, so nobody is
> obliged to accept it.  But some people are left with the impression
> that this is the gemara's or the medrash's view, and cite it (as was
> done on Areivim) as if it had some authority.
> 
> >>
> 
> When I wrote that homiletically, the phrase means such and such, I of
> course was giving my own homiletic explanation, which indeed others have
> developed as well. I myself did not imply, or mean to imply, that chazal
> gave this homiletic explanation.

...
 
> Having said all this, essentially agreeing with RZS, I am uncomfortable
> with the phrase "The problem with this homiletics game is that it is just
a
> game". I hope that RZS did not mean to be so derogatory and dismissive of
> homiletics as this phrase makes it seem. I do not think that homiletics is
> just a game, or that those who engage in it are merely playing games,
> occupying themselves with a trivial activity. Drush is the the
"literature"
> of Jewish religious literary activity, and like literature often contains
> profound insights into the human condition, society, and our relation to
> Hashem, Torah and mitzvot. However, for all its value, it does not "prove"
> these insights but rather presents them , just as a play does not "prove"
> the points it is trying to make.

We don't need RZS for that, the P'nei Yehoshua already states clearly in his
hagdama, "Ki rov d'rush rochok min haemes k'rchok mizrach m'marriv". So,
yes, drush *is* usually a game, useful more for identifying where the
darshan is holding then a legitimate form of Pardes (Pshat, Remez, Drush,
Sod - The four frameworks in which the Torah is to be understood). However,
when the darshan is a known quantity, like the Chasam Sofer, who, as you so
cogently point out, is known as a tremendous posek with authoritative
tshuthos, then his drush is qualitatively on a different level then a plain
plebian's.

So I accept the drush of R' Meir Shapiro Zt"l... but as explained by RET.
"... There is, on the other hand, a satan who only finds fault with
Yerushalayim, who only maligns the holy, whether it is the people, the city,
the Torah, anything that is reserved for sanctity..." Not, as it has been
blithely repeated here, that it refers to EY specifically, but rather that
EY is to be understood homiletically, representing someone who is on a lower
level and can tolerate it and finds nothing to criticize, but criticizes
those that are on a higher level.

Unfortunately, this attitude is almost endemic in certain posts. Virtually
all types of behavior has been explained, understood, tolerated, etc. here
on A/A. When, however, "frum" people are being criticized the same posters
can be counted on to join the bandwagon (the recent case of the stripped
sheitel comes to mind amongst others...), and they explain, "Frum people are
to be held to higher standards, these people aren't really frum, etc." R'
Meir Shapiro has now given us another, IMHO a more valid, explanation for
this behavior. A deep character flaw, one that "grants" its possessor the
"distinction" of being non-Kosher. 

One can be like the Berdichiver and "liberally" defend all Jews regardless
of where they're holding. One can be more "normal" and defend Shomrei
Shabbos Jews as being usually in the right in their actions or at least be
m'lamed z'chus, while condemning the actions of m'challie Shabbos that are
wrong (like chillul Shabbos), and find support for this stance from hilchos
LH (in the chiyuvim of being m'lamed z'chus). However, those that can be
counted on to be m'lamed z'chus on MchS and fail to do that by ShS are
without any support, neither "liberal" or "conservative" and RMS's drash is
apropos.

I would never have commented on this thread, except it appeared to me that
RMS's drash was being mangled beyond recognition.

KT,
MSS