Circumstantial evidence
Rabbi Michael Shalom
In the lesson on Friday at Ohel Ari, you mentioned that Tosafot disagree with Maimonides not being translated according to the estimate – in my opinion, this is difficult because the case of Shimon ben Shetach and many other rulings indicate that there is no proof in the laws of souls other than testimony.
What additions? Are you referring to the addition of the word “D” to the word “D”?
If you have written on this topic, I would appreciate it if you could direct me to the place.
Another note on apparent conversion issues – the process of conversion by freeing a Canaanite slave or slave girl does not involve accepting the burden of a commandment.
With thanks
Indeed, it is added there. The evidence has already been discussed at length, but the Court does not have much evidence for this. We see in many places that anan sahadi is like witnesses, and some have even applied this to witnesses of the presence of a child, and certainly to the mammon.
Regarding the conversion of a slave, he receives the commandments as a woman when he enters slavery against his will (and some say that if he is not willing, he will not become a slave). Therefore, when he is freed, he becomes a Jew against his will. I remember that my friend Nadav Shnarb claims that this is the way to convert without receiving the commandments, but I disagree.
Why don't you agree with this? (That this is the way to convert without mitzvot)
Mainly because it still requires receiving a commandment, but only in the first stage (becoming a slave). And certainly if one turns him into a slave as a fiction of conversion.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
