Volume 11 Number 71
Produced: Mon Feb 7 22:02:47 1994
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Mishloach Manot
[Michael Lipkin]
RAMBAM on AGGADAH
[Bobby Fogel]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <msl@...> (Michael Lipkin)
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 94 08:35:40 -0500
Subject: Mishloach Manot
In MJ 11:53 several people responded to my post about Shul coordinated
Mishloach Manot projects. I agree wholeheartedly with those who hold how
wonderful it is to be personally involved in the mitzvah by making and
delivering Mihsloach Manot oneself. However, I submit that personal
Mishloach Manot and Shul coordianted M.M. are not mutually exclusive. A
reasonable combination of the two can provide a high level of personal
satisfaction (higher still if one gets involved in the Shul project) while
keeping the observance from getting out of hand.
Below, are a few specific responses to comments on my post.
Meylekh Viswanath writes:
> our rabbi has paskened that one is not yotzei through such a
> m.m. package.
I believe our rabbi agrees, hence another reason we make and deliver
a few baskets of our own.
Janice Gelb writes:
> Secondly, I don't know that I'd want the shul office to know what other
> members of the shul I felt were particular friends of mine by providing
> them with a list.
IMHO shul offices have information that is far more sensitive than this.
> What are you going to tell the caller from the shul office: "No, we're not
> really fond of them but they keep trying to make friendly overtures to
> us?" Or wimp out and agree to all reciprocal additions even if you
> can't stand the people?
I think that according to the Chofetz Chaim those are probably the people
that should be tops on one's list.
Samuel Kamens writes:
> They are *extremely* expensive! My synagogue charges $7.50 per
> person to send Mishloach Manot.
Wow! My Shul charges $3.00 for the first 10 then $1.25 for each additional
name.
> In addition, this *does* foster the "Christmas list" problem, where
> everybody feels they have to give to all the people who give to
> them.
This is somewhat true, but from a frundraising perspective it's a postive
side effect. And, at my Shul's prices it's not *such* a big deal.
> People get different baskets depending on how many people sent to
> them. I know that I felt bad when I received only a small basket
> because only a few people sent to me, while other people received
> larger baskets, indicating tha they are "more popular".
This can happen with "regular" Mishloach Manot also. If one lives in a
community with hundreds of families and only gets 3 baskets, he could
feel pretty bad too. However, there is generally a corelation between
how much one sends and receives in both methods of M.M.
> In our shul, they do something which is (as far as I know)
> emphatically NOT halachic. When a person is listed as the receiver
> of Mishloach Manot from only one other person, or if the receiver
> is outside the area where they deliver, the synagogue sends a card
> instead of a basket.
In my Shul every member gets a basket, even if nobody included them.
Cards are only sent to people outside the geographic area of the shul.
> OK, off the soapbox. IMHO, it's much more fun and rewarding to bake,
> put together, and deliver our own Mishloach Manot baskets, and it
> certainly makes me feel better about observing the Mitzvah.
Imagine even how much better one would feel doing all of the above and
helping out his Shul!
Ben Svetitsky writes:
> We have a well-loved and picturesque mitzvah converted into
> Madison-Avenue money-grubbing.
and
> Mishloach manot shows that on Purim we were saved by sticking together
> and caring for each other.
In my Shul the Mishloach Manot project takes the work and cooperation of
dozens of members. People have to coordinate the lists, purchase the food,
set up the baskets, and deliver them. In addition to the money our Shul
raises for operations through the Mishloach Manot project we raise a similar
amount of money for distribution to poor families in Israel on Purim from
direct donations (maybe due to the money saved on Mishloach Manot).
In an ideal world we could all send Ben peanuts and give the rest of our
Mishloach Money to the poor and needy. Unfortunately, this world is far
from ideal. Shuls, for instance, need real "Madison Avenue" dollars to
pay for such frivolous things as utility bills, salaries, seforim, etc.
If a shul can take something like Mishloach Manot, which in some
communities has gotten obscenely out of hand (e.g. spending $100+ *per*
basket), and direct financial and communal resources in a positive way to
benefit the shul and communinity then everyone has gained and we have
performed the mitzvah along Ben's guidelines.
It's very easy to sit on the outside and take sweeping pot shots. People
who do so should try getting involved in the day to day operations of
something, anything. Sure, we could eliminate the Mishloach Manot project,
give eachother peanuts, and have cooperative Seudahs. But, we'd then have to
come up with some way to replace the lost revenue. And when we did, someone
would be waiting in the wings to criticize whatever we found to replace it
with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <bobby@...> (Bobby Fogel)
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 1994 18:55:59 +0000
Subject: RAMBAM on AGGADAH
Regarding the comment of how one should view aggadah, several responses
have been recieved by myself as well as posted to MJ. One in particular has
drawn my attention and I feel I must comment. A previous respndent states:
>The quote in MJ 11:38 about "Anyone who believes them all to be true
>is a fool, any one who believes they could not have occured" (or any
>variation of this theme) to the best of my recollection was stated
>concerning the wonders attributed to the Ba'al Shem Tov zt"l in
>Shivchei HaBesht, a book about... wonders performed by the Besht.
>In a note, Avi commented that this is similar to the Rambam's
>approach. Not exactly. The Rambam accepts all Agadatas to be true,
>but allegorical and possessed of a deeper, more profound meaning than
>face value would indicate, their true meaning concealed so that those
>not on a level suitable for understanding should not understand. . . .
I have looked up the RAMBAM in perek hachelek and this is not at
all what the RAMBAM says, in fact he says just the opposite.
The RAMABAM breaks up people who approach the aggadah into 3
groups. Those who believe in them literally, those who don't believe in
them and those who believe that some of them are partly allegorical.
As for the first group: I quote from a translation of the RAMBAM by
Isadore Twerskey: (ALL UPPERCASE ARE MINE)
"They accept the teachings of the sages in their simple literal sense
and do not think that these teachings contain any hidden meaning at all.
THEY BELEIVE THAT ALL SORTS OF IMPOSSIBLE THINGS MUST BE. THEY HOLD
SUCH OPINIONS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT UNDERSTOOD SCIENCE AND ARE FAR FROM
HAVING ACQUIRED KNOWLEDGE. They posses no perfection which would rouse
them to insight from within, nor have they found anyone else to
stimulate to profounder understanding. They, therefore, believe that
the sages intended no more in their carefully imfatic and
straightforward utterances, than they themselves are able to understand
with inadequate knowledge. They understand the teachings of the sages
only in their literal sense, in spite of the fact THAT SOME OF THEIR
TEACHINGS, WHEN TAKEN LITERALLY, SEAM SO FANTASTIC and IRRATIONAL THAT
IF ONE WERE TO REPEAT THEM LITERALLY, THEIR AMAZEMENT WOULD PROMPT THEM
TO ASK HOW ANYONE IN THE WORLD COULD BELIEVE SUCH THINGS TRUE, MUCH LESS
EDIFYING."
"The members of this group are poor in knowledge. One can only regret
their folly. Their very effort to honor and to exalt the sages in
accordance with their own meager understanding actually humiliates them.
As G-D lives, this group destroys the glory of the TORAH and
extinguishes its light, for they make the TORAH of G-D Say the Opposite
of what it intended. For He said in his perfect TORAH, 'The nation who
hear of these statutes shall say: Surely, this great nation is a wise
and understanding people (Div. 4:6). But this group expounds the laws
and the teachings of our sages in such a way that when the other peoples
hear them they say that this little people is FOOLISH and ignoble. "
Thus, here we have a statement by the RAMBAM about the approach of
taking a midrash that states things that are at odds with what we know
of science. It is not a positive reaction, to say the least. I must
emphasis that the RAMBAM is not saying that " all Agadatas to be true,
but allegorical and possessed of a deeper, more profound meaning than
face value would indicate, their true meaning concealed so that those
not on a level suitable for understanding should not understand. . . . "
as per the previous respondent. When I uses the term "true Aggadas", I
mean those that have historical validity. Versus a purely allegorical
aggadah which has no historical vallidity yet comes to teach us
something. The only positive approach described by the RAMBAM is the
third group :
"There is a third group. Its members are few in number that it is
hardly appropriate to call them a group, except in the sense in which
one speaks of the sun as a group (or species) of which it is the only
member. This group consists of men to whom the greatness of our sages
is clear. They recognize the superiority of their intellegence from
their words which point to exceedingly profound truths. Even though
this third group is few and scattered, their books teach the perfection
which was achieved by the authors and the high level of truth which they
had attained. The members of this group understand that THE SAGES KNEW
AS CLEARLY AS WE DO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE
IMPOSSIBLE AND THE EXISTANCE OF THAT WHICH MUST EXIST. THEY KNOW THAT
THE SAGES DID NOT SPEAK NONESENSE, AND IT IS CLEAR TO THEM THAT THE
WORDS OF THE SAGES CONTAIN BOTH AN OBVIOUS AND A HIDDEN MEANING. THUS,
WHENEVER THE SAGES SPOKE OF THINGS THAT SEEM IMPOSSIBLE, THEY WERE
EMPLOYING THE STYLE OF RIDDLE AND PARABLE WHICH IS THE METHOD OF TRUELY
GREAT THINKERS. "......................The sages themselves interpreted
Scriptural passages in such a way as to educe their inner meaning from
literal sense, correctly considering these passages to be figures of
speach, just as we do." "....if you belong to the third group, when you
encounter a word of the sages which seems to conflict with reason, you
will pause, consider it AND REALLIZE THAT THIS UTTERANCE MUST BE A
RIDDLE OR PARABLE. You will sleep on it, trying anxiously to grasp its
logic and its expression, so that you may find its genuine intellectual
intention and lay hold of a direct faith...."
I think that the RAMBAM that I have quoted speaks well for itself. I
know that their will still be readers who say." AHAAAAA. the RAMABAM
STILL DIDNT SAY THAT THEY WERENT TRUE, JUST THAT THEY CONTAIN AN
ALLEGORICAL MESSAGE AS WELL."
HOWEVER, IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT WHAT THE RAMBAM IS SAYING!!!!" He
catagorizes aggadah into those that make rational sense and those that
dont make rational sense. And indeed he does not speak well of those
who take the irrational as rational. The RAMABAM needs to be read as a
whole.
Clearly, RAMBAM does not believe in the historical truth of those
midrashim that vioate rationality. and feels that these were meant as an
allegorical tool for getting a point accross.
Any responses to this article should please take the entire sense of his
quote and not just pick one are two words to harp on.
Is there something that many in the Jewish world are afraid of if we say
that an aggadah is not true? Why does this seem to test peoples faith
such that they bend over backwards to rationalize them as truths.
Indeed RAMBAM says that such b behavior makes us small in the eyes of
the nations rather than making us tall and smart in their eyes (See
above)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 11 Issue 71
