Torah Fence in the Light of Haran’s Words

Wow. This is quite a revolution (although, a necessary one). Entire sections of the Yeshiva Talmud are not a mitzvah. The condemnation is very strange though

Condemnation?

*logical.

This riddle is too big for me.

It was just a comment that, although your words make sense, they are very new to what I am used to. I find it difficult that there are entire parts of traditional Yeshivah learning (not Jewish thought) that are not actually ‘Torah’. But you are probably right.

Is the discussion of what is considered ‘moral’ according to the definitions of Ramada”a considered ‘Torah’?

In the blessing of the Torah, from Keshan

Apparently, it is possible to say with more certainty that the verses ‘Birbach’ and Baraita D’ are things whose fruits a person eats in the hereafter”’ – but it should be discussed with the understanding that ’we will stop interfering – Maybe these are not considered ’Torah’? 🙂

And a few additional questions:

A. Is someone who has not properly examined the possibilities of apostasy, which has already been explained in several places on the site of the law that he does not truly believe, since his entire faith is in the form of a ‘captured infant’ – allowed to recite the blessings of the Torah? It is clear that someone who does not believe has no value for his commandments. And if so, how can someone who has not properly examined the possibility of apostasy say that ‘whom we have sanctified with his commandments’ has no value for his commandments?

B. After all, many of the authors of Torah literature, Tannaim and Amoraim, first and last, accepted the faith innocently according to tradition and did not properly examine the possibilities of apostasy. After we learned that someone who has not examined the possibility of apostasy is not considered a ’believer’. Is the Torah of a ‘non-believer’ Such is considered Torah, and is there not a concern here of learning from someone who does not believe?

C. Is it possible to ask, “And please interpose the words of your Torah in our mouths,” since from my perspective this is an inappropriate request: 1. After all, God does not interpose? 2. After all, the performance of the mitzvot should be without bias and bias, and how can we ask that God frustrate us in studying with bias, which takes on the full religious and moral value of the mitzvah to learn Torah?

And about all this, may the teacher of charity and the like instruct us!

With blessings, Emmanuel Jeremiah Kantinger

I did not write that those who have not tested do not believe. What I wrote is that if there is someone who is reluctant to test for fear of becoming an infidel, this fear has no basis, because if he becomes an infidel, it will be revealed retroactively that he has always been such, and what good is it that we avoid testing?! But if a person believes innocently, he believes completely and everything is fine. And these things are written to the point in several of my writings (including in the trilogy)..

Anyone who has been adversely affected by arguments of heresy is a ’retroactively’ a believer. Why not? A person is liable to fall into the net of arguments of heresy because he lacks the knowledge and methodological tools to deal with those arguments.

The preventive ’remedy’ is an in-depth study of the faith from the books of the sages of Israel. In most cases, the questions have already been raised, discussed, and answered. Even if these are seemingly new arguments – those who trust in studying Jewish thought from its sources – are aware of the depth and complexity of the matter, and just as a student of the Gemara knows that ’one does not die from difficulties’ and after reaching the answer – anyone who studies faith carefully – will not be frightened by any &#8216 difficulties’ And he will tire of understanding the depth of things, and you will tire and give up and believe.

With blessings, Sh”t