[Avodah] inconceivable-- Ben Sorer uMoreh

[Zev Sero]

Micha Berger wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 06:57:40PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
> : Which chachamim?  Bear in mind that the halacha accepted by everybody
> : until about 1800 was that one may *not* do so, and *not* to worry about
> : eivah...
 
> RDR already raised the question about universality. I'm curious too.
> Given the sugya in AZ ein maamidim, it would seem the machloqes rishonim
> is how much eivah (not doing the job, or not doing it even though he was
> going to pay you) vs the Mei'iri. In any case, the Taz is before 1800,
> no? YD 154 s"q 5, seems to assume that in most cases, we are mechalelim
> Shabbos mishum aivah.

On the contrary, he says we are *not*, and has no notion of what has
now become the accepted rule.  The currently-accepted rule that, in
general, we are mechalel shabbos, was unheard-of in his time, and even
up to 150 years after him.  It's a modern invention, so we can hardly
say "lo plug chachamim"; when the metziut warrants it we can apply it,
but not when it doesn't.



> : About that time the metzius of the nochrim seems to have changed
> : and the fear of eivah to have become more real, leading the poskim of
> : that time to rule that one may be mechalel shabbos for this purpose.
> 
> Actually, eivah went DOWN during that period in most places where we
> lived.

No, it didn't.  The change was that there was less respect for religion
and more intolerance for our differences.  Before the Enlightenment,
the goyim took their religion seriously, so they understood our doing
the same.  If we told them that our religion only allowed chilul shabbos
for those who are commanded to keep it, they accepted that without
question; it made sense to them.  And they never expected us to regard
them as our own people; we were clearly separate nations, and that's how
both sides liked it.

The French Revolution brought with it a Devil's deal: we will tolerate
you, *and* let you practise your silly rituals, which we no longer
regard as evil; *if* you will give up your separate nationhood,
"vehayinu le'am echad", equal citizens of our nation, and stop taking
your religion seriously, just as we have stopped taking ours.  Their
new religion was the Equality of Man, and they expected us to adopt it
as well; to claim that a superstition like Shabbos could take priority
over helping a person in need was intolerable, and to insist on a
distinction between us and them was even more intolerable.  Thus, the
old excuse that Chazal gave, and that all the rishonim and achronim
gave, with every expectation of it being accepted, no longer worked.

At any rate, whether my theory linking it to the Enlightenment and the
French Revolution is correct or not, the fact is every posek until
about the Chasam Sofer was perfectly confident in the same excuse,
which we all know would not fly today.  *Something* must have caused
this sudden change.


> : When that concern doesn't exist, what possible basis could there be
> : for a heter?!
> 
> Darkhei Shalom.

That's a heter for giving away tzedaka money to aniyei akum, but for
chilul shabbos?!  Meheicha teisi?


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
zev at sero.name                 eventually run out of other people’s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher