Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Rabbi Yihyah Gafekh on the idolatrous beleifs of the Qabalah.
q_q_:
--- Quote from: muman613 on December 04, 2008, 09:04:03 PM ---
--- Quote from: Dan Ben Noah on December 04, 2008, 07:15:01 PM ---Rabbi Kafach, as well as the Teimani community in general, is a breath of fresh air. You don't have to be a pagan to be a religious Jew.
--- End quote ---
What do you mean 'be a pagan'... Are you implying that we who follow Chassidus are pagans? You are truly off-base with this remark.
There is nothing idolatrous about Kabbalah, at least from what I understand. Those who think it is simply have not contemplated what Kabbalah is saying. I hear everyone against it says that the sefirot are a form of idolatry, which is completely untrue.
--- End quote ---
The arguments with Dan have taken places in other threads you can see them.. Don't turn this thread into that.
I could easily pull up previous threads but it would just cause more unnecessary trouble.
You should do the research and look it up.
Look at the title that Judea gave to this thread.
Don't hijack it into an anti-intellectual argument like this.
Judea, KahaneBT.. You are both intelligent. i'm sure SP is too, certainly relative to this..
I don't know if muman or dan ben noah are going to hijack this thread (you may even be too polite to admit that it is a hijacking)
But I suggest that any hijacking can be ignored, and the intelligent discussion on the contents of Rabbi Gafah's article can be had.
I know my post wasn't a particularly good response to it.. But at least it was a response!! I would urge others to respond to the article or argue against the response or whatever. And not get dragged into the silly conversation that we(I mean the intelligent we, intelligent in the relevant ways) see potentially happening here.
muman613:
--- Quote from: q_q_ on December 04, 2008, 09:17:46 PM ---<snip>
The arguments with Dan have taken places in other threads you can see them.. Don't turn this thread into that.
I could easily pull up previous threads but it would just cause more unnecessary trouble.
You should do the research and look it up.
Look at the title that Judea gave to this thread.
Don't hijack it into an anti-intellectual argument like this.
Judea, KahaneBT.. You are both intelligent. i'm sure SP is too, certainly relative to this..
I don't know if muman or dan ben noah are going to hijack this thread (you may even be too polite to admit that it is a hijacking)
But I suggest that any hijacking can be ignored, and the intelligent discussion on the contents of Rabbi Gafah's article can be had.
I know my post wasn't a particularly good response to it.. But at least it was a response!! I would urge others to respond to the article or argue against the response or whatever. And not get dragged into the silly conversation that we(I mean the intelligent we, intelligent in the relevant ways) see potentially happening here.
--- End quote ---
Sorry, I expect to answer the original issues when I get a chance this evening. Ive been working all day and should be prepared to write something which addresses the issues which Judea has brought up...
I am not trying to hijack or alter the topic of this thread. I am just a bit emotional when it comes to issues like this which have a potential to divide us. I normally try to look for issues which unite us.
q_q_:
--- Quote from: muman613 on December 04, 2008, 09:30:14 PM ---<snip>
Sorry, I expect to answer the original issues when I get a chance this evening. Ive been working all day and should be prepared to write something which addresses the issues which Judea has brought up...
I am not trying to hijack or alter the topic of this thread. I am just a bit emotional when it comes to issues like this which have a potential to divide us. I normally try to look for issues which unite us.
--- End quote ---
the main thing is not diverting the issue..
It can take quite a bit of work to analyse an article. (if people can, then great). I'm not suggesting that everybody give a response.. Just that they don't divert the thread.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: q_q_ on December 04, 2008, 03:13:38 PM ---
--- Quote from: Kahane-Was-Right BT on December 04, 2008, 01:36:09 PM ---qq, when a rabbi says angels came and taught him Torah, do you really take that literally? Do you have proof/sources that any of these rabbis really claimed this themselves (as opposed to their followers who then ascribed it to the rabbis saying it) ? Whatever happened to the principle of Lo Beshamayim Hee? Even if angels did come to teach them, how could they accept it? For that reason and for others...
--- End quote ---
In the case of the Arizal and the RAMCHAL, certainly they and/or their direct disciples , faithful to them, wrote of it.
Here, in the case of the RAMCHAL
http://www.torah.org/learning/ramchal/classes/special1.html
see he and one of his disciples write of it.
Kabbalistic teachings often have new revelations(particularly in the case of the Arizal). Teachings that cannot come through reasoning or reasonable speculation.
It is silly to think that they believed that their teachings were the product of their imaginations. They took it as serious doctrine.
It can only make sense as teaching derived from heaven.
--- End quote ---
When you say this, I hope that you realize that the Ramchal and others like him CERTAINLY QUOTED PRIOR SOURCES! So had there not been a bubba maaseh about angels teaching to them, still no one would suspect that they invented it of their own imagination, say a work like Mesillath Yesharim. (and the reason the Ramchal's works were burned is a separate issue). Not only that but the Ari is as far as I know considered to be the primary commentary on the zohar as to its explanation and exposition and overall kaballah philosophy (of course there is machloketh with the nefesh hachaim's view and there are two different worldviews in the kaballah). but as far as kabballah goes, he is not considered an inventor by kabbalists, is he? He didn't write his own zohar. He used the earlier sources available to him and expounded upon them. -primarily the zohar. Question is, is zohar authentic kaballah or isn't it....
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
QQ:
--- Quote ---Regarding "Lo Bashamayim Hee/Hi". We can't take that in the complete absolute sense. Since we received the torah at sinai. And after that, we've had Prophets.
--- End quote ---
Obviously that concept, lo beshamayim he, does not refer to Matan Torah! To say something like what you just said, you must not understand the concept or what it means.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version