Ikarei Emunah #1

I thought maybe if we were trying a bit to review and learn the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim. Questions were raised from both sides as to the Rambam's endeavor of identifying Yud Gimmel Ikkarim. The Sefer Ikkarim says that he thinks the Rambam complicated his presentation and the Rambam should have said that there are three Ikkarim. The first five of what the Rambam enumerates as five distinct Ikkarim is basically Hakadosh Baruch Hu. The next four is basically Kabbalat HaTorah, Kabbalat Nevuah. And the last four is basically Sachar VeOnesh, Sachar VeOnesh. And everything else that the Rambam has there, the Sefer Ikkarim says should have been presented as details. And when you space out your learning be'iyun and you want to flesh things out, you want to present things more elaborately, so then you'll provide the details: Hakadosh Baruch Hu, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Kadmon, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Yachid U'Meyuchad, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Ein Lo Guf, etcetera. Me'idach gisa, the Rambam was, the question was raised against the Rambam: How can you limit it to Yud Gimmel Ikkarim? Is it anything else in the Torah it's optional to believe? If a person can, outside the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim, so a person's not obliged to believe what it says in the Torah? So kedarko, so Rav Chaim, nismala habayis orah, Rav Chaim explains as follows. Agav, the Sefer Ikkarim says very interestingly, he says, and I don't know if he says it as a raya lekach, but as a reflection to the fact that really we should think in terms of Gimmel Ikkarim, he says is from the Musaf Shemoneh Esrei Rosh Hashanah. That Rosh Hashanah, the three brachot of Malchuyot, Zichronot, and Shofrot correspond to the three Ikkarim that he identifies. That Malchuyot, Hakadosh Baruch Hu, Shofrot, אתה נגלית בענן כבודך על עם קדשך לדבר עמהם, Torah, and then Zichronot, a little bit in Shofrot also, and then Zichronot is Sachar VeOnesh, אתה זוכר מעשי עולם ופוקד כל יצורי קדם. Al kol panim, so what did the Rambam have in mind? So Rav Chaim explains as follows. Let's say a person doesn't know how many sons Noach had. Never learned the relevant pesukim in Chumash Bereishit, he doesn't know how many sons Noach had. So what's he missing? The answer is he's missing a yedi'ah in Torah. He's missing something in yedi'at HaTorah. Let's say Rachmana Litzlan a person doesn't know Rachmana Litzlan whether Hashem Echad or Hashem is not Echad. He doesn't know whether Rachmana Litzlan whether Hashem is a ba'al guf or not a ba'al guf. So then it's not pshat that he's just missing yedi'ot in yedi'at HaTorah. Then he's missing in emunah. It's not just a yedi'ah from yedi'at HaTorah, Rachmana Litzlan no one is saying that that's unimportant or that's insignificant, but lema'aseh he's missing a yedi'ah in yedi'at HaTorah. A person doesn't know again whether Hashem Echad or Rachmana Litzlan or something other than that, so that's not just missing a yedi'ah in yedi'at HaTorah. That person, his emunah is deficient. He's missing in emunah. So where is the line between that? So what things in the Torah if a person is ignorant of them, so do we say that he's lacking a yedi'ah in yedi'at HaTorah and where do we say Rachmana Litzlan that no, the person doesn't have. have proper adequate emunah because what he's missing is an emunah. So says Rav Chaim, that's what the Rambam's yud gimmel ikkarim represent. That's what the Rambam set out to teach us in the yud gimmel ikkarim. And that's the answer to the Sefer HaIkkarim. The answer to what the Sefer HaIkkarim said: why not, why didn't you simplify it for people and tell them that the three basic yesodos? Because then the answer would be the Rambam wouldn't have told us so if a person believes in Ribbono Shel Olam but is not sure whatever, any of the of the first five ikkarim. By spelling out the details, so the Rambam is telling you that each of these details that I'm spelling out for you in the yud gimmel ikkarim, again, don't belong only to the realm of yedias hatorah, they belong to the realm of what defines most basic emunah. Me'idach gisa, the question from the other, from from the what the Rambam on on on the other the other front was asked: what is it optional to believe in anything else in the Torah? So the answer Rav Chaim says avaday, if a person says rachmana litzlan, no, Noah only had two sons, he only had two sons, so then avaday he's a kofer because he's being kofer batorah. Because it says in the Torah that Noah had three sons and if he insists that Noah had two sons, he's being kofer batorah. That's if a person just doesn't know, doesn't know. He didn't he didn't learn the pesukim, he learned the pesukim and then he forgot. He just doesn't know. He's not he's not denying it. He just says, I I don't know. So then what he's lacking is yedias hatorah, he's not lacking in emunah. Now that's how Rav Chaim explains what what the yud gimmel ikkarim represent. The the shittah that they say about the Rambam for the nefashos of an apikoros, would that be something in a different category? We'll, you're right that logically it belongs to this discussion but we're going to hold off on that for the moment, but you're right, that is a very important follow-up question. Okay. And and that's why with Rav Chaim's answer, the Chasam Sofer has a teshuvah, a teshuvah in the Teshuvos Chasam Sofer. The Chasam Sofer was asked about the twelfth of yud gimmel ikkarim and he says, the truth is I don't understand why it's there in the list of yud gimmel ikkarim. He says zol zain, he said that there wasn't going to be a Melech HaMashiach, there wasn't going to be a Yemos HaMashiach. He said nothing else would change. He said we're we're we're we're here in galus. Zol zain that we didn't have a havtachah that Hakadosh Baruch Hu was going to take us back to Eretz Yisrael, that there was going to be a geulah asidah. Still avoda anachnu and and nothing would change. No no iota of the Torah would change. So I takeh don't understand why the Rambam singles it out. And then he says on the other hand obviously if a person doesn't believe in in Yemos HaMashiach, doesn't believe in the Melech HaMashiach, so לא בשאר נביאים בלבד הוא כופר kedis in Hilchos Melachim אלא במשה רבינו עצמו. So the answer to the Chasam Sofer is again that for the Rambam, ikkarim, the Rambam didn't mean, again based on Rav Chaim, the Rambam didn't mean foundations that uphold other things, meaning if you don't believe in nevuah then you can't have Torah and all of Torah all of Torah all of Torah can't can't stand, right? If you don't believe in in nevuah. If you believe in nevuah but rachmana litzlan you don't believe that the Torah we have was the Torah that was given to Moshe Rabbeinu ve'eilach. So those beliefs are takeh foundational beliefs. They're foundations on which you build the on which which support, which sustain Torah. And Rav Chaim says no, al pi Rav Chaim we see that's not, it's true that many of them are, but that's not what the Rambam set out to enumerate. What the Rambam set out to enumerate was not necessarily foundational beliefs but fundamental beliefs, essential beliefs, essential elements of belief. And that's what the Rambam says, ein hachi nami, I'm not telling you that anything else is built upon the foundation of belief in Yemos HaMashiach and Melech HaMashiach. But what I'm telling you says the Rambam is that belief in again Melech HaMashiach, Yemos HaMashiach is a fundamental fundamental belief, lav davka foundational but fundamental belief. What made him decide these? So he tells us, I don't know, maybe I don't have the lashon here in front of me, but he writes in the hakdama to perek chelek, he says, "I didn't do this, don't think I did this with hesech hadaas, don't think I did this kolach yad," you should know that a tremendous amount of thought went into this. And he says if you learn it once and you think you understand it, he says you're fooling yourself, and if you have any kashas, you have to go through it again and again and again. But maybe just to sort of turn your question around a little bit, why is it that something as fundamental as the Ikarim of the Torah? So why is it that we find it in the Rambam? Shouldn't it be in Chazal? Shouldn't it be a mishna somewhere in mishnayos? The answer is as follows. You need a little bit, as is always true, one needs to overcome our katnus hamoach from just what we're used to. We think of systematization as a tremendous maalah, a tremendous virtue, and it certainly is in a certain context. But let's take the following mashal. Let's say someone comes and asks what was, what is Reb Chaim's derech halimmud? So we try to explain to them a little bit. And if you try to explain, so then you're going to, you should organize your presentation, you should try to formulate what the defining essential characteristics are of that derech halimmud. Whether one has a tradition on this or not, it's very easy to recognize. Do you think Reb Chaim ever sat down with his sons and defined for them, formulated for them what his derech halimmud was? So how did he do? He sat and he learned. And it's also, it's also again equally true and equally self-evidently, compellingly true, and the Rav's father also never defined for him the defining essential qualities, characteristics of Reb Chaim's derech halimmud. He sat and he learned, and was absorbed. And let's take a mashal which is a little closer to the mark. Let's say you have a child grows up and grows up in the home, the mashal would be as follows: someone who was not raised in a home, in an environment of Torah mitzvos, and wants to know what Yahadus is about, and he's asking you about some of the core beliefs of Yahadus. Well, one of the core beliefs... So one of the things we want to explain is that a person's recognition of his dependence upon Hakadosh Baruch Hu. So we'll formulate that for the person and we'll again formulate it, write a sentence clearly, carefully. Yitachen? Oh, yitachen. If a parent is successful in living and thereby exposing his or her children to a life of Torah, that the parent will never formulate that hashkafa for the child. The child will see that the father never says anything without a be'ezras Hashem, without an im yirtzeh Hashem. He sees. He sees that if you ask the father what's something in the future, he'll say, "I hope so, I hope so, I don't know." It grates on the ear when people say what they're going to do without it's without a be'ezras Hashem, without an im yirtzeh Hashem. I'm going here and there for the summer. One hopes to go here and there for the summer. One can't say one is going, one can't say one is doing anything. To make a statement about what is now, you can't make a statement about what one hopes to what one can say what one hopes to be in a second from now. One can't say what one is going to do in a second from now. So the parent never ever formulates, never ever sits the child down and says, "Okay, we're going to talk about today one of the core hashkafos that a ben Torah should have." But he absorbs it, he absorbs it. So while it's true what we began with, that again in to the Western mind systematization again is a tremendous virtue, that's true. But the need to present something systematically as opposed to it just being known and absorbed and felt and the need to have to say it often represents a yeridas hadoros. A משל למה הדבר דומה, again initially in a very, very different type of context. Rambam in general, when you sort of think about his chiburim, so what the Rambam did was he systematized. That's what Mishneh Torah is also, right? It's a systematic presentation of Torah she'ba'al peh. That's what it is. So why did the Rambam write, why did he write Mishneh Torah? Ubizman hazeh writes the Rambam

תקפו צרות יתירות ודחקה שעה את הכל ואבדה חכמת חכמינו ובינת נבוננו נסתתרה. לפיכך אותן הפירושים והתשובות וההלכות שחיברו הגאונים וראו שהם דברים מבוארים נתקשו בימינו ואין מבין ענייניהם כראוי אלא מעטים במספר. ואין צריך לומר התלמוד עצמו הבבלי והירושלמי וספרא וספרי והתוספתא שהן צריכין דעת רחבה ונפש חכמה וזמן ארוך ואחר כך יודע מהם הדרך הנכוחה בדברים האסורים והמותרים ושאר דיני התורה היאך. ומפני זה ניערתי חוצני אני משה בר מיימון הספרדי ונשענתי על הצור ברוך הוא ובינותי בכל אלו הספרים וראיתי לחבר דברים המתבארים מכל אלו החיבורים.

Rambam tells us clearly that that the systematization, again here we're talking about be'ikar halacha, agam that obviously Sefer Hamada is much more than what we generally associate with that term, that the impetus for the systematization was a yeridas hadoros. Now this doesn't, this doesn't represent that I saw that all the pre- What when the Rambam describes why Rabbeinu HaKadosh did what he did, so the description is very much in the same terms, very, very similar. But also here in the Hakdama,

למה עשה רבינו הקדוש כך ולא הניח הדבר כמו שהיה לפי שראה שהתלמידים מתמעטים והולכים והצרות מתחדשות ובאות וממלכת הרשעה פושטת בעולם ומתגברת וישראל מתגלגלים והולכים לקצוות.

So again, even the what Rabbeinu HaKadosh did, again it wasn't an advancement, it was a response to impending decline, not decline that had taken effect yet, but impending decline. So kemiduma the Rambam would tell us why don't we have it in Chazal? For the same reason that you didn't need a chibbur like Mishneh Torah until a certain point in history, for the same reason that you didn't need a chibbur like Shisha Sidrei Mishnah until a certain point in history. When there's such a need, then aderaba aderaba this is where the world that we know, again because we're used to we not as בני אברהם יצחק ויעקב, we as Westerners are used to written culture. So ipcha mistabra. So in that context then aderaba to systematize and to organize is the highest, but the emes is that that happens, the need for that is in response to decline, is a solution to a problem. Keivan d'ata l'yadan so then you have to do it the way the Rambam did it, you have to do it with that clarity and that comprehensiveness. Would you say that there's a downside though to systematizing it? I mean I'm just hypothesizing, but would there be something which is lost in translation if you have to systematize it as opposed to if it's something which is... Possibly, possibly and certainly just again if you think of those meshalim about what's if you need to tell someone what the derech halimmud is then it means that he's standing on the outside. That's the way you talk to someone on the outside. If Rav Chaim would have needed after learning with his children from the youngest age if he would have needed to tell them what his derech halimmud is it would have been an ach and vey. So that's the way you... Everything though that the Rambam discusses in Halacha, it's all from Chazal, just it was systematized. Do we have the same thing for all the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim and Sefer HaMada such as like the idea of how metzius Hashem works, how Hashem echad is, how nevuas Moshe Rabbeinu was different? I mean do we have that in Chazal and then the Rambam systematized it? Because I don't know, do Chazal talk about this stuff the way the Rambam talks about it? The answer is again I don't know what to what extent means. Again do they talk about it? Do they say this, this, this, this? Do they say this, this, this, this? No, that's what we're talking about now, that there wasn't that need. But is it like scattered in different places? Everything is in Chazal. Rambam says everything is in Chazal. Everything is in Chazal as well. Again not systematized and not labeled the way the Rambam did because it wasn't necessary. Before I want to ask if we're speaking about the concept that emunah is not achieved, according to the Rambam emunah is not achieved if not through intense study of inyanei emunah, how does that work with this concept of ingrained things? For example with children, ingrained things in children that you don't have to ever sit down and systematically digest issues of emunah but maybe that's what they do, I'm not commenting on whether you need to do or what then, I'm commenting on whether... Again the, but but but again, it's just in terms of what what what what was going on in previous tekufos. We didn't talk about what Halacha l'maaseh is today, what it means to keep the Mishkan today; we weren't talking about that. Okay, in terms of... okay, I see, never mind. We live in a different tekufa, so what the mashal referred to in an earlier tekufa, what the Halacha l'maaseh is in another tekufa is different, which we haven't touched upon. Okay, so maybe we'll continue.