Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Shalom
Tag-MehirTzedek:
--- Quote from: Zelhar on April 09, 2012, 03:43:43 PM ---So Muman, if Tehiyas Hamesim is such a high and important principle that denying it is like denying the Torah, how comes it is not mentioned once in the Torah, excepts *maybe* in hints like you posted above.
--- End quote ---
He misquoted it, The ressurection of the dead is mentioned in the Torah in a number of places, the Rambam brings them down as well (for example from Isaia, and other places).
What we were arguing is something else, it was about gilgulim- reincarnations. These are different things entirely.
muman613:
--- Quote from: Zelhar on April 09, 2012, 03:43:43 PM ---So Muman, if Tehiyas Hamesim is such a high and important principle that denying it is like denying the Torah, how comes it is not mentioned once in the Torah, excepts *maybe* in hints like you posted above.
--- End quote ---
It is mentioned in the Talmud many times.
Your question has been asked to Rabbis before... I will attempt to find the answer for you.
Basically the answer I remember is that the Torah is a book which intends on telling us how to live, not that we should do the mitzvahs for the reward of the afterlife, or to be righteous to merit resurrection.... The Torah concentrates on being a book of life... The Talmud and the Oral tradition on the other hand address the topic of Resurrection.
I have also heard it said that these things were not written down because of the fact that other religions would take these concepts and twist them {as we witnessed with Christianity and then Islam}...
See this: http://www.puretorah.com/resources/The%20Resurrection%20of%20the%20Dead%20-%20Rabbi%20Kin.pdf
--- Quote ---We have sources in the Torah that allude to the resurrection. It is not explicitly written in the Torah because Hashem doesn't want us to serve him for ulterior motives. The verse says in the Torah that Hashem tells Moshe, you are about to leave this world to go to your forefathers, but “they will rise”. This refers to the resurrection of the dead. Similarly, the verse states“then Moses will sing”. Meaning, there will be a time in the future, at the resurrection of the dead, that Moses will sing again. Also it says “I will fulfill my promise to the forefathers” (they will see the land of Israel in its full glory), how will Hashem fulfill his promise? When the forefathers resurrect. And the verse also says “I will strike them dead and I will bring him back alive.” Just like G-d can bring about someone's death, he can bring someone back alive.
--- End quote ---
Tag-MehirTzedek:
--- Quote from: Zelhar on April 09, 2012, 03:35:18 PM ---If you miss one prayer you get karet. So that's pretty severe, if you take it at face value.
--- End quote ---
Here is the list of the 36 for karet. Mostly sex crimes but other things as well.
http://halakhah.com/pdf/kodoshim/Krithoth.pdf
muman613:
--- Quote from: Tag-MahirTzedek on April 09, 2012, 03:54:16 PM --- Here is the list of the 36 for karet. Mostly sex crimes but other things as well.
http://halakhah.com/pdf/kodoshim/Krithoth.pdf
--- End quote ---
Yes I have NEVER heard that missing a prayer invokes Kaaret...
Maybe the punishment is Lashes, but I do not know a source of that...
--- Quote ---Exempt from Lashes
* Shavuot 3b
Mesechta Shavuot, which we begin this week, follows Mesechta Makkot, and the reason given in the gemara for the sequence is based on a certain similarity between the last mishna of the former and the first of the latter.
There is a topic in the opening pages of this mesechta that recalls the subject of the punishment of lashes so elaborately discussed in its predecessor. Although the general rule is that one who violates a prohibition of the Torah is punished by lashes, there are exceptions. One of them is the case of someone who took an oath to eat a loaf of bread today and failed to do so. Despite the fact that he is guilty of transgressing the command to avoid false oaths, he is not liable for lashes. Two different approaches are offered by the Sages for this exemption.
Rabbi Yochanan's position is that lashes are due only for an active violation and since failure to eat the bread is a passive one it is not punished by lashes.
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish (Reish Lakish) sees this exemption as the result of an impossibility to definitively warn the transgressor, an absolute requirement for any punishment administered by the court. Since the witnesses issuing a warning that he must eat the bread or be guilty of violating his oath cannot be certain at that moment that he will not eat sometime during the day, such a warning cannot make him liable for lashes.
These two explanations also apply to the case of one who transgresses the prohibition against leaving any of the flesh of the Korban Pesach overnight. In this case, however, we find a third reason for exemption from lashes. Rabbi Yehuda states that since the Torah commanded one who did leave such flesh overnight to burn it, we consider this as the Torah's way of saying that such burning is the atonement and no other atonement is necessary.
--- End quote ---
http://www.torah.org/learning/rambam/talmudtorah/tt7.1.html
Zelhar:
I was indeed wrong, I referred to rashi on bavli page 1 and rashi mentioned karet as a punishment for the kohen who ate from the korban on the day after.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version