tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post8296851968740773115..comments2023-12-24T16:36:39.633-05:00Comments on V = I·R: Gavra vs. cheftzaAnarchist Chossidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-46459518824179395082011-08-01T16:46:55.892-04:002011-08-01T16:46:55.892-04:00>a true tzaddik, capable of refining hard to re...>a true tzaddik, capable of refining hard to reach sparks, eats chicken with milk bishogeg<br /><br />That’s an oxymoron. Hashem guards the tzaddikim. But refer to the story of the Maggid not eating in Baal Shem Tov’s house.Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-79151106448690854052011-08-01T16:42:54.599-04:002011-08-01T16:42:54.599-04:00Are you suggesting that, according to the A'R,...Are you suggesting that, according to the A'R, if a true tzaddik, capable of refining hard to reach sparks, eats chicken with milk bishogeg, nothing really bad happens?mornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-3519801078610319462011-08-01T16:31:19.793-04:002011-08-01T16:31:19.793-04:00We have three stages:
A. People can eat chicken w...We have three stages:<br /><br />A. People can eat chicken with milk.<br />B. Yeridas ha’doros. Most people cannot elevate the sparks in the chicken tikka masala anymore.<br />C. Chazal declare chicken with milk not kosher. Now nobody can elevate the sparks in chicken tikka masala.<br /><br />At the stage B, presumably, tzaddikim could still eat chicken with milk and elevate the sparks. While eating pigs has always been a bad idea.<br /><br />Micha: I think "cholov stam" is a concept invented by Rav Moishe Feinstein. Before it was either akum or Yisroel.Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-51798596761966033542011-08-01T16:20:10.038-04:002011-08-01T16:20:10.038-04:00Just because Rav Chaim Brisker branded a couple of...Just because Rav Chaim Brisker branded a couple of issurei hanaah dirabanan as issurei cheftza doesn't mean that everyone agrees with him. <br /><br />Maaseh shabbos is dirabanan. <br /><br />The A'R calling yom tov sheini a metaphysical reality is the A'R being consistent.mornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-20352147879839050992011-08-01T16:11:41.747-04:002011-08-01T16:11:41.747-04:00I think I may have partially touched the idea here...I think I may have partially touched the idea here: http://crawlingaxe.blogspot.com/2008/12/spiritual-timelessness-of-judaism.html<br /><br />(Yes, I recycle my pictures.)Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-65210091367704479962011-08-01T16:10:32.118-04:002011-08-01T16:10:32.118-04:00I will ask A"R’s great-great-grandson on Frid...I will ask A"R’s great-great-grandson on Friday, iyH.Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-87780786242366246662011-08-01T16:07:24.810-04:002011-08-01T16:07:24.810-04:00There was chalav stam in the A"R's day; h...There was chalav stam in the A"R's day; historically it is the term for milk that the OU wouldn't certify either. The whole point of the Igeros Moshe's argument, and I presume that of those who came before him but didn't publish, is that FDA controlled milk isn't really chalav stam. Rav Moshe coins the term "chalav hacompanies" for this new reality.<br /><br /><br />I am disappointed that no one ran with my question about the A"R calling yom tov sheini a metaphysical reality. The problem is really bugging me.micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-21588214142797602612011-08-01T16:03:35.495-04:002011-08-01T16:03:35.495-04:00There is no specific action with an issur hana'...There is no specific action with an issur hana'ah. That's why we learn it (in both of the cases I cited) from the lashon in the chumash "yei'akheil" -- in the passive, referring only to the object with no subject.<br /><br />R' Chaim Brisker (pg 378 in the stencils) contrasts these issurim, which are on the cheftzah, with maaseh Shabbos, an issur gavra. The Igeros Moshe (OC vol 1 126:3) says maaseh Shabbos is an issur cheftzah, but I wasn't sure if getting hanaah from a melakhah done on Shabbos is derabbanan. I think it is, but I wasn't sure enough to cite it as an example.micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-4979085758658773542011-08-01T15:54:35.163-04:002011-08-01T15:54:35.163-04:00"But poultry and meat is an issur derabbanan ..."But poultry and meat is an issur derabbanan on a cheftzah. As is chameitz on erev Pesach."<br /><br />Where is the proof for these assertions? An issur cheftzah doesn't mean "an issur in which there is a cheftza involved" it means "an issur which is chal on a cheftza" as opposed to "an issur which is chal on a gavra." I don't remember the name of the achron being quoted by my teacher. I am pretty sure he said that there are multiple achronim who hold by this issur dirabanan only being on the gavra shitta.<br />Right - I meant chalav akum. My mistake - it wasn't in Tanya. Basically, there is a place in "Lessons in Tanya" (I think in one of the earlier prakim) where this story that the A'R told about chalav akum bishogeg is brought. <br />I am not sure I understand the whole "objective/subjective" distinction. Presumably anybody who tries can elevate klipas noga and nobody who tries can elevate 3 klipos. It seems pretty clear that the A"R holds that chalav akum has 3 klipos. Therefore, there is something assur in the cheftza itself, it is not chalav akum is not a mere prohibition on the gavra.mornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-24404070176986192972011-08-01T15:34:30.594-04:002011-08-01T15:34:30.594-04:00I don’t think there was cholov stam milk in A"...I don’t think there was cholov stam milk in A"R’s times. :-P I think this was a Freudian slip on your part, since according to our poskim, OU-D is treif.<br /><br />On a serious note, I have never heard such a story, but I have heard of the famous letter from A"R where he says that cholov akum is metamtem moach and lev.<br /><br />As I said, I think you could say that gavra and cheftza concepts from those essay refer to the fact that mitzvos Deoraysa are about the objective reality of refining sparks, while mitzvos deRebbanan are about the subjective reality and have to do with individual person’s ability to refine sparks. (I don’t know regarding things like Chanukah and Purim.)Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-4588597197471745862011-08-01T15:27:43.278-04:002011-08-01T15:27:43.278-04:00But poultry and meat is an issur derabbanan on a c...But poultry and meat is an issur derabbanan on a cheftzah. As is chameitz on erev Pesach.<br /><br />BTW, I mentioned the Or Sameiach, I should point out the Chazon Ish disagreed (Deshevi’is 18, #4). He says that the berakhah of success for those who observe shemittah applies today, even when shemittah is derabbanan. Implying rabbinic shemittah has a metaphysical reality.micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-70992729892904318642011-08-01T15:21:43.889-04:002011-08-01T15:21:43.889-04:00I have heard about this concept before in passing ...I have heard about this concept before in passing from my teacher - that some achronim posit that dirabbanan issurim can only ever be on the gavra. He explained that a nafka mina which they bring would be that if you were over an issur dirabanan bishogeg,you would not need to do tshuva or require kapara of any kind. Purely gavra oriented plus shogeg equals no problem. <br />It is very clear that the A'R does not hold by this since he refers to that story about the man drinking cholov stam milk bishogeg and then acting like a yucky person because of it until he realized his mistake. I find it very strange that this shitta with which the A'R disagrees would be brought in a chabad.org article as if it were the ultimate truth. <br />The fact is that most mitzvos, both deoraysa and dirabanon, clearly have both gavra and cheftza components. This is certainly true about both chametz and ner chanuka.mornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-19907633261419678842011-07-31T22:34:08.810-04:002011-07-31T22:34:08.810-04:00Actually, in this post, I quoted this story the wa...Actually, in <a href="http://crawlingaxe.blogspot.com/2010/04/matir-ossurim.html" rel="nofollow">this post</a>, I quoted this story the way I got it in an e-mail (it seems that I forgot that story and then re-told it, or something).Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-78270767491843980152011-07-31T22:31:18.167-04:002011-07-31T22:31:18.167-04:00I think a possible answer is that there are some t...I think a possible answer is that there are some things which are chayav or ossur from themselves, and some things are relative to the people.<br /><br />In all cases, there is a clear ontology for Halachos, both deoraysa and derabbanan. But deoraysa applies accross the board, and derabbanan is dependent on avoida abilities of people. Maybe there is a case of isarusa d'leila vs. isarusa d'lesata.<br /><br />For instance, Rabbonim forbade blowing shofar on Rosh HaShana if it coincided with Shabbos. Reason? Because whatever shofar accomplishes, Shabbos Rosh HaShanah accomplishes by itself. (Not a perfect example, because it explains how it was conceivable for Chazal to forbid such a mitzva as shofar because of a mere possibility of prohibition; doesn't really explain the source of the prohibition — but I haven't learned either of the hemshechim that talk about this sugya till the end.)<br /><br />Now, the question is: why was shofar blowing allowed during the first Beis HaMikdosh? Because what the shofar in the first BHM accomplished, Shabbos does not accomplish.<br /><br /><a href="http://crawlingaxe.blogspot.com/2010/07/following-threads.html" rel="nofollow">Another example</a> of a combination of ontology and personal level.<br /><br />Without doubt, halachos derabbanan have their own ontology. In fact, Purim and Chanukah are considered in Chassidus days more holy than Yom Kippur.Anarchist Chossidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129716759837282565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-924316815185498346.post-2988189625361232072011-07-31T20:03:07.012-04:002011-07-31T20:03:07.012-04:00Chameitz is an issur cheftzah deOraisa, ner Chanuk...Chameitz is an issur cheftzah deOraisa, ner Chanukah is a chiyuv gavra derabbanan.<br /><br />I believe the point of the essay you're quoting is more along the lines of the shitah of the Meshekh Chokhmah (Devarim 17:11). R Meir Simchah haKohein writes that while basar bechalav is an ontology -- it's something metu'af, the same is not true of milk and poultry.<br /><br />Not so much gavra vs cheftzah as whether the issur is describing a real spiritual problem vs pragmatic advice for the person.<br /><br />I'm not sure how this position dovetails with a comment in SA haRav on yom tov sheini shel goliyos. The Alter Rebbe writes that while yom tov sheini is derabbanan, the supernal force it connects the day to is the same one as on the previous day. The supernatural concept which has a deOraisa connection to 15 Nissan is the very same reality the derabbanan connect the 16th to. An ontological basis for a derabbanan, no?micha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.com