[Avodah] History Scenarios and (Emunas) Chachamim??

[Harvey Benton]

When conflicting
medrashic/Talmudic statements describe the same event, (with or without direct
immediate halachic implications – like which fruit Adam ate in Gan Eden, or was
their ever a ir hanidachas/ben sorer u’more) how/why should we believe the
chachamim on other issues?

It has been mentioned (Joseph
Pearlman/Kolel Iyun Hadaf Yerushalayim in the name of the Chazon Ish) that if
the original sefer Torah that Moshe received was found it would be discarded if
it differed from the versions we currently have today.  Assume for the moment that this is true, what
theoretically would be the implications for the Bais Shlish vis a vis the
Menorah and/or the lettering on the Tzitz of the Kohen Gadol?  In the absence of the originals say we were
to construct a menorah in say Year 1 of the Geulah,  with a certain shape (say straight-arms), and
then 40 years later the original Menorah turned up; would we still hold by
straight-armed one that we had constructed, or would we have to admit our (historical)
error and either re-construct a new menorah (with curved arms), or use the
original Menorah that had been found (also with curved arms). 

Similar scenarious could apply
to Rashi/ Rabeinu Tam/Shmushei Raba and/or Raivad Tefillins etc?  Do we Care what either: what Hashem told
Moshe or Bnei Yisrael to wear? Or do we ignore historical facts, despite the
fact that either Moshe Rabeinu himself could tell us (techiyas Hameisim) or
Eliyahu Hanavi (or someone else) could reveal to us the exact and necessary
order of the parshios.  Simila reasoning
could apply to the chilazon fish/techeiles, other scenarios, etc. 

All the best from galus L
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20090330/73daf99e/attachment-0001.htm>