Due to the recent arguments in the forum which deals with the certain issues. Even though people claim that what motivates them is trying to understand what the Torah really says, but it’s obvious it’s not the case. We all know that every time someone gives a reason for his thoughts or actions, it’s not necessary the real reason, but the excuse to rationalize it. What is really behind it is a hidden reason that wouldn’t come out so noble, so they hide behind other this reason. I already wrote in the other threads the rational and proofs and debunking of the other’s proofs. Yet, since that is not the REAL ISSUE, nothing is going to be settled there. If a question is answered, the other side won’t admit it, since that question is not what really was bothering him. It’s only the cover up of what is really bothering him. So he’ll hang on to his question refusing to hear an answer in order to protect their real reason.

There are very interesting observations that could be made about these arguments that would be the symptoms to what I said is the true case.

Why are the only ones that object to Kabbalah coming from the Modern Orthodox camp? It’s not that they’re more interested in the true meaning of Torah than the Yeshiva community, since that is very out of character of them. (Not to say that they’re not Shomer Mitzvos, but they’re more lax on average than the Yeshiva community.)

Another observations, those who claim they had outsmarted the Ramban and Gra in basic Torah truths are no great Talmidai Chachumim, as plain to see from there other posts. What makes them think that they can do it due to there very limited knowledge.

In any other part of Torah, if we have a question on a Rishon, we say Tzorech Iyun (that we should do more research) but nobody has the Chutzpah to say there wrong. Logic dictates, if you don’t understand an expert, the problem is in yourself, not in the expert. So why over here are these people just wiping them off for a question, without saying the customary that they don’t understand?

Why is no answer acceptable to them?

Why isn’t the fact that the Gemarah in Chagigah and the Braishes Rabah 8:2 says that regular people shouldn’t learn these things that beyond their grasps. Echoed by the Ramban and Rama, Shach and Gra (in YD 246) not to learn them, because all they’ll do is misunderstand it. Yet, Am Haratzim think that they can dispute it from their puny understanding and say it should be disregarded?

Also the contradictions in their arguments. On one hand, the Agadata part of the Gemarah we’re not privy to understand what it means, yet kabbalah, if we don’t understand it, it must be wrong, since we must understand it.

From all these observations, it seems obvious that this is not the objection over here that, for the sake of Shamayim, that it doesn’t fit into Torah, but rather something else is bothering them. This is what I want to bring into discussion, what is really bothering them?

PART I
INFLUENCE OF WESTERN CULTURE

One of the bigger factors here is that the whole concept of mysticism is contrary to western thought and culture. Those that are the most influenced by western culture are going to be the most opposed to Kabbalah. It’s not the incompatibility with the Torah, but with western culture, is what really bothers these people IMHO. Thus, to make compatible their belief of Torah with their belief of western ideas, they must “prove” that the Torah is incompatible with Kabalah. Thus answering how they’re compatible will not solve the question, since it’s still incompatible with western culture.

PART II
SECULAR CULTURE AND KABBALAH TRADITIONALLY DOESN’T MESH

We se from Chagigah 15a that Acher made a great mistake when he went into the Pardes, not dissimilar then those on this forum’s mistake as paraphrased by Kollel Iyun Hadaf

1) THE STORY OF ACHER
(a) Acher entered the Pardes and cut down the
plantlings (i.e. he became corrupt.
1. About him the verse says, "Do not let your mouth
cause your flesh to sin" (Koheles 5:5).
2. What happened to him:
3. He saw the angel "Mttrn" who received permission to
sit and write the the merits of Yisrael.
4. Acher said, "We have a tradition that there is no
sitting, competition, no backside, and not tiredness
(among the heavenly beings) -- perhaps there are two
powers!"
5. They took out "Mttrn" and lashed him with 60 pulses
of fire and said to him, "You should have stood up
when you saw him (an earthly being)!"
6. They gave him permission to erase the merits of
Acher (because of his blasphemy).
7. A Bas Kol issued forth saying, "'Repent, o' wayward
children' (Yirmiyahu 3:22) -- except for Acher!"
8. When he heard this, Acher said, "Since I have been
pushed out from the next world, I might as well go and
get pleasure from this world!"
9. He went onto an evil path.

On Amud b it says why this happened to him

(a) Why did Acher go bad?
1. Greek (foreign) songs did not cease from his mouth.
2. When he would rise from the Beis Midrash, many
books of heresy would slip from his lap.

Thus foreign culture and Kabbalah don’t mesh, and cause them to think that there are Chas V’Shalom 2 R’Shuyos. We see a pattern here.

quote:

Reply



Home Torah Community Torah Forums Beis Medrash Excuses vs. Real reasons and accepting Kabbalah

Lej Leshalom

Somewhere I have read that many roads take one to the palace with many doors but just one road will take him to the right door entrance to the palace. In kabbalah I feel that Razei ( the hired message ) is recieved by working together, being able to connect our physical needs with the soul of divine nature belonging to a upper most energy.

It is to me that all Torah as Instruction of law is given by G-d, as so explains levels of mistical nature achieved in order to be close to our divine nature, G-dlly nature.

It is misticism that the Torah begins with the letter Bets ( Bereshit ): " Bereshit bara Elohim et Hashamayim ve ´et ha ´arets" in the beggining G-d created Heaven and earth, a kabbalistic interpretation is that everything existed from the beggining. A story tale tells us that an angel sat right besides us while we were in our mother´s belly and taught us all knowledge needed for to fullfill our task in this physical world, but just before being borned we forget everything and we have to work our way to remember what we were taught, so in the beginning all existed.

But " The earth was without form and empty with darkness... but G-d spirit moved on the water´s surface" . Every thing was sloppy and without direction until the G-d of Israel came over the water of life and put conciousness or ein sof and the rationale movement toward free choice.

I think kabbalah is real and by accepting The Law of Creation we might enclosed a better relationship with our Lord G-d as One and Unique over all things.

Lej Leshalom

quote:

PART I
INFLUENCE OF WESTERN CULTURE

One of the bigger factors here is that the whole concept of mysticism is contrary to western thought and culture. Those that are the most influenced by western culture are going to be the most opposed to Kabbalah.

So very, very true! It is this same (very young) culture that promotes the reading of the Kabbalah before the age of forty for men and say that it is acceptable for women to so, then reject it because it doesn't fit their understanding.

quote:

Originally posted by Rav Chaim:
Why is no answer acceptable to them?

Why isn’t the fact that the Gemarah in Chagigah and the Braishes Rabah 8:2 says that regular people shouldn’t learn these things that beyond their grasps. Echoed by the Ramban and Rama, Shach and Gra (in YD 246) not to learn them, because all they’ll do is misunderstand it. Yet, Am Haratzim think that they can dispute it from their puny understanding and say it should be disregarded?

It seems to me (and I certainly know nothing - so feel free to disregaard what I have to say) that one who has a high opinion of himself is much more likely to be less humble. As is the one who thinks he is humble, but really is not. From the skewed opinion of an 'am ha'aretz' why would he not think that he knew all - when in fact knew nothing? On the contrary he is much more likely to be convinced of his viewpoint because he knows so little. Whereas one who knows much more is much more likely to think that he knows little because he realizes all which he does not know.

Whoops, baby crying... hopefully my though clearly came through. If not, many apologies.