Ra'avad on teshuva 3:15 continued

As I stated in the previous post, it is more than clear that the Ra'avad held from a rational mesora . However, there is still the main question that I had raised which has yet to be answered. The question, in summation is, why would the Ra'avad use the phrase Gedolim vtuvim memenu to refer to those who believed in a physical G, if in fact he rejects that notion.


In the kesef mishna, Rav Yosef Karo takes up our question:
כתב הראב"ד "ולמה קרה לזה מין וכו' .המשבשות את הדעות עכ"ל.
ויש לתמוה על פה קדוש איך יקרא לאומרים שהוא בעל גוף ובעל תמונה גדולים וטובים ממנו . ואפשר שעיקר הנוסחא כמו שכתוב בספר העיקרים פ"ב ממ"א וז"ל. א"א אע"פ שעיקר האמונה כן הוא המאמין היותו גוף מצד תפיסתו לשונות הפסוקים והמדרשות כפשטן אין ראוי לקרותו מין .


"There is astonishment at the holy mouth [ the Ra'avad] how can he call those who say that G' ahs a body or image " greater and better than he"? It is possible that the essential textual version is the same as is written in the sefer haikkarim : "Abraham states, even though the essential conviction is thus ( that G' is non physical) , one who believes that G' has a body because of the language of the verses and the literal interpretation of the midrashim , it is not appropriate to call him a min."

I was recently made aware of a shiur given by my Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Y. Chait regarding contradictory beliefs in which he mentions this Ra'avad. The shiur can be accessed at http://www.ybt.org/Sunday03092003.ram.

The main point that I have gathered from the shiur regarding our Ra'avad is one which deserves a post in its own right.

The real question here is when we are confronted with language from chazal or other chachamim that semingly contradicts our Yisodos, what should our response be? Our Ra'avad is a prime example of this. Are we to view the problem language as a claim against our already established principles , or is there another reaction.According to Rabbi Chait the appropriate reaction to seemingly contradictory language in the corpus of Torah sheba'al peh is the reaction of the kesef mishna to the Ra'avad. The Kesef Mishna did not read the Ra'avad and question his yisodos. The reaction of Rav Yosef Karo was to utterly reject the problem language as invalid and suggest an appropriate replacement. The response to problem chazals is not to run away screaming that the Yisodos are uprooted because of whatever problem language appears. Rather, the response to a problem language is to clamly return to your knowledge of the foundational principles of yehaduth and to accept that the way in which you are understanding that language is impossible within the mesora and to simply reject the problem statement.This is not to say that you cannot try to resolve the problem, if there is a sevara that can preserve the language and is within the framework of Torah then congratulations you have fought a war in which the truth has prevailed. However, if you cannot salvage that particular language then be satisfied that you were able to determine a conflict between what you were reading and the Yisodos and know that the Yisodos are true and there is no statement that will shake you of that notion.

In conclusion, whenever we are faced with a seemingly problematic statement within the mesora there can be but one reaction. To retreat back to the sound foundations of yehaduth that have been rationally proven , and not put stock in languages that conflict with what we already know is true.

The Chazon Ish brain surgery, Rav Charlop and his "telekenisis" and other fantastic tales of bizui haTorah

I recently met a very intelligent fellow who told over two very fantastic "stories" regarding gedolim and seemingly miraculous events. This gent proceeded to question the rational philosophy espoused by my yeshiva based on these two fantastic stories.I had heard the first story many years ago and it remains unverified and without a source to this day. Recently I was informed ( although I have yet to see it myself) that this story is included in the biography of the Chazon Ish ( Harav Avrohom Yishaya Karelitz) which was published by a very prominent religious publishing house. The second story was new to me and I have been unable to find it anywhere. Again it is unverified and unsourced. I am writing this not in response to the stories themselves but rather as a reaction to the way people view these stories . I would like to preface by saying that this is in no way an attack on the individual who told me these stories. Indeed he was doing nothing less than seeking the truth and he should be commended for it.This is however, a response to the method of thinking that these stories are used to support.













(I will present the stories as I have heard them, If there are sources and or corrections in the story please make me aware of them.)






Story A- The Chazon Ish- brain surgeon.






The story goes as follows.






There was a patient in Israel who had a large brain tumor that required surgery of a very difficult nature in order to be cured. No surgeons were able to figure out exactly how to execute the surgery.The patient was distraught at the possibility that modern medicine could not save him and he sought guidance from the gaon Rav Avrahom Yeshaya Karelitz , the Chazon Ish. As the story goes the Chazon Ish examined the patient and using his knowledge of mesechet Chullin was able to plot the appropriate method for surgery.






Story B- Rav Charlop and his telekinetic abilities






The second story as told by this individual :






During the first World War Rav Charlop was mithpalel at the kotel. Suddenly he had a vision of Rav Avraham Yitzchak Hacohen Kook learning in London. ( Apparently Rav Kook was residing in England during the hostilities.) Not only did Rav Charlop envision Rav Kook learning but he was also aware of the sugya that he was learning at that very moment. Rav Charlop was purported to have told this to Rav Kook sometime later when they were reunited.











The problem I have with both of these stories is as follows. Let us assume that both stories are real. It is possible that the Chazon Ish was able to devise a way to remove a brain tumor. Rav Karelitz was a tremendous chacham and it is possible that he was aware of brain function and physiology enough to help the medical professionals. Perhaps. It could also be logically argued that the second story was a result of Rav Charlops tremendous understanding of the mind and thoughts or Rav Kook which led him to think of what Rav Kook was learning. Again, it is theoretically possible. My problem is thus: as I said it could be that both of these stories occured in some form, somehow. However, the emphasis and weight that is put into these stories along with the inevitable questioning of rationality that follows is the problem.





When these stories were told to me they were told in order to somehow prove to me that there are magical phenomena at work in the world. Miraculous occurences which somehow should call into question my world view. The purported surgery was a function of the fact that " everything is in the Torah" and so therefore a chacham will know science better than the scientist. ( I am still unclear as to exactly what the Rav Charlop story was supposed to prove).This is my problem. When we allow fantastical stories to creep into our minds and give them as much weight as rational investigation and mesora then we are degrading the very Torah which we claim to adhere to. I dont care one iota whether Rav Charlop knew what Rav Kook was learning or whether the Chazon Ish knew brain surgery. To the adherent of the mesora it is irrelevant.

There is another point that I am always astonished by aside from the sheer irrelevance to the mesora. These stories are nothing less than bizui haTorah and bizui talmidei chachamim. The fact that there are stories being told about chachmei hamesorah and their seemingly magical powers is defining what the mesora and chachamim are to the people who peddle these fables.In short, the mesorah( to those who adhere to these stories) is some magical tradition that allows those who master it to perform miracles and break the rules of science . In fact the mesorah is a rational worldview which accepts cause and effect as real and denies stupidity and foolishness. To imply that the Torah is a magic " realm" is to completly degrade the essence of the Torah. As the verse in Deuteronomy states(Chap.4 verse10)

וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם--כִּי הִוא חָכְמַתְכֶם וּבִינַתְכֶם, לְעֵינֵי הָעַמִּים: אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁמְעוּן, אֵת כָּל-הַחֻקִּים הָאֵלֶּה, וְאָמְרוּ רַק עַם-חָכָם וְנָבוֹן, הַגּוֹי הַגָּדוֹל הַזֶּה
" and you shall guard them to perform them for they are your wisdom and understanding in they eyes of the nations that will hear all of these statutes and declare ' surely a wise and discerning and great nation this is".

The mesora and its masters are not magicians and anyone who implies the opposite should go ask one of them and they will instruct you to examine your actions and return to the system of reality.