- This topic has 39 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Is there such a thing as an aveirah l’sheim shamayim? What?
yes,
when yehudis had relations with the general in order to kill him
the gemara says an Aveirah Lishma is better than a Mitzvah Shlo Lishma
CA: It says they are equal, actually.
What do you mean by an aveira meaning the person should do it,but still has to do tsuhvah for it?
Sam2 actually it says greater (gadol aveira lishma mmitzvah shelo lishma)
Coffee pls remind me where that gemara is. If yehudis was only karka olam then why is it considered an aveira on her part at all?
Coffee addict – Go vaiter, you’ll see Sam2 is right.
Coffee addict, who told you Yehudis did anything there? She very well might have killed the general without doing an aveira.
Tickle toe(Joseph), you are running out of names, if you had to take on ” tickle toe…”.
Shticky Guy -“If yehudis was only karka olam then why is it considered an aveira on her part at all?”
You can only say Karka Olam, if she doesn’t instigate it, like by Esther Hamalka, not over here.
Ill look it up tomorrow morning, and I think the reason was because she didn’t lay still bshas maaseh
Just to clarify, the Gemara in question is in reference to Ya’el and not Yehudis. And Karka Olam is still Assur, there just is no punishment and is not Yeihareg V’al Ya’avor due to the technical detail of there being no Ma’aseh.
after matan torah we cant make cheshbonos. the answers to all the shaalos on the avos cant be applied today, even if you know it will come out good. ie- Menashe not being osek in pru urivu. although the gemara does say the above its in theory, not in maaseh- after matan torah what is written goes and thats it.
Toi: Eis L’asos Lashem, Heifeiu Sorasecha. But yes, no one individual today can make a call on that issue.
The mekosheish eitzim was such in instance. He was mechaleil Shabbat in order to establish the authority of Beth Din to act in such an instance.
The concept of an aveirah lishma is mentioned by the Shlah Hakadosh and was adopted by the early chassidic leaders as legitimate under certain circumstances. It is very closely related, possibly identical, to the concept of yeridas hatzaddik. For those chassidic leaders who espoused this possibility, all of the mentioned cases (Esther, Yehudah, Yael, etc..)are invoked. A corrollary to this issue, and one which is widely discussed in halachah, is the question of whether a minor transgression may be committed in order to avoid a more severe transgression.
Didnt Eliyahu commit an Averiah L’Shem Shamayim?
Only if you have no choice! you cannot decide i want to do an aveira
and i have a good reason, I mean it for HB”H.
Lishma is a lofty madregah that not most people who think they are doing something lishma makes it actually so.
There are certain circumstances…
However generally NO! You are not allowed to do an aveirah thinking you have a good reason lishma. If there is a certain forced circumstance, then you should ask a shailoh!
To a competent, living, breathing, Posek. Not online!
How about telling a baal teshuva to do an aveira in the expectation it might lead him to do mitzvos?
anyways horiyos says kmitzva shelo lishma
Eliyahu did NOT commit an aveirah. the gemara in yumah says it was a horaas shah. this is very different then people making their own rationaliztions.
Old man, it sounds like the Shabsi Tzvi shittos. Baruch HaShem, the Misnagdim opposed them.
Yael was after Mattan Torah. Yehuda was not Oiver an Aveira. The Medrash says that Yehuda started walking past her when his Taava started yelling, “Yehuda, what will be with Malchus Beis David!?” I don’t know if he ever knew it, but he was forced into it.
You can also learn Pshat like the Or Hachaim Hakadosh in Ki Seitzei that when a person who erradicated lowly desires suddenly feels drawn to something, he knows there must be something to it.
Old Man,
I think that the phrase was used but not in a litteral sense. Nobody was Mechallel Shabbos to greet a Malach. But, perhaps somebody took a small break from learning for the long term benefit.
With a Baal Teshuva, some utilize the concept of Mutav Sheyechalelu Shabbos Echad Velo Yechallelu Shabbasos Harbe, rather we should desecrate one Shabbos than desecrating many. Rav Illowey, a famous rav in America and a Talmid of the Chasam Sofer, allowed a woman to travel by train on Shabbos to come to Shul. He knew that it is her lifeline to Yiddishkeit and there is no real Issur involved, or there are many applicable Hetteirim.
mdd: old man’s point is incorrect. In any event, there are no more misnagdim. Their decendents are b’achdus with Chasidim and Litvaks tzuzamen.
Mdd: shabsai tzvi and mostly his students held that inorder to be metaken the olam they had to sin to the fullest there is a sect which follows this today. This has nothing to do with chassidim chas v shalom.
old man: That is a gross misunderstanding of the concept. There is no such thing as an averah lishmah despite what some people take from reading Rav Tzaddok too quickly.
There is no such thing as an averah lishmah despite what some people take from reading Rav Tzaddok too quickly.
please explain this
There were some early Chassidism whose ideas and actions were very similar to the followers of Shabsai Tzvi’s. Baruch Hashem almost none of that entered mainstream Chassidism.
Rav Tzaddok is known for talking about “averah lishmah” and he seems to approve of the concept, which makes him a favorite of some Zalman Schachter (oisvorf former Lubavitcher Schechter, not JTS Schechter) but a closer reading (a rebbi who knows machshava helps) shows that he’s really talking about how even averos are holy when they lead to teshuva and similar concepts. Sorry, but I don’t have the sefarim at home. I’ll get back to you with exact sources.
Sam2: That part of the movement has, thank God, almost entirely vanished. Out of sensitivity to the CR’s chassidim, let’s not bring it up when it’s not relevant. Leave that to Gershon Shalom.
Gershom Scholem was an anti-religious apikorus who historonics is as valid as Goebbels.
Godwin’s law. Goodnight.
PS I agreed with you until after apikorus.
However, in chassidic philosophy(not all sects, but most) if a person, usually the Rebbe himself but not necessarily, needs to do an aveirah to reach a certain spiritual level, he is permitted to do so.
Complete fiction, unless you are referring to the Admou”r meCreedmoor who believes that welfare fraud is the path to spiritual redemption of expired food stamps.
If anything, some Chassidim do not believe their Rebbeim are even capable of aveirois (also misunderstood, but anyway..).
600: That’s not misunderstood. It’s pretty explicit in the Tanya.
Chassidishe Sefarim, especially early ones are to be read with a certain context. Looking back with a Litvish or technical reading, you’ll find everything to be very weird. They were written for those who were ‘in the Parsha’.
I once heard that when Reb Aron complained bitterly about how in Chabbad they said that a Chassid is like a Kohen and the Rebbe is like the Kohen Gadol, Reb Gedalya Shor said that he just didn’t understand the language. He said, “Did the Lubavitcher mean that a Rebbe can go in to Lifnai Velifnim? No. He meant that a Chossid should have Shaychus with his Rebbe.”
I’ve felt for a long time that the major Hisnagdus was the outcome of hearing things without being there to understand the context. A Chossid, who learned the terms from the Chassidus and his Rebbe, knows how to take it. To an outsider, who is only used to technical understandings, it would sound like claims of the Merkava visiting.
When people drive to the Chabad House and the Rabbi asks the person where they live and the answer suggests the person lives too far away to have walked (The Rabbi does not ask directly DID YOU DRIVE)
Those people are people who want to be with Jews or just check out davening for Shabbos. The rov just might want to invite those people over in the future if he can and if they return so that they don’t have to drive. He’s also avoiding the aveiro of embarrassing someone in case they do know they’re not supposed to drive.
In many cases, the driver barely knows he’s doing an aveirah by driving or that davening is a mitzvah. The rov is trying to prevent future aveiros and there is no mitzvah to tell someone to leave a shul because he drove. (Actually, in prior years our rov has told people not to drive on YK, to the point that shul attendance declines every year.)
Sam, see HaLeiVi’s post. He explains things better than I can because I am noigea bedovor and “in the parsha.”
600K; This a complex question, I believe Harav Chaim Kanievsky discusses a similar dilemma.
I have heard that many shuls who have these type of kiruv gathering with the knowing of the possibility of some people driving there but not immediately addressing it, have a huge success rate within one year of most of their crowd becoming proud Shomerei Shabbos.
You have to understand that for a person who is living a
certain lifestyle and is
a) unaware of the issurim
b) clueless of the reason behind it
c) unaware of the joy and warmth of being religious
d) very hard to drop a certain practice they’re used to and have been doing for ages, in one shot
So I’m not paskening, but telling these clueless people
you “can’t come join us” and feel the warmth, or find out the truth unless you stop doing something you are very used to, don’t even know it’s wrong, or why it’s wrong on the promise of first
give it up everything, then well explain it…
I can see how it could be a struggle and not easy to reach them
this way. Though one has to always ask a Sheilah with a every case specifically as it tends to make a difference when it can be allowed and when it cannot.
Rav chaim Volzhin says this is a trick of the yetzer hara to do an averia lshem shamyim(Nefesh Hachaim hakdama shar 4:7)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.