- This topic has 22 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
In several places (e.g. Pesachim 50b, Nazir 23b, Sotah 22b) Rav Yehuda says in the name of Rav ????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?? ?? ??? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?? ???? (there is slight variation in the wording in the different masechtos).
In Berachos 17a, Rava says ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ??? ????.
In Taanis 7a, R’ Bena’ah says ??? ????? ????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????.
Several questions:
1) What exactly is the chiddush of ??? ?? ??? ????? We know from Eruvin 13b that everyone is ??? ?? ??? ????.
2) Assuming it is really ??? ?? ??? ????, what of it? Just like the Gemara in Eruvin says ????? ????? ????? ??????, so too, once you were created you have a chiyuv to learn Torah even if you’re going to do it ??? ????. R’ Yisrael Salanter indeed writes (Ohr Yisrael Iggeres 27): ??? ?? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ???? ????. But this is not really such a kashya because granted you still have to learn, the Gemara is telling us to strive to do it lishmah. This is really more of a setup for the next question.
3) Tosafos in all five of the aforementioned Gemaros about lishmah, asks that it’s a stirah – Berachos and Taanis are contradictory to Pesachim, Nazir, and Sotah. Now what’s the big stirah? Berachos and Taanis are telling us that learning ??? ???? is bad and Pesachim, Nazir, and Sotah are telling us that you still have to learn even ??? ????. As the Orchos Tzadikim (Sha’ar Hatorah) writes about Acher’s father:
?????? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ????? ??? ???? ?? ????. Now it could be that Tosafos’s question is simply that if ??? ???? is bad it can’t be that it would lead to something good. (Although the Orchos Tzadikim doesn’t seem to feel that that’s a problem.) But that can’t be the basis of Tosafos’s question because Tosafos’s answer (in Pesachim his answer is slightly different than in the other places) is that there are two types of ??? ???? – l’kavod, and l’kanter. Which means that even in his answer he is granting that ??? ???? for kavod can lead to ????, so in his question where he didn’t yet invent the category of l’kanter, why can’t ??? ???? lead to ????. If Tosafos thought that there is something inherent in ??? ???? that it can’t lead to ???? then he should have a kashya miney ubey om the statement of ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? even without the Gemara in Berachos. And if he didn’t think that there was something inherent, then his kashya should be minay ubey on the Gemara in Berachos without bringing in the other Gemaros, namely what’s the big issue with learning ??? ???? that could possibly make it ??? ?? ??? ?????
4) According to Tosafos’s answer, the same terminology is being used to mean two very different things. Obviously this is not a fatal blow*, but it seems to be an unnecessary dochek in light of the above.
* The Maharatz Chayes in Sotah 2a writes:
?? ????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?”? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???”? ????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??”? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???’ ??? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ??”? ???? ???? ???”? ??? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ????? ??????? ?????
He is talking about an Amora speaking in general terms when he only means a specific subset, which would seem to be the case here. However, it could be that the case here is an ???? ???? ??? or that it’s not as ???? ????.
Any thoughts on the matter are welcome.
#3, could it be that tosfos’ problem is that the loshon by ??? ???? is so harsh, how could the gemorrah advocate learning in that way?
1) See Tosafos in Eiruvin, and Maharsha in Makkos (23b). It is ??? for righteous individuals, so the gemara in Berachos seems to be saying that shelo lishma does not put someone in this category, but Tosafos asks that the gemaros praising even shelo lishma indicate that it would. This answers point 2 as well.
I’ll try bl”n to get to point 3 later.
The Maharal actually says your Terutz, that although it is not good you should do it anyhow. Tosafos seems to take it like it is an Aveira. Language works with context. A phrase doesn’t have to always mean the exact same thing.
In Eiruvin it is saying that due to the slim chances of coming out of this world pure, we would prefer not to take the chance. Here we are saying that you didn’t accomplish anything.
Tosafos in Eiruvin says that for Tzaddikim we don’t say it is better not to be born. So, in simple Terutz form we can day that this Gemara is saying that learning this way does not get you out of the category of Nuach Lo Shelo Haya Nivra.
In case you would say that, I added the Maharsha who says it’s a matter of numbers of lavin vs. esin.
I don’t really think you need that, though; I think he is a tzaddik in its meaning of one who does k’shuras hadin.
(It should be noted that the gemara is referring to all mitzvos, not just learning.)
3) Actually, I think I addressed it, but I’ll explain. If learning shelo lishma is a mitzvah, albeit on a lower level, how can it not elevate him to a status of noach shenivra, and, as secretagentyid said, why would it be a sam hamaves? So Tosafos needs to split it into two categories. (The case of Acher might be shver, but a couple of suggestions come to mind.)
4) “Shelo lishma” is a negative – NOT for it’s proper purpose – so the meaning is actually the same. What fills that void is different, which isn’t shver.
Why can’t it be a mitzvah and it’s still noach lo shelo nivra? Especially according to the Maharsha.
Because the reason it’s noach shelo nivra is because it’s not worth the risk that he’ll do more aveiros than mitzvos. Since he’s doing mitzvos, for him it’s noach shenivra.
I pointed out that that should be stam a kashya on the gemara in Taanis (sam hamaves) or on the gemara in Berachos (noach lo shelo nivra), but not a stira.
Without the other gemaros, one might think there’s no mitzvah to learn shelo lishmah; in fact, it might be an aveirah (kardom lachpor bo).
Then it should also include learning in order to get schar (for sure according to the Rambam).
The same din doesn’t have to apply to everything to which that terminology fits.
If you like more answers, the Maharal says that although for us it would be more comfortable not to have been born, since it is the will of HKBH we make His will our will. So the Gemara here is saying that after having done so, and we currently consider it a blessing to be born, we tell this ???? ??? ???? that for him it is truly better not to have been born.
I don’t understand what the ????”? has to do with it. I am saying that the lashon itself is precise.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.