כָּל אִישׁ וְאִישׁ מִכָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם- notice how the rambam doesn’t say Jews. How would you understand this for a non Jew? If he learns some Gemara he also wouldn’t have to go to the army? If you check up הלכות ת״ת you would see that the rambam includes philosophy in learning Gemara. לַעֲמֹד לִפְנֵי ה' לְשָׁרְתוֹ וּלְעָבְדוֹ לְדֵעָה אֶת ה' וְהָלַךְ יָשָׁר כְּמוֹ שֶׁעֲשָׂהוּ הָאֱלֹהִים This is clearly not including a guy learning a few blatt a zman in a yeshiva, he doesn’t even mention talmud torah. The rambam is talking about a true philosopher. That’s what it means to know hashem.
If the Rambam means to include non-jews, which I highly doubt, it would mean a non-jew who dedicates his life to Hashem. It is possible that would entail a lifetime contemplating the sacred philosophy, or alternatively taking a greater step and being mekabel the Torah.
The Rambam's sacred philosophy is about coming close to God, and has nothing to do with the secular philosophies and sciences of the modern era, and is indeed much closer to kabbalah than it is to any of those.
The reason to asssume he includes nonJews is because elsewhere he always uses the term מִכָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם to include nonJews, (though perhaps he means to include them through Geirus?)
What’s your basis for saying it’s through geirus? He uses the most expansive language possible and you’re just deciding it means a group that would be considered a Jew so is already included. As rambam says in maamar techiyas hameisim, he can say anything as clear as possible and people will still misunderstand.
If you find the expansive language so convincing, then maybe כָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם also includes dogs and cats. And if it is a גזירה שוה, I don't think the Rambam was meant to be darshened with the יג' מדות. Rather, you should go by what makes sense in context.
Come on, the Rambam is very careful with his choice of words, and besides its not just the Rambam. These words always mean all people (yes, people). Do a search on Bar Ilan or Otsar.
Why do you doubt he’s including non-Jews? This fits perfectly with his philosophy. Obviously I don’t mean modern philosophy, I mean the kind of Aristotelian Philosophy he himself ascribed too.
The point is, your main source is the rambam, who clearly doesn’t think the modern day yeshiva student is someone who is devoted to דעת ה.
I doubt it because don't think it fits perfectly with his philosophy and certainly doesn't fit into the context of comparing to Shevet Levi. I don't see why the modern day yeshiva student is not devoted to דעת ה, the Rambam agrees that there are many Torah preparations before you reach that stage, which the yeshiva student is undertaking.
How does this not fit the context of shevet Levi? See the first perek of הלכות ע״ז where he describes the origin of shevet Levi.
That’s exactly my point, at best a group of people who are merely preparing for daas hashem are not like shevet levi. Beside the fact that they don’t treat it as preparation and never advance the way rambam thinks you should, in the preparation stage you don’t fit into the parameters of what is shevet levi.
So your point is that anybody who doesn't serve a"z is on the level of Shevet Levi? That can't be. Shevet Levi is designated for Avodas Hashem, and the Rambam is saying any בואי עולם who similarly separates himself for Avodas Hashem is similar. I very much doubt one can do that without the Torah, but perhaps it is possible
I don't understand why you think somebody who is "merely" preparing for דעת ה is not included in נָדְבָה רוּחוֹ אוֹתוֹ וֶהֱבִינוֹ מַדָּעוֹ לְהִבָּדֵל לַעֲמֹד לִפְנֵי ה' לְשָׁרְתוֹ וּלְעָבְדוֹ לְדֵעָה אֶת ה'. And I don't know why you think they never reach that level. The Rambam is not talking about the level of Nevuah. He is talking about somebody who strives to know Hashem. Do you think that because they don't study Aristotelian philosophy? If so, do you think that Aristotelian philosophy, including the astronomy and four elements which the Rambam uses to know Hashem is still valid? Or do you think that knowing Hashem is obsolete, now that all of those components of Aristotelian philosophy are obsolete?
דעת ה is based on the Aristotelian idea of thought. So yes the rambams entire idea needs an Aristotelian framework. If you think that’s obsolete, than don’t quote a rambam that is based on this idea as a relevant thing.
And, of course, the idea that every yeshiva student falls into the category of someone who "does not care about worldly concerns" is a joke. They certainly care about worldly concerns when deciding who to marry!
Who in the world is Rabbi Steven Weisberg? Looks like the only thing he ever published is this unfortunate essay. Him vs. Rav Chaim Kanievsky, what a complete joke. He can't even get the Mishnah in Sotah right. For an organized refutation of Steve's nonsense, see Derech Emunah at the end of Shemittah v'Yovel.
The funniest thing to me is the description of rabbi weisberg at the beginning: he lives in eretz yisrael and his sons served in the army and he also gives shiurim to chayalim for free and he earns a livelihood in high tech as well...
Like some kind of passive aggressive jibe directed against charedim
Good point, thanks. I am not sure if that is a proof, since unlike the other shevatim it doesn't describe them with weapons (ועי' דעת מקרא שם, ברוך שכוונתי), and he needed representatives of all the shevatim to be ממליך him. But on the other hand, there is also the story of the Cohanim protecting little King Yehoash with weapons. So I modified the post.
"I am not sure if that is a proof" etc. That's why I wrote to do a search as the recent mefarshim grapple with this, as that pasuk doesn't describe them with weapons but the beginning of the list seems to be stating that all these had weapons.
Thanks
That quote from Reb Moshe Zvi is beautiful!
כָּל אִישׁ וְאִישׁ מִכָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם- notice how the rambam doesn’t say Jews. How would you understand this for a non Jew? If he learns some Gemara he also wouldn’t have to go to the army? If you check up הלכות ת״ת you would see that the rambam includes philosophy in learning Gemara. לַעֲמֹד לִפְנֵי ה' לְשָׁרְתוֹ וּלְעָבְדוֹ לְדֵעָה אֶת ה' וְהָלַךְ יָשָׁר כְּמוֹ שֶׁעֲשָׂהוּ הָאֱלֹהִים This is clearly not including a guy learning a few blatt a zman in a yeshiva, he doesn’t even mention talmud torah. The rambam is talking about a true philosopher. That’s what it means to know hashem.
If the Rambam means to include non-jews, which I highly doubt, it would mean a non-jew who dedicates his life to Hashem. It is possible that would entail a lifetime contemplating the sacred philosophy, or alternatively taking a greater step and being mekabel the Torah.
The Rambam's sacred philosophy is about coming close to God, and has nothing to do with the secular philosophies and sciences of the modern era, and is indeed much closer to kabbalah than it is to any of those.
The reason to asssume he includes nonJews is because elsewhere he always uses the term מִכָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם to include nonJews, (though perhaps he means to include them through Geirus?)
I don't think we can make a גזירה שוה, and I doubt that he includes it based on the context. But it is possible through geirus, certainly.
What’s your basis for saying it’s through geirus? He uses the most expansive language possible and you’re just deciding it means a group that would be considered a Jew so is already included. As rambam says in maamar techiyas hameisim, he can say anything as clear as possible and people will still misunderstand.
If you find the expansive language so convincing, then maybe כָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם also includes dogs and cats. And if it is a גזירה שוה, I don't think the Rambam was meant to be darshened with the יג' מדות. Rather, you should go by what makes sense in context.
Come on, the Rambam is very careful with his choice of words, and besides its not just the Rambam. These words always mean all people (yes, people). Do a search on Bar Ilan or Otsar.
Exactly, so when he’s saying that people can transcend their specific roles, he includes people who’s role is to do ז מצות בני נח.
Why do you doubt he’s including non-Jews? This fits perfectly with his philosophy. Obviously I don’t mean modern philosophy, I mean the kind of Aristotelian Philosophy he himself ascribed too.
The point is, your main source is the rambam, who clearly doesn’t think the modern day yeshiva student is someone who is devoted to דעת ה.
I doubt it because don't think it fits perfectly with his philosophy and certainly doesn't fit into the context of comparing to Shevet Levi. I don't see why the modern day yeshiva student is not devoted to דעת ה, the Rambam agrees that there are many Torah preparations before you reach that stage, which the yeshiva student is undertaking.
How does this not fit the context of shevet Levi? See the first perek of הלכות ע״ז where he describes the origin of shevet Levi.
That’s exactly my point, at best a group of people who are merely preparing for daas hashem are not like shevet levi. Beside the fact that they don’t treat it as preparation and never advance the way rambam thinks you should, in the preparation stage you don’t fit into the parameters of what is shevet levi.
So your point is that anybody who doesn't serve a"z is on the level of Shevet Levi? That can't be. Shevet Levi is designated for Avodas Hashem, and the Rambam is saying any בואי עולם who similarly separates himself for Avodas Hashem is similar. I very much doubt one can do that without the Torah, but perhaps it is possible
I don't understand why you think somebody who is "merely" preparing for דעת ה is not included in נָדְבָה רוּחוֹ אוֹתוֹ וֶהֱבִינוֹ מַדָּעוֹ לְהִבָּדֵל לַעֲמֹד לִפְנֵי ה' לְשָׁרְתוֹ וּלְעָבְדוֹ לְדֵעָה אֶת ה'. And I don't know why you think they never reach that level. The Rambam is not talking about the level of Nevuah. He is talking about somebody who strives to know Hashem. Do you think that because they don't study Aristotelian philosophy? If so, do you think that Aristotelian philosophy, including the astronomy and four elements which the Rambam uses to know Hashem is still valid? Or do you think that knowing Hashem is obsolete, now that all of those components of Aristotelian philosophy are obsolete?
דעת ה is based on the Aristotelian idea of thought. So yes the rambams entire idea needs an Aristotelian framework. If you think that’s obsolete, than don’t quote a rambam that is based on this idea as a relevant thing.
For an organized refutation of all this, see https://www.mhcny.org/pdf/Enigmatic%20Passage%20in%20The%20Mishneh%20Torah.pdf
And, of course, the idea that every yeshiva student falls into the category of someone who "does not care about worldly concerns" is a joke. They certainly care about worldly concerns when deciding who to marry!
Who in the world is Rabbi Steven Weisberg? Looks like the only thing he ever published is this unfortunate essay. Him vs. Rav Chaim Kanievsky, what a complete joke. He can't even get the Mishnah in Sotah right. For an organized refutation of Steve's nonsense, see Derech Emunah at the end of Shemittah v'Yovel.
The funniest thing to me is the description of rabbi weisberg at the beginning: he lives in eretz yisrael and his sons served in the army and he also gives shiurim to chayalim for free and he earns a livelihood in high tech as well...
Like some kind of passive aggressive jibe directed against charedim
😂 Truly amazing! A Bosnian Muslim on a post about the Israeli Palestinian war grasps a fine point of anti-chareidi rhetoric that even I didn't get!
Do a search on אוצר החכמה for מִן־בְּנֵי֙ הַלֵּוִ֔י אַרְבַּ֥עַת
Good point, thanks. I am not sure if that is a proof, since unlike the other shevatim it doesn't describe them with weapons (ועי' דעת מקרא שם, ברוך שכוונתי), and he needed representatives of all the shevatim to be ממליך him. But on the other hand, there is also the story of the Cohanim protecting little King Yehoash with weapons. So I modified the post.
"I am not sure if that is a proof" etc. That's why I wrote to do a search as the recent mefarshim grapple with this, as that pasuk doesn't describe them with weapons but the beginning of the list seems to be stating that all these had weapons.