samet@sfmag.UUCP (A.I.Samet) (07/10/85)
> a) Torah law is based on "consent of the governed", said > consent having been given at Mt. Sinai. > b) I submit that the real issue is not homosexuality or > Nazism, but rather how that "consent", understood by > Orthodoxy as applying for all time, relates to those > Jews who do not choose to accept the Torah. [Jay Hyman] It seems to me that there is a big hole in this argument. Why should any single individual be obliged to accept the principle of consent of the governed? Even if you say that the Torah mandates it (dina d'malchusa dina), he has not yet accepted the Torah. Suppose he wants to be different from other members of the society and do his own thing. What's to say that he's "wrong"? I realize that there are midrashim that say (on the surface) that the acceptance of our forefathers is somehow binding on us. However, these can be interpreted homiletically. I know of no source which interpret these midrashim halachically. (Does anyone?) Another more serious problem with this approach is that it seems to imply that even if the Torah is G*d given, man is still in a position to decide whether or not to accept it. Is there a basis for such a position in our tradition? Yitzchok Samet
slerner@sesame.UUCP (Simcha-Yitzchak Lerner) (07/24/85)
> > a) Torah law is based on "consent of the governed", said > > consent having been given at Mt. Sinai. > > > I realize that there are midrashim that say (on the surface) that > the acceptance of our forefathers is somehow binding on us. > However, these can be interpreted homiletically. I know of no > source which interpret these midrashim halachically. (Does > anyone?) > > Yitzchok Samet For whatever it is worth, in chasidus we learn that ALL jewish souls of all times were at Sinai and ALL accepted to Torah. Therefore, every jew has already accepted to Torah. -- Opinions expressed are public domain, and do not belong to Lotus Development Corp. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Simcha-Yitzchak Lerner {genrad|ihnp4|ima}!wjh12!talcott!sesame!slerner {cbosgd|harvard}!talcott!sesame!slerner slerner%sesame@harvard.ARPA
am@vilya.UUCP (MALEK) (08/07/85)
> > > a) Torah law is based on "consent of the governed", said > > > consent having been given at Mt. Sinai. > > > > I realize that there are midrashim that say (on the surface) that > > the acceptance of our forefathers is somehow binding on us. > > However, these can be interpreted homiletically. I know of no > > source which interpret these midrashim halachically. (Does > > anyone?) Yitzchok Samet > > For whatever it is worth, in chasidus we learn that ALL jewish souls > of all times were at Sinai and ALL accepted to Torah. Therefore, every > jew has already accepted to Torah. Simcha-Yitzchak Lerner This is not based on chassidus, but on a pasuk in Devarim, Parshat Nitzavim: Ki et asher yeshno fo imanu omed hayom lifnai adonai elohainu v'et asher ainenu po imanu hayom. (sixth pasuk in Nitzavim). (free translation: whoever is here is standing with us today as we sign this treaty with Hashem and whoever is not here is also with us today) The involuntary acceptence of the Torah by the Jews bothered the sages throughout the ages; therefore the midrashim about a second acceptence in the time of Mordechai and Esther and many covenants in the time of Joshua, Nehemiah, etc. This is also part of the reason for the great significance of the public acceptence of the "yoke of mitzvot" at the age of 13(12). >>> Does anyone have a proper answer to Samet's question? Avi Malek -- Avi Malek @ATT Bell Labs Parsippany, NJ