Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Rabbi Yihyah Gafekh on the idolatrous beleifs of the Qabalah.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
QQ, from what I can remember that gemara you have quoted has a greater context that is necessary to understand it fully.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: q_q_ on December 04, 2008, 04:15:04 PM ---
Reading it again and again, he seems to be saying that the Zohar claims that Adam did not have to ask permission from anybody, and that he is the first cause of something to do with G-d. And that this contradicts what we know to be Torah beliefs..
--- End quote ---
When he says "First Cause" the Rabbi is speaking about G-d. I don't see how one can gather otherwise from that paragraph. That said, I do not understand that paragraph either. It probably requires knowledge of Zohar as most of his writing seems to require.
Tzvi Ben Roshel1:
I'm not sure if it was in this thread or one of the other recent threads on this subject, but I would like to say that the different Sefirot DO NOT represent G-d in any way, shape or form. In some ways they are part of man (at least each man does contain the "dna" of these things). The Sefirot are just channels and the way that G-d created and interacts with man. They are not to be worshipped, or identified as being seperate or independent of G-d. Everything depends on G-d and the Sefirot just describe the way that G-d channels His Shefa (or energy- for a lack of a better word) to us collectivly and individually.
Even in Midrash I believe that it says that G-d created the world with 10 sayings.
q_q_:
--- Quote from: Kahane-Was-Right BT on December 05, 2008, 07:26:10 AM ---QQ:
--- Quote from: qq ---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.
--- End quote ---
Goodness me.
I SAID I Actually SAID that it does not refer to matan torah.
Your logic has gone completely.
Yes, there is a gemara, first google result. I read it before I responded to you, and I was familiar with it before. Try reading it too!
Infact, where you wrote Hi, I wrote Hee/Hi, because if you write Hee, you can find it in google.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: q_q_ on December 06, 2008, 08:05:37 PM ---
--- Quote from: Kahane-Was-Right BT on December 05, 2008, 07:26:10 AM ---QQ:
--- Quote from: qq ---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.
--- End quote ---
Goodness me.
I SAID I Actually SAID that it does not refer to matan torah.
Your logic has gone completely.
--- End quote ---
My logic is gone? What you did say, was said specifically as a challenge to me. A challenge - Where I presented the concept (lo beshamayim he) as a challenge to the idea of angels teaching 16th century kabbalists halacha and Torah. So when you suggest that the concept, which does not address Matan Torah, that the fact that it doesn't apply to Matan Torah or the prophets is somehow a "refutation" (and I use that term lightly) or a point of contention to MY CHALLENGE, it is clear to anyone here that it is you who presented something nonsensical.
--- Quote ---Yes, there is a gemara, first google result. I read it before I responded to you, and I was familiar with it before. Try reading it too!
Infact, where you wrote Hi, I wrote Hee/Hi, because if you write Hee, you can find it in google.
--- End quote ---
You didn't understand the implication of what I was saying. Let me explain. You quoted in brief a story from the gemara surrounding this statement lo beshamayim he. I suggest that the story fits into a context and requires learning the gemara and the context. Not googling a translation. Learning the gemara. You presented conclusion(s) from this piece that I suggest may need reexamining.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version