Home › Forums › Bais Medrash › Korach's Profound Argument
- This topic has 31 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by oomis.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 17, 2014 3:13 am at 3:13 am #613027Patur Aval AssurParticipant
So Korach had his argument from a Tallis Shekula Techeiles. Now seemingly the only reason why you would think that a Tallis Shekula Techeiles should be patur from Techeiles strings, is that the purpose of the Techeiles strings is so you see them and get reminded of all the things that Techeiles is supposed to remind you of. If so then he did not need to make a Tallis shekula Techeiles in order to make this argument. There are so many other ways to do this. For example he could have just held Techeiles in his hand and asserted that his regular Tallis should be patur from Techeiles. There are countless examples of such things that he could have done. So why in the world did he make 250 Talleisim shekula Techeiles – besides for the question of where he got all that Techeiles from, it was a collosal waste of time and resources.
June 17, 2014 3:16 am at 3:16 am #1020624popa_bar_abbaParticipantMy wife says PAA is meshuga l’davar echod.
June 17, 2014 3:31 am at 3:31 am #1020625☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantMy wife says PBA is meshuga
ftfy
June 17, 2014 3:35 am at 3:35 am #1020626popa_bar_abbaParticipantDY does not want to know what she just said about him.
June 17, 2014 3:50 am at 3:50 am #1020627☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI can probably imagine.
June 17, 2014 4:01 am at 4:01 am #1020628Patur Aval AssurParticipant“My wife says PAA is meshuga l’davar echod”
That’s just her way of rationalizing why she doesn’t wear Techeiles.
June 17, 2014 4:44 am at 4:44 am #1020629MDGParticipant“the purpose of the Techeiles strings is so you see them and get reminded of all the things that Techeiles is supposed to remind you of. If so then he did not need to make a Tallis shekula Techeiles in order to make this argument.”
Korach has a 1 – 2 punch. First he had the populist view that we are all holy and don’t need the techeilet reminder string (Moshe). Next he asked if a house is full of sefarim does it need a mezuzah? The halachah is that it does not (although we customarily do put on mezuzot in our shuls which have sifrei Torah). Korach pointed to the contradiction between the needed reminder of tzitzit (regardless of the techeilet beged) and the “unneeded” reminder of mezuzah in a shul.
_____
“For example he could have just held Techeiles in his hand and asserted that his regular Tallis should be patur from Techeiles. “
And if you were to tell me that there might be some quantataive difference between techeilet and mezuzah, a talit comprised of 100% techailet would be refute that. But in both cases they have to be attached of the item.
_____
“it was a collosal waste of time and resources.”
Not for someone filthy rich and power hungry.
June 17, 2014 12:58 pm at 12:58 pm #1020630☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantThat’s just her way of rationalizing why she doesn’t wear Techeiles.
Lol (I hope…)
June 17, 2014 1:39 pm at 1:39 pm #1020631popa_bar_abbaParticipantOf course not. She wears sheish and argaman.
I think I’m going to write a competing tznius sefer and call it ?? ?????? ?????, and it will be about the actually appropriate way for a bas yisroel to dress in her status as a bas melachim.
June 17, 2014 3:33 pm at 3:33 pm #1020632Patur Aval AssurParticipantMDG:
I think you got it wrong. The Medrash says:
??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ?”? ????? ?????? ?”? ??? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ????, ??? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ?????? ?”? ?? ????? ???? ??”? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ????? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ????? ??? ?????
He wasn’t raising a contradiction between Techeiles and Mezuza; he was saying that neither one makes sense.
June 17, 2014 7:08 pm at 7:08 pm #1020633MDGParticipantThe Shulchan Aruch in YD 286:3 says that shuls only need a mezuzah if someone sleeps there.
June 17, 2014 8:35 pm at 8:35 pm #1020634oomisParticipantThe Shulchan Aruch in YD 286:3 says that shuls only need a mezuzah if someone sleeps there. “
Considering some Shul Rabbi’s droshas, I would say many Shuls are in need of mezuzos. :p
June 17, 2014 9:47 pm at 9:47 pm #1020635Patur Aval AssurParticipant“The Shulchan Aruch in YD 286:3 says that shuls only need a mezuzah if someone sleeps there”
And if someone sleeps there a mezuza is required despite the sifrei torah. The whole reason why in general a shul would not need a mezuza is not that it’s a ??? ??? ?????, but because it’s not a ???? ayen Yoma 11a-11b where the Gemara discusses this and says:
??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ?????
June 17, 2014 9:55 pm at 9:55 pm #1020636HaLeiViParticipantForget about the reason, he was arguing Halachicaly.
June 17, 2014 10:04 pm at 10:04 pm #1020637Patur Aval AssurParticipant“Forget about the reason, he was arguing Halachicaly”
I know. He was arguing that it should be patur but Moshe said that it’s chayev. That is why MDG’s original answer doesn’t answer my question.
June 18, 2014 2:46 am at 2:46 am #1020638HaLeiViParticipantI am saying that to answer your question. He was using terminology of Patter and Mechuyav to show that following Halachic logic doesn’t make sense. Your question was about the reason, but he didn’t have your Kasha of wearing Techeles in any other form. Besides, your question is more general than it sounds. Why shouldn’t three corners be Mechuyav?
June 18, 2014 3:19 am at 3:19 am #1020639Patur Aval AssurParticipantI’m not sure how you are answering my question. Obviously Korach could have picked any mitzva and found something that had no logical reason. But I am operating under the assumption that Korach was granting that there could be mitzvos whose reasons we don’t know. But his kashya from Techeiles was that we know the purpose of Techeiles and a Tallis Shekula Techeiles would accomplish that purpose just as well (if not better) than the strings of Techeiles. My question then is why he had to come on to a Tallis Shekula Techeiles when there are so many simpler ways that he could have made the same point about Techeiles.
June 18, 2014 1:02 pm at 1:02 pm #1020640HaLeiViParticipantMy point is that he was not using Taama diKra. It was Halachic logic. Techeles Paturs the clothing, for whatever reason.
June 18, 2014 1:24 pm at 1:24 pm #1020641Patur Aval AssurParticipantThen he had no kashya. The Torah says that you have to put Techeiles strings on. What does it make a difference if the beged is Techeiles or not? Unless you assume that there is a known reason for Techeiles strings, and a Techeiles beged can accomplish the sane thing. Which leads me to my question. So I’m still not understanding your answer.
June 18, 2014 3:44 pm at 3:44 pm #1020642HaLeiViParticipantHe was using the same type of logic we use in a Kal Vachomer. We don’t know the reason the Mitzva was given but we observe the given parameters and use them as laws. We don’t understand ‘why’ but we understand ‘that’. The Gemara uses this type of ‘Svara’.
Here too, we observe how there is a Chiyuv on a four-cornered garment which Techeles resolves. So we know that for whatever reason, or even for no reason, Techeles ‘fixes’ this garment. Therefore, he asked why would Techeles itself have to be ‘fixed’.
June 18, 2014 10:12 pm at 10:12 pm #1020643Patur Aval AssurParticipantHe could have made such a kal vachomer without Techeiles – if wool (strings) fix a garment then surely wool itself would not need to be fixed. So any beged of wool should be patur from tzitzis.
June 19, 2014 12:30 am at 12:30 am #1020644HaLeiViParticipantThat’s surprising, coming from you!
Probably, Techeles was the name for Tzitzis in general, as we find in Chazal. ??? ?? ????? means Tzitzis in general. Also, I think it is not hard to realize that the Gidul is what is necessary. The coloring appears as what you must add to the Tzitzis.
June 19, 2014 2:38 am at 2:38 am #1020645Patur Aval AssurParticipantYes Techeiles can be a general term for Tzitzis. But not in this case. See for example the Eitz Yosef who explains that Korach was maskim that his tallis would still require the lavan strings. His only argument was that it shouldn’t require Techeiles strings. Now if his claim was “why do I need Techeiles strings if I have a Techeiles beged?” then he could have also said “why do I need wool strings if I have a wool beged?” Unless you say that he was granting that there is some reason why you need strings but that the blue shouldn’t have to be specifically on the strings, in which case we’re back to my original question – he could have taken any techeiles and had such an argument.
June 19, 2014 5:41 am at 5:41 am #1020646HaLeiViParticipantHolding disconnected Techeles obviously won’t Pattur the Beged. Having Gedilim is part of the Mitzva and dying one or two strings with Techeles is also part of the Mitzva. Obviously, he viewed Techeles like a Mezuza, that it sanctifies the Beged.
June 19, 2014 12:57 pm at 12:57 pm #1020647Patur Aval AssurParticipantBut if he can grant that there is an intrinsic reason to have techeiles on the beged then he can also grant that there is an intrinsic resaon to have Techeiles on the strings and thus he should not have a kashya.
June 19, 2014 1:48 pm at 1:48 pm #1020648Mayan_DvashParticipantI wonder about the following: look at the comments of Dasan & Aviram “..you took us from a land of milk and honey..” they used attributes of Eretz Yisrael to describe Mitzrayim. Now, they actually made it out of Mitzrayim with the 20%. I cannot even imagine the mindset of the 80% who did not come out!
;
June 19, 2014 2:14 pm at 2:14 pm #1020649HaLeiViParticipantYou have to be right at some point. His Kasha trully doesn’t bother us. But, he obviously saw the Gidul and the dying as two things done to elevate the Beged. His Kasha on Mezuza doesn’t bother me, either. Having a Sefer is very nice but having it on the door post is something else.
June 19, 2014 2:19 pm at 2:19 pm #1020650HaLeiViParticipantMayan, keep in mind that Dassan and Aviram were very nice people. They were from the Shotrim, who famouly took beatings for protecting their brothers. In last weeks Parsha, when they said Nitnah Rosh Vinashuva Mitzraima, they meant Dassan and Aviram. They were popular amongst the masses and were seen as an alternative to Moshe and Aharon, probably as political leaders.
June 19, 2014 7:44 pm at 7:44 pm #1020651Patur Aval AssurParticipantThe kashya on mezuza I hear – a sefer torah includes a mezuza and then some so it should accomplish whatever a mezuza accomplishes.
June 22, 2014 4:14 pm at 4:14 pm #1020652eyefortruthMemberThe Kli Yakar suggests at some point during parshas korach, that the point of the tzitzis and mezuza exampls were that just as a begged that is completely techeilis should not need an additional string of techeilis, so too since ?? ?? ??? ???? ??????, they do not need moshe to be their spiritual leader. The same idea goes for mezuza. These ideas are very easily expressed through these two mitzvos.
Also, perhaps one should notice that the last thing mentioned in parshas shlach is the mitzvah of tzitzis and techeilis.
June 22, 2014 4:53 pm at 4:53 pm #1020653Patur Aval AssurParticipant“that just as a begged that is completely techeilis should not need an additional string of techeilis”
why not?
“Also, perhaps one should notice that the last thing mentioned in parshas shlach is the mitzvah of tzitzis and techeilis.”
That is in fact the basis for the Medrash about Korach.
June 22, 2014 8:00 pm at 8:00 pm #1020654oomisParticipantAlso, perhaps one should notice that the last thing mentioned in parshas shlach is the mitzvah of tzitzis and techeilis. “
That is because those two things are (among other things)a tikkun for the cheit hameraglim, who went “la-tur es haAretz.”
If you look at the lashon used about tzitzis and techeiles, “v’lo sasuru (or in Ivrit Sefardit, lo taturu) acharei eineichem,”
which was exactly what the meraglim did, and the same shoresh word, TUR is used in both places in the Parsha). They saw things with their eyes that they turned to negatives, rather than positives about E”Y. The Tzitzis and Techeiles are reminders at how easily our eyes and hearts can lead us astray.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.