[Avodah] Gid ha'nasheh and 'therefore'

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:37:13AM +0200, Lisa Liel via Avodah wrote:
: On 11/26/2017 4:20 AM, Ben Rothke via Avodah wrote:
: >In the coming week's parsha, it has the story of Yaakov wrestling
: >and then concludes:

"Al kein lo yokhlu BY es gid hanasheh."

: >I am trying to figure out the connection between the wrestling
: >injury and klal Yisroel not eating gid hanasheh.

: >The term '[al kein]' implies consequently, to which I don't see the
: >consequence.

: I don't think al ken denotes causation.  In most cases, it seems to
: mean "How correct it is that..."  For example, the two times we're
: told "al ken", the city is called Beersheva.  They can't both be the
: cause.

Why not?

It could be that each were necessary but insufficient causes, so
that the name "Be'er-Sheva" is the consequence of both being true.
Or it could be that each were sufficient cause, and the name
Be'er-Sheva was justified by either alone -- but equally so. And
thus the city's name represents both.

But to answer RBR's question, I don't think al kein implies sufficient
causality. Rather, because of the fight, HQBH had an opportunity to
turn eating thigh meat into a ritual that reminds one of the fight,
and thus of the Jew's ability to act on the level of (in the sense of:
interact with) angels. Without the fight, the mitzvah would lack that
historical symbolism; so it's a cause, but of a different sort than it
seems from your question that you are thinking of.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             It is our choices...that show what we truly are,
micha at aishdas.org        far more than our abilities.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - J. K. Rowling
Fax: (270) 514-1507