<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>R. <FONT face="Times New Roman">Akiva Miller wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>“<FONT face="Times New Roman">One can ask similar questions about other
turning-points in history.<BR>What if Kayin had not killed Hevel? What if the
world has not gone to<BR>Avodah Zara a few generations later? What if Yishmael
and/or Esav had<BR>not gone of the derech? What if Moshe Rabenu had acted
differently by<BR>the rock?”</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Actually I had thoughts along similar lines
that you express. The most prominent such turning point was the cheit ha’eigel,
where again, had they succeeded, that again would have been the end for man’s
tafkid and correction the cheit of Adam, direct route to eretz Yisroel, no forty
years in the midbar and presumably Moshe R. would have been the final moshiach
and on to the final gemul. The reason these two stick in my mind more than the
other forks in history you point to, is that these would have been endpoints to
the tafkid in this world and led directly to olom haba with no continuation of
the “Torah” story we are familiar with. The moments in history you point to
would have been forks in the road but not endpoints. So if say Esau/Yishmoel had
made good choices and been more like his brother Yaakov/Yitzchok, the story
would have had a different twist to it, but the overall gestalt to the Torah
could still have been quite similar. What we have now, with some changes. But we
would have no problem imagining all (perhaps most) of the mitzvos as we know
them.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style='face: "Times' New roman?>These two, cheit of Adam and cheit
ha’eigel, were fundamentally different than the other “forks” in the road as
what we know to have followed would never happen. So Regalim, and avdus in
Mitzrayim, etc, etc are ideas that seem not to have a place in such a reality
had Adam succeeded while the other forks would have led to a variation on a
theme we are familiar with and can at least readily imagine.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">The idea you mention of “70 panim latorah”
would have to be expanded greatly if for every fork on the possible choices made
in the biblical period (by this I mean the time through the end of the forty
years bamidbar that were recorded in chumash). If every possible choice made at
every fork (say N) resulted in a diff version of Torah, then that would result
in 2 to the N panim laTorah – with N being very large! Perhaps 70 is just a
synonym for “many”? When we say that there are 70 umos, I always wondered how
that was defined, as it seems to me that there are many more and that the number
would change for different periods in history. If 70 here too means “many” that
would clear that up. But then the precise number of 70 for the parei hachag
might be a problem unless for some reason that may have been fixed symbolically,
or perhaps to coincide with the original number at some early point in
history as say per the list of the 70 nations Art Scroll makes in its chumash at
the end of this weeks parsha (Noach). Basically it is a listing of certain of
the names of descendants of Noach. Have you ever heard of a nation called Ever
(or most of the other names they list)? So is the “essence” of </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Torah something beyond our ken. Is all we can
see just a single facet of the 70 panim laTorah? (This of course is not the
normal meaning to 70 panim laTorah, which usually is applied to differing
explanations to our “current” Torah, and not the other “possible” “Toros” as you
are suggesting. Is this so far off the beaten path that this might even be
an accidental trip into thought that might be apikursus or a credible notion
within the daas? (Torah lo yehai moochlefes). I have no idea!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>R. <FONT style='face: "Times' New roman?>Akiva Miller wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">“Torah manifests itself differently to
a<BR>kohen than to a levi, and differently to a woman than to a
man.”</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">There is a fundamental difference between a
mitzvoh only applying to some vs the concept not existing. Even if I am a
Yisroel I can still be oseik in torah of the mitvos of a cohen – it is still a
part of Torah given to all of us even if not all of it pertains to
me.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>R. <FONT style='face: "Times' New roman?>Akiva Miller wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">“Or perhaps Gan Eden would have had that
status.”</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">I actually had a thought similar to yours as
well on this idea. When I thought a little more about it, I had difficulty
putting it all together. so what kind of meaning would trummos and massros have.
What would orlo mean. Without aniyim, what is the point of leket shichacha
upei’a? (or tzedaka in general, or even more broadly of gemila chasadim in
such a world?) The mitzvos hatelyuous ba’aretz only make sense in an
agricultural society, not in a world of olam haba where there are no farmers or
farms. No need for orei miklat in a world without a yetzer. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">On another thought, would the notion of baal
tigra in the world of only one mitzva leave you with no mitvos at all? That
would make one a kofer bekol haTorah koola? Also there would be no need for lo
tassur yamin usemol for gezeirot derabanan in such a world (though perhaps it
might have stopped Chava if such a takana existed to protect the only mitzvoh
they had).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>R. <FONT style='face: "Times' New roman?>Akiva Miller wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">”"If there is life on other planets, might
they possibly have a<BR>Torah? But Mitzrayim doesn't exist there, and Moshe
never lived<BR>there!" That question bothered me for a very long
time,”</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Strangely enough, I had similar thoughts years
back. As a young bachur in yeshivo, my rebbi was teaching us that their
was a period during which the progenitor of kelal Yisroel would happen. I asked
what would have happened if there had been another deep thinker who came to the
same realization and belief that Avraham did. He answered that there would have
been two (or more) chosen peoples to eventually be mekabel Torah. It didn’t
occur to me at the time to ask, would they each have the “same” Torah or each
get a tailored version to their (eventual) am? Or, would there be one Torah that
talks of both of the chosen peoples? Years later when discussing what is the
purpose to us of the trillions of stars and galaxies so distant that they could
never possibly affect us here on Earth? Then it occurred to me, what if those
stars had planets with intelligent beings on them and they too went through a
similar period wherein they too had some allien being come to the same
conclusions as Avraham did and they then became the chosen people of that planet
and received a Torah possibly tailored to their experiences and appropriate
there etc.? This almost makes sense of the questions the malachim asked Moshe
when he went lamorom to accept Torah. They too wanted Torah in a version
suitable to them which would deflect all of Moshe’s responses. If memory serves,
I think some meforshim try to make sense of the malachim in such a
manner.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Just some more rambling thoughts.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Kol tuv</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman">Chaim Manaster</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>