<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Micha Berger <<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 12:03:48AM -0400, R Richard Wolpoe wrote:<br>
: I have a completely different POV on this matter. Based loosely upon<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d">: archaeology and alleged comments by R. MM Kasher heard from S/A/R High via<br>
: my daughter Chana Yocheved...<br>
<br>
: Hypothesis: the issur of Hametz is rooted in the fact that this was an<br>
: Egyptian delicacy<br>
: hence it's issur for BOTH mizbeyach and for Passover....<br>
</div>: 1. Hebrews in the Land of Canaan ALWAYS ate matzo, Hametz was "alien"<br>
: 2. When HKBH tooks US out of Egypt HE also took EGYPT out of us by<br>
: forbidding this Egyptian delicacy<br>
<br>
But what about the shetei halechem of Shavuos (Vayiqra 23:17)?<br>
<br>
A more fundamental question:<br>
When a mitzvah is an os, does it stand on its own, or does HQBH presume<br>
we know the history? And how much history beyond what we're given in the<br>
Torah?</blockquote><div><br>HBKH was talking to the dor hmidbar they got the message. The message was forgotten.<br>The entire point says 2 things:<br>good news There was a G-d talking to Refugees from Egypt who understood Egyptian metaphors<br>
bad news: later speculation lost he simple points and was either darshaening or rationalizing. But as we several of Rambam's hypotheses in the Moreh have proven true. <br><br><br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
Your proposal would imply that for millennia, non academics got<br>
next-to-nothing out of all the work of bal yeira'eh bal yeimatzei.</blockquote><div><br>The followed orders. Ta'amei hamitzvos were never a big deal re: performance. Think of parah Adumah.<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
I find it hard to believe that a mitzvah ledoros depends on something<br>
from Egyptian culture that is not ledoros and not even mentioned in<br>
the chumash.</blockquote><div><br>Self evident to those who grew up in Egypt. That was the original intended audicence. however if you are suggsting the docuemntary theory of a Document composed in 700 CE or so then your point carries some weight<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
I realize this same question applies to a number of the Rambam's<br>
explanations (eg basar bechalav) but I bet I'm not alone among the<br>
chevrah here who those explanations never sat well with.<br>
<br>
Tir'u baTov!<br>
-Micha<font color="#888888">-</font></blockquote></div><br>The Hinuch did not like the Ramabm's points either. But there is a great deal of evidence to support that the main thrusts fof many hukkim were simpmy anti " ma'seh eretz mitzaryim and eretz k'na'an."<br>
<br>I am sorrow that this paradigm shift leaves you uneasy, but as I posted about 10 years ago, Rav Sa'adyah Gaon already posited that over time hukkim will be seen as more and more rational. The rabbi wer Igrew up taught us this in shul I applaud this development as a fulfilment of the long awaited dei'ah that makes the Torah more and more reasonable, plausible, and utterly sensible. Not to mention historical.<br>
<br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br>RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com<br>see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>