quote:

As long as you base yourself on the gdolim who adapted the Kabbala into the Torah, you cannot see that.

I don't get it. Who are we suppose to base ourselves on? These Gedolim are the foundation of our tradition and without them we are lost. Who are you basing yourself on? I haven't seen many sources coming from your side, only ideas and philosophy. The Torah is handed down from Rebbi to Talmud. I am a big believer in taking logic to its end in the search for emes but just because you have some logic under your belt doesn't mean your right. What it may mean is that you have a difficulty which at the end of the day must translate into "I don't understand" and a prayer for bina and das. You cant throw out 500 years of Torah sages because you have a kasha. I hope you hear what I am saying and take it to heart because the Global Yeshiva is based on teachings of the Yeshiva world and if we don't agree on these fundamentals we will need to part ways. The basis for every Talmudic arguement is that the Gedolim are right, both right. Please see Honor to the Sages

quote:

Originally posted by Rabbi Mitterhoff:
You cant throw out 500 years of Torah sages because you have a kasha. Honor to the Sages

I do honor the Sages, the Rabbis, and every old person. However, this honor does not mean I have to accept everything they say.
The difference between you and me is that your Torah sages lifespan is 500 years old, and mine is 3.500 years old.
And I am saying "don't forget Torat Moshe" (which are the last words of the last prophet Malachi, who sat in the Sanhedrin of Ezra).
That different life-span means that if the later day Torah Sages tell me about a doctrine like the Kabbala and gilgulim, which is not taught by Talmud or by the Geonim (of whom I quoted Rav Saadya), it is not a Jewish doctrine. That is verifiable by the fact that this new doctrine has very many fundamental contradictions with the Torah of Israel Saba.
I respect every gadol and learn from everyone's wisdom. But in regards to Kabbala, I reject it because this is not what Chazal teach.
I think I explained my position quite clearly. The problem you have accepting it is of course that on your side - backed up by the Yeshivot - my position goes against what they teach and also all the dinim which have been introduced into our rituals through Kabala. I understand it is difficult to live with dual-loyalty.
I suggest that you refer the "kushiot" and arguments I expressed on this Forum to the rabbis of your Yeshivot. The list is long!
And I hope you will not accept "it comes from a Kopher" for an answer. Let them explain what Kephira there is in following dina d'guemara as codified by the Rambam, and saying the blessing before netilat yadayim or tevila, because Chazal did not forbid saying a blessing in a state of impurity? (That is just one instance out of many).
And so it goes with Hashkafa. A book (the Zohar) which tells me NOT to pray to God (but to his "son" the zeir anpin) is not a Jewish book.

Quote "The mystical allegories of Chazal do not refer to transmigration of souls "
How the heck could you say that if you don't know what there saying. II really don't see your thought process on this. It goes like this "I have no idea what anything means but for some reason I know what it can't say. Go figure.

Quote "it is better to say "I don;t understand what they allude to" than to interpret them according to "keys" which are not compatible with the basic principles of Torah and the faith it teaches."

It's better for below average Torah learners to admit that they cannot understand what the faith the Torah teaches then to say that the greatest minds in Jewish History doesn't understand this. The Ramban and Gra are from the top 20 Talmeidi Chachumim in the last 1000 years. If your lucky, maybe you would be in the top 100 million (but I wouldn't vouch for it.)
Quote "There are no "manuscripts" of the any holy writings which are not known, because if there was, being holy, Chazal would have mentioned them."
Chazal never referred to any manuscripts, besides Megilas Taanis, for nothing else was written in those days. I already proved that Chazal does mentioned that these Limudim do exist and was enact in the days of Chazal, and that Chazal didn't want to publicize it. What else do you want? I really don't understand where your assumptions start from. But don't expect people should "buy" extremely weak arguments.

Quote "Eliyahu Hanavi is indeed a wonderful figure, but he did not teach the concepts of Kabala (transmigration, sefirtot, tzimzum, partzufim, and NOT TO PRAY TO HASHEM (!) because He is too far away in the skies (re-!,and there is nothing of the kind in Eliyahu Rabba or Zutta."

There are many ridiculous assumptions in this statement. First, you're assuming that Eliyahu Hanavi is limited in his learning and he exhausted his knowledge in writing Eliyahu Rabba and Zutta. Those where what he taught specifically to R' Anun, but obviously he knows a lot more than that. We can assume he knew as much as R' Yochanan b. Zakai who knew Masah Markava.

Second assumption, that Eliyahu is far away in the skies. That's why I brought 3 Gemaras (there are more) that he traveled down to learn with Talmidai Chachumim on the EARTH. Read those Gemaras. The Gemarah in Kesuvos infers that you have to be especially holy that he should learn with you. That would explain why he would appear to the Ramban and not to you.

Thirdly, the Ramban brings a warning that those who aren't taught by a competent Mekubal and isn't up to learning it shouldn't learn kabalah. He brings the Braishes Rabba 8:2 that you shouldn't learn things beyond what you can grasp and not get involved in the mystical. If you cannot understand it, doesn't disprove Kabbalah, but you become a poster child to prove the Braishes rabbah quoted by ramban.

Quote" I understand it takes a lot of courage to dare question all the gdolim "

It takes a lot of stupidity. Only fools go where angels dare not tread.

Quote "Basic line: Anything that contradicts what Chazal teach does not come from Chazal, whoever teaches it. "

This is my point. You're an Am Ha'aretz. your limited understanding of either doesn't affect the truth of themselves. on contradictions, this is not a problem. Anyone who knows anything about Torah realize that the Gemaras contradict each other, yet the Rishonim and Achronim come along and answer the contradictions. There is nobody here that you can convince that you understand the Zohar, but even if you read the basic wording, nobody in their right mind would doubt you didn't learn it B'Iyun. If Ramban and Gra didn't think it contradicted, since they did learn it B'Iyun and knew the whole Shas backwards and forwards, why should a nobody ignoramus feel he knows enough to argue. This is stupidity and arrogance at it's worse.

I'm also reminded, from those who think they can disprove Nister when they are lacking in understanding in Gemarah, is from the Gemarah in Sanhedrin 39a and is paraphrased by Kollel Iyun Hadaf

(e) A heretic: It says "(Hash-m) Moneh Mispar la'Kochavim" - what is so special about this? 5. Version #2 - the heretic: I counted the stars!

6. R. Gamliel: How many molars and teeth do you have? The heretic put his hand in his mouth to count them.

7. R. Gamliel: You do not know what is in your mouth -do you know what is in Heaven?!

Those that can't figure out what is in Niglah is going to say what they think about Nister?

1. Insults are not arguments.
2. Chazal do not teach gilgul neshamot, and you did not bring proof to the contrary.
3. Chazal do not say that r.ShBY wrote the Zohar, and what's more the Zohar's teachings are CONTRARY to what r.ShBY says in the Talmud.
4. The Arizal himself (shaar hakavanot) admits he cannot say the first verses of IGDAL because they speak of the God in way contradictory with the system of the Zohar. The Torah (and the beginning of Igdal) teach the Unity and incorporality of God, and the Zohar teaches multiplicity!
I do not think one necessarily has to be a great Chacham to understand there is a problem.
Your beleif is sustained by the hashkafa of your rabbis (Ramban, Gra, etc...). and mine of mine (Rav Saadya Gaon, Rambam, etc...).
These are two schools of thought - one ancient and one new. And two interpretations: one which says that Maase Merkava is Kabbala, and one which says it isn't. Indeed, I do not pretend I delved into Maaseh Merkava, but so too, I do not think you delved into Kabbala.
Your mockery and grins are not a sign of intelligence, nor a proof to your thesis.
There are two types of proof: The Written and/or Oral Torah whose divine authority is unquestioned (even if we do not understand it), and logical argumentation (historical, experimental, logical).
So if the Torah (written and/or oral) wants me to beleive in gilgul neshamot, it has to tell me so, and if the Zohar is a holy book, CHAZAL would have sanctified it.
And if history, experience and logic (of which I brought some arguments) do not corroborate your beleief, it is exactly that... a beleif and not knowledge.

Quote: "These are two schools of thought - one ancient and one new" This is a mistake. Our tradition is in our Yeshivot. You will not find a Yeshiva that will tell you that the Zohar is not chazal. All the great Rabbis for a thousand years quote the Zohar. Who are we to go against them? I am closing this post as it is not helping anyone to learn and there is no communication happening.

B"H

Sheva,

For your information: The Chida (Rabbi Chaim David Azulai) writes in his book, "Shem Hagedolim," under the listing of Jewish publications in his day (Letter "zayin" - Zohar), that the Zohar was written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. The Chida says this in the name of Rabbi A. Revigo who, in turn, wrote that he saw an old Zohar that had the same information written in it, and which said Zohar belonged to Maharam Cordivero. The same Rabbi wrote that the Zohar (that book written by Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai) was hidden from sight for many years, until it was unearthed by a certain king of the east, sealed away in a chest. He first sent it to the Christians, but they knew nothing about it. He then sent it to the Chachomim of Israel, until at last it was sent to Toletila, in Spain.

The Zohar has enjoyed unprecedented popularity amongst almost all Rabbis since its discovery!

Sincerely,
David

B"H

Sheva,

I found another proof, of sorts, about "reincarnation." This time, it's from the Ben Ish Chai. He writes that in the blessing "Borei Nefashos Rabos" is alluded the transmigration of souls.

Can you think of another reason why the Sages would have given us the format of this blessing after eating meats, or a fruits, or vegetables, or even drinking water? They have required us to say, "Blessed are you, O Lo-rd our G-d, king of the universe, who creates a multitude of souls, etc." What soul could there have been in an apple?

By the way, Rabbi Amnon Yitzhaq has a video-tape which interviews a Druze boy who describes a situation where there was no way that he (the Druze boy) could have possibly known the details about his deceased uncle's past life, and about places where the boy had never been before, yet confirmed by the boy's family and relations to be the things done by the boy's uncle, or places visited by the boy's uncle, without that child ever having prior knowledge about those things, viz., about his uncle's past life experiences and about places that he had been. (All these things happened long before the child's birth, and which his family never spoke to him about.) The conclusion of this video-tape follows that since the Druze boy recalled detailed events and things that happened to his uncle, he was the reincarnation of his uncle, and had come back a second time into this world.

David

I thought this thread was closed, but I see people posting on it so:

Quote "1. Insults are not arguments"
Those are not insults, they're a reality check. This is instrumental to my disproof,as I'll explain next.

Quote "Indeed, I do not pretend I delved into Maaseh Merkava, but so too, I do not think you delved into Kabbala."

That's both true. In regards to Maasah Markava and true Kabalah, neither of us have too much delving into. Your "proof" is, that I learnt Kabalah and understand it and I find it contrary to the Torah. So the only proof is on the claim "I learnt Kabalah and understand it" which I find hard to believe. That's why I'm harping on your lack of scholarship. That its impossible to claim that you delved into Kabalah and understood it correctly.

Secondly, since of your lack of scholarship, Halachically you would be disqualified to learn Kabalah. Thus it would rule out that you were taught by a qualified G-d fearing Mekubal. Therefore we are left with that your source for Kabalah must come from some dubious source. Most probably your source (or your source's source) is from the accursed Apikores, Gershon Sholem. It's a shame that people actually read his books (besides a prohibition under Sifrei Minim.) A bigger shame is that they think that his views represent real Torah's Kabalah. That's where your lack of scholarship leads me to believe the dubious and phoney source of your Kabalah learning.

And since any quote of Kabalah from you cannot be taken to be accurate, then any question that you may bring up from it should be moot.

All i have to go with is with what the experts in Torah say, and none of your week arguments that are based on baseless assumption could convince me otherwise.

After admitting that I never learnt any real KAbbalah, so I need to rely on the expert Talmidai Chachumim. I want to show how logically implausible it is to think the Ramban and Gra (and hundreds of other Rishonim and Achronim) doesn't understand the basics of Judaism. to give an example that secularist can appreciate, it's akin to a high school student who gets a "c" in physics to argue on Einstein and claiming his mistake was he didn't realize that gravity exist.

[/QUOTE]
And so it goes with Hashkafa. A book (the Zohar) which tells me NOT to pray to God (but to his "son" the zeir anpin) is not a Jewish book.[/QUOTE]
Oh, my goodness! The Zohar tells us to pray to someone other than God?! Excuse me? I hadn't read it yet, but this sounds awfully similar to a christian phylosophy to me.
Thank you for the heads up!

quote:

Originally posted by David Ben-Abraham:
B"H

Sheva,

I found another proof, of sorts, about "reincarnation." This time, it's from the Ben Ish Chai. He writes that in the blessing "Borei Nefashos Rabos" is alluded the transmigration of souls.

Can you think of another reason why the Sages would have given us the format of this blessing after eating meats, or a fruits, or vegetables, or even drinking water? They have required us to say, "Blessed are you, O Lo-rd our G-d, king of the universe, who creates a multitude of souls, etc." What soul could there have been in an apple?

By the way, Rabbi Amnon Yitzhaq has a video-tape which interviews a Druze boy who describes a situation where there was no way that he (the Druze boy) could have possibly known the details about his deceased uncle's past life, and about places where the boy had never been before, yet confirmed by the boy's family and relations to be the things done by the boy's uncle, or places visited by the boy's uncle, without that child ever having prior knowledge about those things, viz., about his uncle's past life experiences and about places that he had been. (All these things happened long before the child's birth, and which his family never spoke to him about.) The conclusion of this video-tape follows that since the Druze boy recalled detailed events and things that happened to his uncle, he was the reincarnation of his uncle, and had come back a second time into this world.

David

David, I discovered the truth of my birth when it was heavily concealed, quoted circumstances and events to my un-mother which I wasn't even born to witness and other amazing things, but I still don't believe in reincarnation per se. There is something called ruach ha-kadosh which I have mentioned before tonight. This is how this boy did these things, I'm sure. This is how I was able to gain such knowledge. I recently saved my car's engine from permanent damage after flooding by ruach ha-kadosh, the night before last, and I know only the most rudimentary things about cars.

quote:

Originally posted by Hawke:

quote:

And so it goes with Hashkafa. A book (the Zohar) which tells me NOT to pray to God (but to his "son" the zeir anpin) is not a Jewish book.

Oh, my goodness! The Zohar tells us to pray to someone other than God?! Excuse me? I hadn't read it yet, but this sounds awfully similar to a christian phylosophy to me.
Thank you for the heads up!

Don't lose to much sleep over that. This is his interpretation of the Zohar, which of course says nothing of the sort.

B"H

Although Pesach is behind us, the subject matter of this thread is still vital.

We have received by way of an Oral Tradition that Pinchas (Bamidbar 25:7) is Eliyahu, and Eliyahu is Pinchas. For both men, though they lived at different times, displayed the same zeal for good, and had perfect hatred for the evil. Moreover, this was in keeping with the old traditions of the Pharisees (Heb. Porushim) who, according to the historian Josephus (Yoseph Mathiah) in his "Wars of the Jews" (Book II, chapter VIII, verse 14), "believed that the souls of good men came again into this world in other bodies." That is to say, were reincarnated.

[BTW: For those who can bear with this, however strange it might sound, this opinion is repeated in the book of the Zohar, in Shemos, Section "Mishpatim," where we read that in a man's single lifetime, the soul or spirit that is within him is one of three souls (individuals) who lived in different ages, and that all of them belong to the same man. The first is the soul of that man who has long since been dead in lapsed ages. He, according to this opinion, is the one whose original body will be resurrected. His soul (or spirit) is in heaven. The second is the living man himself, who bears within him the spirit of the first man (that is, he is actually that same reincarnated person that has died in yonder years), and he goes through this life in order to make amends over the wrongs that his first body committed during its natural lifetime. His body, according to this opinion, is insignificant, and therefore will not be resurrected in the days to come, but his soul (or spirit) will return to its original body. For this reason, in this life he is called by the Zohar "a naked soul."
The third soul (or spirit) is he who is called by the Zohar, "Goel," or "redeemer." He it is who plays an important role in the second individual's life in order to bring him unto his desired place. Their lives are inextricably bound together, and he too will return to his original body at the resurrection.]

These statements are so deep and mysterious in nature that they have, obviously, frightened away many people. I have only mentioned the matter here, as a way of giving "proof" that the transmigration of the soul has been mentioned by the ancients of our nation.

David Ben-Abraham