Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › ikarei hadas › Reply To: ikarei hadas
@R Eliezer it’s not how rashi learns.
@avira
it’s not a good comparison to Miryam. IIRC, what the acharonim say is the when Miryam judged Moshe, it had still not been established that his nevuah was unparalleled. It was afterward that it became established. Maybe that can be extended to explaining R’ Hillel’s position as well {though a tad far fetched, IMHO). The “why is nevuas moshe an ikar” is not explained by the above, nor will it explain why Bias Moshiach is an ikar. The reason I didn’t ask about Necuas Moshe is because I think it can be answered with the meshech chochma–maybe he himself answers this question with it–that Nevuas Moshe’s superiority is a prerequisite for emunah b’Torah min Hashamayim. [I might be somewhat misquoting the meshech chochma, I can look it up later, but that is his general yesod.]
What I was really wondering, using the first question as a prelude, was why are we expected to believe the ikarim? Are they mesoratic based? Intellectual based? The answer is, I think, some and some.
For instance, someone who doesn’t believe in Techias Hameisim MIN HATORAH is a kofeir. (Parenthetically, this is befeirush a Mishnah, so why does Sefer Haikarim not include it?) Said belief is at least partially a result of belief in the Torah.
Sachar Vaonesh, some (I think the chinuch) say is rooted in svara (though of course belief in the torah will automatically result in said belief).
Now, what about that Hashem is eino guf….? Is that something that’s a component of Metzius Hashem? That is, someone who believes in a corporeal god is essentially believing an impossibility? If so, the source for this ikar will be the same source–sevara–as Metzius Hashem.
Or maybe it’s not one and the same. (According to the raavad, it’s not an ikar; clearly he understands belief in a corporeal guf does not negate the belief in a god.)
I have to respond to your second point but later.