tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post982809935455603748..comments2023-10-12T10:09:54.121-04:00Comments on Believing is Knowing: Kilayim - Separation of Mind and Matter: Livyat Chen.David Guttmannhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-53183333684556431662010-12-08T19:29:32.475-05:002010-12-08T19:29:32.475-05:00http://www.magnespress.co.il/website_en/index.asp?...http://www.magnespress.co.il/website_en/index.asp?category=214&id=2537David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-55250298007617058362010-12-08T17:01:04.003-05:002010-12-08T17:01:04.003-05:00where can I purchase or find Livyat Chen?where can I purchase or find Livyat Chen?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-21140544534941923142010-10-12T21:13:27.147-04:002010-10-12T21:13:27.147-04:00Perhaps the true meaning of the Gra's comment ...Perhaps the true meaning of the Gra's comment was "that accursed philosophy that gave him the idea he could think on his own." (Was that your allusion?)Aryehnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-78956654066596696182010-10-11T08:27:47.797-04:002010-10-11T08:27:47.797-04:00Micha
Could you explain why a taam has to be self...Micha<br /><br />Could you explain why a taam has to be self evident or mechanistic to be valid? So what if a dimension of mesorah requires greater minds to be known. Why is the need for a Gadol in taam, more alien than in Psak? Surely the people do not have the ability to pasken shaalos without the superior knowledge of poskim. By the same token, if a taam is not revealed by a great mind, the Mitvot will be lacking as well. Note Moshe was exhorted to function in both senses, as educator in hidden senses of perush and taam.<br /><br />אשר תשים לפניהם: אמר לו הקב"ה למשה לא תעלה על דעתך לומר אשנה להם הפרק וההלכה ב' או ג' פעמים עד שתהא סדורה בפיהם כמשנתה, ואיני מטריח עצמי להבינם טעמי הדבר ופירושו, לכך נאמר אשר תשים לפניהם, כשלחן הערוך ומוכן לאכול לפני האדםRabbi Jonathan Sackshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06724954433302279666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-42432225543679601032010-10-10T11:51:39.262-04:002010-10-10T11:51:39.262-04:00Kilayim as AZ or in this particular case teaching ...Kilayim as AZ or in this particular case teaching mercy etc... is one of possible reasons if it works for that particular person. <br /><br />I think the point is that the reasons for Mitzvot is individual and i believe that is what Rambam end Hilchot Me'ilah says (I have a post on that in the plans). The reason for one Mitzvah can be multiple depending on the person that performs it. Each person has to find the relevant one for himself, and not necessarily from a preset list<br /><br /><br />I do not understand this overemphasis individualism in the seeking of reasons for Mitzvot. Doesnt this kind of individualism preclude a communal field of study? Not just Rabbi Levi, but all Mefarshim of the Torah, by sharing their insights with the community, point to the possibility of consensus. This consensus should be carefully attained, through discussion and scrutiny of the strengths and weakness of various possibilities and opinions, yet it must be sought. Is this not the essence of Talmud Torah?Rabbi Jonathan Sackshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06724954433302279666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-54922987795502123932010-10-10T07:42:38.036-04:002010-10-10T07:42:38.036-04:00rabbis Micha and Sacks,
i thought i was clear tha...rabbis Micha and Sacks,<br /><br />i thought i was clear that rabbi levi accepts the reasons for Mitzvot as proposed by other Rishonim. He also holds that the specific reason for a mitzvah may change based on each person's personality and status of development as well as with the culture it is practiced in. Kilayim as AZ or in this particular case teaching mercy etc... is one of possible reasons if it works for that particular person. The reason he gives here is for a thinker like himself or one who follows his thinking. That is why I wrote in the above post -<br /><br />"This interpretation of the reason for the Mitzvah conforms with the individualized approach to Ta’amei Hamitzvot. After all, one has to be a philosopher to appreciate this reasoning. For the common person the other reasons would be relevant, such as teaching about cruelty or promiscuity."<br /><br />Regarding R. Micha's point about ethics as a tool in Rambam I will address in a post BLN.<br /><br />Re emanations, I also agree that Rambam has them except that he limits man's knowledge of them to Ishim, the lowest while all the ones above we know exist but do not know their functions. The numbers are also not set see MN 2:11. He also sees them as the natural process that is part of how the physical world runs and have no direct connection to HKBH (other than a result of Retzono like everything else),and have Bechirah in a sense, see MN 2:7 (which BTW I am still struggling to understand well). <br /><br />Re 3. <br /><br />I think the point is that the reasons for Mitzvot is individual and i believe that is what Rambam end Hilchot Me'ilah says (I have a post on that in the plans). The reason for one Mitzvah can be multiple depending on the person that performs it. Each person has to find the relevant one for himself, and not necessarily from a preset list, as long as he is aware that it is a tzivuy hashem.David Guttmannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07668302013143561290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-67608411993001449652010-10-09T20:24:49.334-04:002010-10-09T20:24:49.334-04:00In what way does this explanation of Rabbi Levi he...In what way does this explanation of Rabbi Levi help the Torah Jew live his life of Mitvot better? I find explanations such as these, in this disconnected format rather ineffectual.<br /><br />Perhaps you could make the case that Shor as form naturally emerges from the Tanach more powerfully than this?<br /><br />Or that form is more deeply rooted in limud Mitzvot?Rabbi Jonathan Sackshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06724954433302279666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-75409071774496637582010-10-09T06:33:06.021-04:002010-10-09T06:33:06.021-04:00Brain is brain [See: Shatner, Billy]Brain is brain [See: Shatner, Billy]https://www.blogger.com/profile/03037704048671379868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21749731.post-11628577188903429652010-10-07T10:07:56.699-04:002010-10-07T10:07:56.699-04:001- I still don't see int he Rambam the notion ...1- I still don't see int he Rambam the notion that mitzvos are a tool for ethics. I see him as giving three classes of mitzvos:<br /><br />a- those necessary for an orderly society, so we have the freedom to think,<br />b- those that eliminate errors that humans are prone to (eg meat and milk being associated with avodah zara), and<br />c- those plant correct ideas.<br /><br />But ethics? That's a handmaiden to knowledge -- see (a). Perhaps also an outgrowth, but the Rambam doesn't explicitly say so. But not the end-all of mitzvos.<br /><br />2- The Rambam has his parallel to emanations, see Yesodei haTorah 2:5. The difference is whether one speaks of beams of "Light" which cause ever more course forms and substances, or invokes a line of angels -- which the Rambam describes as forms without substance, anyway. See my comparison, based on the Leshem. (Summarized <a href="http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2010/01/maimonidian-qabbalah-recap.shtml" rel="nofollow">here</a>, with links to the individual posts.<br /><br />3- I find my problem embracing R' Hirsch's Horeb applies here too. The problem I have with symbolic interpretations of mitzvos is that they give mitzvos value only for those who are "in" on the symbols. And the vast majority don't even know the symbol, never mind gain by having it internalized. To my mind, for mitzvos to improve the person, either:<br />a- the symbol has to be either self-evident,<br />b- the improving effect being behavioral, through habituation or seeing the results, not symbolic transmission of abstract information; or<br />c- the effect is given mystical explanation.<br /><br />(I think the essence of R' Yisrael Salanter's approach is the notion that (b) and (c) are different descriptions of the same thing.)<br /><br />-michamicha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.com