[Avodah] yovel

[kennethgmiller at juno.com]

R' Micha Berger cited R' Zev Sero, who in turn referred us to "Leaves of Faith: The World of Jewish Learning" by Rav Aharon Lichtenstein, which can be read on Google Books at http://tinyurl.com/3mvv9cl

Some of the questions I was going to ask RMB and RSZ were anticipated by RAL himself, who writes, on page 66-67 there:

> If we ask, in purely descriptive terms, whether anyone born of
> Jewish parents is a Jew, the answer must be yes. As an epithet, the
> terms "Jew" remains applicabe to any individual who was ever endowed
> with Jewish status - even to a meshumad. Hence, he is obligated to
> pursue a Torah life, and should he decide to return, he would
> perhaps require no new conversion.(38) However, if we ask whether a
> meshumad has anything of a Jewish personality and character, and
> whether therefore, he continues to be endowed with the personal
> status of a Jew, the answer is a ringing no. He remains a Jew
> without Jewishness. What he retain is simply the descriptive
> epithet: shem Yisrael. Of kedushat Yisrael, however - of the
> sacredness of the Jewish personality, that which essentially
> constitutes being a Jew - he is bereft. And let us remember that
> kedushat Yisrael is not simply a psychological condition or even a
> legal status. It is also a metaphysical state. Of this, the meshumad
> is divested completely. As he has renounced Jewry, so Jewishness is
> divorced from him.
>
>...
> Footnote 38: The first point, that the obligation remains, is
> certain. The second, that reentry would not necessitate gerut, is
> open to question. One might argue that even for one who is endowed
> with shem Yisrael, the recovery of kedushat Yisrael requires full
> gerut. It may also be contended that gerut would not be required,
> but only because the return to the fold would retroactively cancel
> the earlier renunciation.

To me this sounds like a contradiction. Clearly, RAL is trying to describe a very subtle point, but I am lost on it. I hope someone can explain it to me.

If RAL had said that this person is legally and technically a Jew, but socially and psychologically a non-Jew, then I would understand completely. But that is not what he said. He said that this person "is obligated to pursue a Torah life", yet at the same time, "of kedushat Yisrael, however - of the sacredness of the Jewish personality, that which essentially constitutes being a Jew - he is bereft."

I do not understand. Aren't obligation in mitzvos and kedushas Yisrael the exact same thing? Isn't this what we mean by "Asher kid'shanu b'mitzvosav"?

How can a person be chayav in mitzvos, yet bereft of kedusha? Perhaps the kedusha is too small to perceive, but is this not what is meant by the Pintele Yid? And is this not the exact situation where we look for that Pintele Yid?

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
57 Year Old Mom Looks 27!
Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4e0b7bc0b3f9a1225a5st04vuc