[Avodah] loshon of the gemorrah/kol mi she'omer

[T613K at aol.com]

From: Harvey Benton <harvw613 at yahoo.com>
T"

the  gemorrah loshon is "kol mi she' omer"....that dovid didn't sin, etc, 
ela  
only toeh....
the gemorah does not say that dovid, and shlomo, etc did  not sin, 
because the loshon and tone of the novi, is that they did  definitely sin 
(otherwise why the rebuke from the novi re: batsheva, and his  first-
born dying, etc???)
-----
however, the gemorro is teaching us  perhaps, that, on our level, 
"kol mi she' omer" whoever "says" that they  sinned, is mistaken, 
because on our level we dont' really understand what  their sin was....
and are therefore unable to say it 
(eg, above out pay  grades, but not above the novi's pay grade....)
---
otherwise, how to  explain this discrepancy from novi to gemmorrah??
 


>>>>>
 
 
You are concentrating on "whoever says" but the part you should  
concentrate on is "he didn't sin."  The Gemara is not addressing  the issue of whether 
a person should give voice to his thoughts.
 
Your main question has already been asked and answered on Avodah more than  
once, but it's easier for me to summarize the answer than to find the old 
thread  in the archives.
 
"Whoever says Dovid sinned is mistaken"  MEANS "Whoever thinks that  Dovid 
committed the sin that a simple reading of the pesukim would imply --  i.e., 
whoever thinks he committed the sin of adultery -- is mistaken."  
 
Batsheva wasn't married because her husband had given her a get before he  
went off to war, as all Jewish soldiers did back then, to prevent questions 
of  agunah from arising.
 
At the same time, it is glaringly obvious from the sharp words of Nasan  
Hanavi that even if Dovid didn't technically sin, what he did was nevertheless 
 very wrong, especially for a man on his madreiga.  He had used a halachic  
technicality to take another man's wife "legally."  (He then sent the man  
into the most dangerous part of the battle in order to get him killed in  
battle, but as king he had the technical right to send any soldier wherever he 
 wanted; additionally the man was chayav misah because he had disobeyed the 
 king's orders -- although I'll admit that whole case is cloudy, hard to  
understand and hard to justify.)
 
>From the navi's words, and most of all from Dovid's response to Nasan  and 
his lifelong remorse and emotional Tehillim of repentance, it is  obvious 
that "he didn't sin" is not meant literally.  Dovid said to  Nasan, "Chatasi 
Lashem." 
 
So you have to understand what the Gemara means when it says "he  didn't 
sin."   People who have learned a lot of Gemara, like people  who have read a 
lot of any given literature, pick up a sense of what words  and phrases 
mean.  Like when somebody says, "Well blow me  down!   You could knock me over 
with a feather!" -- an  overly literal reading would lead to a 
misunderstanding.  You might  try to blow the guy down or push him down with a feather, 
and then accuse him of  lying if he remained standing.  So, an overly literal 
reading  of the  Gemara leads to many questions that would be easily 
resolved or not even arise  if people just had a feel for the flow of language.
 
 
 
--Toby Katz
================







_____________________  




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20110702/b9dbe1cd/attachment-0002.htm>