Originally published on 4/9/11, 9:34 pm.
Please permit me to boast a bit, as you may see below:
R Willig questioned the Marc Shapiro read of the 13 Ikkarim and declared them as having been accepted by all Israel [Similar to Baer's Avodat Yisroel comment on Yigdal at the end of Shacharit]
Briefly - here is how I interpret the disconnect between Academic Scholars [Acad] and Rabbis
Shapiro and other Academics approach the ikkarim - they
• Read the original source. Viz. Rambam's Peirush Hamishnah
• Follow the Rambam's points precisely [pedantically]
• Find numerous sources that quibble - sometimes significantly
Thereby
• Conclude that the devil is in the details and that the Rambam's ikkarim are really not [so] normative
Rabbis see it more like this
• They see Yigdal and Ani Maamin
• They understand how widespread [nitpashet] these principles are now and have been.
While they also see the quibbles -
• They determine that the ikkar re: the ikkarim is indeed normative acceptance - but with some caveats still debated
For example, R' Willig illustrated this using the issue of the piyyut Machnisei Rachamim. Those who recite such piyyutim feel perfectly compliant with the ikkarim, albeit lav davka with a very strict read of the ikkarim. But since when do rabbis take things without a hachi ko'amar or a bame d'varim amurim, or a haha b'mai askinan? Doesn't P'saq often follow a Mishnah? - yet often so with an Amoraic caveat, even though Amoraim [theoretically] may NOT dispute a Tanna!
Dispute? No. Qualify? Yes!
The Ikkarim are universally accepted, but not quite as originally formulated. Rather the ikkar for Rabbanim is "the ikkarim are normative as has been accepted and applied, but not as conceived by the Rambam.
The boast is that this matches my longstanding position on the Avodah List - that the more generalized Yigdal or the Ani Maamins are more normative than the Rambam in Peirush Mishnayos, because that is after all how they've been viewed and embraced halachah l'maaseh.
R' Willig did continue with several other points on the ikkarim such as how R' Hillel in Sanhedrin could quibble regarding moshiach [#12] but that we may no longer do so.
P'saq, or, history happens.
Shalom,
RRW
1 comment:
Here's the difference between academics and Torah-types.
Academics give equal weight to any source. If they find some mystic from 13th century Italy who has a different list of ikkarim, even if this guy never had any followers and was just expressing his opinion in a non-authoritative fashion, the academics conclude: See? Other ikkarim existed! The Big 13 weren't universal.
Torah-types, on the other hand, look at impact as well as existence. Did this mystic type actually make a difference other than leaving behind an essay or 2? This gets missed by the academics.
Post a Comment