[Avodah] Ki Seitzeh NOT Strictly for the Birds

[Micha Berger]

On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 01:39:16AM -0400, Cantor Wolberg via Avodah wrote:
: The concept is that even in the animal world, there exists motherly
: feelings (which Rabbi Hirsch refers to as "the noblest profession in the
: world"), and the Torah wants us to be sensitive to these feelings...

According to the Ramban.

Back in the days when the siddur was more of a framework than a fixed text,
the mishnah rules that a sha"tz who says, "al kan tzipor yagi'u rachamekha"
should be replaced. (Among other such banned ideas.)

The gemara (Megillah 25a) asks why, and gives two answers:

a- It arouses jealousy of other animals.
b- Mitzvos are nothing but decrees.

(b) sounds like what philosophers call Divine Command Theory -- saying
that Morality is by definition that which G-d wants. So, I blogged about
it <http://www.aishdas.org/asp/divine-command-theory>

The Maharal (Tif'eres Yisrael ch. 6) explains:

a- According to the first opinion in the gemara, it is because it arouses
jealousy of other animals. The implication is that G-d doesnt run all
of the world equally, and thus some species have a reason to be jealous
of others. It opens room for polytheism or incomplete theism. (Another
example in the gemara is a sha"tz who says "Modim Modim", and thus sounds
like Zoroastian dualism -- also a case of incomplete monotheism.)

b- The second opinion states that mitzvos are nothing but decrees. We
can not assign attributes to G-d. Hashem chose these mitzvos because of
pure Will, not because of this middah or that.

Real DCT. It seems that to the Maharal, din (law) is more than a middah
in contrast to chessed (compassion), since it means our following His
Will. It doesnt imply a trait of Divine Providence, but rather is closer
to G-dhood Itself as pure Will.

The Rambam (Guide III) uses this gemara and Bereishis Rabba (44:1) which
says that it can't matter to G-d whethere we do shechitah or meliqah,
and Rav holds that mitzvos are purely "letzareif ba es haberios". The
Rambam concludes that we needed a rite to elevate how we kill animals,
thats more significant than what the rite is. If Hashem said that we
should shecht from the back of the neck we could ask why not the front? Or
had he told us to take a pepper on Sukkos, we could ask why not an esrog?

The Ramban argues that its a dercree on us because shiluach haqen is
about developing our compassion, not an expression of Hashems. This is
reading the Bereishis Rabba, which explicitly says the difference in
how one slaughters for the sake of our middos, back into the gemara in
Megillah.

(Much more there on my blog.)

RSRH is not the only modern to take the Ramban's position for granted.
We just have to be honest that it's not the only possibility.

:               The only other positive mitzvah which the Torah specifies
: the same reward, is honoring one's parents -- which is considered one of
: the most difficult mitzvoth to observe...

Actually this is a third -- Devarim 25:15:
    Even sheleimah vetzedeq yihyeh lekha
    Eifah sheleimah vetzedeq yihyeh lekha
    lemaan ya'arikhu yamekha al haadamah
    asher H' Elokekha nosein lakh.

I think it's just that Rabbi Yaaqov (Qiddushin 39b) mentions these two.
Perhaps because it were the two mitzvos in the story that turned his
grandfather, Achieir, off of Judaism. (A son was sent as a shaliach
mitzvah by his father to send away the mother bird, fell off the ladder
and died. In the middle of three things that promise protection.)

:                                         From the fact that the easiest
: and one of the hardest mitzvoth both receive the same reward, we realize
: that the reward for mitzvoth or the punishment for aveirot is beyond
: our ability to rate or even understand.

This is from the Yerushalmi. R' Abba bar Kahanah on Pei'ah 1:1 (bottom of
3b).

This contrast two would single out these mitzvos as a pair.

But not because they are the only ones promising the samer reward.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Nothing so soothes our vanity as a display of
micha at aishdas.org        greater vanity in others; it makes us vain,
http://www.aishdas.org   in fact, of our modesty.
Fax: (270) 514-1507              -Louis Kronenberger, writer (1904-1980)