[Avodah] ancient minhagim

[Rich, Joel]

A scientific theory can be inherent in the data collected. That doesn't
mean the person collecting the data realized it.

I wonder whether RCB would say that the Rambam would recognize his
lomdus, or whether he would say that the Rambam would necessarily accept
his lomdus as a necessary implication (that he didn't necessarily draw
himself).


Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

==================================================
Listen here for varying approaches :
http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/730439/Rabbi_Zvi_Sinensky/R.
_Tzvi_Sinesky_Brisk_at_a_Crossroads-Between_Lomdus_and_Postmodernism


As I summarized on hirhurim:

What if the Lomdus isn't (gasp!) what the historical Rambam meant?
(humph - you might as well ask what if Chazal were not always on the
same page as each other hashkafically)? R'M Rosensweig would say beneath
the surface (IIUC meaning they might not have been self aware of why
they came to a conclusion) they did mean it; Chazal and Rambam were all
attuned to the internal logic of the Torah (and Ratzon Hashem).  R'A
Lichtenstein would say doesn't matter - there is a Torat Emet and a
Torat Chesed (IIUC - whatever Rambam thought his work is now a cheftza
shel torah - very postmodern).



KT
Joel Rich
THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE 
ADDRESSEE.  IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL 
INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE.  Dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 
strictly prohibited.  If you received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message.  
Thank you.