The Rambam here introduces us into the next subject that he will be talking about. First, he just wants to point out the differences between the two subjects of "Maaseh Merkava" and "Maaseh Bereishis." He says,
כל הדברים האלו שדברנו בענין זה כמר מדלי הם ודברים עמוקים הם. אבל אינם כענין עומק פרק ראשון ושני. וביאור כל אלו הדברים שבפרק שלישי ורביעי הוא הנקרא מעשה בראשית. וכך צוו החכמים הראשונים שאין דורשין בדברים האלו ברבים אלא לאדם אחד מודיעין דברים אלו ומלמדין אותו:
"All of these things that we have spoken about on this subject are like a drop of water in a bucket and they are very deep. However, they are not as deep as the first two perakim. The subjects that are in the third and fourth perek are known as 'Maaseh breishis' (Acts of Creation). So too the original wise ones commanded us not to explain these subjects in public, rather they should be made known to a single person and taught to him."
The difference that Rambam points out between Maaseh Breishis and Maaseh Merkava is that Maaseh Breishis deals with things that are in the physical world. It talks about the elements of the world, decomposition and physical creation. Basically, Maaseh Breishis can be defined, according to the Rambam, as physics. However, Maaseh Merkava is that which relates to G-D. This deals with G-D's negative attributes and how man connects to Him. Also, the knowledge of the different angels and how they relate to the world are both Maaseh Merkava subjects. This is why the Rambam tells us that the subjects of the first two perakim are deeper and more complex subjects, because metaphysics is harder to understand than physics. Physics deal with the natural world, so man can eventually understand it on his own level. However, metaphysics deals with the connection between man and G-D. The Rambam himself points out that even Moshe never fully comprehended G-D or His characteristics. It is only through understanding what G-D is not, according to the Rambam, that we can have some type of semblance of what G-D is.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Does the Rambam Think Believing in Creation Ex Aliquo (Creation of the World From a Primordial Matter) Makes You a Heretic?
I was learning through some of the Rambam's Hilchos Teshuva and something caught my attention. In perek 3 halacha 7 of Hilchos Teshuva the Rambam lists five types of people that are considered heretics. He says,
"There are five types of people that are called heretics: One who says that there is no G-D and there is no guide (for the world); One who says there is a guide (for the world), but there are two or more; One who says that there is one G-D, but He has a physical body and an image; Also, one who says that He (G-D) is not the only first one and former of everything; Also, one who worships another 'G-D' in order that it act as an intermediary between this man and the Lord of the world. All five of these people are heretics."
It would seem from this statement in the Rambam, that anyone who says that G-D is not the only first one and former of everything, that he believes that anyone who believes in creation Ex Aliquo is a heretic. Creation Ex Aliquo is the belief that there was a primordial matter that had no shape or form that G-D used to create everything. This idea was first brought forth by the Greek philosopher Plato.
The Raavad here says that the Rambam is talking about the philosopher in the following Medrash Rabbah (1:9). The Medrash says,
"A certain philosopher asked Raban Gamliel, 'Your G-D is indeed a great former, but he found good materials which assisted Him, tohu, vohu, darkness, wind, water and the deep. Rabban Gamliel replied, May your spirit blow away! With regards to all of them it is written that they were created." The rest of the Medrash goes into the different verses throughout Tanach that prove all of these six things were created.
The commentator on the Rambam that most clearly points out that he thinks the Rambam is saying that believing in creation Ex Aliquo makes one a heretic is the Lechem Mishna on this Rambam. He explicitly says that if someone believes in creation Ex Aquila then they are in the Rambam's category of a heretic.
However, I saw in the sefer likutim in the back of the Rambam Frankel, in the name of the Rada, that the Rambam clearly states (The Guide for the Perplexed 2:25) that if one found a proof for creation Ex Aliquo that it could be read into the pasukim. The Rada seems to think that the Rambam and Raavad are arguing here and not agreeing like the Lechem Mishna says. The Raavad would call a person that believes in creation Ex Aliquo a heretic, but the Rambam would not. He is referring to something else when he says, "Also, one who says that He (G-D) is not the only first one and former of everything."
Indeed, the Rambam does say that creation Ex Aliquo, Plato's view, is a possibility if one wants to believe in Judaism. He even says in The Guide for the Perplexed(2:25),
"If, however, we accepted the Eternity of the Universe in accordance with the second of the theories which we have expounded above (ch. xxiii.), and assumed, with Plato, that the heavens are likewise transient, we should not be in opposition to the fundamental principles of our religion; this theory would not imply the rejection of miracles, but, on the contrary, would admit them as possible. The Scriptural text might have been explained accordingly, and many expressions might have been found in the Bible and in other writings that would confirm and support this theory."
By the Rambam's own admission, if a person believes in Plato's idea of creation, Ex Aliquo, then they are not rejecting the fundamental principles of the religion. So why would the Rambam call this man a heretic? If the Lechem Mishna is right, what is the Rambam saying?
In light of this I think we can correctly understand the Rambam in the following way. The Rambam is saying that someone who believes in Aristotle's philosophy, that the world has always existed in its current state, would be considered a heretic. In fact, the Rambam even says in The Guide for the Perplexed(2:25),
"If we were to accept the Eternity of the Universe as taught by Aristotle, that everything in the Universe is the result of fixed laws, that Nature does not change, and that there is nothing supernatural, we should necessarily be in opposition to the foundation of our religion, we should disbelieve all miracles and signs, and certainly reject all hopes and fears derived from Scripture, unless the miracles are also explained figuratively. The Allegorists amongst the Mohammedans have done this, and have thereby arrived at absurd conclusions."
This seems like a reasonable understanding of the Rambam since Aristotle believed in a single G-D that is not physical. However, Aristotle believes that the universe is eternal and that there was no creation. The Rambam believes that if someone denies creation then they are a heretic. However, a person can believe in creation Ex Nihilo or creation Ex Aliquo. This seems to be the correct understanding of the Rambam.
"There are five types of people that are called heretics: One who says that there is no G-D and there is no guide (for the world); One who says there is a guide (for the world), but there are two or more; One who says that there is one G-D, but He has a physical body and an image; Also, one who says that He (G-D) is not the only first one and former of everything; Also, one who worships another 'G-D' in order that it act as an intermediary between this man and the Lord of the world. All five of these people are heretics."
It would seem from this statement in the Rambam, that anyone who says that G-D is not the only first one and former of everything, that he believes that anyone who believes in creation Ex Aliquo is a heretic. Creation Ex Aliquo is the belief that there was a primordial matter that had no shape or form that G-D used to create everything. This idea was first brought forth by the Greek philosopher Plato.
The Raavad here says that the Rambam is talking about the philosopher in the following Medrash Rabbah (1:9). The Medrash says,
"A certain philosopher asked Raban Gamliel, 'Your G-D is indeed a great former, but he found good materials which assisted Him, tohu, vohu, darkness, wind, water and the deep. Rabban Gamliel replied, May your spirit blow away! With regards to all of them it is written that they were created." The rest of the Medrash goes into the different verses throughout Tanach that prove all of these six things were created.
The commentator on the Rambam that most clearly points out that he thinks the Rambam is saying that believing in creation Ex Aliquo makes one a heretic is the Lechem Mishna on this Rambam. He explicitly says that if someone believes in creation Ex Aquila then they are in the Rambam's category of a heretic.
However, I saw in the sefer likutim in the back of the Rambam Frankel, in the name of the Rada, that the Rambam clearly states (The Guide for the Perplexed 2:25) that if one found a proof for creation Ex Aliquo that it could be read into the pasukim. The Rada seems to think that the Rambam and Raavad are arguing here and not agreeing like the Lechem Mishna says. The Raavad would call a person that believes in creation Ex Aliquo a heretic, but the Rambam would not. He is referring to something else when he says, "Also, one who says that He (G-D) is not the only first one and former of everything."
Indeed, the Rambam does say that creation Ex Aliquo, Plato's view, is a possibility if one wants to believe in Judaism. He even says in The Guide for the Perplexed(2:25),
"If, however, we accepted the Eternity of the Universe in accordance with the second of the theories which we have expounded above (ch. xxiii.), and assumed, with Plato, that the heavens are likewise transient, we should not be in opposition to the fundamental principles of our religion; this theory would not imply the rejection of miracles, but, on the contrary, would admit them as possible. The Scriptural text might have been explained accordingly, and many expressions might have been found in the Bible and in other writings that would confirm and support this theory."
By the Rambam's own admission, if a person believes in Plato's idea of creation, Ex Aliquo, then they are not rejecting the fundamental principles of the religion. So why would the Rambam call this man a heretic? If the Lechem Mishna is right, what is the Rambam saying?
In light of this I think we can correctly understand the Rambam in the following way. The Rambam is saying that someone who believes in Aristotle's philosophy, that the world has always existed in its current state, would be considered a heretic. In fact, the Rambam even says in The Guide for the Perplexed(2:25),
"If we were to accept the Eternity of the Universe as taught by Aristotle, that everything in the Universe is the result of fixed laws, that Nature does not change, and that there is nothing supernatural, we should necessarily be in opposition to the foundation of our religion, we should disbelieve all miracles and signs, and certainly reject all hopes and fears derived from Scripture, unless the miracles are also explained figuratively. The Allegorists amongst the Mohammedans have done this, and have thereby arrived at absurd conclusions."
This seems like a reasonable understanding of the Rambam since Aristotle believed in a single G-D that is not physical. However, Aristotle believes that the universe is eternal and that there was no creation. The Rambam believes that if someone denies creation then they are a heretic. However, a person can believe in creation Ex Nihilo or creation Ex Aliquo. This seems to be the correct understanding of the Rambam.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Different Branches of Orthodox Judaism
In orthodox Judaism there are several different branches. There are the Litvaks, Chassidim, the moderns, the centrists, the left wingers, and countless others. The strangest part about all of this seems to be the extremes. Why is it that the extremes believe that the rest of the orthodox Jews are not valid? If you don't follow every single chumra, even the one made up by my rabbi last week, then you are a kofer. What? How does that make sense? Also, on the other side, Judaism was meant to make people respect one another so if you follow the stricter rulings than you are being ignorant. What?
How can it be that one sect of Judaism has so many conflicting ideas? How can it be that one sect that defines itself by a strict adherence to halacha can deviate so widely? Some people might want to say that left wing orthodoxy does not follow halacha. This is incorrect, as much as some would love you to think it. Sure, there are people in the group that do not follow halacha, but that doesn't mean the group as a whole should not be considered orthodox. I would counter and say that there are many Ultra orthodox people that do not follow halacha, however, they don't follow different halachas than those people found in left wing orthodoxy. In the end of the day, no group can be defined by its individual members, rather the group must be defined by its ideologies.
Left wing orthodoxy tries to adapt the Torah to be completely congruent with modern morals and acceptable behavior. Ultra orthodoxy does the exact opposite. They require a strict adherence to how life was 200 years ago. Notice how I say 200 years ago and not 2000. Then there are the centrist orthodox that believe there should be a balance of somewhere in between. Centrists believe that, although Judaism is meant to adapt with the times, there is not supposed to be a complete congruence with modern culture.
In general, what I have observed, there seems to be the following differences between left wing orthodoxy, right wing orthodoxy and centrist orthodoxy.
1) Left wing orthodoxy seems to say, there is such a thing as halacha, but we can push the boundaries as far as they can go. This has most recently been shown through the whole Maharat issue. Left wing orthodoxy seems to be saying that women can be Rabbis and you can not show me any place in the Shulchan Orech that says otherwise. The idea of minhagim seems to be unimportant to an extent and forget about classical ideals. It seems like they believe that modern morals, acceptance of everyone and equality should be the dominating ideas in Judaism. However, what seems to de-legitimize this approach in the eyes of those outside this branch of orthodox Judaism is that some of its followers are not strict adherers to halacha. For example, there are some that do not follow all of the rules of kashrus, taharas hamishpacha or shabbos. Some will value other things before halacha and the Torah. The biggest characteristic that I have seen in this branch is that very few people ask the Rav halachic questions. Apparently they all know the Shulchan Orech by heart.
2)Ultra Orthodoxy seems to be the exact opposite in certain ways, but very similar in others. Ultra Orthodoxy refuses to accept any modern morals. They do not think all things should be equal. They think that there should be a strict adherence to halacha, but that if their Rabbi says something and you don't follow him then you are digressing from the real mesorah. I have met many Ultra orthodox Jews that consider me to be eating non-kosher when I use chalav stam. There are many other examples, but why go into it? Unfortunately, Some of them do not follow halacha either. They all keep shabbos, taharas hamishpacha and kashrus, but when it comes to treating other people civil, there are some that do not follow halacha. For example, the protests that have been going on in Israel are just ridiculous. I am not even going to get into the Neturei Karta brand of "Judaism" Yemach Shemam. The most telling part of the Ultra Orthodox community is the clothes they feel obligated to wear and that they ask their Rav about everything, even when to get a job or move houses.
3)The Centrist Orthodox, where is their place in all of this? They hold onto traditional values, but also incorporate modern values into their lives. I mean, they believe in equality, but also hold onto tradition. This allows them to keep halacha without compromising. They learn Torah, study secular studies and get jobs. They have Rebbeim that are competent and are compassionate. They do not desire to change Judaism, but can adapt it in order for it to interact with the modern world. When people have questions, that is ok and a logical answer is searched for. They ask halachic questions, but they believe that everyone should be able to make some decisions by themselves.
I think these descriptions accurately describe the differences between the varying branches of orthodox Judaism. If you disagree or agree let me know why or why not. Any additions are welcome.
How can it be that one sect of Judaism has so many conflicting ideas? How can it be that one sect that defines itself by a strict adherence to halacha can deviate so widely? Some people might want to say that left wing orthodoxy does not follow halacha. This is incorrect, as much as some would love you to think it. Sure, there are people in the group that do not follow halacha, but that doesn't mean the group as a whole should not be considered orthodox. I would counter and say that there are many Ultra orthodox people that do not follow halacha, however, they don't follow different halachas than those people found in left wing orthodoxy. In the end of the day, no group can be defined by its individual members, rather the group must be defined by its ideologies.
Left wing orthodoxy tries to adapt the Torah to be completely congruent with modern morals and acceptable behavior. Ultra orthodoxy does the exact opposite. They require a strict adherence to how life was 200 years ago. Notice how I say 200 years ago and not 2000. Then there are the centrist orthodox that believe there should be a balance of somewhere in between. Centrists believe that, although Judaism is meant to adapt with the times, there is not supposed to be a complete congruence with modern culture.
In general, what I have observed, there seems to be the following differences between left wing orthodoxy, right wing orthodoxy and centrist orthodoxy.
1) Left wing orthodoxy seems to say, there is such a thing as halacha, but we can push the boundaries as far as they can go. This has most recently been shown through the whole Maharat issue. Left wing orthodoxy seems to be saying that women can be Rabbis and you can not show me any place in the Shulchan Orech that says otherwise. The idea of minhagim seems to be unimportant to an extent and forget about classical ideals. It seems like they believe that modern morals, acceptance of everyone and equality should be the dominating ideas in Judaism. However, what seems to de-legitimize this approach in the eyes of those outside this branch of orthodox Judaism is that some of its followers are not strict adherers to halacha. For example, there are some that do not follow all of the rules of kashrus, taharas hamishpacha or shabbos. Some will value other things before halacha and the Torah. The biggest characteristic that I have seen in this branch is that very few people ask the Rav halachic questions. Apparently they all know the Shulchan Orech by heart.
2)Ultra Orthodoxy seems to be the exact opposite in certain ways, but very similar in others. Ultra Orthodoxy refuses to accept any modern morals. They do not think all things should be equal. They think that there should be a strict adherence to halacha, but that if their Rabbi says something and you don't follow him then you are digressing from the real mesorah. I have met many Ultra orthodox Jews that consider me to be eating non-kosher when I use chalav stam. There are many other examples, but why go into it? Unfortunately, Some of them do not follow halacha either. They all keep shabbos, taharas hamishpacha and kashrus, but when it comes to treating other people civil, there are some that do not follow halacha. For example, the protests that have been going on in Israel are just ridiculous. I am not even going to get into the Neturei Karta brand of "Judaism" Yemach Shemam. The most telling part of the Ultra Orthodox community is the clothes they feel obligated to wear and that they ask their Rav about everything, even when to get a job or move houses.
3)The Centrist Orthodox, where is their place in all of this? They hold onto traditional values, but also incorporate modern values into their lives. I mean, they believe in equality, but also hold onto tradition. This allows them to keep halacha without compromising. They learn Torah, study secular studies and get jobs. They have Rebbeim that are competent and are compassionate. They do not desire to change Judaism, but can adapt it in order for it to interact with the modern world. When people have questions, that is ok and a logical answer is searched for. They ask halachic questions, but they believe that everyone should be able to make some decisions by themselves.
I think these descriptions accurately describe the differences between the varying branches of orthodox Judaism. If you disagree or agree let me know why or why not. Any additions are welcome.
Mattos- Selfishness of the Tribes of Gad and Reuven
In this week's parsha of Mattos-Masei we have the infamous story of the 2 tribes, Reuben and Gad, request to stay on the other side of the river and not enter the land of Israel. This raises the questions of "was this request proper?" Did they really have a right to ask for this? Why did they in fact think that they were entitled to this land on the other side of the river? And if this was an inappropriate request, what was their punishment?
In order to answer these questions we must first understand what Bnei Gad and Reuben were thinking. The pasuk says (Bamidbar 32:1), “Umikneh rav haya livnei Reuben vilivnei Gad atzum miod” (The children of Reuben and the children of Gad had abundant livestock). There is a clear reason here why the pasuk is telling us that Bnei Gad and Reuben had abundant livestock before we are told of their request. Seemingly, because they had a lot of possessions this caused them to think that they could ask to not come and participate in battle alongside with their brethren. This introductory pasuk is showing us the selfishness of Bnei Gad and Reuben. Like a little child that is satisfied with his own portion, Bnei Gad and Reuben decided that they were happy with what they had and since they were happy they did not care about the needs of the other tribes.
The Midrash (Tanchuma 5; Yalkut Shemoni 32; Bamidbar Rabbah parsha 22 siman 7)comes to teach us why they were mistaken with their idea to stay behind and be satiated with their possessions. The Midrash says that there are three gifts that G-D gives to people in this world; Chachma, Gevurah, and Osher (Wisdom, Strength and Richness). And the Midrash tells us that people who have these things only acquire them since G-D has given it to them as a gift, but if they are undeserving of that gift G-D will take that gift away from them.
There are three examples of people who had these gifts and lost them because of their undeserving behavior. The one who lost his wisdom because he acted inappropriately was Achitofel, one of King David’s advisers. He joined the side of Avshalom to rebel against David since he thought it would bring him much fame and glory. Achitofel lost his wisdom because he used it to help Avshalom in rebellion against the king. Shimshon (Samson) was a mighty warrior, but he lusted after what he saw with his eyes, aka women, so because of his sin his might was removed from him along with his eyes. And the final person was Korach. He had more money than everyone, but since he used it to rebel against Moshe and Aharon it was taken from him, along with his life. So we can see from these instances that people who use their gifts inappropriately are bound to lose them.
This idea holds true by Gad and Reuben as well. They were satisfied with their own wealth and did not care about anyone but themselves. They wanted to stay on the other side of the Jordan River and allow the rest of the Jews to fight without them. Because of their selfishness they were ultimately punished and exiled before everyone else. As the pasuk in divrei hayamim 1(Perek 5) says, “Vayiglaim laReuben vilagadi vilachatzi shavet menasheh” (Reuben, Gad and half of the Shavet of Menasheh were exiled).
So we can learn from this parsha the virtue of selflessness. Selfishness is what brought down these tribes so don’t let it get you too. One must always realize the source of everything, G-D. If a person is able to focus on this then they will never be selfish. Once a person realizes that everything is from G-D then they will not assume that they received it by themselves. With this in mind, it is impossible to be selfish.
In order to answer these questions we must first understand what Bnei Gad and Reuben were thinking. The pasuk says (Bamidbar 32:1), “Umikneh rav haya livnei Reuben vilivnei Gad atzum miod” (The children of Reuben and the children of Gad had abundant livestock). There is a clear reason here why the pasuk is telling us that Bnei Gad and Reuben had abundant livestock before we are told of their request. Seemingly, because they had a lot of possessions this caused them to think that they could ask to not come and participate in battle alongside with their brethren. This introductory pasuk is showing us the selfishness of Bnei Gad and Reuben. Like a little child that is satisfied with his own portion, Bnei Gad and Reuben decided that they were happy with what they had and since they were happy they did not care about the needs of the other tribes.
The Midrash (Tanchuma 5; Yalkut Shemoni 32; Bamidbar Rabbah parsha 22 siman 7)comes to teach us why they were mistaken with their idea to stay behind and be satiated with their possessions. The Midrash says that there are three gifts that G-D gives to people in this world; Chachma, Gevurah, and Osher (Wisdom, Strength and Richness). And the Midrash tells us that people who have these things only acquire them since G-D has given it to them as a gift, but if they are undeserving of that gift G-D will take that gift away from them.
There are three examples of people who had these gifts and lost them because of their undeserving behavior. The one who lost his wisdom because he acted inappropriately was Achitofel, one of King David’s advisers. He joined the side of Avshalom to rebel against David since he thought it would bring him much fame and glory. Achitofel lost his wisdom because he used it to help Avshalom in rebellion against the king. Shimshon (Samson) was a mighty warrior, but he lusted after what he saw with his eyes, aka women, so because of his sin his might was removed from him along with his eyes. And the final person was Korach. He had more money than everyone, but since he used it to rebel against Moshe and Aharon it was taken from him, along with his life. So we can see from these instances that people who use their gifts inappropriately are bound to lose them.
This idea holds true by Gad and Reuben as well. They were satisfied with their own wealth and did not care about anyone but themselves. They wanted to stay on the other side of the Jordan River and allow the rest of the Jews to fight without them. Because of their selfishness they were ultimately punished and exiled before everyone else. As the pasuk in divrei hayamim 1(Perek 5) says, “Vayiglaim laReuben vilagadi vilachatzi shavet menasheh” (Reuben, Gad and half of the Shavet of Menasheh were exiled).
So we can learn from this parsha the virtue of selflessness. Selfishness is what brought down these tribes so don’t let it get you too. One must always realize the source of everything, G-D. If a person is able to focus on this then they will never be selfish. Once a person realizes that everything is from G-D then they will not assume that they received it by themselves. With this in mind, it is impossible to be selfish.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Maharal- How One Removes Themselves From The World to Come
While researching a little bit about what "Sefarim Chitzonim" means in the Gemorah on Sanhedrin 100B I came across a great explanation by the Maharal in the 15th perek of Tiferes Yisroel. Also, I was shocked at what I found Rav Moshe Shapiro, the Rav of Rabbi Hartman (he wrote the notes in the newest Maharals), says. First let us hear what the Maharal says.
In order to understand the Maharal's ideas, we must first translate part of the first mishna in perek hachelek of Sanhedrin. It says,
"Every member of Israel has a portion in the World to Come, as it is written 'For your nation has all righteous people forever they will inherit the land. They are the shoots of My saplings, My handiwork to glorify (Me).' (However,)these are the people that do not have a share in the world to come: Someone who says that the revival of the dead is not from the Torah; Someone who says the Torah is not from Heaven; and one who is an Apikores. Rabbi Akiva says, even someone who reads from 'Sefarim Chitzonim' and someone who recites verses of the Torah over wounds in order to heal them."
I am not going to go into what an Apikores is, however, I want to discuss what the Maharal says about Rabbi Akiva's additions to this Mishna. The Maharal says,
"Rebbe Akiva was trying to point out that it is not only these first three people, that completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come, that do not enter the world to come, but even someone who veers to the right or left of the path to the world to come. This that Rebbe Akiva said that 'Even one that reads from Sefarim Chitzonim or recites a verse over his wound loses his portion' is because Sefarim Chitzonim remove a person from the truthful Torah, that the Torah teaches the true and proper path. However, these Sefarim Chitzonim teach worthless ideas. These worthless ideas remove a person from the world to come, specifically from the world of intelligence, completely. This is because when a person reads from these Sefarim Chitzonim, that are full of worthlessness, this removes a person from the path to the world to come. Therefore, (if a person removes himself or herself from the path to the world to come) they will not receive the world to come."
The Maharal is telling us some basic principles. The first three types of people that are mentioned in the Mishna, the denier of the revival of the dead, the denier that Torah is from heaven and the Apikores are all people that completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come. Therefore, since they have removed themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come, they will be unable to enter the world to come. Why it is that these three people remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come is spoken about by the Maharal earlier in this perek.
With this in mind we can now venture forth and discuss why someone who does not remove themselves completely from having the ability to enter the world to come will still be unable to enter the world to come. According to Rebbe Akiva, the Maharal says that these two types of people, the reader of Sefarim Chitzonim and the reciter of verses over wounds, do not completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come. However, they do not follow the path that will lead them to the world to come. Therefore, since they do not follow the path that will lead them to the world to come, they will not enter the world to come.
The idea the Maharal is pointing out here is that Rebbe Akiva is of the opinion that Jews need to earn the world to come, whereas the Tanna of the Mishna seems to say only that Jews can lose their world to come. A person who removes himself, or herself from having the ability to enter the world to come is a person that knowingly rejects the existence of the world to come. That is why The denier of the revival of the dead, the denier of the Torah being from heaven and the Apikores are rejected from the world to come, because they deny the existence of the world to come. Therefore, if you deny the existence of the world to come, you no longer have the ability to enter the world to come.
However, a person that reads Sefarim Chitzonim or recites verses from the Torah over wounds to heal them do not deny the existence of the world to come. This is where the argument between Rebbe Akiva and the Tanna of the Mishna comes into play. The Tanna of the Mishna believes that all Jews automatically enter the world to come, no work is required. Therefore, even someone who wastes their time with falsehoods, like the Sefarim Chitzonim, can still enter the world to come. Rebbe Akiva rejects this idea. He is of the opinion that even though every Jew has a portion in the world to come, they must earn it. Therefore, if they waste their time on flasehoods, they will not enter the world to come since they have not earned it.
The Maharal continues and explains why it is that someone who recites a verse over a wound has no share in the world to come. He says,
"By a person that recites a verse over a wound, he or she is using the Torah for something that is the opposite of the Torah, since he or she is using the Torah as medicine for the body. It is the opposite use since the Torah is abstract (spiritual, intelligence) and this person is using it for something physical. This person is removing the grandeur of the Torah that is abstract (spiritual, intelligence) since he or she is using it for physicality which is the opposite of the Torah. We have already said that the Torah itself is the world to come, like is known to the ones who understand and the wise ones, therefore, when a person veers away from the abstract (spiritual, intelligence) Torah, that is the world to come, then he or she will lose their entrance into the world to come. These two things, reading from Sefarim Chitzonim and reciting a verse over a wound are the two ways of veering away from the Torah either right or left. This is because one who reads Sefarim Chitzonim does not consider the Torah of any value, for if this person considered the Torah of any value they would not waste their time with these books that are full of nothingness and worthlessness. However, one who recites verses from the Torah over his or her wounds does the exact opposite of this. This verse reciter values the Torah, however, this person thinks that the Torah should even be used as medicine to heal wounds."
The two ways to veer from the path to enter the world to come are 1)to not value the Torah enough and 2)to think that the Torah has application even to physical matters such as healing a wound. However, what are the real problems that are divulged through this understanding? Rabbi Hartman quotes an idea he heard from Rav Moshe Shapiro. He says,
"Here we are dealing with the disgraces of adding or subtracting. Someone who reads Seforim Chitzonim does not give enough credence to the Torah, therefore there is the disgrace of subtracting (value from the Torah). However, when someone recites a verse from the Torah over a wound he or she thinks the Torah can do everything, even things pertaining to physicality. This is the disgrace of adding to the (value of the Torah). Veering to the right or left means disgracing the Torah by either adding (right) or subtracting (left)."
The lesson here is that we have to understand the place of the Torah. Adding or subtracting to the use of the Torah takes away from the value of the Torah. To say something like, "the Torah can heal a wound" is absolutely ridiculous and diminishes the value of the Torah. However, saying that there is no value to the Torah is wrong as well. What is important is to find the balance and realize the place for the Torah. Therefore, one can enter the world to come through the Torah.
As a side point, it seems like we are saying that Sefarim Chitzonim are books that are read instead of the Torah according to the Maharal. However, Philosophy, Science, Mathematics, and any other type of book that helps one understand the Torah seems like it would be fine. The only problem is a book that will lead one to discount the Torah. Perhaps this means that one who reads books that bring a person to reject the Torah has no share in the world to come according to the Maharal.
In order to understand the Maharal's ideas, we must first translate part of the first mishna in perek hachelek of Sanhedrin. It says,
"Every member of Israel has a portion in the World to Come, as it is written 'For your nation has all righteous people forever they will inherit the land. They are the shoots of My saplings, My handiwork to glorify (Me).' (However,)these are the people that do not have a share in the world to come: Someone who says that the revival of the dead is not from the Torah; Someone who says the Torah is not from Heaven; and one who is an Apikores. Rabbi Akiva says, even someone who reads from 'Sefarim Chitzonim' and someone who recites verses of the Torah over wounds in order to heal them."
I am not going to go into what an Apikores is, however, I want to discuss what the Maharal says about Rabbi Akiva's additions to this Mishna. The Maharal says,
"Rebbe Akiva was trying to point out that it is not only these first three people, that completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come, that do not enter the world to come, but even someone who veers to the right or left of the path to the world to come. This that Rebbe Akiva said that 'Even one that reads from Sefarim Chitzonim or recites a verse over his wound loses his portion' is because Sefarim Chitzonim remove a person from the truthful Torah, that the Torah teaches the true and proper path. However, these Sefarim Chitzonim teach worthless ideas. These worthless ideas remove a person from the world to come, specifically from the world of intelligence, completely. This is because when a person reads from these Sefarim Chitzonim, that are full of worthlessness, this removes a person from the path to the world to come. Therefore, (if a person removes himself or herself from the path to the world to come) they will not receive the world to come."
The Maharal is telling us some basic principles. The first three types of people that are mentioned in the Mishna, the denier of the revival of the dead, the denier that Torah is from heaven and the Apikores are all people that completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come. Therefore, since they have removed themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come, they will be unable to enter the world to come. Why it is that these three people remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come is spoken about by the Maharal earlier in this perek.
With this in mind we can now venture forth and discuss why someone who does not remove themselves completely from having the ability to enter the world to come will still be unable to enter the world to come. According to Rebbe Akiva, the Maharal says that these two types of people, the reader of Sefarim Chitzonim and the reciter of verses over wounds, do not completely remove themselves from having the ability to enter the world to come. However, they do not follow the path that will lead them to the world to come. Therefore, since they do not follow the path that will lead them to the world to come, they will not enter the world to come.
The idea the Maharal is pointing out here is that Rebbe Akiva is of the opinion that Jews need to earn the world to come, whereas the Tanna of the Mishna seems to say only that Jews can lose their world to come. A person who removes himself, or herself from having the ability to enter the world to come is a person that knowingly rejects the existence of the world to come. That is why The denier of the revival of the dead, the denier of the Torah being from heaven and the Apikores are rejected from the world to come, because they deny the existence of the world to come. Therefore, if you deny the existence of the world to come, you no longer have the ability to enter the world to come.
However, a person that reads Sefarim Chitzonim or recites verses from the Torah over wounds to heal them do not deny the existence of the world to come. This is where the argument between Rebbe Akiva and the Tanna of the Mishna comes into play. The Tanna of the Mishna believes that all Jews automatically enter the world to come, no work is required. Therefore, even someone who wastes their time with falsehoods, like the Sefarim Chitzonim, can still enter the world to come. Rebbe Akiva rejects this idea. He is of the opinion that even though every Jew has a portion in the world to come, they must earn it. Therefore, if they waste their time on flasehoods, they will not enter the world to come since they have not earned it.
The Maharal continues and explains why it is that someone who recites a verse over a wound has no share in the world to come. He says,
"By a person that recites a verse over a wound, he or she is using the Torah for something that is the opposite of the Torah, since he or she is using the Torah as medicine for the body. It is the opposite use since the Torah is abstract (spiritual, intelligence) and this person is using it for something physical. This person is removing the grandeur of the Torah that is abstract (spiritual, intelligence) since he or she is using it for physicality which is the opposite of the Torah. We have already said that the Torah itself is the world to come, like is known to the ones who understand and the wise ones, therefore, when a person veers away from the abstract (spiritual, intelligence) Torah, that is the world to come, then he or she will lose their entrance into the world to come. These two things, reading from Sefarim Chitzonim and reciting a verse over a wound are the two ways of veering away from the Torah either right or left. This is because one who reads Sefarim Chitzonim does not consider the Torah of any value, for if this person considered the Torah of any value they would not waste their time with these books that are full of nothingness and worthlessness. However, one who recites verses from the Torah over his or her wounds does the exact opposite of this. This verse reciter values the Torah, however, this person thinks that the Torah should even be used as medicine to heal wounds."
The two ways to veer from the path to enter the world to come are 1)to not value the Torah enough and 2)to think that the Torah has application even to physical matters such as healing a wound. However, what are the real problems that are divulged through this understanding? Rabbi Hartman quotes an idea he heard from Rav Moshe Shapiro. He says,
"Here we are dealing with the disgraces of adding or subtracting. Someone who reads Seforim Chitzonim does not give enough credence to the Torah, therefore there is the disgrace of subtracting (value from the Torah). However, when someone recites a verse from the Torah over a wound he or she thinks the Torah can do everything, even things pertaining to physicality. This is the disgrace of adding to the (value of the Torah). Veering to the right or left means disgracing the Torah by either adding (right) or subtracting (left)."
The lesson here is that we have to understand the place of the Torah. Adding or subtracting to the use of the Torah takes away from the value of the Torah. To say something like, "the Torah can heal a wound" is absolutely ridiculous and diminishes the value of the Torah. However, saying that there is no value to the Torah is wrong as well. What is important is to find the balance and realize the place for the Torah. Therefore, one can enter the world to come through the Torah.
As a side point, it seems like we are saying that Sefarim Chitzonim are books that are read instead of the Torah according to the Maharal. However, Philosophy, Science, Mathematics, and any other type of book that helps one understand the Torah seems like it would be fine. The only problem is a book that will lead one to discount the Torah. Perhaps this means that one who reads books that bring a person to reject the Torah has no share in the world to come according to the Maharal.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Maharal On How to Find the Truth
In the Maharal's Sefer Tiferes Yisroel (perek 16) he discusses how to ascertain proofs as to why it must be that the Torah is from heaven. These proofs are not empirical, but they follow a logical approach to the matter. His opening remarks resemble his sentiments that have been shown in previous posts about philosophers. He says,
"There are men that posses examining hearts that only follow their own wisdom, these are the wise men of the nations that are called philosophers. They want to use their wisdom to figure out the truth of how the world and its nature works. However, their understanding is far (from the truth) they do not know or understand (the truth) since they are searching in the dark. For if they are going to figure out (the truth), they first need to admit to this basic principle, that the Torah is from heaven. Then they will move out from the shadows and the darkness (and in to the light). This core idea that the Torah is from heaven removes a mans dirty and disgusting clothes (metaphor for incorrect ideas) and purifies his thoughts. Once this happens he or she will be able to be certain about their decisive proof that the Torah must be from heaven. "
The Maharal is not discounting the philosophers wisdom in any way, In fact, he refers to these people as wise men from the nations. The point of the Maharal is much deeper than mere knowledge. His point is that man can never know the truth without first setting up basic principles. Just like man can not figure out physics without first understanding the force of gravity, so too man can not understand the true nature of the world without first realizing that the Torah and the wisdom contained within it comes from heaven.
The idea here is that man without a guiding set of principles will not be able to find out the truth. Think of it in this sense, if man is put on earth without any guidance, how does he then figure out reality? How does man invent mathematics, art, language and all the other subjects? This leads us to believe that there is a higher being that all knowledge stems forth from. Therefore, once we realize that the Torah is from heaven, it is possible for the guiding principles of the Torah to be expounded upon by philosophers. Man's own knowledge is unable to figure out the truth without guidance, but with a basic principle that guides man's knowledge, then man is able to figure out all truths that exist in the world.
"There are men that posses examining hearts that only follow their own wisdom, these are the wise men of the nations that are called philosophers. They want to use their wisdom to figure out the truth of how the world and its nature works. However, their understanding is far (from the truth) they do not know or understand (the truth) since they are searching in the dark. For if they are going to figure out (the truth), they first need to admit to this basic principle, that the Torah is from heaven. Then they will move out from the shadows and the darkness (and in to the light). This core idea that the Torah is from heaven removes a mans dirty and disgusting clothes (metaphor for incorrect ideas) and purifies his thoughts. Once this happens he or she will be able to be certain about their decisive proof that the Torah must be from heaven. "
The Maharal is not discounting the philosophers wisdom in any way, In fact, he refers to these people as wise men from the nations. The point of the Maharal is much deeper than mere knowledge. His point is that man can never know the truth without first setting up basic principles. Just like man can not figure out physics without first understanding the force of gravity, so too man can not understand the true nature of the world without first realizing that the Torah and the wisdom contained within it comes from heaven.
The idea here is that man without a guiding set of principles will not be able to find out the truth. Think of it in this sense, if man is put on earth without any guidance, how does he then figure out reality? How does man invent mathematics, art, language and all the other subjects? This leads us to believe that there is a higher being that all knowledge stems forth from. Therefore, once we realize that the Torah is from heaven, it is possible for the guiding principles of the Torah to be expounded upon by philosophers. Man's own knowledge is unable to figure out the truth without guidance, but with a basic principle that guides man's knowledge, then man is able to figure out all truths that exist in the world.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Rambam-What Part of a Man Lives Forever- Yisodei Hatorah perek 4 halacha 9
The Rambam tells us which part of a person it is that lives forever. He says,
אין צורת הנפש הזאת מחוברת מן היסודות כדי שתפרד להם. ואינה מכח הנשמה עד שתהא צריכה לנשמה כמו שהנשמה צריכה לגוף. אלא מאת ה' מן השמים היא. לפיכך כשיפרד הגולם שהוא מחובר מן היסודות ותאבד הנשמה מפני שאינה מצויה אלא עם הגוף וצריכה לגוף בכל מעשיה לא תכרת הצורה הזאת. לפי שאינה צריכה לנשמה במעשיה. אלא יודעת ומשגת הדעות הפרודות מן הגולמים ויודעת בורא הכל ועומדת לעולם ולעולמי עולמים. הוא שאמר שלמה בחכמתו וישוב העפר על הארץ כשהיה והרוח תשוב אל האלהים אשר נתנה:
"This form of the soul is not made up of the elements and therefore it does not break down into them. Also, the form of the soul does not have a spiritual force in the sense that it does not have the same needs as a spiritual force, like the spiritual force requires a physical body. This (form of the soul) comes from G-D from heaven. Therefore, when the physical body , that is made from the elements, breaks down and the spiritual force is lost, since it is not found to exist without a physical body (since it needs a physical body) for all of its actions, this form of the soul is not cut off since it does not need the spiritual force for it to work. In fact, it knows and attains knowledge that is separate from the physical body and it knows the creator of everything and it exists forever. It is the subject that King Shlomo refers to with his wisdom when he says(Ecclesiastes 12:7), 'And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to G-D who gave it.'"
The Rambam is pointing out the difference between the spiritual force of a man and the actual soul of a man. The force that a man has to be able to walk, run and basically do all of his actions comes from a spiritual force that is connected to his physical body. This spiritual force is lost when the body of a man dies. However, the soul of a man lives forever. This soul is made up of the knowledge that a man acquires while he is alive. This is what the philosophers refer to as the acquired intellect.
This is why it is so important to learn as much as possible while still alive. The part of a man that lives forever only consists of that which he or she acquires in this world. Therefore, one who learns more and gains more knowledge has more of a world to come based on the knowledge that he or she has acquired. One must always keep this in mind and be careful not to waste their time. Through knowledge man lives forever.
אין צורת הנפש הזאת מחוברת מן היסודות כדי שתפרד להם. ואינה מכח הנשמה עד שתהא צריכה לנשמה כמו שהנשמה צריכה לגוף. אלא מאת ה' מן השמים היא. לפיכך כשיפרד הגולם שהוא מחובר מן היסודות ותאבד הנשמה מפני שאינה מצויה אלא עם הגוף וצריכה לגוף בכל מעשיה לא תכרת הצורה הזאת. לפי שאינה צריכה לנשמה במעשיה. אלא יודעת ומשגת הדעות הפרודות מן הגולמים ויודעת בורא הכל ועומדת לעולם ולעולמי עולמים. הוא שאמר שלמה בחכמתו וישוב העפר על הארץ כשהיה והרוח תשוב אל האלהים אשר נתנה:
"This form of the soul is not made up of the elements and therefore it does not break down into them. Also, the form of the soul does not have a spiritual force in the sense that it does not have the same needs as a spiritual force, like the spiritual force requires a physical body. This (form of the soul) comes from G-D from heaven. Therefore, when the physical body , that is made from the elements, breaks down and the spiritual force is lost, since it is not found to exist without a physical body (since it needs a physical body) for all of its actions, this form of the soul is not cut off since it does not need the spiritual force for it to work. In fact, it knows and attains knowledge that is separate from the physical body and it knows the creator of everything and it exists forever. It is the subject that King Shlomo refers to with his wisdom when he says(Ecclesiastes 12:7), 'And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to G-D who gave it.'"
The Rambam is pointing out the difference between the spiritual force of a man and the actual soul of a man. The force that a man has to be able to walk, run and basically do all of his actions comes from a spiritual force that is connected to his physical body. This spiritual force is lost when the body of a man dies. However, the soul of a man lives forever. This soul is made up of the knowledge that a man acquires while he is alive. This is what the philosophers refer to as the acquired intellect.
This is why it is so important to learn as much as possible while still alive. The part of a man that lives forever only consists of that which he or she acquires in this world. Therefore, one who learns more and gains more knowledge has more of a world to come based on the knowledge that he or she has acquired. One must always keep this in mind and be careful not to waste their time. Through knowledge man lives forever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)