[Avodah] is this ok?

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 03:45:39PM +0000, Akiva Miller wrote:
: R' Saul Newman asked:
:> why does an ex-meshumad toivel?
:> is there not an inyan of removing tum'ah?

: We tend to associate tevilah with removal of tumah, but that is a
: gross over-generalization. Tevilah is also often done to add kedusha.

I'm not sure I agree.

: I think the simplest example of this is the many tevilos done by the
: Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur - surely no one thinks that there's any tumah
: he needs to get rid of. I would think that tevilas keilim is another
: example - the pots aren't really tameh, are they?

I'm not as sure. Perhaps it is just in case he touched something?
But really, I think the tevilos of the KG are commitment ceremonies;
ways of focusing kavanah for the task ahead. This is similar to "adding
qedushah", but not necessarily the same thing.

:                         I would think that tevilas keilim is another
: example - the pots aren't really tameh, are they?

Tevilas keilim or actual geirus are also commitment ceremonies.

And I think the tevilah of the ex-meshumad is a way to concretize his
breaking ties with the old faith community. Which is why we named this
practice as though it were a form of geirus, even though it isn't.

: I think there are also times when tevilah is for *both* tumah and
: kedushah reasons: When men tovel for Shabbos or Yom Tov, for example,
: I understand it to be for both purposes - getting rid of those
: forms of tumah that we are able to get rid of, and also for added
: kedusha. Similarly, the tevilah of a ger - While one could argue that
: it is to get rid of the rabbinically imposed tumah of non-Jews, the
: d'Oraisa requirement must be for something above and beyond that.

There is an overlap between taharah and qedushah: Taharah is
separation from gashmius. RSRH, kedarko beqodesh, phrases the idea in
lesson-teaching, psychological, terms (commenting on Vayiqra 11:47):

    A dead human body tends to bring home to one's mind a fact which
    is able to give support to that pernicious misconception which is
    called tum'ah. For, in fact, there lies before us actual evidence
    that Man must -- willy-nilly -- submit to the power of physical
    forces. That in this corpse that lies before us, it is not the
    real human being, that the real human being, the actual Man, which
    the powers of physical force can not touch, had departed from here
    before the body -- merely its earthly envelope -- could fall under
    the withering law of earthly Nature; more, that as long as the real
    Man, with his free-willed self-determining G-dly nature was present
    in the body, the body itself was freed from forced obedience to the
    purely physical demands, and was elevated into the sphere of moral
    freedom in all its powers of action and also of enjoyment, when the
    free-willed ruling of the higher part of Man decided to achieve the
    moral mission of his life;

R. SR Hirsch portrays the tamei object as one that causes the illusion
that man is nothing more than a physical object, an animal, a helpless
subject to physical forces and physical desires. In reality,

    death only begins with death, but that in life, thinking striving and
    accomplishing Man can master, rule, and use even his own sensuous body
    with all its all its innate forces, urges, and powers, with G-d-like
    free self-decision, within the limits of, and for accomplishment of,
    the duties set by the laws of morality;...

Qedushah is a commitment to avodas Hashem which can only come through
a separation from competing life-goals. As R' Shimon Shkop writes
(translation mine):

    In my opinion, this whole concept is included in Hashem's mitzvah "Be
    holy, [for I am Holy]." (Vayiqra 19:2) The Midrash (Vayiqra, Emor,
    ch. 24) says about this verse: "Can it [truly] be 'Like Me?' This
    is why it continues, 'for I am Holy' to teach that My Sanctity is
    above yours." And about the foundation of this mitzvah of sanctity
    the Toras Kohanim has "'be holy' -- be separate". Nachmanides,
    in his commentary on the Torah, explains at length this notion of
    separation as it is stated in this mitzvah, that it is separation
    from excessive comfort and pleasure -- even if they are actions that
    are not prohibited to us. In one illustrative statement, he writes
    that it is possible for a person to be disgusting with [what would
    otherwise be] the permission of the Torah, see his holy words there.

    According to this, it would seem the Midrash is incomprehensible. What
    relevance does the concept of separation have to being similar to the
    Holy One? The verse tells us with regard to this that His Will is not
    like this. As it says, "Can it [truly] be 'Like Me?' This is why it
    continues, 'For I am holy' to teach that My sanctity is higher than
    yours." It is more difficult to understand "My sanctity is higher
    than yours." This explanation is incumbent upon us to understand --
    in truth there is some similarity in the holiness He expects of us
    to His [Holiness], except that His Holiness is more general and
    inclusive. If we say that the essential idea of the holiness He
    demands of us (in this mitzvah of "be holy") is distance from the
    permissible, that kind of holiness has nothing to do with Him.

    And so, it appears to my limited thought that this mitzvah includes
    the entire foundation and root of the purpose of our lives. All
    of our work and effort should constantly be sanctified to doing
    ...

I'm eliding RSSkop's definition of what avodas Hashem focuses upon,
as history shows it can prove distracting.

    .... And as understood, all holiness is being set apart for
    an honorable purpose -- which is that a person straightens his
    path ... Then, anything he does even for himself, for the health of
    his body and soul he also associates to the mitzvah of being holy,
    for through this he can also do [avodas Hashem -mb]...

    In this way, the concept of separation is a consequence of the
    underlying basis of the mitzvah of holiness, which is recognizable in
    practice in the ways a person acts. But with insight and the calling
    of spirituality this mitzvah broadens to include everything a person
    causes or does even between him and the Omnipresent. In relation to
    this, this holiness is comparable to the Holiness of the Creator
    in whatever little similarity. Just as the Act of the Holy One in
    all of creation, and in each and every moment that He continues to
    cause the universe to exist; all His actions are sanctified...

The question of whether Qedushah means following the letter of halakhah
or going beyond it appears to be a machloqes Rashi and the Rambam on
one side (halakhah), and the Ramban (beyond halakhah) on the other. See
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2010/11/qedushah.shtml where I posted on
the latter two points ("tahor mei-" vs. "qadosh le-", and din vs lifnim
mishuras hadin).

This distinction between qedushah and taharah leads me to my next post,
on a different thread...

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             If a person does not recognize one's own worth,
micha at aishdas.org        how can he appreciate the worth of another?
http://www.aishdas.org             - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye,
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef