PaRDeS and Berei**** 1:20-25

[CMike]

We don't always know with surety the intent of the ultimate author: that is why we have halachah, and the ability to interpret, reinterpret, and introduce novellae by rabbinic decree.

Torah has frequently been reinterpreted based on new ideas and halachah emended to deal with new concepts and changing ideas.

You don't have to like or agree with how such reinterpretations are done in communities other than your own today, but it is simply historically inaccurate to say it has not taken place, and textually dishonest to try and read it out of Gemara and later halachic writings.

Torah is never reinterpreted by new ideas.

The morals, principles, and ideas are constant, and never changing.

Applications may change based on changing technology.

For example, they didn't have airplanes, cars, ultrasound, etc in those days.

However, the same ideas and principles are applied to changing technology. The rabbis figure out how.

Also, in judaism the earliest rabbis in the Talmud have more weight than the next generation, that generation has more weight than the next generation, and so forth.

 

[Levite]

Torah is never reinterpreted by new ideas.

The morals, principles, and ideas are constant, and never changing.

However, the same ideas and principles are applied to changing technology. The rabbis figure out how.

The morals and principles may remain the same, and the methods remain fairly constant, but it is simply inaccurate to say that Torah is never reinterpreted in light of new ideas. To say that would be utterly ahistorical, and either ignorant or manipulative of halachic precedents.

Also, in judaism the earliest rabbis in the Talmud have more weight than the next generation, that generation has more weight than the next generation, and so forth.

You are attempting to conflate three different ideas: the authority of the Rabbanim being greater than of post-Talmudic generations; yeridat hadorot bikedushin; and the principle of hilcheta kevatrai.

This conflation of these ideas is common in charedi Judaism today, but it ignores the fact that there are varying schools of thought concerning the application and weight of the principle of hilcheta kevatrai-- not everyone has held it to be an ironclad law of interpretation-- and that numerous authorities in our tradition have not subscribed to the theory of yeridat hadorot bikedushin.

Conflating these ideas as you are doing is a common method of attempting to paralyze the halachic system, force it into greater stricture and away from interaction with modernity, and stripping rabbis of their traditional halachic authority, except for the chosen few in the charedi world deemed to have da'as torah or ruach hakodesh or whatever excuse is popular these days for why their authority will be acknowledged but not that of other rabbis.

The idea has no actual merit.

 

[CMike]

The morals and principles may remain the same, and the methods remain fairly constant, but it is simply inaccurate to say that Torah is never reinterpreted in light of new ideas. To say that would be utterly ahistorical, and either ignorant or manipulative of halachic precedents.



You are attempting to conflate three different ideas: the authority of the Rabbanim being greater than of post-Talmudic generations; yeridat hadorot bikedushin; and the principle of hilcheta kevatrai.

This conflation of these ideas is common in charedi Judaism today, but it ignores the fact that there are varying schools of thought concerning the application and weight of the principle of hilcheta kevatrai-- not everyone has held it to be an ironclad law of interpretation-- and that numerous authorities in our tradition have not subscribed to the theory of yeridat hadorot bikedushin.

Conflating these ideas as you are doing is a common method of attempting to paralyze the halachic system, force it into greater stricture and away from interaction with modernity, and stripping rabbis of their traditional halachic authority, except for the chosen few in the charedi world deemed to have da'as torah or ruach hakodesh or whatever excuse is popular these days for why their authority will be acknowledged but not that of other rabbis.

The idea has no actual merit.

I am not Charedi as I mentioned before.

I did graduate from Yeshiva University, H.S. and College, as I stated before, as well.

There are two types of jews as far as the Torah is concerned:

1) The ones that realize that G-D in the Torah tells them what to do.

2) The ones that try and tell G-D in the Torah what to do or what he really meant.

The lefties are number 2.

I see a lot more respect for the Torah from christians than I do from the far left jews. It's very saddening.

 

[Levite]

I am not Charedi as I mentioned before.

I did graduate from Yeshiva University, H.S. and College, as I stated before, as well.

There are two types of jews as far as the Torah is concerned:

1) The ones that realize that G-D in the Torah tells them what to do.

2) The ones that try and tell G-D in the Torah what to do or what he really meant.

The lefties are number 2.

I see a lot more respect for the Torah from christians than I do from the far left jews. It's very saddening.

YU, unfortunately, has been getting steadily more charedi in its theology and ritual practice for decades. The fact that they still teach secular studies and sciences doesn't change the fact that their Orthodoxy hasn't been particularly modern since the 1950s.

Since you seem to be monolithic, inflexible, and completely ahistorical and uncritical in your approach to halachah, I can only assume that either whatever they taught you at YU must have been carefully selected and taught with a greatly biased agenda, so as to exclude concepts and schools of thought in halachah they didn't want you to learn; or that you heard only what you wanted to hear in your classes there, and simply refused to absorb any knowledge you found problematic.

For the record, making what I can only assume you think passes for snarky attacks at "left wing Jews" does not actually count as taking a halachic position.

 

[dantech]

CMike, you're giving a bad name to orthodoxy with your "I'm right, you're wrong" answers.

Judaism revolves greatly around debate. Debate revolves greatly around supporting your arguments with facts. I agree with your views since we're both orthodox, but there are ways to defend them that will be more effective, especially to other Jews, rather than just dismissing others' opinions.

If someone says "I believe this pen is blue", and you just say "nope, it's red." Without demonstrating that it is, then you haven't done anything.

If you believe you are right, and others are wrong, wouldn't it be more effective to get them to try and understand your point of view, rather than calling them Christian-like?

That's something Tumah did well, and I miss him for it. He supported his arguments, and spoke respectfully.

 

[dantech]

Shabbat shalom everyone!

 

[CMike]

No. We have a totally different belief system.

And I am being as respectful as the ultra left wingers are to me.

Actually I said the fundy Christians respect Torah more than they do.

Please get it right.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Shabbat shalom everyone!

Shabbat shalom.

 

[Levite]

CMike, you're giving a bad name to orthodoxy with your "I'm right, you're wrong" answers.

Judaism revolves greatly around debate. Debate revolves greatly around supporting your arguments with facts. I agree with your views since we're both orthodox, but there are ways to defend them that will be more effective, especially to other Jews, rather than just dismissing others' opinions.

If someone says "I believe this pen is blue", and you just say "nope, it's red." Without demonstrating that it is, then you haven't done anything.

If you believe you are right, and others are wrong, wouldn't it be more effective to get them to try and understand your point of view, rather than calling them Christian-like?

That's something Tumah did well, and I miss him for it. He supported his arguments, and spoke respectfully.

I would frubal this, if I could. And if there were a special frubal for menschluchkeit, I would give that, too.

 

[CMike]

There is a surprise.

 

[CMike]

YU, unfortunately, has been getting steadily more charedi in its theology and ritual practice for decades. The fact that they still teach secular studies and sciences doesn't change the fact that their Orthodoxy hasn't been particularly modern since the 1950s.

Since you seem to be monolithic, inflexible, and completely ahistorical and uncritical in your approach to halachah, I can only assume that either whatever they taught you at YU must have been carefully selected and taught with a greatly biased agenda, so as to exclude concepts and schools of thought in halachah they didn't want you to learn; or that you heard only what you wanted to hear in your classes there, and simply refused to absorb any knowledge you found problematic.

For the record, making what I can only assume you think passes for snarky attacks at "left wing Jews" does not actually count as taking a halachic position.

I am sure from the extreme left it may seem so.

However, YU is the largest modern orthodox school in the US

I would be more concerned how you were taught that you tell G-d what his commandments should be rather than the other way around.


Your approach is highly arrogant and has led to disaster for the Jewish people.

 

[TheKnight]

No. We have a totally different belief system.

And I am being as respectful as the ultra left wingers are to me.

Actually I said the fundy Christians respect Torah more than they do.

Please get it right.

Your posts in this thread remind me far more of fundamentalist Christian behavior than anyone else's. They have this sort of self-contradictory ignorance about them that suggests you either have no idea what you're talking about, or deliberately choose to spit on the Torah you claim to believe in by disregarding what it teaches.

As danteach already pointed out, there are better ways to make an argument, and better ways to get your point across. What you're doing, by claiming "righteousness" and the title of Orthodoxy while simultaneously looking down on your fellow Jews with disgust as if they were inferior creatures who are not worth your time, is utterly reprehensible and a great chillul Hashem.

 

[Levite]

I am sure from the extreme left it may seem so.

However, YU is the largest modern orthodox school in the US

I would be more concerned how you were taught that you tell G-d what his commandments should be rather than the other way around.


Your approach is highly arrogant and has led to disaster for the Jewish people.

I'm sorry, I just keep laughing at being called "extreme left." Both that and the suggestion that any halachist, non-Orthodox or not, is "telling God what His commandments are" when interpreting are equally ludicrous.

Have you really never learned the tanur shel Achnai sugiya?! Or learned anything else about rabbinic authority?

As far as I can tell, it's not any interpretation or psak halachah that has been disastrous for the Jewish People, it's lack of education on the left and excessive rigidity and closed-mindedness on the right.

I'm sure you'll forgive me if I find it a little difficult to take seriously an accusation of arrogance from someone who routinely suggests I might as well be Christian. You might want to review the bit in Rambam where he notes that one should be both kind and humble in order to give tochechah to another, especially in public....

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I'm sorry, I just keep laughing at being called "extreme left."

I always knew that there was something I really liked about you.

 

[CMike]

Since we are solidly into personal attack I will be happy to join in.

This is to Levite, O, Dantech, and The Knight.

At least the christians have some respect for the Torah. Most of them believe that it is divine.

When we argue over passages they usually misinterpret it, but what the ultra left wing jews do are insidious.

They don't like the passage about homosexual behavior being an abomination. That's fine, they just change it.

After all the Torah needs to be modernized. It's not stylish enough to fit the ultra left.

This is the height of arrogance, which I have stated several times.

Instead of G-D telling them what to do, they are going to tell G-D what his commandments are supposed to be.

I pointed out the passages in Dvarim 13 to these christians many times.

1. Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.

Buy hey that doesn't matter. That's probably just a suggestion.

Obviously, according to the ultra left, the commandments must comply with their left wing agenda, and fit into the commandments being "stylish" and in fashion for them.

Other than them being born that way, why do they even consider themselves jewish?

The Torah doesn't apply to the them. At least the part that they don't want to apply to them.

It's a highly arrogant attitude that is not part of judaism. It's really about not caring what G-D said, it's only caring about what you want it to say.

If there are commandments and you don't do them for whatever reason, that is one thing. Most jews that know a little about the Torah, probably know that they don't do all the commandments, but realize that they should

However, changing the commandments to "modernize" them is nefarious.

I stand by all my statements.

BTW Levite just throwing jewish terms every now and then doesn't make your arguements any sounder. It may be good for your ego, but I don't find it any impressive, when you twist them around.

 

[CMike]

I'm sorry, I just keep laughing at being called "extreme left." Both that and the suggestion that any halachist, non-Orthodox or not, is "telling God what His commandments are" when interpreting are equally ludicrous.

Have you really never learned the tanur shel Achnai sugiya?! Or learned anything else about rabbinic authority?

As far as I can tell, it's not any interpretation or psak halachah that has been disastrous for the Jewish People, it's lack of education on the left and excessive rigidity and closed-mindedness on the right.

I'm sure you'll forgive me if I find it a little difficult to take seriously an accusation of arrogance from someone who routinely suggests I might as well be Christian. You might want to review the bit in Rambam where he notes that one should be both kind and humble in order to give tochechah to another, especially in public....

Pot, kettle.

 

[Levite]

Since we are solidly into personal attack I will be happy to join in.

This is to Levite, O, Dantech, and The Knight.

At least the christians have some respect for the Torah. Most of them believe that it is divine.

When we argue over passages they usually misinterpret it, but what the ultra left wing jews do are insidious.

They don't like the passage about homosexual behavior being an abomination. That's fine, they just change it.

After all the Torah needs to be modernized. It's not stylish enough to fit the ultra left.

This is the height of arrogance, which I have stated several times.

Instead of G-D telling them what to do, they are going to tell G-D what his commandments are supposed to be.

I pointed out the passages in Dvarim 13 to these christians many times.

1. Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.

Buy hey that doesn't matter. That's probably just a suggestion.

Obviously, according to the ultra left, the commandments must comply with their left wing agenda, and fit into the commandments being "stylish" and in fashion for them.

Other than them being born that way, why do they even consider themselves jewish?

The Torah doesn't apply to the them. At least the part that they don't want to apply to them.

It's a highly arrogant attitude that is not part of judaism. It's really about not caring what G-D said, it's only caring about what you want it to say.

If there are commandments and you don't do them for whatever reason, that is one thing. Most jews that know a little about the Torah, probably know that they don't do all the commandments, but realize that they should

However, changing the commandments to "modernize" them is nefarious.

I stand by all my statements.

BTW Levite just throwing jewish terms every now and then doesn't make your arguements any sounder. It may be good for your ego, but I don't find it any impressive, when you twist them around.

In other words, כל חדש אסור מן התורה. The Chatam Sofer already made your argument almost 200 years ago. It's the foundational, classic charedi argument. So much for the "modern" in Modern Orthodox, I guess.

 

[CMike]

In other words, כל חדש אסור מן התורה. The Chatam Sofer already made your argument almost 200 years ago. It's the foundational, classic charedi argument. So much for the "modern" in Modern Orthodox, I guess.

G-D made my arguement in the Torah.

in Dvarim 13

1. Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.

As I said I am not charedi.

Modern orthodox doesn't mean the ideas and principles in the Torah are modernized.

The ideas, principles, and laws in the Torah stay the same.

How to apply them is based on changing technology.

From the ultra left things look different I'm sure.

 

[RabbiO]

Since we are solidly into personal attack I will be happy to join in.

This is to Levite, O, Dantech, and The Knight.....

I stand by all my statements....

I take it, then, that your response to my public and private offer to try to clear the air, lower the tension, and engage in discourse that is more civil and less confrontational is - "No."

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There is a logic and a methodology that progresses from viewing Torah as, literally, holy writ wherein every letter has multiple and divine intent. One can accept or reject the premise, but that renders the conclusion no less reasonably coherent.

Alternatively, there is a logic and a methodology that progresses from viewing Torah as human text, refined through a long process of oral and textual transmission, and conditioned by the authors and their times. Again, one can accept or reject the premise, but that renders the conclusion no less reasonably coherent.

But it seems to me that some real problems arise for those who try to straddle these two camps. Their explanations often bring to mind the word of that most curious goy, Humpty Dumpty:

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master – that's all." (Looking-Glass 6.63-65)

"I meant by 'impenetrability' that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life."

"That's a great deal to make one word mean," Alice said in a thoughtful tone.

"When I make a word do a lot of work like that," said Humpty Dumpty, "I always pay it extra." (Looking-Glass 6.68-70)

Let me now return to the poll. I find Berei**** 1 to be remarkable on a number of levels, containing more than its share of jewels in a text bedecked with jewels. But this in no way prevents me from acknowledging that the author got the order of creation wrong. Whether or not his intent was to divulge this order is (a) unknown to me, and (b) wholly beside the point. The fact remains: science tells us that the pshat is in error, and one would imagine that Holy Writ would be more than capable of avoiding such an embarrassment.

Nor am I impressed by efforts to navigate the distinction between God-authored and Man-authored by referenced to 'God-inspired', since I am not sure what is intended by these appeals. I am inspired by many things, none of which (or whom) render me any less fallible.

It is my belief that those who evolved PaRDeS were, in fact, inspired by an abiding belief in Torah as holy writ, and I further believe that this approach to biblical interpretation rests firmly on that conviction. So let me ask this question:

Can PaRDeS retain its coherence in the absence of such a conviction, and can such a conviction be maintained in the presence of clear errors in the pshat of the text?​

Finally, regarding CMike. While I have occasionally found him infuriating (and have him on my ignore list) I acknowledge the coherence of his position and probably share some of his frustration with those who (from my perspective) approach Torah as a text partially pregnant with divine authorship.