<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>RYZ wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>according to you in the part of the<BR>Nvuoh that is meant for conveyence
(which is the most important) there is no<BR>difference by the fact that he sees
thru Eina Meiroh,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>CM asks:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Frankly, I am not 1000% sure, but I would assume
that there would be a difference in the final comprehension between Moshe's
comprehension with aspaklaria hameira and other neviim even after an
"infallible" pisron. But I am not clear where exactly the distinction lies but
have a vague idea as described below.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If I understand you correctly though, you seem to
be saying just that - that the only difference is the method of delivery of the
nevuoh due to the frailty of klei kibul of shar neviim as compared to Moshe
Rabbeinu, as you seem to say in this quote "<FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>the Rambam defines that the Eina Meira is in the fact that it is thru a
Moshol."</FONT><BR> But that after the pisron is received there is NO
difference in the comprehended message? Is this correct? Or is this only
what you impute to me?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>RYZ wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>... <FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>and not
that others see things that are irrelevant.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>In addition why should HKBH show in a nvuoh useless information?</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3></FONT><BR>CM
responds:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I think it is obvious that no part of a nevuoh
"is irrelevant" or "useless," even the moshol or chido without pisron or with
partial pisron (the part Hashem wishes to transmit). The reiyah to this is that
often the moshol or chido was recorded in Nach ledoros. I would speculate that
eventually meaning will somehow (perhaps through chidushei Torah?) be ascribed
even to the denser parts of the nevuoh.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Just to understand you clearly, is it your position
that EVERY part of the mareh has a full pisron, fully comprehended by the
novi? And that the aspaklaria sheina meira only means the method of
delivery, but has no consequence on the level of comprehension of the novi
because he has the aid of the infallible pisron?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>RYZ wrote"</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Where does it say that it was Nvuoh with a Pisron? It was Gilui
Shchina<BR>(Rashi Shmos 15:2) there are different levels in that.<BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>CM responds:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I imagine you mean the Rashi D"H "zeh Keili." I see
no mention of ruach hakodesh in that Rashi?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I recall (from many years ago) that I was taught
that at krias Yam Suf the entire klal Yisroel attained for that brief moment the
level of nevuah. (I hope my memory serves well here, although I do forget my
keys etc. :-), I imagine there must be a medrash somewhere but my bekius is not
adequate. Anyone with a Bar Ilan search?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>RYZ wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>if Eino Meira indicates that there is non<BR>understood parts in the
Cholom, and (that fact itself indicates that) those<BR>parts he doesn't need to
say, then how can there be an entire Cholom w/o<BR>understanding and yet he has
to say it. of course If HKBH would tell him<BR>that he should say it anyway he
would have to, but it would be a Stira in<BR>Higoyon.<BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>CM responds:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>First, as I wrote above, no part of the nevuoh is
without merit, even the parts with no or partial pisron. Furthermore, the fact
that the nevuoh was "eina meira," is not necessarily synonymous with "non
understood parts." For example, if you are looking at a picture of your lawn,
you see the message of the picture, is it a "non understanding" because you
don't have a magnifier to see the angle of each blade of grass in the picture,
or with yet greater electron microscopic detail to see each molecule of
each blade of grass? It depends on the nature of the message you want to convey.
Is the message about the molecules of the lawn, the position of the blades of
grass or the macro qualities of the lawn that are discernible from the picture
provided. To what extent has the complete message not been understood because
you did not get to see molecules? Most likely, herein lies the point of "eina
meira."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>RYZ wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>LAN"D Moshol
does not mean not understanding</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>CM
responds:</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>So we are back
again full circle with the need to explain the difference between Moshe and shar
neviim in this aspect of nevuoh. Do you think my above model is not appropriate,
or do you agree with this as at least a partial description of "eina
meira"?</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Kol Tuv and a
Gut Shabbos</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Chaim
Manaster</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>