[Avodah] Historicity of Aggadta

[Micha Berger]

(To catch up RSM, who I CC-ed, RZL and I are arguing about how to
understand the Rambam's position on the historicity of aggadita.
The part I could use your help with is in his description of the
3td kat. See below.)

On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 09:55:13PM -0500, H Lampel via Avodah wrote:
: You are saying that Rambam repeated in a historic context the Talmud's 
: plausible reports of events principally for "a literal point worth 
: making," and not because he assumed them to be actual historical 
: events? But surely you agree that the Rambam  recorded Chazal's reports 
: of the Chanuka victory and oil miracle (Hilchos Chanuka 1-3)...

Thinking about your example for a minute: The story of the Chanukah oil
might not be an aggadic story, as the chiyuv of pirsumei nisa is impossible
without knowing the neis. This is the same reason the Rambam records the
story in the Yad, no?

: https://www.torahmusings.com/2017/01/avraham-finding-hashem-spreading-word/ 

I fail to see the relevency of any of this first piece of your post. You
are arguing as thought I said that the Rambam concidered EVERY aggadic
story ahistorical.

What I said was, according to the Rambam none of them were repeated for
the sake of history. Which then leaves the matter of historicity open
to personal opinion.

I have gone further and noted the implication of the notion that history
isn't the point of the story that spending all this time worried about
historicity is itself against the Rambam's description of what medrash
is about. We shouldn't even bother honing a position about when a
medrashic story is historical or not; Chazal didn't care that much, why
should we?

...
: And I refer you again to my point(posted Tue, 26 Dec 201, Message 10) 
: about the Rambam's felt need to identify which aggadic reports were 
: really reports of dreams and which were not...

He felt a need to reassure the rationalist that his mesorah isn't teaching
things that were disproven philosophically.

: But you are going even further than saying the Rambam did /not say/ that 
: plausible medrashim should beassumed to be literal history. You go on to 
: imply that he indicates the principal intent in all historical reports 
: is for their deepest truths, and that the historical veracity of even 
: plausible medrashim is irrelevant.

Which presupposes your answer on the question you raise next:

:      l'fi shedivrei hachachamim kulam /bedevarim ha-elyonim she-heim 
:      hatachlis/ amnam heim chiddah umashal.

Me, as correctly summarized by RZL:
:     "for /all the words of the sages/ are about lofty matters, which 
:     form the ultimate concern, but they are [all expressed through] chiddah 
:     and mashal."
 
RZL's take:
:     for the words of all the wise men /concerning the lofty matters,
:     which form the ultimate concern,/ are truly [expressed in] chiddah
:     and mashal.

Hachakhamim kulam = all the wise men? Wouldn't that need a "kol", as in
"kol hachakhamim", or for emphasis, "kol hachakhamim kulam"?

And what do you do with the prepositional "be-" in "be'inyanim ha'elyonim"
if it isn't "kulam be'inyanim ha'elyanim" -- there is no noun afterward
either.

And "amnam" is not "are truly" but "but they are".

(Side-note: I believe "tachlis" here refers to THE ultimate concern. As
in, out tachlis as human beings, lefi shitaso.)

So, I CC-ed RSM, in case he has time to check the original Judeo-Arabic
for us.

Let's go back to haqdamah to Cheileq, since your quote is only of part of
what I discussed. Earlier in the description of the 3rd kat the Rambam
talks about "mimah shenimtzah bikhlal, divreihem morim al inyanim
amitiyum me'od".

You agree that mashal is the way of communicating deep stuff -- but it's
ALL deep stuff.

(To the Rambam, apparently, someone who qualifies as a Mishlei-style
chakham wouldn't be discussing anything else. Remez typifies "divrei
Chakhamim".)

But let's go on with your parallel passage:
: Fortunately, there is a parallel passage in the Rambam's Hakdama 
: L'Payrush HaMishna that eliminates the mistake that he means that /all 
: the words of the sages/ are really intended only to convey lofty 
: matters. There he phrases the thought:
: 
:     V-al inyan zo ramaz Shlomo b-amro (Mishlei 1:6) "lehavin mashal
:     umelitza, divrei chachamim vechidasam." Umachmas seebos eilu kav-u
:     haChachamim a"h /ess divreihem be-inyanim elokiyim/ beramazim.
: 
:     And to this idea Shlomo hinted/indicated by saying (Mishlei1:6) "to
:     understand mashal and melitza, the words of wise men and their
:     chiddos." And for these reasons (to hide lofty teachings from the
:     undeserving, and to provide material for children and women to
:     develop as their minds mature) the sages, a"h, established their
:     words /concerning inyanim elokiyyim/ [not "all their words"--ZL]
:     through remazim.

Except that what makes it into aggadita IS inyanim elokiyim, and not
their discussion of snake gestation periods for the scientific value
of it.

In any case, the copy at http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/mahshevt/hakdama/6-2.htm
continues after the quote from Mishlei with:
    Umipenei eilu hasibos, sideru hachakhamim a"h divreihem bidrashos
    al inyan sheyarchikahu sekhel hakesil lefi machavto.

It happens not to have anything about inyanim elokiyim. Just that they
are teachings fools will misunderstand so badly that they would be better
off not being given misleading hints.

But again, to really get to this topic, that diyuq is irrelevent
because to get to our point we don't need sources about the topics of
the nimshalim. We need sources from the Rambam saying they ever write
in the gemara anything but those topics, and thus there could be stories
that needn't be of the mashal - nimshal sort.

AND, we need to separate the question of what is mashal from what is
historic. After all, a historical story could be retold for its mashal
value.

In fact, I am saying it always is; which is why we can't pick out the
historical vs ahistorical by any rule. Nor should we be worried overly
much about the question.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             The goal isn't to live forever,
micha at aishdas.org        the goal is to create so mething that will.
http://www.aishdas.org
Fax: (270) 514-1507