- This topic has 55 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Then how come if you go in one direction you won’t eventually end up in the same place?
Just goes to show how you learn something in elementary school and never think about if it’s really true.
You will
OK. I’ll bite.
If you go in one direction , where will you end up ?
Matan: Only if you’re on the equator.
PBA: What do you mean? It’s Kefirah to say the world is round.
It never happened to me.
Where did you end up?
Wait – the motzei shabbos troll threads are baaaaccckk!
Why did you stop?
(I meant to ask why you stopped walking, but why you stopped with the M”S troll threads is also a good question.)
As opposed to any other day of the week’s troll threads?
It’s actually not round but more like a slightly misshapen circle.
If you managed to walk on a give line of latitude or longitude you would end up at the same place except for problems such as ocean, mountains and other obstacles.
Everyone has always known the earth was roughly “round”. It isn’t hard to figure out since if it were flat the horizon wouldn’t disappear. The issue in 1492 was the size of the earth (Columbus had it wrong and thought the earth was much smaller, the general scientific consensus was correct as to size, and had the Americas not been there a crew sailing west would have died of thirst and starvation before reaching Asia). No ever thought that anyone believed it was flat (except so not very bright public school teachers, who probably moonlight teaching in day schools).
akuperma: False. It was a Machlokes among the Greek/Roman philosophers and the Catholic Church Paskened like the Man D’amar that it was flat. General consensus of the Hamon Am during the dark ages was a flat world. (Or, more accurately, a slightly raised bubble of land rising out of either infinite ocean or nothingness at the edge of the ocean. In fact, there are some who read a Yerushalmi like that Deah.) Pashtus is there are some Rishonim who thought like this general consensus. Don’t insult their intelligence by trying to tell us that “everyone knew it was round”.
Well, if they “knew it was round”, they were absolutely wrong. The horizon disappears because of the ghosts.
PBA: What do you mean by ” the earth’s curve”? I thought you said the earth was flat?
In any case:
Yerushalmi Avoda Zara 3:1 towards the end:
?????? ???? ?????
Rashbi, in the Zohar on Vayikra states outright the earth is round. The Yerushalmi and Berashis Rabba imply this as well.
Rebbe Yid: That is an excellent way to quote half a sentence from a Yerushalmi and make it imply the exact opposite of its Pashut Pshat. Please, tell me, what are the next two words?
Sam, you know what Tosafos quotes it for, right?
And yes, it was well known in Columbus’s days that the world was round. Their navigational equipment was based on that, as well as their terminology of location.
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=52940&pgnum=470
He seems pretty aware, and assumes it as undisputed too. Unless you are referring to the guys in the ???? ???? there.
what are the next two words?
??? ???
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14136&st=&pgnum=616
DY: lol. I meant the next Olam K’kadur. And I forgot the V’es so it’s the next three words. Still, my point stands.
What does the yerushalmi say?
I don’t see how that changes anything, I don’t see how your point stands, and I don’t see how you’ve refuted HaLeiVi’s point.
???’ ?”? ?”?. ??”? ?????
What does the yerushalmi say?
The Yerushalmi (which I linked above) says the world is round. It then relates that ???????? ?????? flew up and saw the world as a ???? and the ?? as a ????.
Yeah. Pashtus in Tosfos is that he doesn’t mean a sphere. He means a raised bump surrounded by an infinite ocean.
Why is the Pashtus something which he doesn’t say? He is explaining what the point of a ball is in the hand of an idol. A ball is not a bump.
Sam: Don’t be obtuse. Kadur is a ball. Rashi says it’s a ball (“pelote” in French). The statue is holding a ball. I don’t what the ocean being a plate is, but I do know we’re being told the olam is a ball. In any case, you’re making it like the story with Alexander is coming to limit the prior statement that the olam is a kadur, which it’s clearly not doing.
By the way, when you said in your first comment on this topic, “It’s Kefirah to say the world is round”, which part of the Yerushalmi were you accusing of kefirah?
What’s more, Sam, is that you’re being dishonest. You obviously didn’t see the first, unambiguous statement in the Yerushalmi, which is why you incorrectly stated that I only quoted half a sentence. Then, when your mistake was pointed out to you, you laughed it off and pretended that “lol…I meant…I forgot…”
Stop backtracking.
If you managed to walk on a give line of latitude or longitude you would end up at the same place except for problems such as ocean, mountains and other obstacles.
Walking on the line of a latitude is not going around the world. If I’m on the north pole and I walk around my tepee, did I just walk around the world?
The earth is (to a very good approximation) a sphere. Astronauts have proven it with photographs.
And this has been known for a long time. Eratosthenes of Cyrene who lived in the 3rd century BCE even got the dimensions about right.
Rebbe Yid: This is a troll thread. My first statement was clearly a joke.
The Mishnah is clearly referring to Atlas, who is always holding a ball. But the ball he is holding is the Aristotelean “Heavenly sphere” the makes up the entirety of the cosmos, not just the planet Earth. That is what is referred to in the Mishnah and the first statement in the Yerushalmi. The second statement, about Alexander, is referring to Earth, with the Yam as a plate holding this planet.
?? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ?????? ????? ????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????, ?? ?????? ????? ????? ???? ?????, ?????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?????? (??? ??? ????), ?????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ????.
??? ???? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ???? ?? ?????? ????? ??. ????? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????????? ????? ?? ????? ????? ?? ???, ??-???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ???? ??? ??????? ???? ????? ???? ????.
????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????? ????? ??? ????. ???? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?????, ????? ?????? ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??????.
?????? ??? ????? ??????? ??????? ??, ??? ?? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ??????, ???? ??????? ????? ????? ???????? ?????? ????? ?????:
Hi all
a couple of points:
1) Round and sphere are not synonyms, the ancients (virtually?) all believed the earth was round, they did not believe it was a sphere. They viewed it as a flat disk some cultures had elaborate systems in place such as a disk on the back of an elephent or turtle.
2) The above is true for the “hamon Am” the intelligentsia knew for thousands of years that the earth is spherical. There is much observational evidence for the spherical shape of earth including ships going over the horizon, lunar eclipses, and careful mapping of the sun/stars in different positions. In fact not only did Ancient Greek philosphers accept a spherical earth, but in 240 B.C.E Eratosthenes calculated the circumference with decent precision
3) The yerushalmi does not necessarily mean the Earth is shaped like a ball. Clearly, “es hayam Kekarah” does not fit with the Earth as we observe it. Some rishonim understood it to mean that the deity was in control of the earth “like a ball” i.e. like one controls a ball,not that that was the shape. Similar to makal which clearly isnt referring to shape. Rabbeinu chanalel says this clearly, Pnei Moshe is also mashma like this.
The Mishnah is clearly referring to Atlas
Actually, the Mishnah is stating that any statue with any of these characteristics is considerrd a”z. Nothing whatsoever to do with any specific idol.
DY: Sure. Because they are similar to representations of a common idol-i.e. Atlas.
No, because it represents authority over the world. As the meforshim say.
You should not be making up pshat in a Mishnah based on what you happen to know about Greek mythology.
They viewed it as a flat disk some cultures had elaborate systems in place such as a disk on the back of an elephent or turtle.
Or as a disc on the backs of four elephants which were on the back of a turtle. 🙂
The Wolf
I’m not sure how high exactly Alexander got, but I wonder if he mistook the blue atmosphere for the ocean.
Alexander, by the way, was a student of philosophy and should have been aware of the shape of the planet.
These two statements don’t work together.
I happened to overhear a conversation between Sir Columbus and his sailors, thanks to Dr. Midos’s bein hazmanim radio. And he’s telling them about the world being rrrrround.
DY: This has always been an issue that troubled me. I know what the Meforshim (all quoting Rashi, really) say. However, they never saw such a statue.
It seems inconceivable (and honestly, a bit insulting) to me to have the Tannaim talking about a theoretical yet nonexistent statue when there was a statue that meets the Gemara’s Lashon perfectly that would have been in just about every city. Almost all of Maseches Avodah Zarah is in context of what the Goyim did. Why on earth would they not be referring to Zeus (who is almost always depicted with a staff and a bird) and Atlas? It seems foolish to make the Mishnah talking about the theoretical when the practical is obvious and right there. Rashi was unaware of what their idols looked like. We are aware and it fits the Gemara perfectly.
HaLeiVi: It was a Machlokes among the philosopher’s. Round earth began to spread after Aristotle “Paskened” that way. But most before him held it was like a disc in the ocean.
It’s not nonexistent. But it’s not referring to one specific A”Z.
Rashi had Ruach HaKodesh.
DY: It is nonexistent. The Greco-Roman Avodah Zarahs are pretty well-preserved. We know what we’re seeing. As far as I could find (and I researched this when I learned this Gemara) there is no idol of something holding a ball. At all. So either Chazal were making up a concept of an idol that didn’t exist (because why would we assume that any ball represents the world unless, you know, we know the case of a ball that actually does represent the world) or they were talking about an actual idol.
Joseph: That’s nice. Again, if you say like the Rishonim Chazal don’t make any sense. Ruach HaKodesh does not mean infallible.
Aristotle was before the second Beis Hamikdash. So it was common knowledge 500 years later, don’t you think. And unlike his other theories, this one is verifiable and was used in navigation.
What is your basis for saying Rashi is unaware? Are you assuming Rashi lived in a cocoon? He seems pretty aware of outside culture and history. Do you think these Getchkes were just discovered?
You’re making that same mistake again, assuming that if you haven’t seen something, it must not exist.
HaLeiVi: The Christians in France did a good job of wiping out any minor vestiges of those Avodah Zarahs (the Romans had a very tough time in Gaul) so Rashi didn’t really see much of their Tzlamim.
DY: No. I’m assuming that we have a lot of evidence and the total lack thereof shows that even if it existed, it was incredibly minor. We know what they worshipped. There are books and records. We know their gods. We know how they were depicted. None were depicted holding a ball, not even Athena (who sometimes holds an orb in later literature). Why would the Mishnah be talking about a minor-at-best-but-not-accepted-by-anyone idol when Atlas is the common and obvious way to fit?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.