tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35481891.post4492805494305639774..comments2022-05-15T11:52:41.828+03:00Comments on rabbisedley: Redefining Heresyrabbi sedleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15276453426346276243noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35481891.post-10784422992334087962013-07-05T19:02:13.943+03:002013-07-05T19:02:13.943+03:00This article has a lot of "haven't finish...This article has a lot of "haven't finished it yet"s and "it is difficult to know"s. Why don't you get the facts before making your own decisions? Otherwise, you're guilty of the same thing you charge the Vaad and others with. Maybe you would find, on the last page of the book, something that you actually realized was total kefira and you would have to retract your whole post. How can you villify others for "probably" not being thorough, when you yourself have surely not been.<br /><br />I haven't read the book, but Lockshin's description of Solomon's thesis, that the historical claims of the Torah are FALSE, should give us pause. Is that orthodox?Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00875337500035491999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35481891.post-80228377785397453122013-02-14T05:03:20.376+02:002013-02-14T05:03:20.376+02:00I think we need to distinguish between what the Ra...I think we need to distinguish between what the Rambam personally believed (the question of truth) and what he held was the limits of permissible belief (the question of law).<br /><br />The Rambam holds something related to the idea that there are no disputes in laws that are halakhah leMoshe miSinai. (There are counter-examples and other quotes in the Rambam that seem to say otherwise, so this position of his has a long list of interpretations.) When it comes to what we received in Sinai, it is not a question of differing interpretations, no true machloqesin, only a right and a wrong. And I think the same kind of reasoning holds here when he says that we have the accurate Torah -- which also has conflicting sources (R' Meir's statement that we no longer know all the cases of full and deficient spellings) and therefore needs interpretation.<br /><br />However, with respect to the 8th principle of faith, the legal limits of belief, it seems to me that the Rambam is speaking about semantics, not syntax. If he were speaking of words and spellings, the Torah sheBe'al Peh being from heaven would require a separate iqar. As long as all the versions of the Seifer Torah convey exactly the same meaning to the reader, e.g. that any sane translator wouldn't base a decision on which text he has, I think the Rambam's criterion would be met.<br /><br />Second, I would distinguish between the Rambam's 8th iqar and the version we accepted in practice. Halachic thought was shaped by the inclusion of Yigdal and Ani Maamin in the siddur -- and the decision to include and keep them reflect halachic thinking. Therefore, when a beis din is trying to decide whether a geirus candidate is a believer, or a hekhsher would have to decide whose touch would prevent them from certifying a wine, a far looser form of the iqarim is actually utilized; something broader than the Rambam's criteria.<br /><br />I think "they could say it, but we must not" is valid. The limits of belief are a legal decision, and the halachic process is dynamic. It is no different than noting that Rabbeinu Tam fulfilled the mitzvah of tefillin, but if we used tefillin of his design, we would not.<br /><br />If the beis din really considers this kefirah, they should mandate that every Miqraos Gedolos contain warnings that we not take the long lesson from the parts of the Ibn Ezra that appear or do say things we must not accept personally.<br /><br />But, there is a huge difference between quiblining over spelling, a word or two, or even verses of narrative, and making the same claim about the majority of the Torah. If the text of the Torah isn't dictated by G-d in the Sinai, then the whole notion of derashah becomes a game, and things labeled deOraisa become just as man-made as any other. (Even according to the Rambam, derashos are mined, not inventions.) There is no coincidence that JTS which invited in Document Hypothesis with Solomon Schechter ended up fostering a legal system that does not resemble what Orthodoxy considers halakhah. Once all the pieces are there to conclude that rabbis of the past were playing a game to remake the law as they wanted, they have no reason not to do the same themselves. (And if even deOraisos are man-made, it's all fair game.)micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.com