[Avodah] Who is a Talmid Chacham

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 06:37:43PM +0300, Doron Beckerman wrote:
:> You were the chareidi in question.
: 
: And I am VERY troubled that you think it okay to espouse and post a notion
: (is it accepted non-Charedi thought?) that any thought expressed by a
: Charedi is indicative of "accepted Charedi thought." I actually find
: it deeply offensive. Who even says I'm a Charedi? By whose definition?

R' Shach's statements are "accepted Chareidi thought", in particular in
Israel. So your proposed defense, relying on defying not only R' Shach's
position, but a cause he used to declare someone's writings -- even on
other subjects -- michutz lamachaneh, doesn't work. Not because you
personally must follow REMS, but because the people whose decision you're
explaining do.

:> R' Yehudah's very complaint...

: How do you know it is a complaint? Did you look up the Maharsha?

The Maharsha is where I got the idea that R' Yehudah bases his shitah
of what was Asa's cheit (drafting chasanom and kallos) on it not being a
milkhemes mitzvah.

Which is why I don't think any discussion of Asa's wars has anything to
do with today's defensive wars. (See definition of a milkhemes mitzvah
in Hil' Melakhim 5:1.) A war aimed at saving lives or defending existing
borders does call for drafting chasanim and kallos -- something to think
about if we ever get to discussing giyus banos.

In addition to the milkhemes mitzvah vs Asa's milkhemes reshus issue,
Rav emphasizes that the TC were being drafted for grunt work and not
core duties. Which brings us to "anagriah"...

:> If it were the draft
:> altogether, and we assume he disagrees with R' Yehudah because it taqeh
:> /was/ a milkhemes mitzvah, why the rare Greek (transliterating the Greek
:> original: aggareia) loan word?

: Did you look up the definition of the term Angaria!? It does NOT, NOT, NOT
: mean "loan"  in the Gemara!! ...

In Greek (from which the word was borroed -- thus I called the word a
"loan word") it means specifically to collect enemy materiel for use
in the war. This meaning is still its usage in English. It is also is
how "anagria" is used in BQ and BM, when discussing an owner who loses
animals to anagria.

In Asa's case it is clear from the rest of the pasuq that the work in
question is anagry in the Greek, Latin and English sense of the word
"... vayis'u es avnei haramah ve'es eitzeha asher bana Ba'sha..."

Angaria is "bevinyan, vachavita ... lishruras hamelekh" (from which Hil'
Talmud Torah 6:10 exempts the TC), not lehilakheim.

:> Sheivet leivi isn't listed in Hil' Melakhim, so we
:> can argue whether their petur applies for milkhemes mitzvah.

: Zev already explained that. Besides, I already quoted RMF that it isn't
: clear that the wars today are Milchemes Mitzvah.

And I acknowledged that it was possible to pasqen that way, and that many
did. But it is far from clear-cut enough to be called a "proof" of anything.

:> And the
:> ability for anyone to assume the role of sheivet Leivi doesn't mention
:> whether this is also for the draft altogether.

: It is pashut pshat in the Rambam,

Depending upon what you walk up to the Rambam depending to find. To wit:
:> Nor is a petur for the
:> draft mentioned when discussing their petur for paying for the police.

: Because those are two entirely separate issues.

Less so than public support vs drafting. At least there, both are
contrubitions and both are about defense.

Look at how the Rambam discusses sheivet Leivi, without presuming one
conclusion or the other. I'm looking at the end of in Hil' Shemittah
veYovel (13:12-13). Halakhos 10-11 said that sheivet leivi do not get
spoils or land specifically from the EY HQBH promised the avos. 

12 now says why, "mipenei shehuvdal la'avod es H' ulsharso... lo orikhim
milkhamah... ela heim cheil H'... veHu barukh Hu zikah lahem..."

And 13, "velo sheivet leivi bilvad". How far does this go? A TC from
one of the other shevatim has nachala. So the Rambam's arguments against
getting spoils doesn't apply. For that matter, he proves his point from
David haMelekh "H' menas chelqi vegorali..." (Tehillim 16:5) And David
haMelekh DID go to war, and DID take spoils from war -- both metaltalim
and qarqa.

It would seem just as compelling to say that the Rambam was closing his
Seifer Zera'im -- a book that to a large extent is aimed at an agrarian's
sociaty's baalei bayis -- with aggadita, promoting to those who are
capable of it ("vehevino mada'o") to go into kelei qoedesh. (Nothing
specific there about learning, BTW, but "lesharso ule'avdo, ledei'ah es
H', vehalakh yashar...")

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If you won't be better tomorrow
micha at aishdas.org        than you were today,
http://www.aishdas.org   then what need do you have for tomorrow?
Fax: (270) 514-1507              - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov