September 1, 2013 7:13 pm at 7:13 pm #610500
Ok, who allowed themselves last night to be a heretic according to the Rambam by violating his fifth ikkar by reciting the “Machnisei Rachmim” prayer?September 1, 2013 11:13 pm at 11:13 pm #974366
Do you really think you are first person who discovered America? This issue has been mulled over by many Gedolei Yisroel. Some held it violates the principle you refer to and some explained how it doesn’t. Nobody, though, went along with it as a prayer to angels. The Chasam Sofer famously felt uncomfortable with it but not enough to abolish it, although he personally avoided saying it. The Maharal offers two explanations of how it is meant to be said. It has been discussed since then by many, many Gedolim. Then came the researcher. He realy figured it all out.
Even Rav Shrira Gaon, who says that we may actually pray to an angel, is borrowing the term and doesn’t really mean prayer as we use the term.
Sorry. Look for another example of how we don’t hold like the 13 Ikkarim — so that we can stretch that to Torah Min Shamayim or who knows what else.
Perhaps after that there will be room for THIS FELLOW to be considered Frum. Who knows.September 2, 2013 12:04 am at 12:04 am #974367nishtdayngesheftParticipant
Ironic comment from someone who supported Zev Farber’s remarks.September 2, 2013 3:53 am at 3:53 am #974368YW Moderator-42Moderator
I didn’t say it last night. For that matter, I didn’t say any selichos last night (other than slach lanu in maariv). But I did pray selichos in the morning before shacharis. Does that make me a heretic that I decided I was too tired to follow that minhag and rather davened in the morning when I was able to concentrate better?September 2, 2013 3:55 am at 3:55 am #974369YW Moderator-42Moderator
Hmm, looking back at that post, I think I sound like a mix between The Wolf and 147*. I hope I wasn’t oiver on kilayim. Are mods allowed to have favorite posters?
*who happen to be 2 of my favorite postersSeptember 2, 2013 4:29 am at 4:29 am #974370
The Wolf would have a foot note instead of parentheses.
Good point. Edited. 🙂September 3, 2013 3:24 pm at 3:24 pm #974372
“Ironic comment from someone who supported Zev Farber’s remarks.”
When did I say that I supported Rabbi Dr. Farber’s remarks? I didn’t even read most of them!
But it is indeed ironic that some people who will run someone out of Orthodoxy for a possible violation of one of Rambam’s ikkarim themselves violate a different ikkar.September 3, 2013 3:26 pm at 3:26 pm #974373
” Does that make me a heretic that I decided I was too tired to follow that minhag and rather davened in the morning when I was able to concentrate better?”
Of course not! 😉
I recently asked a rabbi for help in sorting out all the varying minhagim for the times for selichot and he basically rolled his eyes in response.September 3, 2013 3:29 pm at 3:29 pm #974374
“Look for another example of how we don’t hold like the 13 Ikkarim “
Prof. Marc Shapiro wrote an entire sefer full of examples of such, from the time of Rambam to the present.September 3, 2013 4:44 pm at 4:44 pm #974375twistedParticipant
I do not say it, nor would I say the yehi rotzon in Hineni as a shatz, and the slicha Midas Harachamim is either truncated or reworked. Also from the principles of less is best, and not to utter untruths, any slicha referencing shachar or boker, if said at chatzos, such stanzas should be omitted.September 3, 2013 5:09 pm at 5:09 pm #974376Mayan_DvashParticipant
Simple answer to simple people asking this silly question: these are attributes of Hashem and NOT ‘powers’ of ______ (fill in the blank).
;September 3, 2013 5:20 pm at 5:20 pm #974377zvei dinimParticipant
???”? says it;s not a ????? to the ?????? ?????, it’s jusi a kind of ??? ???.
“Prof. Marc Shapiro wrote an entire sefer full of examples of such, from the time of Rambam to the present.”
Gil Student has a series of critiques on that book. One of them linking to a speech-notes from the one and only Dr. Sid (Shneyer Zalman) LeimanSeptember 3, 2013 6:00 pm at 6:00 pm #974378truthsharerMember
I’m not sure why you stetch the definition of kefirah in this case, yet in other cases, the first word out of someone’s mouth is labeled as kefirah.
As for Machnisei Rachamaim, my understanding is that it’s 100% kefira and everyone knows it, but since we say it, it’s suddenly allowed. That still doesn’t take away the fact that it’s a prayer to angels.September 3, 2013 6:12 pm at 6:12 pm #974379WolfishMusingsParticipant
*who happen to be 2 of my favorite posters
Thank you for the kind words. 🙂
The WolfSeptember 3, 2013 6:47 pm at 6:47 pm #974380nishtdayngesheftParticipant
How can you say this “But it is indeed ironic that some people who will run someone out of Orthodoxy for a “possible” violation of one of Rambam”, (emphasis mine)
When you say this:”When did I say that I supported Rabbi Dr. Farber’s remarks? I didn’t even read most of them!”
Besides, you most certainly did try to support Farber’s remarks on Popa’s LOL thread.
And you last comment is either foolish or completely disingenuous, quite possibly a good mixture of both. There is no one, other than you possibly, who did not agree that Farber’s comments were plain apikorsus. The minhag of saying Machnesei Rachamim has been dealt with many times over the years.
Don’t think that you are suddenly being mechadesh something.September 3, 2013 11:42 pm at 11:42 pm #974381
charlie: See, this is something I really don’t like that’s been done with Rabbi Shapiro’s book. His point wasn’t to say that since not everyone held by the Rambam forever that we can just throw out the concept of Ikkarei Emunah. His point was just that the rules aren’t as set-in-stone as many want to say nowadays. The fact is, what Farber said is Apikorsus according to everyone, ever. That is undeniable. Apikorsus does exist. And while Rabbi Shapiro might be right that the rules aren’t has clear as some might be, the fact is that that doesn’t give us license to ignore all Apikorsus.September 4, 2013 1:33 am at 1:33 am #974382
My husband doesn’t say it. He finds Kiddush Levanah to be problematic for similar reasons, but nevertheless, since it’s more mainstream to say Kiddush Levanah he says that but doesn’t say Machnisei Rachamim which is considered more controversial (I think; he’s sleeping so I can’t ask him now).September 4, 2013 3:57 am at 3:57 am #974383
He finds Kiddush Levanah to be problematic for similar reasons
Truthsharer, it’s been dealt with. The one who wrote it obviously felt it is not Apikursus. Either it is meant to be read as a command as the Maharal suggests, or it is a Tefilla to Hashem as the Maharal also suggests — albeit that would require a tweak of the Girsa, or it is poetic and depends on the ending of Lach Mischaneinan, or some of the other Peshatim that were mentioned and suggested over the many times it was discussed.
Mayan, we are commanded ???? ??? ????????, so that doesn’t help.September 4, 2013 10:09 am at 10:09 am #974384
My husband wants to add that his rebbeim specifically told him not to say Machnisei Rachamim.September 4, 2013 11:21 am at 11:21 am #974385ToiParticipant
jewsish fem- who are his rabbeim?September 4, 2013 12:39 pm at 12:39 pm #974386
As mentioned above, the Chasam Sofer felt uncomfortable with saying and personally avoided it. However, even he didn’t feel he had the authority tell others not to say it. That is something Talmidim of his contemporary are more keen of doing.September 4, 2013 1:23 pm at 1:23 pm #974387Mayan_DvashParticipant
HaLeivi: Please read what I wrote, we are not praying to His ????, we are asking Him to apply certain ???? etc. The ???? ????? (made famous by Avraham Fried) that ??? ?????? ?? ????? once went into the ???? ????? and he “saw” the ????? which asked him for a ???? to which he responded may your ??? ????? conquer over your anger….. That is (similar to) the way I interpret ?????? ?????
;September 4, 2013 1:43 pm at 1:43 pm #974388
“The one who wrote it obviously felt it is not Apikursus.”
As did the rishonim who argued that God has a body!
“you last comment is either foolish or completely disingenuous, quite possibly a good mixture of both”
How is pointing out Prof. Shapiro’s sefer foolish or disingenuous?
“That still doesn’t take away the fact that it’s a prayer to angels.”
And clearly a violation of the 5th ikkar. If you ran rationalize saying Machnisei Rachamim, to run Rabbi Dr. Farber out of orthodoxy because he violates the 8th ikkar is intellectual and theological dishonesty.September 4, 2013 10:55 pm at 10:55 pm #974389yitayningwutParticipant
The apology that is offered for machnisei rachamim doesn’t sit very well with me. I don’t understand why would need to explain to Hashem exactly how to apply his midos. Perhaps instead of asking for health, we should read a biology textbook and at the end, say “ok God, now that you know how the body works, please ensure it functions properly.” Hashem knows quite a lot. I would think that it would be more useful to utilize one’s praying time praising, pleading, and thanking, rather than trying to sound all cool by letting God know that we have all this fancy inside information.September 7, 2013 9:51 pm at 9:51 pm #974390LevAryehMember
Just wanted to point something out: The 13 principles come from the Rambam’s Pirush in the 10th perek of Mishnayos Sanhedrin. Since Pirush Hamishnayos L’HaRambam was originally written in Arabic, some people may argue that the translation is not exact and the Rambam never said what everyone thinks he said.
So for the purposes of dispelling all doubt, here is the lashon of the Rambam in Hilchos Teshuva Perek 3 Halacha 7. He is discussing the five types of people who do not have a portion in Olam Haba, because they are called Minim.
??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ???
Please note that there is a discrepancy in Girsa on this line between the Warsaw-Vilna (classic) edition, and others, including the Frankel. I believe the one I quoted is from the Frankel. (I got it from hebrewbooks.)September 7, 2013 11:39 pm at 11:39 pm #974391
R’ Yitzchak Blau, the son of R’ Yosef Blau (mashgiach ruchani of Yeshiva University).September 8, 2013 2:28 am at 2:28 am #974392
Charlie: No. What is intellectually dishonest is to use Rabbi Shapiro’s book to be Mattir Apikorsus across the board. What Farber said is Apikorsus L’chulei Alma. That is true regardless of whether or not debate also exists about other Ikkarim according to the Rambam. He ran himself out of Orthodoxy when he said that the Torah wasn’t Min Hashamayim.September 8, 2013 3:19 am at 3:19 am #974393HaKatanParticipant
I once heard (I don’t recall where/what) that the Machnisei Rachamim tefillah is, essentially, simply asking the malachim to do their job, as in to deliver the tefillos to Hashem as they are supposed to do, not that we are davening to them.
I’m not sure how “hishtadlu viHarbu sichina…”, though, fits into that.September 8, 2013 7:02 pm at 7:02 pm #974394
” The 13 principles come from the Rambam’s Pirush in the 10th perek of Mishnayos Sanhedrin.”
Actually, the ani ma’amins are the rambams list of minim, apikorsim, etc phrased in the positive.September 8, 2013 7:08 pm at 7:08 pm #974395
“I don’t understand why would need to explain to Hashem exactly how to apply his midos.”
That’s because we don’t, inasmuch as we don’t need to explain to Hashem any more so what our particular needs or feelings are; nor does the kohen gadol not wear gold because Hashem would suddenly “Remember” the cheit haeigel. (There are many many more examples of this.) Davening is beseeching to do something – there are many reasons given for why daven altogether and how it can possibly accomplish anything in terms of “convincing” Hashem to “change” His “Mind”.September 8, 2013 10:38 pm at 10:38 pm #974396yitayningwutParticipant
Many reasons is takkeh a convincing answer.September 8, 2013 11:26 pm at 11:26 pm #974397
HaKatan: That explanation doesn’t help. Asking the Malachim anything is Apikorsus according to the Rambam.September 8, 2013 11:52 pm at 11:52 pm #974398WIYMember
The Rambam says we can’t ask them anything even if we recognize that the only reason they can do anything is because they were assigned that role by Hashem?September 8, 2013 11:53 pm at 11:53 pm #974399WIYMember
How is it different than going to kivrei Tzaddikim to ask them to intercede on your behalf?September 8, 2013 11:58 pm at 11:58 pm #974400
WIY: It’s not. The Rambam would call that Apikorsus as well (I think he says that B’feirush somewhere; I have to find where).
It’s fine to say that we don’t entirely hold like the Rambam on this issue, certainly because mainstream Shittos are far more mystical and less rationalist than the Rambam was. But trying to answer it up and say why it works within the Rambam is, frankly, an insult to the Rambam.September 11, 2013 9:56 pm at 9:56 pm #974401
It’s fine to say that we don’t entirely hold like the Rambam on this issue, certainly because mainstream Shittos are far more mystical and less rationalist than the Rambam was. But trying to answer it up and say why it works within the Rambam is, frankly, an insult to the Rambam
But unfortunately, people today apparently wouldn’t be able to come to grips with the idea that there may have been some pretty extreme machlokasim on some awfully fundamental issues. And there is also the “mitzvas asei chiyuvis to answer every shver Rambam” mentality.September 11, 2013 11:26 pm at 11:26 pm #974402
WIY: It’s not. The Rambam would call that Apikorsus as well (I think he says that B’feirush somewhere; I have to find where).
Many people have similar views but it doesn’t really sit well with some Gemaros.
I mentioned that Rav Shrira Gaon held it is Muttar to ask a Malach something which is in its control. This is not prayer. When we recite and teach the Ani Maamins we say that we can not pray to Malachim. Even if the Rambam took it further it is possible that we don’t. No one said we hold of everything the Rambam held of, but we do hold of the 13 Ikkarim, especially since he didn’t make them up.September 11, 2013 11:52 pm at 11:52 pm #974404
HaLeiVi: We hold like him for many K’lalim in the Ikkarim. We certainly don’t hold like him on every Prat.September 12, 2013 12:10 am at 12:10 am #974405
especially since he didn’t make them up.
Than why is it a machlokes rishonim not only if those of the Rambam are accurate, but also whether there are a slew of others?? (One shitta has i think 24(!) (including one to believe kabbalah is true)). No where in any jewish literature through the gemara is such a concept laid out.September 12, 2013 4:46 am at 4:46 am #974406
That’s not a Machlokes on Ikkarim. It is a Machlokes on numbers.
The Rambam also held of Sisrei Torah. He spoke of it often, and dedicated more than a Perek in the Yad to that. The question is only what is the Sisrei Torah. –side point
Besides, when I say that he didn’t make them up it still doesn’t have to mean it is Mefurash. They aren’t personal musings. It is what he took from the words of Chazal.September 12, 2013 1:18 pm at 1:18 pm #974407
HaLeiVi: Right, but his way of defining these things certainly was unique. He had basis in Chazal, yes. But he also had to counter-read and/or dismiss many Gemaras. It was not for nothing that many contemporaries felt his books had to be burned. The Rambam was not mainstream in his time. And he’s certainly not mainstream on a lot of things now, especially when the current world has a far less rationalist outlook than he did.September 12, 2013 6:11 pm at 6:11 pm #974408
That’s for sure, but it has nothing to do with the Ikkarim, which everyone agrees to. (And among the other stuff there is much misunderstanding and misinformation)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.