quote:

Originally posted by David Ben-Abraham:
B"H
Moshe,

It is implied by the Talmud that it is not necessary for each Jew, in each generation, to renew his covenant with G-d (kores bris), since the covenant is passed down unto him automatically. The Talmud brings the example of what we would do with that person who says that he swears by a solemn oath not to perform a certain "mitzvas aseh," in order to make himself exempt from the commandment. The Gemara says that this is virtually impossible, since he has (as it were) already sworn at Sinai to perform all the commandments. His sworn oath is rendered null and void by a prior oath.

The Rabbis have furthermore said:
כל המתנה על מה שכתוב בתורה תנאו בטל

(Translation)
"Anyone who makes a stipulation against that which is written in the Torah, his stipulation becomes null and void."

It would seem to me that this "covenant" between G-d and every Jew is automatically passed down, and is eternal, even an on-going covenant that does not require renewal with each subsequent generation.

Sincerely,
David Ben-Abraham

Shalom R'David, my (limited) understanding of this subject was basically the same as you are describing until R'Moshe raised the issue now.

It may be helpful in understanding this if some specific sources would be referenced, whether for or against this position. So far there has been some discussion of the Talmud, but I do not think that any specific refernces have been pointed out.

Aaron

Jews are a people not a race. The inheritance of Torah has nothing to do with genetics. Prayer requires kavvana. A bnai brit person should be taught the brit of his people BY his people. If that knowledge is not passed down then a person has an obligation to seek that knowledge and re-new the brit relationship obligations with the Elohim. A precident being Yeshua at gilgal, the last righteous king of Yehuda also re-newed the brit. Obviously if a persons says krea shma and tefilla with kavvana his oath qualifies as only a strengthening of the will to do the commandments.
A bnai brit person can not make an oath that annuls the oath brit of the nation. This in no way diminishes from an individual member of the nation from cutting an oath/brit, for by doing so he/she only aknowledges a true given reality.

I can not comment upon how others learn Torah but for me this way i understand with clarity.

with respect,
moshe

quote:

I can not comment upon how others learn Torah but for me this way i understand with clarity.

So you're saying that "From Moshe to Moshe there is none like Moshe"; that only you have this clarity of understanding.

Thus the answer to the question as to what your sources are is "none, apart from my own sevora."

B"H
Moshe,

You have written:
"The inheritance of Torah has nothing to do with genetics."

While it is true, on the one hand, that the knowledge of the Torah is not passed down genetically from father to son, rather all men must occupy themselves in the study of the Torah for it to be their field of expertise, it is also true, on the other hand, that the Torah was given unto the people of Israel by way of a covenant at Sinai, which the Chinese did not receive. This makes the Torah the sole inheritance of the Jews, and of those who make themselves Jews, as it is written:
תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה קהלת יעקב

Only a Jew can claim the Torah as his own, since he alone is obligated to keep the Torah. This means the obligation is passed down unto him genetically, or else, that he converted to the Jewish religion and thereby became obligated. A gentile who keeps the Sabbath is liable to the death penalty.
כי אות היא ביני וביניכם לדורותיכם לדעת כי אני יי' מקדשכם

The inheritance of Torah has, therefore, much to do with genetics.

Sincerely,
David

The midrash teaches explicitly that the Torah was given at Sinai that all people, including chinese, had an equal opportunity to accept the Torah. Of the 7 commandments not included is Honor your mother and father. The Torah revelation did not occur in the past but rather it occurs every minute of every day its called בראשית!

with respect,
moshe

I think you're confusing creation with Matan Torah.

quote:

Originally posted by moshe kerr:
The midrash teaches explicitly that the Torah was given at Sinai that all people, including chinese, had an equal opportunity to accept the Torah. Of the 7 commandments not included is Honor your mother and father. The Torah revelation did not occur in the past but rather it occurs every minute of every day its called בראשית!

with respect,
moshe

Moshe,

True, the Torah was initially offered to all peoples of all nations. They refused to accept it. Those who did accept it were of the nation of Israel, both them and their descendants, as also those proselytes of each and every generation. This means that to them, and to their progeny, the Torah has been given. (Only to them, and to them alone.) It was, moreover, given by way of an eternal covenant. The covenant between G-d and his people has never been broken.

David

quote:

Originally posted by David Ben-Abraham:
B"H
Moshe,

You have written:
"The inheritance of Torah has nothing to do with genetics."

While it is true, on the one hand, that the knowledge of the Torah is not passed down genetically from father to son, rather all men must occupy themselves in the study of the Torah for it to be their field of expertise, it is also true, on the other hand, that the Torah was given unto the people of Israel by way of a covenant at Sinai, which the Chinese did not receive. This makes the Torah the sole inheritance of the Jews, and of those who make themselves Jews, as it is written:
תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה קהלת יעקב

Only a Jew can claim the Torah as his own, since he alone is obligated to keep the Torah. This means the obligation is passed down unto him genetically, or else, that he converted to the Jewish religion and thereby became obligated. A gentile who keeps the Sabbath is liable to the death penalty.
כי אות היא ביני וביניכם לדורותיכם לדעת כי אני יי' מקדשכם

The inheritance of Torah has, therefore, much to do with genetics.

Sincerely,
David

On the subject of DNA and descendants of Avraham Avinu perhaps the following website may be of interest:
http://www.duke-law.org/pages/1/index.htm

Imho, I would tend to agree with Moshe about this, unless one were to suggest that the DNA of a Convert would change when they undergo the conversion process, which would truly seem to be somewhat miraculous. I am not saying that it is not possible, but it would seem to be unlikely.

quote:

Originally posted by David Ben-Abraham:

quote:

Originally posted by moshe kerr:
The midrash teaches explicitly that the Torah was given at Sinai that all people, including chinese, had an equal opportunity to accept the Torah. Of the 7 commandments not included is Honor your mother and father. The Torah revelation did not occur in the past but rather it occurs every minute of every day its called בראשית!

with respect,
moshe

Moshe,

True, the Torah was initially offered to all peoples of all nations. They refused to accept it. Those who did accept it were of the nation of Israel, both them and their descendants, as also those proselytes of each and every generation. This means that to them, and to their progeny, the Torah has been given. (Only to them, and to them alone.) It was, moreover, given by way of an eternal covenant. The covenant between G-d and his people has never been broken.

David

David, how would you explain this following passage from one of the talks of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. It seems to me imho, that it may actually be supporting R'Moshe's view.

quote:

...A passage is brought in the Talmud: “From whence do we know that even a Gentile who is preoccupied with Torah is a likened to the Cohen Gadol {the High Priest who served in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem}?[2] As it is written that ‘a man should do them – the Commandments - and live by them’; Cohanites, Levites and Israelites are not mentioned here but rather the term used by the verse is man. We thus learn that even a Gentile who is engaged in the study of the Torah and the fulfillment of the Noahide Laws is a likened to the Cohen Gadol – the High Priest”.

This is not in contradiction with that which we find elsewhere in the Talmud – that “a Gentile who is preoccupied with Torah is obligated with the death penalty. As it is written; the Torah was commanded to us by Moses, an inheritance for us (Israel) and not for them (for the Nations))”. In the one case the Talmud is referring to a preoccupation with the Seven Commandments - with the legislature concerning those Seven Commandments in order to become expert in them.[1] ...

[2] The High Priest’s role in the time of the First and Second Temples in Jerusalem included the Yom Kippur – Day of Atonement service every year. Part of this service required the High Priest to enter the Holy of Holies on the Temple Mount, and to attain atonement for the entire nation of Israel and for the entire world. We may therefore infer that even one single righteous Noahide is capable of achieving atonement both for him self and even for the entire world by virtue of his sincere genuine service of G-d.

[1] According to the Meiri {an authoritative Talmudic commentary} the other case (who is shunned by the Talmud) is referring to a Gentile whose intent in learning Torah is specifically to distort that which he learns for an ulterior motive or agenda {such as for example – to use this knowledge to promote another religion or agenda; aside from Judaism}, and not genuinely for the sake of Heaven.
http://home.primus.ca/~aharonbenjamin/gpage3.html

quote:

Originally posted by AharonBenjamin:
Imho, I would tend to agree with Moshe about this, unless one were to suggest that the DNA of a Convert would change when they undergo the conversion process, which would truly seem to be somewhat miraculous. I am not saying that it is not possible, but it would seem to be unlikely.

Aharon,

The Talmud says about converts that they are:
כתינוק הנולד דמי ("They are like unto newborn babes.")

Does this mean that they were, literally, born again? Of course not! They still have the same DNA as their biological parents from his paternal line. What I think the Talmud is saying is that the convert possesses a new soul, as it were, at his conversion to the Jewish religion.

David

quote:

Originally posted by David Ben-Abraham:

quote:

Originally posted by AharonBenjamin:
Imho, I would tend to agree with Moshe about this, unless one were to suggest that the DNA of a Convert would change when they undergo the conversion process, which would truly seem to be somewhat miraculous. I am not saying that it is not possible, but it would seem to be unlikely.

Aharon,

The Talmud says about converts that they are:
כתינוק הנולד דמי ("They are like unto newborn babes.")

Does this mean that they were, literally, born again? Of course not! They still have the same DNA as their biological parents from his paternal line. What I think the Talmud is saying is that the convert possesses a new soul, as it were, at his conversion to the Jewish religion.

David

That sounds reasonable.

Shabbat Shalom,
Aharon

It seems to me that the act of creation continuously occurs, in the first blessing before krea sma the siddur says this explicitly.

Consequently just as the creation continuously renews itself the revelation of the Torah at Sinia. Granted that the goyim rejected the brit bnai noach when they rejected the Torah, the Sifre teaches this explicitly. But since the revelation of Torah is not bound by time or history, if the sons of Avraham do T'shuvah and accept the Torah revelation at Sinia, they logically accept upon themselves the brit bnai noach. Avraham afterall, a bnai noach himself, did keep all the commandments. From this drosh a person can learn that the commandments are not some code as perceived by many Jews in the darkest night of cursed exile but rather the commandments qualify as a prophetic revelation. True prophets like Bilam profaned the name of the nations in public. This in no way means that bnai noach prophets can not sanctify the Name and uplift the degraded and disgraced reputation of the goyim.

with respect,
moshe

quote:

Originally posted by moshe kerr:
It seems to me that the act of creation continuously occurs, in the first blessing before krea sma the siddur says this explicitly.

This is nothing new. I have heard it many times before.

quote:

Originally posted by moshe kerr:
It seems to me that the act of creation continuously occurs, in the first blessing before krea sma the siddur says this explicitly.

Consequently just as the creation continuously renews itself the revelation of the Torah at Sinia. Granted that the goyim rejected the brit bnai noach when they rejected the Torah, the Sifre teaches this explicitly. But since the revelation of Torah is not bound by time or history, if the sons of Avraham do T'shuvah and accept the Torah revelation at Sinia, they logically accept upon themselves the brit bnai noach. Avraham afterall, a bnai noach himself, did keep all the commandments. From this drosh a person can learn that the commandments are not some code as perceived by many Jews in the darkest night of cursed exile but rather the commandments qualify as a prophetic revelation. True prophets like Bilam profaned the name of the nations in public. This in no way means that bnai noach prophets can not sanctify the Name and uplift the degraded and disgraced reputation of the goyim.

with respect,
moshe

I agree with you Rabbi Kerr, but I am still not clear on why this may require an oath on a Sefer Torah.

Shavuah tov,
Aaron

When parties to an alliance cut their agreed alliance, they do so by swearing an oath. The book of בראשית teaches this explicitly. For this reason the Torah begins with בראשית for the other 4 books teach upon a specific whereas בראשית teaches upon the general. Obviously the specific can not have any validity if it goes outside the bounds of the general.
Before the Torah revelation when people cut a brit they did so over an altar with its sacrifice. But its not the altar and sacrifice that's the central point but rather the oath that the parties to the alliance swear. Alas so many confuse the form for the substance. The Torah continuously employs a משל/נמשל manner of teaching. For example the repetition of the middot of the mishkan. Its not the משל that's important but rather understanding the נמשל! Just as Moshe could not enter into the Mishkan so too he could not enter into the land of Israel. The teaching being that the purpose of the oath defined lands that within these land that the Elokim would fill and reside therein like the specific example of the Mishkan. Hence the issue of salvation for the Jewish people does not concern that a man will rebuild the Temple but rather that JUSTICE shall reign within the borders of the Jewish state. When the substance of the brit exists then the form - the building of the Temple - can follow; but form thinkers seek only the form and never even contemplate upon the substance of the Mishkan. At least the 1st half of the 3rd book Moses covers משל/נמשל relationships.

with respect,
moshe

quote:

Originally posted by moshe kerr:
When parties to an alliance cut their agreed alliance, they do so by swearing an oath. The book of בראשית teaches this explicitly. For this reason the Torah begins with בראשית for the other 4 books teach upon a specific whereas בראשית teaches upon the general. Obviously the specific can not have any validity if it goes outside the bounds of the general.
Before the Torah revelation when people cut a brit they did so over an altar with its sacrifice. But its not the altar and sacrifice that's the central point but rather the oath that the parties to the alliance swear. Alas so many confuse the form for the substance. The Torah continuously employs a משל/נמשל manner of teaching. For example the repetition of the middot of the mishkan. Its not the משל that's important but rather understanding the נמשל! Just as Moshe could not enter into the Mishkan so too he could not enter into the land of Israel. The teaching being that the purpose of the oath defined lands that within these land that the Elokim would fill and reside therein like the specific example of the Mishkan. Hence the issue of salvation for the Jewish people does not concern that a man will rebuild the Temple but rather that JUSTICE shall reign within the borders of the Jewish state. When the substance of the brit exists then the form - the building of the Temple - can follow; but form thinkers seek only the form and never even contemplate upon the substance of the Mishkan. At least the 1st half of the 3rd book Moses covers משל/נמשל relationships.

with respect,
moshe

Shalom R'Moshe, is it not also true however that if one makes a vow and then violates it ch'v, that he will be held accountable before HaShem much more than he would have, had he not made the oath in the first place?

Be well,
Aharon

[/QUOTE]Shalom R'Moshe, is it not also true however that if one makes a vow and then violates it ch'v, that he will be held accountable before HaShem much more than he would have, had he not made the oath in the first place?

Be well,
Aharon[/QUOTE]

It also says that if one does not keep such a promise made to god, that he will send the destroying angel who will ruin the work of our hands......

Shalom,

Because a brit stands upon the foundation of an oath, Moshe the Teacher of Israel said i give you blessing and cursing life and death, choose life. The 2000 year exile just recently past testifies that oaths and vows constitute as very heavy and serious responsibilities. Profane an oath and there's no place where to hide!

with respect,
moshe

quote:

Originally posted by moshe kerr:
Shalom,

Because a brit stands upon the foundation of an oath, Moshe the Teacher of Israel said i give you blessing and cursing life and death, choose life. The 2000 year exile just recently past testifies that oaths and vows constitute as very heavy and serious responsibilities. Profane an oath and there's no place where to hide!

with respect,
moshe

R'Moshe, the Rambam has not required any taking of an oath by the Bnai Noach in his Laws of Kings if I am not mistaken.

If the taking of an oath would be recommended for Bnai Noach, then why did the Rambam not include this in his chapters about the Noachide Laws?

Learning Talmud qualifies as a great discipline. What's the bottem line of learning the Talmud? Halachah, that's the opinion of many folk - this approach it appears to me to be quite erroneous. During the dark ages, Jewry as all know was uprooted from their lands and in poverty and rags begged a temporary residence in the goyish ruled lands of exile. Poverty among the Jewish people was the norm, wealth and leasure the exeption. The great teachers of Torah, RaMBaM being accounted as one of these great teachers, sought to transmit the Torah through the generations in vile living condition! Teachers of halachic codes and P'shat sought to simplfy the Torah so that people pressed for the priviledge to learn could have easy access unto the Torah and Talmud. These great teachers of Torah did a great service unto their people. None the less the bottem line of Oral Torah centers squarely upon interpreting the intent of the Written Torah of Moshe. In darkest galut the Jews did not rule Israel and the Torah did not exist as the Constitution of the Jewish state. Gere toshav did not and do not exist then or today. The book of בראשית, the book of cutting a brit teaches explicitly that the Avot swore an oath in the process. Learning Talmud divorced from the Chumash distorts reality. RaMBaM's code further divorces the halachic debates as a means of understanding the language of Rabbi Yuhudah HaNassi in the context of significant actions called mitzvot, and simplifies it to a simple codification of halachot without debate and lacking a means by which the reader could better understand the language of the Mishneh, irregardless that he named his code: Mishneh Torah. His code distorts the authority of the Gemarah and places it on equal footing as the Mishneh, its not. The gemarah employs a common law system of case/rule that empowers a student of Torah to logically interpret the intent of the language of the Mishneh by putting its words into context of significant actions be they halachic or aggadic. This discipline under ideal conditions trains Torah scholars to interpret the Chumash as Constitutional law. Obviously these conditions did not apply or exist in RaMBaM's lifetime.
That RaMBaM did not discuss the Oath/brit, makes sense because the Talmud divorced from the Chumash also does not discuss the Oath/brit. None the less the bottem line of Talmudic scholarship centers upon interpreting the intent of Moshe our Teacher and determining halachah for our current generation. Making halacha as ice cubes requires no Divine Presence revelation. The Yeshiva system that teaches Torah with a galut style of learning needs to be re-vamped.

with respect,
moshe