I know what I'm about to say might set my serial commenters off for its ridiculousness (in their eyes), but so be it.
We are all familiar with the famous chazal, אמר רב יהודה אמר רב גדולה הכנסת אורחין מהקבלת פני שכינה. Chazal learn this out from avraham - in the middle of hakbalas pnei hashechinah, avraham gets up and puts G-d on hold to go perform the mitzvah of hachnasas orchim. From here we learn that hachnasas orchim is "greater" than hakbalas pnei hashechinah.
I think it is criminal to learn a chazal like this without being attentive to its normative implications. Chazal are saying a halacha: hachnasas orchim is docheh hakbalas pnei hashechinah.
But that leads to a question: Is only hachnasas orchim docheh hakbalas pnei hashechinah?
Suppose you lived in a city with no lulav and esrog, and in the middle of having a conversation with G-d, you saw a man passing by with lulav and esrog - if you don't interrupt the "conversation", you miss lulav and esrog. If chazal only said that hachnasas orchim is docheh hakbalas pnei hashechinah, are other mitzvos not? Why not? And if other mitzvos are docheh hakbalan pnei hashechinah, then whats so special about the fact that hachnasas orchim is also docheh it?
I think the latter option is correct. What halachic justification could one offer to be mevatel a mitzvah for hakbalas pnei hashechinah (which, as far as I know, is not a mitzvah whatsoever)? Furthermore, it seems unlikely that hachnasas orchim would be the only mitzvah to be docheh hakbalas pnei hashechinah, when there are other mitzvos that would seem to be greater.
So why did chazal single out hachnasas orchim? I don't know. But a possible suggestion:
There is a clear parallel between hachnasas orchim, inviting a guest into your home, and hakbalas pnei hashechinah, inviting the shechinah into your home. From a strict halachic perspective, as we mentioned before, all mitzvos should be docheh hakbalas pnei hashechinah. But specifically by hachnasas orchim, there was a counter sevara - what a chutzpa to Hashem to prioritize inviting some random guest into your house over inviting in the shechina! It was that sevara that chazal had to counter: to the contrary: Hashem himself would rather you give precedence to the mortal guest over the shechinah.
The most real way to be makbil pnei shechinah, chazal are telling us, is not through lofty prophetic vision, but through the down to earth, mundane, helping someone out and making people, tzelem elokim, feel welcome.
Shavua tov!
Mr. Mashkim
ReplyDeleteAs far as I am aware your name is not Vincent Van Gogh so I am not sure why your are painting with such broad strokes, I am truly dismayed that you would assume outright I would find this post ridiculous. However, as we all know even a broken clock gets the time right twice a day and you are correct in assuming that this post is an absolute travesty. To make a mockery of chazal by exploring the normative implications of an aggadic statement is mind boggling. I am sure you know the Ramban in his Vikuach, the Meiri in Shabbos, and Avraham Ben Harambam regarding aggadata. This is what I first thought when reading your piece. Out of a merciful and generous spirit I read on, only to be further appalled. Somehow you end up concluding that Hachnasas Orchim is in fact Hakbalas Pnei Hashechinah, I would love to understand how you came to that conclusion. Mr. Mashkim, Purim is in 2 weeks.
Sincerely,
Tzafnas Paneach
I didn't assume you would find it ridiculous because you find everything I say ridiculous. I knew, mr. tzafnas, that you would find this post specifically ridiculous. Sorry if that was not clear.
DeleteNonetheless, I also knew that you would be 1000% incorrect. None of the mekoros you quote have any bearing to anything we are talking about; the rambam and ramban reject the position that we must take all divrei aggada literally, even when the stories are fanciful and far fetched. The ramban goes so far as to say that far fetched aggados do not need to be accepted at all, but I don't want to get into or particularly care about the debate amongst the gedolei hacharonim whether he actually held that position; it is of no matter. All this has no relevance to chazal's statement here that derives the greatness of hachnasas orchim from an interpretation in chumash - not at all a far fetched or ridiculous story that the rambam would say cannot be interpreted literally.
It is true that there is less of a trend to paskin based on aggadic statements amongst rishonim like the ramban and rambam. But I'm sure you're very much aware of a counter trend within tosfos and the gedolei ashkenaz who DID paskin with aggada, so even if I would be working within a subset of rishonm, I dont think it proper to call such an approach ridiculous, or a "mockery of chazal."
More to the point, the rambam himself paskins this aggada - TWICE - in the mishnah torah. ayen hilchos avel perek 14 towards the beginning, and hichos yesodei hatorah, 6:9. vitimtzah nachas, my dear friend mr. tzafnas.
Last point: the idea I was meramez at the end was plagiarized from the maharal. I dont remember where it is, but artscroll and the mesivta gemara both quote it in shabbos 127a. I apologize for the intellectual dishonesty, but nonetheless find your absolute rejection of the idea to be part of a fascinating experiment of mine in the social sciences.
It is fine with me that your positions in above comment were an insult to almost every rishon on the books. I'm a selfish guy - I care more about my kavod than the kavod of the rishonim.
But if you have any intellectual honestly, I do hope that you'll admit that you might have been just a tiny bit incorrect, at least within the confines of interpretation provided by our mesorah.
All in good fun,
Best Regards to you and the mishpacha,
E.S.
I would suggest E.S. (or Vincent) to check Dr. Grach's refutation of Grossman's assertation that Tosfos paskins Aggaditta. While we are all aware of examples where Tosfos does paskin aggaditta, it is far from normative. Also, you didn't seem to address the point that the Rambam held that simplistically assuming pashut pshat in Aggaditta is a travesty.
Delete(i am israelic so i have some mistakes, be strong)
ReplyDeletesory, i read the post and i realy not understand what Tzafnas Paneach want. the parallel between hakbalas pnei shechina and hachnasat orchim is so clear, so the damagogy is so lame.
please exlain what you want.
eliezer, you can write the principle in one sentence, for what the all post??
hello from israel,
netanel .s
i read again, so i have more disunderstanding about the comments.
ReplyDeleteTzafnas Paneach and Feechol, attack the point that eliezer compare to lulav and etrog. (if my english is ok..)
i disagree.
even if its not real comparing in halacha prespective, in idea prespective who can compare. because agadeta is not the pshat, we use anything to understand. when is start read the post my mind tell the end. because its so clear that its not statement in halacha, becuse of lulav etc, its pashut that the chdush is something else, and this chidush is pashut.
eliezer, i realy want to attack you like the old days, so please give me a link to another article, but with more meet.
Mr. Mashkim,
ReplyDeleteFirst of all I would like to say that your are an admirable sparring partner, but I think you misunderstood my last point. I did not reject your conclusion wholesale (and honestly knowing the maharal said it wouldn't change my mind), but I wanted you to elaborate on your conclusion that hachnasas orchim is hakbalas pnei hashechina, is maharals basis for this just that aggadta, because if so I don't think we should hang our hats on one statement especially when the conclusion is as radical as you wrote. I await for clarification on this matter. I looked up the rambam in yesodei hatarah and could not find your citation. Tzafnas jr. says hi.
Forever yours,
Tzafnas Paneach
First to Mr. Sagron,
ReplyDeleteWhile I have trouble writing in hebrew on the computer, you are more than welcome to write in hebrew, as long as you can put up with me writing in english.
I wrote somthing that if you or Mr. Tzafnas were to read it, would probably make both of you go crazy. I would be happy to disprove all you fools there once again (just like old times):
http://doleh-u-mashkeh.blogspot.com/2014/01/bechira-4-and-evil-of-milgram.html
And to Tzafnas:
You will admit that by reminding me that purim is in 2 weeks, it certainly was not unreasonable on my part to see a "wholesale rejection". I do appreciate the clarification.
I admit, that as Mr. Sagron pointed out, this does not seem to me to be very radical - it seems to be the natural interpretation of this agadta to compare hachnasas orchim to hakbalas pnei hashechina in a qualitative (and not only quantitative) fashion. I'd love to try to understand what you find so disturbing about this notion.
The Rambam in yesodei hatorah paskins that all the shemos by avraham are holy - this lends itself to the interpretation of chazal that Avraham interrupted his discussion with Hashem to greet guests. Maybe you can quibble and get out of it, I'm not sure. Its not really relevant given the rambam in avel.
I would love to post a "guest post" by any of the gedolim who comment here. If anyone is interested just let me know.
Kol Tuv,
E.S.
Mr. Mashkim,
ReplyDeleteThe purim is in 2 weeks line was merely a hachraza that if you had not begun to study the halachos you should begin now, I am truly hurt that you thought it was anything more sinister. In terms of why I think your pshat (i.e the maharal)is radical is because I approach these issues with a different perspective working within a diferent system of thought. As a believet in an esoteric maimonides who essentially believed in a deitic unchanging first cause (ayen strauss, fox, viod kama gedolim), the fluff you ended the post with was antithetical to the pure rationalist elitist philosophical approach I inherited from my proffesors. So for me the maharal is radical, while within his own philosophical system it may be absolutely logical. This is really a discussion for another time, perhaps we should meet over tea. By the way, are you a proffesional or still in school, as I hope you do not treat your patients or clients the way you treat your commenters, no matter how rude they are in return.
Until death do us part,
Tzafnas Paneach
The Netziv on chumash VaYeira touches on these issues.
ReplyDelete