Avot and the Great Paradigm Shift - Answers

By way of background, it will be helpful to view the separate tractate Avot as an evolving document, instead of it being separated into its own tractate by Rebbe - the editor of the Mishnah.

However, Avot refers to a position, that is Av Beit Din. This masechet is specifically geared to the Avot Beis Din throughout our history. (Another possiblity it that Avot means "principles", for example, Arbo'o Avot neizkin, Av melocho, etc., but, I prefer the first answer.}

Regardless of what Torah was received at Sinai as opposed to what was received later on, Moshe received the position of Av Beit Din at Sinai. This dovetails well with those who date the the "mimochorat" in Yisro as the day following Mattan Torah.

Specifically he gave to Yehoshua not the body of the Torah, rather the administration, or the authority of the Torah. Yehoshua was Moshe's successor as "Trustee" of the Torah. While all of Israel could learn the Torah, and had to follow the Torah, only Yehoshua, and his successors were responsible for adjudicating, legislating, and administering the Torah.

Since it refers to the guidelines and the wisdom of Avot Beis Din, therefore it is connected to Tractate Sanhedrin.

Kol Yisroel indicates a tremendous paradigm shift. That which was the private province of the Avot Beis Din is now being taught to and learned by ALL of Israel. This paradigm shift is hinted at by the dictum of the Anshei Knesses Hagdolo -Ha'amidu Talmidim Harbei. As a reaction to the Babylonian exile, the Beis Din was concerned that if a future exile were to occur, all of the Torah theory could be lost since it was concentrated into a small elite body. The solution was to disseminate Torah widely, in order to preserve the tradition and not to keep all of the Mesorah's proverbial eggs in one basket.

The Mishna Kol Yisroel serves to underline the paradigm shift. Avos is no longer the exclusive province of Avos Beit Din, but now becomes the possession of all of Israel. Also see the connection above to Tractate Sanhedrin.

PIRKA is the Term used for Shabbat Afternoon studies. PIRKEI Avot originally referred to the sereis of 5-6 Shabbat Afternoon Seessions that were instituted between Passover and Shavuot>

--

Kol Tuv- Best Regards,

Rabbi Richard Wolpoe

RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com

Originally Posted on Aishdas.org on Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:40:59 -0500

Schadenfreude IV - Mishlei & Avot

Schadenfreude - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude



«The Book of Proverbs mentions an emotion similar to that now described by the word schadenfreude:

"Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth: Lest the LORD see it, and it displease him, and he turn away his wrath from him." (Proverbs 24:17–18, King James Version).»

Avot 4:19 Quoting this verbatim

19. Samuel the Small would say: "When your enemy falls, do not rejoice; when he stumbles, let your heart not be gladdened. Lest G-d see, and it will displeasing in His eyes, and He will turn His wrath from him [to you]" (Proverbs 24:17-18).

Translation from
Chabad.Org-Avos

So far as I know it is the only Passuq quoted verbatim as an entire Mishnah

KT
RRW

Avot & the Great Paradigm Shift - The Questions

Note: Below is the first half {Namely the questions} of my outline of a lecture I gave in Teaneck on Motsoai Shabboat P. Vo'eiro {1999}:

Following Passover, there is a custom to recite one or more chapters from Masechet Avot. During my classes on Avos given during this time period over the years, several points evolved into a new understanding regarding the history of this most popular Masechta. My thoughts emerged from the following questions with which I began my presentations. I pose these questions again to give a chance for you to ponder the issues. In future postings I will present my ideas on the subjects touched upon in these questions.

Questions:

1. What does the name Avot mean? If it means "ancestors", how is it that the first quoted Ancestor is from Anshei Kenesset haGedolo and does not include Avrohom, Moshe, etc.? It is obvious from the text, that all ancestors prior to Anshei Kenesses haGedolo are virtually ignored.
2. What is meant by the Mishno stating: Moshe Kibel Torah Misinai when Hashem gave him the Torah? Furthermore, Bamidbor and Devorim came after Sinai? In other words what specific transmission took place At Sinai and NOT later?
3. The Mishneh states Moshe.. umesoro LeeHoshua. Didn't Moshe give the Torah to ALL of Yisroel? As it says: Vezot Hatoroh _ Lifnei Benei Yisroel? And Tzivo Lonu Moshe, Morosho Kehilat Yaakov? IOW: what "Torah" was given to Yehoshua that was NOT given to all of Yisroel.
4. What is the connection between Avot and Seder Nezikin?
5. How did it come about that Avot is learned publicly?
6. What is the significance of introducing each perek by the Mishno Col Yisroel Yesh Lohem_? What is the specific connection is there between this Mishnah from Sanhedrin and Avos. That is since it is NOT an intrinsic part of Avos, why is it added in the public learning of Avos?
7. Why is it call PIRKEI Avot?
   

KT
RRW

First Posted on the Aisdas.org Avodah list:
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 10:17:27 -0500

"They're not anti-Semites; they just dislike Chassidim"

Originally published 7/11/07, 10:01 PM, Eastern Daylight Time
An article, written by Barbara Kay, appeared reflecting on the present situation in Quebec regarding hostility showed to some Chassidic communities in the province in Canada's National Post.

She argues that the anti-Chassidic backlash that is now being experienced in parts of Quebec should not be labelled anti-Semitism. Ms. Kay, a self-described mainstream Jew,  would also not want Chassidim moving into her neighbourhood. It's not a Jewish thing,  its just that Chassidim have practices that make them less than ideal neighbours. She understands this anti-Chassidic backlash - although, surely - not condoning the violence that has accompanied it. It is only confusing to call it anti-Semitism.

Ms. Kay's words raise so many issues. Is her distinction a legitimate one? Does this not sound like those who maintain that anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism? Is there not a hint of an argument for assimilation in Ms Kay's words - Jews don't distinguish yourself through your practices? On the other hand, is there some legitimate mussar in Ms. Kay's words. Should the Chassidic community be more aware of their neighbours? Yet, whatever Ms. Kay's issues, can it justify her comments?

The Ntziv in his Introduction to Bereishit in HaEmek Davar, states that the Avot were called yashar, upright, because of how they related to the outside world. To meet the standards of Torah, one must uphold one's standards, maintaining one's principles in a world that may challenge them -- but in doing so one must still maintain a level of civility and caring to the population of the world, even, as the Ntziv states, the disgusting idolaters.

This is what the Avot did. For example, look at Avraham Avinu. He stood up to the king of Sodom and maintained his principles in the face of this evil, yet also had the caring and compassion to pray for Sodom.

This is Tisha b'Av's challenge. Sinat chinum emerges when a principled person maintains an improper hatred for those who challenge his or her principles.

Please read the National Post article. I look forward to your comments.