Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Talmid Chacham or Apikores -- It's How You Ask the Question

 Just for grins, I looked up what Merriam-Webster thinks is the definition of apikores:

apikores

api·​ko·​res
variants: or apikoros \ ˌäpēˈkȯrəs \
plural apikorsim\ -​rsə̇m \

Definition of apikores

: a Jew who is lax in observing Jewish law or who does not believe in Judaism; also : skeptic, atheist

Given that, I guess they would define an axe murderer as "someone who is not careful while carrying an axe, or a cold-blooded criminal who attacks and kills innocent victims with an axe."

That's not directly on topic; but quite entertaining.

We have several examples (four, off the top of my head) of individuals  expressing some level of surprise at the decision/directions of their superior/leader and expressing that thought directly to said superior/leader. Yes, I am being tediously careful in how I worded that. Why?

The four example are:

  • Betzalel -- who wondered why Moshe directed him to build the vessels for the mishkan first, and then the mishkan, which seems to be the opposite of the way things are normally done.
  • The daughters of Tzlafchad -- who wondered, given that their father had died and left no sons -- why they could not inherit in his stead.
  • Korach, who wondered why a garment that was completely made of t'cheiles would still require a tassel of t'cheiles.
  • The blasphemer (that's a spoiler alert if there ever was one), who questioned the propriety of leaving the show breads for a whole week on the table in the mishkan -- instead of replacing with fresh bread every day, as befits the King.

The first two are praised for their righteousness and wisdom, that latter two... not so much. The devil, as they say, is in the details. Let's do some delving, shall we?

First, Betzalel: When Betzalel was told by Moshe Rabbeinu to build the keilim and then the mishkan, he didn't just do as he was told.  Rather, Betzalel said, "Everything I know from the Rebbie up till now would lead me to believe that the mishkan should be built first and then the keilim"  (Rashi to Shemos 38:32).  Why didn't Betzalel just do as he was told by his rebbie; a man who had just come done from weeks of intense instruction from the Creator of the World, Himself?  Betzalel was looking to Moshe Rabbeinu to correct his thought processes in order that he could appreciate and feel that this was the proper way to proceed. (In fact, Moshe Rabbeinu in this case admitted to a mistake and praised Betzalel for his questioning and analysis.)

Next, the daughters of Tzlafchad:  They started by noting that if they had brothers from their father, then they would not even be here to present their case. That is, first they learned the background halachos to understand the topic themselves. They then felt they had a reasonable question, and that is precisely how they presented their case. They were saying, similarly to Betzalel, that in the context of what had been done and what they had learned, it seemed to them that a portion of the land should come to them. They were open to being told they had either misunderstood or were missing any information. In this case, it seems that this was a gap in the information that Moshe Rabeinu himself had; so we went back to ask. (Fortunate is the generation with a leader who can just turn to the Creator for immediate answers!)

What about the other two? I'll preface my remarks with an incident I heard happened with R' Yaakov Kamenetsky as reported by a grandson. A couple of talmidei chachamim came to R' Yaakov's home one Shabbos afternoon to ask a question. R' Yaakov listened and told them it was a very interesting question and he'd have to think about it. They left. Later, at shalosh s'udos in shul, R' Yaakov mentioned the question and gave a very straightforward answer. On the way home, the grandson (who had been there for both the original conversation and later at shalosh s'udos) asked his zeidy why he hadn't just given that answer on the spot to the visitors. R' Yaakov replied, "They weren't really interested in the answer; they were interested in my acknowledgement that it was a good question. So I gave them what they came seeking."

Korach and the blasphemer were not coming to increase their clarity, they were coming to clarify to the world that they were smarter than the Creator. Even if you want to say that would claim that they just felt the message had been garbled and they were the heros coming to save HaShem from His bumbling messengers... um... isn't that HaShem's place? Again, they are taking on that the Creator had -- Heaven forfend! -- missed something.

Any way you slice it, there is no greater apikorsus than that!
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...
Post a Comment
Read more

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aru...
Post a Comment
Read more