‘Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. Tintroduced the discussion by stating that for the last 10 years I had been working on producing an index to the Igros Moshe and the Mishna Berura. In the course of this work I had come across many issues concerning the nature of Halacha, Furthermore, I have found widespread ignorance concerning the nature of Halachic authority and wished to compile a sefer concerning the issues of authority that would clearly detail the sources. I had discussed the issues with a number of rabbonim some saying that it was better not to discuss these issues and others saying it was desirable. I had requested the meeting to clarify a number of issues that T was presently working on, The first issue was the relationship between the Arizal and halacha. In particular, there is a tshuva of Rav Moshe Feinstein’ concerning the question of saying Berchas HaShachar for someone who has stayed up the entire night. The questioner stated that since there is a rule of the Knesses HaGadolah? that where there is a Machlokes HaPoskim - the practice of the Kabbalah determines the Halacha, why don’t we follow the practice of the Arizal? To this Rav Moshe replies that Kabbala refers to sources such as the Zohar, The Arizal is not considered t0 be Kabbalah but is a major Talmid Chachom and his opinion can be disputed. I mentioned that Thad addressed this issue to Rav Yaakov Hille!’ * who indicated that in fact that the Halacha is according to the Arizal. Furthermore, he sro neva AMT WOT NN pon AVA ATAN nw" moa yma DY Ny na Wy a Aan pod THI Ava wan At pay NM APB PapaN MM MANA MNS ABV. YpPA ‘vy Dipn S3e poyan ‘noma DaTIMNA aND) ,DIPOINN MPI wenn. pad wy and or AM NOM AYapH nnn ax Bron 37 paw DRM IAW "y NMA yon AoaPTY ByppION 990 orm 1 >T_ Pan ‘Tow *DAML BMY yd WH AdAPA MITA AN VSP DIT PROT! ro Hw 790 IM» pyMpa wT PN 1 mn dram ‘nD JM PBw? aye PP ¥pNY maw PAV Nh ANNI NNT ITN MAY NTA PN WIN MPT NL NIV 4H) MND PA nat 99 nyporon *yoa 2tAIDA AND.” (an) AD "AINA nwa? aman ane yon mypOIM waMIA DY PPP IMM Ayapn yyw Nd BND Df Tvonnd wr PND nyap %ya ON IMD BrPOINM aya Pom DN PR Adapa T2Nw OPN D-pOIAN WMA TNA nat ann Tod w DIpoIN prea ana TaND PRY PD Pam nD) nap NIT DypVIAA pa Nanya wy DrpDa BM nap peima ph nary Yan maT 92." (n yo" jh) ype a1? of yin ma parm pe 3109 N>E eR oy (a0 a7, ’n gpy mA MTA AMT NAD , a pon) WA? NS indicates in one of his Tshuva’s* that we follow the Arizal even against the Shulchan Aruch. The Chida explains that this is because we know that if the Shulchan Aruch had heard the psak of the Arizal he would have surely changed his psak to conform to that of the Arizal. The Ben Ish Chai also indicates that we always follow the Arizal.° Rav Shapiro replied that he had not been aware of the psak of Reb Moshe. He did want to emphasize that the explanation I had from Rav ‘Yaakov Hillel was problematic, This approach of accepting the Arizal over the Shulchan Aruch was a new thing. Since Klall Yisroel had fully accepted the rulings of the Shulchan Aruch they could not simply be disregarded. In particular, if the Magen Avrahom does not mention a change in favor of the Arizal we are bound to follow the Shulchan Aruch and not the pr nan (@op qT 7 *3 pon n yare) Yon app m nND DM awn * ‘unyea 9 No MaMN Wop weap UAB PIN BoM WM rant ypO9 JM Mwy yey pond PAY PAD BA MOA mia pop po NoMPT rr TINA MIA pap papa 293 (8 MN Yh yDVD) qo Naa SA NEMA. YAP y..5pN xv (0 990 DY) Ty Iya NB Anse no qp%> pmaN MT wma amon veon nny 29% qo DNB a2 Mt 9M Ta poape qe SAT Yan wen vam» Sy nan maT TH 1a Sar Yn VrTp Aor NN NM AN HDA YP BYP JD MEAN oro) Pp aro Mapa Maw TA AnD Pr "ay Mov nN? MM NIA oD BNoN x7. Tor NAN) AIT MMA TD TPH LOND CT YIN 90 wNIAD DPA PH. INA MT wD SpNd MA Pox WH de my BHO pen 9 WNW GM 550) BeMn avna Nnmayr Anno poo NST NOM Thad NW pant m7 St shar on DIpo Dom AN Tad 9 Nm Tew TAN Sm pip poe “na voioN SA PNT AANA oN aI pron ‘na PINT NoWwNT BMT sNwA PY ST NOD “yy TaD nov gy *oran way MN Poa Ta Was DNA MIA Sr mwa aN WAIN nay Bw AMIN yor) TAMA NV M903 yoo eT pI ny DPT 9 TD poo yo!M Aa MoMA PTA tina wiper pee Da ap Wa vA man PMA AAT OF Sp vorrp Yor ano (> yore) oH Tn waEAW naywMA AD nosnn "a BMY Dnata Yan Sf YAN MTD DHT Da IN TT swan Jo wh» 9°39 mana pod Paya tome [Mp qnwa Mproon haa mBpo noosa wn rw Tan nYow ana Dow Ar 999 319 q0 Tyron ON WAT 2 MO qT" ToD) PIM ama Py ‘pyro Yaa and Jar OND VD AT V"D JOM) 9 TH TAN nm mee yapT AN FAA ONT MN 410 3° POO) ‘on ros Bh DN San jor oh In BY pon URW TATA NPAT Wn prea yrivn ‘ana prop noma nda a pW aa Opn on on gM JB PA BNR TT Bor YT To omer 19 NOD” (0°D Jor.) Dw PPI GIN 9M qT "DYDD Hy NN) 7D NAD ATMO BMDN NP -Tad AN ST HANA aT Td NW [Sr PAO} AAI BAT 9°39 TAB) ,9pAY MN pO TI prina on wave oN MAT wa 22.0" Ch yD ,T'n) oye a1 pty ana pom pe v0} Noe MN Oy 1‘Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. Arizal. Furthermore, he noted that it was not likely that everything the Arizal said was in fact from Giloi Eliyahu, He was in fact also a Talmid Chachom, Many of his minhagim were derived based on his earning rather than Ruach HaKodesh. This aspect of his teachings can be disputed by other Talmidei Chachomim. asked whether Rav Moshe’s ruling was that of the Gra according to the letter of the Bal HaTanya, I mentioned that I had asked Rav Zalman ‘Nechemya Goldberg who had said that they were unrelated. In addition I noted that Rabbi Eliach in his sefer Avi HaYeshivos’ claims that the letter of the Bal HaTanya © about the Gra is a forgery. Rabbi Eliach claims that anyone who was familiar with what Rav Chaim Voloshner'® had said in the FOUN NMA aR AY Ar Paya. (619-621 1) Maro aK T hon qem Nn xa NON TANDB..DyBINA yO MY mM *anraNn BN Dt ‘Tor 9p" GH Dp AT ("ven = ry) WMD ONA pun t Fon ma.21Nbo TdT MID MN MM BA ATW PR MDW ‘on aypaa Wd pronto NIN 1a..aMIM2 1MIY "INI wo nova mya 7p PN wma." (1797. Mopn) TH WN AMUN” ND ANIM WP NM Mvy? Yd MD RW DI’ Mvp dx woo UyPN ANNA TVA NaN. ANID NAC UNTO camara 3ra..oy9 Iya Nya "Bor.aMay Ym TOMA yeh ‘Bropn 19 wp? ayTPA Andy Nd Mam 3" aNyPw P"P? Wy Nye nmin anos TX DANI BByO wT WP Nd WR ‘pono 329 99 NVAY ,MDt 2p NTT UN NONN..nDWWD w> Mwy? mame2 AD.-D>ya Np»SD PaO DIY %3 WD VoNAD YAN PPT yoma nOM AMIN BWW wHD yow Nd Dyan Any oa TMA» DIA AAT BPA WI MPO YW PID NDA 7 MwIPe TDN \OTP Mand IN npTYy DOT Dede 2 WPA AD BMD DOT emma Yan 99 DNY yr 99 ra MOND AN Nw HM TIN Ar nny 3°X0...AYAN yap NO DA TN,-mwIph 92 DMNA NOX DD _ND.-OMBN TOP? ’O dy INDIAN TMTNAWIN a7 ‘pn ana Nd Dn ya9yy DeSIpMA ND ,ATAY 9 HNN NPI POND p>) PONT MEV Mm WyAI_yy Nm” .wrPsa D7 WIN on nd WMV. Ay PT MANA NIE poxny avn wy AP NNN YM IVR 9D VD 2.29 TON wR ON AY MND WAN DANN NAD NI pywrpN WTP ran> 9B wm T 3_mnan wava AN IT DPT TMD 9H NVM AND WF ANDY THN? TT DIN] SIVA TW WA ASMWA ATTN EIN ‘Data Tp Afndyor DAwyAA AN MN ANd D9 NIWLTOY apy _n UTP mxyan momma Mat rm (aoTpA) NMyasTT ABD * “np? pA 7A Hy MEN WN WN Wr, YA ws yw MN povea PT DMNA DN nay AM ANP? WR TINA VND 722 Jy a em DIED TVTTPY UTA AN NT NP TOR PTA mo mat omy ‘TPA DD dwAY Mora mam Non nea mnoNa YY dran WA wIP MMvD NPI yw yan wand yaya 20M An ND DMA a POMP PPIX MN A wTTPA NV mxy mY MI 7a ANY DPMP TWR OAD MMR TAP ANT IT bmn MD poy a apd Yn pA TwOKA Nd PUMA Hakdoma to Sefer DTzenusa could not say that the Gra did not fully accept the Arizal Rav Shapiro replied that the letter is clearly not a forgery and in fact does reflect the views of the Gra. This is consistent with what Rav Shapiro had said before ie.,that there are aspects of the Arizal which are open to disagreement because they were said as Chochma and not because of Giloi Eliyahu. The statement of Rav Chaim Voloshner was not a proof that the Gra would not disagree with the Arizal, He reiterated that the statement of Rav Moshe is consistent with the views of the Gra. I mentioned that the Ramchal indicates that Chazal had keys to understanding Agadata and Pesukim. In contrast the Leshem'* asserts that DAY "NY pre oy pny NMaNM 3pw nav Modan ‘Damp Non 79 ,2eTwAA MTD NAN ND ;NpHNw IMM Wan ano DAMA TPO 9y ma Dw" fo TMA UNIT WP on Nd NPV" -ON.OM om’ PN ATENAD DPD yay 73V "pd MNT 739 Wy DAMN -7OIAM wyOI BANAT 917 0” may wT a Pon MINA Boy wwTTT ANyMN 13V BD" (161) ON PRRAY AND? Hew? vp 93 annon pia _AraN_myna_9 Na NYO nD 93v ABV yaa. Ryn NNW AD 9979 DYN DPPH NIT Bo on DTT away wo] wey “TNs pa ArT Wwe 9 Nanin NVI 999 MeyDPI Aven VD WAY PIA Ow IPO “oy yey) "1p .DY AavwNA ANTM yp wan ToD 377 manna 3") now 9% nn xhAD Nay Sy NYDa "AND BLL nM ¥np At 9p an D2 oT Mwy) IHN IM 9 ny 112” x anne Yop pra pr AN prENAD MMO 7073. 2 i ” 2.01 9 maya nyo. TM dey ar P9p ma [WN mph pea bIo2 VOTE Mwpdy A goo MN WT PHA gor sano. 9 mm Fnp Sop mow wp 999 ayn MVPwD_ me NON NIN NOBY AY NTR 7D TOM PN ow a3 ‘apo pa 7271 Tw Ta po wo YT ND WT ND 7 Ww) 13) "yo TD YrrTGDS Y y ap 92 monn 9D |"y DYN MPM MMMA WA YT BANAT 99 I {0 Norm Dap naan apo wa TaN TeN ‘nH Bh DAD Nw mmm rove $93 im wavnD AM nM Sym ANN qn ping bm ave» 29 kn no HAeWw? a dN NTH MD 2av ‘Bnaom param emp Mp W> nan yn TN na Woy TAA 29 vio ) wy nA maT By Hy nT aaTa DMD pr om py PIN myon Sov An ama mao NM In (atywA TD NATO ‘nara hi a) 2 hana ving MN APTI AA DDD RANT Dn ptot qyoa nto sero NAN mor 99 manny BA on meme 220 PR APE mwa ws 220 inonp “ima nt 9p1 Mom mrvag) aad xn Yop BM AD 32-nvp ma yxy DADDN»D .DDIN App ny Donn pnt jp>_praryen ony op “on npw NIM wy wa Tynd TMD ‘ON AT Dy AAA MNOANPHaN MRD AT 53 9p 99 7 PH TAY PION 2Meeting between Rav Mos she Shapiro and Danie! Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. everything of Chazal including Halacha, Medrashim—| and Agadas must be accepted as the word of the living G-d because all that they say is with the Spirit of G-d who speaks through them. The Leshem severely criticizes the Maharetz Chajes who indicates (based on a Tshuva of the Ralbach), that Chazal have a bias to say good things about Tzadikim and bad things about Rashoim. [The Ramchal” says in fact that there is a general principle in Agada to say good things about ‘Tzadikim and to conceal what appears to be bad.] The Leshem argues that Chazal did not darshan based upon their desires but only according to the Spirit of G-d that speaks in them. Anyone who thinks himself wise enough to understand their truthfulness brings himself into great danger. This is because human intelligence can not possibly comprehend them fully and therefore he is in danger of entering into blasphemy. Leshem seems to say that there were no principles but that Chazal spoke according to what G-d wanted them to say. Does anyone have these or general principles today? Rav Shapiro answered simply that we don’t have these keys today though there are those that have fragments but not the actual keys. Consequently the nature of the keys of the Ramchal and the issue of the Leshem is not a simple subject. I noted that there were opinions among the Gaonim'*"‘and Rishonim’* '* that Medrashim could Pr S38 .Den MTN Ww Nd TaN? BNI Par? NY AWA 9D ‘ang mmnn 99-9? Nan 9D FY ANTDNA ‘ta nym yet Nona 3% 999) NIM Man nM Nonna nM ym v2w ‘dypypna jn PAD wD yra_NM Own yy Ton ANDNY nD 9991 NYP IMM ya ANY NNW 13v PEIN 9p nn." (apy py? nerpn - 9M MBN 99 BND) ym * 7 p99 w Draw amma ” 2m vr "wD med ANAM INv_M>o3_Nh Dy aM pn 99 WAN DPwTA sway nan wi ery nn ANN “eDONAN TD qT n° Msn wwNA 90 aan raw vata pM pro part ey NNTB 27 oR mm? neta MAY A Mat TaD 7p NIMY BAD wn TN ATMA 2a noma Thna pon yoa weEOD MANA Soom NPD ND ad wD TAP AT vENpD yA vIn 2D J> NV A ATM ‘nognm mava wy Nn MeN BV vio Mae DAN 1B BN Dorm? Ayow 9 UND fA 99:9 IMT THOM weTOM BPX vOR MH NMTON [aD BVA MOA ToD TIT >oyorra) MYBNA yo primp pw TM TN 9p yIOTD YM Be aera nny nen AVIVA NooD PW AB MBB TOR PIT $a wand yhwer maa ma Nw MAA DAMN TN yA MOTD 287 BN NA TONT PBN YU TAD NON ND 1M 1B PRY 99 dap) WITT NoON MUTT Tr ND BOM T POW ANI Ip $y pan ona bapa spon jm 99vn yp pinoy np pnp ps main nyBN pa won AM NA 37 SM ANY nom nn_M3nIn_FBAY OWA” WOR? BMn uNY nna NOD ADB Nv no 2% ‘Wan? KW: prap axv_TH 3 Fak TN 10 73.89 WIT 12 WY 999 79 AD ww yRY_BNIID AVP AVIA VoRY eID IK PH BW TindNI BMD 599 PONY Im PR TMdMA yap) NW nD D3 nN ‘m3 7 23. DPavD WN PAIN? DN m1 on no 5p panto oN vena Tima NIP 37 ONT (or Mana) MP PPA ara *t (69-60 91 nvan %1 pom) Dan aM cnoyma manon na pa vr won AD INA 1 SNVN vO SaeP0M -nppny yn nadMIA TaN BNW Pond OMYD BNE yaN 3" opm 2 yaps NIV noo A TMD “Mada Yar MO in 999 79 DmSp 7NOOD PM YAN? TH IMD» No BN, 12: MINN yond py Aw “TNpNa PPh 99 DAN ADR ON PDT PR. smibbna yap2 Nd wrIn 12 wy NY JP MVP wh wr TID San anoon pre BMaTs Mwy wae VONY PANO NN ps oA Non nom yon DN TD 999 POMw UR YR BPN yapa Nw no 33 PPDOD UN PR WY DAN IMN PBDI PONT pmo Sx no BUN WT TWN Wad WON MT eT Mow DAW nana nt aT PAY mwa BMD A YPY THD AMM Day Nami nt 92x) oN DMV? wind pA DATMONM BABMA (oe) nan mows ammayt Nop prea B-MaIN ww>va" Gapy” p> tpn) nsw 1% pram Brrr pps ansv aD YAM Noy NAD DAN vt xo TH jw {nD w (= DIT Sy mm DTN onan ya DAp|D NAT aN wa MN MAT MwIN Ta pwDa pr brava nga a m9 fan 7a nan TTD wa} ya wn na NEO) DOP? PANN yam ‘on @ 497399 BM a Ty NoMa THT YAW MOA MN ADHD’ phy mano no Wfapn MAow_OL AwyD Ty Hw META yo 2m pan ON me AN IND PwOITA YO DAVOAD owe Dey [rosa ya Nava DAM WPM FT yew BN TY iene maa 9p DMA NPM ‘sa wD DDN NIT NT NAD uD PMY DYN TM Dw TWONA Poyn gar myo PD 229 BYDL MwyD BPN IMR 93) DNB My VOIA FIMO “TH man Mbyo WM OTN NI WY 1D PRO DARD Pan prey YD iano PMY DMM BAIT DAY IN Ta 7a AN 9w weyna pre 12_wn G Dy aya 12 DyDNDA HON nhwn 7 on_wr pom fo NST Vi | UMw TDM DIAN TTT MN wD Ip rN ‘oa v'n9 Doyo Hind} NAY THN ANPOW nD YTON Ma WND NIT yon Dope aM ANA NOT AE Sy MoM 91 MOD BT TM nay vty wre ve DA wR BND BNET 737 MN DTA Pap a2 npER_waNn we M pina NN ABN pon Me ws "PD NEP pO ya Now wr Bry ‘wry 1nD_wn v9 AND yp NNO IND vr I DreTTBA yn ‘peponn_1o_MA_wATY AD naw 3 2 5 110. ND WAN a0 om map)_provna yM_BIT]ON MPI Me PISA BN NPD YY aA Da 2 erry_mVn? NDA wT Mw psp 99a WPOA AR Thorns YON Dry wD re 113 {gon nia Dp) poMp UMP TIN DB %99 DIN MPA so mapoA win’ MR APND WIT OTT MV BD 7 3 x‘Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn ‘Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. be disregarded. For example Rav Shmuel HaNagid 1 states that “Agada are all the statements in the Gemora that are not concerned with Mitzvos. You are only to lear from them if they make sense, Those statements of Halacha which Chazal indicate are from Moshe Rabeinu which he received from G-d can not be modified, however Chazal’s explanations of verses were done according to whatever each one thought was correct. Therefore whatever makes sense of these explanations you should study and the rest do not rely on.” However, the Michtav M’Eliyahu’* understands these amin N39 ANIA PApa WrTIN WIN? TP VY Ad ym 91 NdD fra NyM) DopA AoM naw wINy AMAA THyY amd aon cr yaa Mt Tndna NON Dp OMMN Dre BBV TON ap 337] NAV 937) WITT A WoR MwTTDA 2 many NOM AP ANN Tp wT rN TDN ‘AMAT 9p AayoM TT na wr row Dr ya WIN NPA ‘nmp21 BNI] DYyMPABY YPN NINA DAPI TN IMA Hp typ Denon Mat oy Dnkadn MAD 9p TAI MoD cnedn_pv2 337 NY ANI DIAM NIT bp 3X ANY TIM 7 732 70 2 ann m>vTy? PIX MM Mow apr wT WA yA IM ANN wT ‘ThwTyAR Noon PA NOX AD oD TOW MaVT IywTP Ty ima NBO" NBA FPN TH 724 TMI -AOTPAA MMA NINN 29d moana po av 1a PRO Son nN Wan pM 797 BAT HDD nwa POND day mW PN NIN FAT PAK FO "PMD NON BV Dap) UIT NBR MrT PD "kD VDI 2mm PVN MND Dye av VY Y NMS IM amp moa NBO Aan nb _NB Ira ner TAN mi DN 2 VDD PNY NVTT_ OTD? NNT NPT WTI SP PaPVD PAT [aN Myra 5 ayn aN "NSD [> -ANN DpH noon Dea 9 92 sn Mam" (ruNM nM) ‘TaN Iw? “ToeNA N20 7 2) sran won wt = mMAp nn NW PAY DW dp TOdNa RIV np 990 mov? wr apm op Ab np Now MDD Tne van bape mp way eo 9a we aD Paya noon SM THD ywrev mn aN tBD YUP Nr wD OM “p YN AMAA DD). INYTA AN W AD) y> TW ND 799 TNN 92 DrPIDST NT BYwVWAN YD yA gy Ny -DIP?y p2DID weaea Gham 7a..." 653/91) wND ann * DN PR GPR Nb TON ABN MaTaT Na BeVED wen mM anv 73 7 BN jab Nay ao BMN Nay OM an DNDN AwyNd ANY NINN YAN TINA NINO? ‘pend mea Row miaNN SON BI NO Ma BN AMON AUPE vam PR (unten mIop 9m) > MND AVN yor 99 M77 ‘nm nme pase avy ny MaIMY 7p ,Ra Pon? BrPAND (a9 Man? R9 wNITTO °7V Jor 991 ANA AYO NTN TH TD {2 oye yan ga popnna nym YA Tp ON Ninn TONER “ON ‘pan DA nT Bae IAN AMMNND NYY INK DOD UN TID ‘bmx urn wown DMPIA pwr * AD MRbS wy PRI Anse TOR wR A Tn. Dw? W NIWwd "any DIMI PR WweN rma 9p NON i MTOM “ww oN MMM 99 HABA ‘nemw Tay? vb TORN RD NOD ON GAY DAD PAO DD rp nn yoNoA wrPTD M90 BN ZB NO EN BAD Ip wa statements to mean that since the explanations of Chazal are the foundation to understanding Torah, they can not be discarded. If, however, a particular drasha doesn’t make sense it should be put aside until you reach the level to understand it. He asserted that it is obvious that the Michtav MeBliyahu’s understanding of these statements is correct and that when we don’t understand Chazal that they are not to be discarded. This brought up the subject of Ailu VeAilu. It seems that there are three major shitos. On the one hand you find the Chinuch’? explains the gemora (Bava Metzia 4b) concerning Rabbi Eliezer |-and why G-d said “my children have vanquished me”. He says that the truth was with Rabbi Eliezer as the Bas Kol testified and not with his opponents. But since the majority did not comprehend the truth they were forced to follow the Mitzva of majority rule. Therefore when truth is obscured it is as if the source of truth - G-d - has been vanquished. A similar opinion is expressed by Rav Moshe Feinstein” (Though he seems to contradict himself ym x>w 77 9p WoO Te PD BAY Ina DYMO wD NATO fe Ty) snmw> wn MINA RDA MND NBM wrPS PHP {ond we DvETD PIM WTI AY TH pA er TaN TWN AMT ‘> YMA IMA pas BI 12 VERON Yo NW LMA wD hyn ney 90 Ma AWN ATT nwyN.. ww MED TN wD” aN? YO 9 HMBWN DY TAK 4709 BAA] MON 99 nmBNON 7) oN AMO NMA AM TNA rTPA PAP AD A) DN AD yaa nw 9p Mn TA VPA ND WAV wa AMD IBN TPN Joxw_ pm oa Any mond AMA ‘MMM TA DSM oro San ANAT wed pnw mond abn naa mn py ayn ony WMD AM NPI’ AT PY 9p wT aT apron Syp_nan_naa Wye vei AMAA wana man Sp nab) na Ata HN MONA TN 79 9p qty anra> np ma an AON EE MAY NM INT MOP TA NI ann nn 299 ume mma yapA pM yo AA nwaM, $_TMA_ AMAA WAL IN WM AW NOX MOND Pa DAD 2319 NBM 3 pny “INN. 7DY> ha nga roo vp na Bm_.OA NO own ne Ara [na MN NT penne 9959 19 BX ,Boy> ann A yw) EMAL’ AINA __ABAN_WAMY_wIMay> MAM py|a_mMny “3 2 oon amnion PROT MAw..£ C8 BN TN AEA) MOD AMBK mara mien yan pawn PA Ndw 4k nVMAD BATIAKA AMT Nom 999 [FT MMPDR wI"D ND HIN BIND wT wD ‘mA MA yen mma Np woRs Taa MATIAY MBN aN NYA 1999 MOAT ere im pww.1 AW NA ART wx Taya MD 99 PPO DR_qR [> NNN? ayn MeAY ROA kA PTA po NTA YODA) AD 3 WIAA p wR NOW x59 WH Oya x 32 wa po maTat 4‘Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. later"). He also asserts that any Halachic position arrived at by a Talmid Chachom working to the best of his ability is included in Ailu V’Ailu - even if he is absolutely wrong ‘in his conclusions. Here he also says that the Halacha is not always in accord with Emes but itis still Halacha, On the other hand is the view that there are multiple Truths. The view of multiple truths says everything is true the debate is only as to which perspective it is best to look at the situation, An expression of this view of multiple ‘Truths is found in the Yam Shel Shlomo™ He says x am apne an InN Vp prep VN >" qT NAWT NAD mI} ABT ANDIM wr". para nay 97a ow AAPA BA? yAN NAD PEAy Ynw YN AN 9x Yn MN Sy 19 NP nda dy mya Ay!IN MID Maw ypmaa n>po avn NIM NAD NYY oO NITE NAN NONTW zapo_Bn_nyNN?_amnow NAIA? NBNAT XBPR NVA nom ‘pop NBN 9301 131 799 anpam_pwrexa_wma_MpIn 29_ Psp InN 12M pr 93v nD AN Tom aw jap na 77 302 1DW7D3 fawn Wap mM DyoM NY IP NaF Ap po 337 WY NBON mya_a 3 134 ‘Tnywa gH MON THN ay YD TWN PID WA AT DVM DAN. coma nay Panwa WIed PI PWPNA NIN wa MIT PUR Nd NTA Pr May ABW NY DN PwAA Ta IY pond pr? pra 388 Xp nyTA DWNT MAT MMP pA BANANA Pr pre sym Tash 9) n’D Na Mra NNW Pao nos eyed imn2 MvyyD TAY PN NOX Nay OA PMN Nay MWD oN NY NAT TaD ava P.O AM Mon? TAMA wrND nam 99 7a) yp many Mon pR MAW wn Ty BAP Man ayonw> qe PH AMA Nara 999 aw wR DYE NANT NANT e ymaa> Nin np NON DITA 92 TON Nd NM YY TaD OD nay maT 2 AMw ayn Oxya Mpp ya IMD mpMv NA pnoPe PMN TWD 4X yMD2 DA yA DN DMN DPN nat bn yo 9 maT mw No WON NM MND OO BrPNAD ym we ANY IMM pro) wT IMB. DIN BA Td DN nm> nm nfa9 AINT yp Man YN DP MAN MyaN nM JOunT nt yo nM wnt Dap MAND Mvp? v» 9 nM MAP? sad nyp vam yam.” (NOP NADY ADTPA) MDyY 9w OY? paw | AME v'D TT Wap wD IAA YA Mov! F3v 299 521 27 Bn Ow Awe AYA Ym .DonyaD pp AAW O-oyD ANN IMR 99 Aya MPSA Myr yA MoI MN DN Tw? according to Kabbalah, there were forty-nine conduits of Torah at Mt. Sinai Every Neshama received the Torah through the conduit which was appropriate for its level of understanding. Therefore ‘one could legitimately perceive something as Tahor while a second would perceive the same thing as Tamei and a third would arrive at a position equally distant from the other two - but all these positions are True, Therefore when Chazal argue their positions are all True and surely when they agree that position is True. The Ritva™ (Eruvin 13b) {quotes from the from the Rabbonim of France, that the Torah was given with 49 aspects for Issur and 49 aspects for Hetair for each Halacha. G-d explained to Moshe that it was given over to the sages in each generation to decide which way they wanted the Halacha, There seems to be a third position which posits the existence of relative truth which is nonetheless ‘Truth. This is expressed by Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky.* He explains that before Man was ww nnpry any Wy mow n> 799 apr aMwT 799 YO TIRE TT ap) po eM annoy yw MN’ 7D aD pM an a gpk 99M) MPN 7o PM MPSOND wwrOM BOY PNM Dope mat D9 DenoAn Dann Mary nwo DMA ION A yoxya yan 3M aM DMEM mM 5p cDNA ON DON soap ome TWN 999 YON Ta TAIN %9D AND Nd nod mwD fo mY ASW ba O"D NAA TN} THN DBE AMM POD Ur 12 ‘ABD yan Na TM nt $9. DR MATT THN voy groin mov praynd 2x 99 anoDIn 9p ABDI YA -ABUIA MY Woy NIM Ap TIN {p nmeN noDINA MTA PEI DNV MpIED yo N7w “TwON Onn HN TATA Syd OMNI DAN qND MY NOVI yAMD Amann mpoop 99 NIN yMnd MWD yo NEMA DAL pM “yoo 34) WAN A MAD DIN 5Y TP NAM’ ND 7p NAAN HD ‘ypa en 99 Than TH 99-77 93a HMA DANY AAMT Na DN DepM To 19 ANT nD %99 ONDA Nowy’ poM> 1930 29 wee» M09 spon DIpPAt MAT WAN WN be I AM a pany) aetxon ? 2B DPA MAT DIP’ IY WAN TAN A Now aT THD den Mn bap? wna’ wD Yoyv9"9 FAM HPAD NN TO AN xvi jpn wn TD WN DID vtD TaN aT 99 4y 1 Am TM Yazw dew saoNy HOD A NNW IBAY AT 9D MEIPAD {ho nyo w» MBNN TEN wma 999 won Pan DMD MANIA TIA om won PR MMOITnIME GOPR 47 NAD BAAD APH now * DipT) Deo Bae maT 3"9yN DMNA Pa npn MAND 5‘Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Bidensohn ‘Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. created, the attribute of Truth complained that since Man was full of lies, he shouldn’t be created. G-d threw Truth to the ground and then created man. Ray Yaakov explains that this act was the creation of relative Truth in addition to the Absolute Truth that had existed before. This relative Truth is truth according to the person’s comprehension. Rav Shapiro answered that the Chinuch and Rav Moshe were dealing with the issue of Halacha LeMaaseh where something has to be done. Only one position can be selected as the final halacha. That does not change the fact that the other positions are also true and that they are true from some perspective. (I noted that that was the position expressed in the Michtay MeElliyahu”™ which asserts that the dispute is only how to act but not in the Halacha itself since both sides are true - Ailu V’Ailu. (A similar explanation is given by Rav Moshe Feinstein®) The debate between Shammai and Hillel JRE npn me Pron ‘nw [kta Va] 9% wr TD a¢p mM TA Ino AMON NON :*NN"A MITT Mw BBY wInM TY BM s99 ney AIMY NI yan? MAA ANA’ [IoT WOM ammny 13) MN 91 AN D'owAB NoNN orn IN ZN amzom wa77a 999 ona (19) movaa "maa eA BASNwY AN" 353 477 OND aN > ‘prim popes 9aN AATwH *yr> Now WAIN N9 Tr DVAIN I Sopa7 DrpD ONT aN “TT DO) TMD DYE ANN ND PP - Pw_Nd NON TM../oNMW DIM OM Ops DM navn 2oy> pe nvpod yw Pr Mra wn non 772 {R118 9 DIDND .npND pro NO MYA DIN DyyA DAN BAWw)_gIMe DvD Wy —_MPTA MoT .wrPD .DMN ‘PIN MIT ap nDbA MAN Nad PAY PA TI NBY TA NPM. AOL paw rm mr mama nabny van my N29 PMY *D >ADD ‘rao MEN AN MAN TAN 997 soMPINA TM on "PN maT in maya wma ma pion “rw NY yap aK *yTL TM mpMa yNBA NIM jgen jyngrnaa nN 92 NON DroaDA BT DVwA nD NA TNANIM 2m VT Wo Mya NANDA TNA "Pr .nwyD? pon roma “gem TY yA = MPINMA yD MyM THAN. rR ta prima’ gn MaxD Aor 72 TwD - Tay nVS¢n TaN ebay. NID TAY VAY ANB TAD AMR MIND a NY aMna MT WT HEY NTT FMD TMD IY NINA AANDVT fr pom whew Nimv waNA MAE wre .wnMAA TA MWA “ata 2rvA 9p nUPNY not ax 1H 2 TY pon nD nraN he * sho nym np nay pou 37 nN" 7 7 Ma “ona BAL MD 2°8) yp nah TON PIN o*9y T1399 NPM MAS NI mY OID =P a= no pa Mp n3t a * 9b not dao soew 2% Toe Mn D3 NAD Myh XY VPA NO. x p91 BYN DPR AIT nya Pa Awa ps ws aT pa PM Aaa wo pan BAT RENN DANN 993. TMA yo NAD ToYNY Ip nan ADA no wwe aT aN! NEN was whether Halacha should be based on Midos HaDin. There was no debate as to what the Midos HaDin Halacha was only whether it should be used. At the present time, following the directive of the Bas Kol, we reject the approach of Midos HaDin but in the future, we will adopt Beis Shammai’s viewpoint. Thus it is a discussion of the correct implementation of Truth rather than who is right and who is wrong, I tried arguing that the language of the Chinuch and Rav Moshe, however, seem to imply that only one position was Emes and that by contrast the others were False and that this is in fact what it means “that My children have vanquished me”. Rav Shapiro replied: Chas VeShalom! and reiterated that what is practical halacha and whether something is True are two different issues. Tasked about the Maharal” discussion of the Gemora (Chagiga 3b) which states that in the ‘Tow7e9 AN NON IN W ym TN PID UN nt DyeN DIT pen nat Pn Ta Ww. PI PVM AIT Va TT PT 18? NTA “Pr Mat waDY kd DN PwANA THD 9 pIIM? AD 37a 288 qosy nyTD DavENA AIT mM pow waNMNA yA Pho tom TaN P99 AMD NYO MPA NANT PsA MSM Teya) ima Meyya IMB PH MBX AIT BAP NAT IED TON NY NAT Mad avs PA .OM NNN MoNY mana wr prim ¥2 woo dap many Mon PX MA BN Ty Oa Dp man 2Ponw. 48 PA AM MATa 999 VE AWN DByD NAVTT NIMT yo ma5 NiMw AD Nox DATTA 99 WH NY NA TO TMI MB nav nat m2 Aw “NDA ByA DID 99a IMD T-A’ NM paepe MMA WT AX Imo oA YA BN DN DPN aT bn yer? 9 maT DIO ND TN Ndr IID IOS? BYP yay aM nto MD prosy wr imBD BNA BAI THAI MBN Amma fm n> ABINT Mp man YAN IAP MAN NYDN nM SOIT At pron NID wnt Ap Nand Mvp? w» 199 NII MAP? ‘pron at (2) rant pea Co" qT ‘NINA nowan wea) dno * DY. AVN YM MAX *ya DIP MADDON mn anor No oMpIynD. nn pyran ppg TAI wis WI woe PMNS BAMA BATT PR ANN TR TW TOND 4, pat ate nA nS Ao MAD BANAT | Mw? 22.9 wns) wh DN 12 MNT NA Wwe DMN WwN beyem bh 9 woosya bmn Aa nova pond wa AM TON mow Ty WadNy MIN MN Ww kA AM JNA AN Spon men TT OTM Me PrwMD DMN MAT pI MwA (Da sire DIN 22 rap BMpy DMN Ma IM! MONON M7 AHN nt 5p (.) yona ben WAT nN wn PRY DTN a MA MTwMD wT Noo 092 ,DYyOPOD DM AMMA NAT AN YodTwD AMT ND MTOR S70 9oD DAY NPTT nt yowea Mn DemAD TN Mat PAW TORN Joa TeNPY -TwONT ,prapA DV Pr 99VN 19 TMD POON Dron AIT wp 79 ONT JP Dd -PapN OMIM Wn Jp Da IMR 1a Ym nk Pay7 IMD) TUN TWND ,IIPRy mpHN DI>oPIon jy. AMON BH MIA MAT DWN NSP OTNY waIo 19 6 pros OMI rma _AvyAy! QN DYyA MDX maT DwMeeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. arguments between Chazal both sides are true. When concemed, however, with Halacha only one 9) pnw omy -AN May DN yp ;prnan torpDa yipn TwoBAY “Bmpon UMe pry pee Bry ba ome ano Pom wn comme ‘biwa nN DAMM TMM MaTw THNNA ND Tt DIT () jovorwD ONY wy NMBVND BAW wwA .DMN wT) AWD rina ox soo BMT AWTY YN JAM oA Be Bnw *rOn (.) Dan) DpTP on ‘by wrmana YT Ar WwoH_nE 19 9 MOTOR wpa TDN phn PAV np 2 DAWA pion MY Now TwOR no TM 7 ON aT 27 99 9 .n}Iwa noma 7.19 7 RPV WON Me AOD AT 33 19 Pm Ndv wwoX my AMY TaTM_BN PMB 7 MM IN Pe 7waN At 23va WIPIIND OTL Aay ANNI 9v AB APT {ao Tm 99 PA RaW wo 23 oh moron *ya op TT 9 aeow pon a9 NNN MMA Japp *0 BYIVI DPN BAY ANY ANNA POW MsON DAWrY my 92 Dna wr DIOONND DA TEND jm DeoNND OA 2am NW My NBO TAK AT MA TNA J (.) MPAA “THN 737 99 TOP THR TRH 24 NN Tz 13_.VN_ MH Tr {some np 999 nx maa yaA AMV? Wer IDO InN THAD nm nro 9°27ON nr yoy HNN NBO yoMEM 82 tm) TENA Anh? jBreyaA YR 790 BA DAY TORT AM PTA WAY YI 9% NIN 7TNI9 WAY AD TOrVyNA 99 PT 9D gonna pst 1a ww agNAN Boy xem UBD oF 2 myma.1 v 131 998 At 3 Nagra 4) wr ames nw 939 °B oywA wD AMA ID? AT aMOOM NoOOA ano 72 vr aT” Wa NIM Yon MN Na MOM oxy 99a TMI 1B. aDy IN MANY pov Pm nvPD? NYA PIP? PTA 309 NEP BY AND Ni ‘ NY WED AMO! BAY MMA DMPA (AW WM AA avo Navn on npiono thin yhoo pen AVS VA yD OVID nrg mimaa anv Bw DDI IPSN MAT HA DN INP na ‘Dyphe Mav wen oR wR AF Sy OW MAMA WN (A) AD Com 2m pope nat 29 Anan Dw one 3at_ Am payp mp BNV-n9B awM In*s> MPM TN ND NE DISMN YAY 9 WN Wo wa yw BVA DAT ‘no pahyp Bam Dsbp3n A py fa my Hyon Yad pw Ayn eWay ND] VVA_ MNS _MAMAY TWIN_ININ BA nnd mowen AT NNN ATM 9 MINNA Ine MyM ayMi_.vIvs 99” NYA ASMNN 9 Ay we DA yore: 1w? abya NIN WAI 23 WY 273 pan TwN> ADM me NIA WH OVA F9vn INN TON piven Soon $8 prannn way 19 nT n3! 9 snDond_AMNT AID NM PaAyM Mn 7 TH ym_y ren de INA NIM Twn JD To WY TM THM NM ADIN ‘poy (2) MN ME TT WANA TAN AIA EAT NIP. PIA srImd {Pan WwxD IND wy oR 2737 yom Yok yo ta wa ABIONDA NOVI *> VT Tw Dp {AMA NpINDS Ayn wn oN .DYN wYPIN ‘ea WHDY_999 TN Np NO 1a) 32 DN OpoN NIT DAW Maw Tp BAP NpYoND Ayn AT BP 1B DAT? WI" NNT PAD AyyND WAND pYono BAI AA MNT DAT ON NINA API ONIN aT ay we npABA WA PADI MIT OAD TN [DXDT ]M_npyonn IN wmMA 99 Tan_oen Dy 2 YR) Bn BPN May TONY TwdA INN pIpBA Ty INN srawnd pip factor is the prime one. It is only in the original argument - that of Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai - |_were both sides equally correct. which says that the term Ailu V’Ailu only applies to the original dispute of Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Rav Shapiro replied: that the Maharal is a unique Shitah which is a chidush. I mentioned that I had difficulty with the statement of the Michtav M’Eliyahu* who was asked why do Rishonim often ignore the words of Chazal in giving explanations. If in fact Chazal are the correct explanations of the verses it is difficult to understand why they should not be quoted. The Michtav M’Eliyahu answers that these explanations were given to confused people. As long as the explanations don’t contradict Chazal they are legitimate. I said that since Chazal constitute Emes rent pond on yx mann (5" 355 97% pon anyon anon > pay 9° 99 BNMETT par wr Yn9 NIV wr pa DION pmowin na anno nt_BYea) wap owe 2'm_1w9_ywND vvea MMR —TT_BAY WM? InWA Tva_x2 ND) on 9 7V_DreYS DRY BTA raya 2nra_ngynh_no ww pyr paw Dea o> or amen wm won ey MNT Typ 9D aon AN Tt 1 % 2 Tox THA WM BOR yo? wee 99 2 5 ENE 7 p xD? aw jamm2 19 men vos Taw Pan wn ans mo To inepaw mya apy 9 DIT pant DDWAV "IN DID 990 sy “A joa UWI) Toy ‘nop .TO9nn a> WIV 99 DPD! ” "2 mw 9°at PaMA WN yrs Ma At TAB %9 99% yawn Dap ‘hoa Tn Aro % yovD “MMVN .oMYwNAA Ta SM Sy wr aoxn moo > MAN" Th wnoTpAAl aeMIM NPA pra answ pmonm Woven BNsoA TAX AVN Maw nap 1 TWIN aga mVry MANA HMA NewTA MD *wIAN IMA TINA WT Ne DIpaN BAyT %99 aMn MN Dna 1M wNava nono Nov pina wand IN Mp2 NOV INNA AND WIA 9p DNyT MA nov yinap ne TE Hen MN TD yan p> Doan wan sma N7W NIT Ta PATNA NIT 9 9p DAW YTD THN Lys pawEI P1 NON MVMWID YON MPD PX sMNMOWA 11M DIVA mama nprgnna yw 99 9 DX APA ARM ANT %9 9 PN ‘neipa 232 M1 xa MPM NP Wa DV Bw? NpronD ITN fm amnsna Fn “P NOS AT TY DMD MA MAD AD» AM anv mewn a THs bn NL NST NT APN WAV pagan mMANIW MARYA MINI AMA pI AD Aa APIA fr vob aA nDNA» Sy mapa pr NdI ans ‘nyo nw minpwa non na NPT 79> TwaNY wr pny oN Da ON ‘ny vn) vavan dena Aya ANDD ww ‘nya 29 99 4p TAN 2 Yon DyIya My TwaND AVyyIMA wa AG BNAT ox 2enon TM APA | BMI’ MMP? wwyAN NA Pond MNT on aMeeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. why is it legitimate to give an explanation which is not that of Chazal. I had found a related issue in the Leshem. The Leshem notes most statements in Chazal concerning Matan Torah indicate that Moshe Rabbeim received everything. There is one exception found in Medrash Rabbah. There Rabbi ‘Abahu says that it was simply too difficult to teach the entire Torah in 40 days so therefore Moshe Rabbeinu only received the general principles and not the details. The Leshem says that this answer was given because of the Minim, That Rabbi Abahu lived in Caesarea where he had to deal with Minim and that is why he said what he did. To me this seemed to be deception and not consistent with Chazal being Emes? Rabbi Shapiro said that all the words of Chazal are Emes. The explanations of the Rishonim are also legitimate. He felt that there was a lack of precision in the Michtav M’Eliyahu on this, It is not whether the Meforshim are more or less Emes than Chazal. They are both expressing Emes but they are presenting it from various perspectives. When dealing with those who don’t except the legitimacy of Chazal - the Truth needs to be presented differently. Namely it is presented from theire perspective, Therefore the details ie, the Oral Law ‘was not presented from their point of view. This is not a lie but the Truth from the point of view of someone who can’t see it any other way. I said is that might be the answer to the problem of the Ramban’s apparent rejection of the necessary validity of Agadata. [The Ramban’” was forced by the king to have a debate with an apostate concerning Christianity. A focal point of the debate was a Medrash” that states that Moshiach was born when the Beis HaMikdash was destroyed. The apostate presented this as proof that Moshiach has already come, The Ramban replied that he did not believe “'this Medrash but said that nevertheless it = onye 7 naan me 38 78 To Ya van2a) Mann 720 * @xt90n pre 21 TO ‘m 7ay MIN AM (era) NIM ATID ANAM (BN) may AM * Pe nw pI AV EMA AV REMMI TBM MD [non yor mp. ama ve wenn ‘Nw JeTp|N MA FNMAY aparmen Pom ZDpAP NON PA TON MAN NOH TH TON = pnye > WISN ION ANP maT? MAT WT NM MAA DN yo PHD AVSY n> wr UMN 02 97) =n Nop. NM YUM -nDyY NBN 12 POND yD [yon] WAN vrvea 12 DANS wn MAA MIN wrAD MM "BA ventayw and AN ,VTTD Nap wy ro 2d wr Ty Imvan yn Pomwn yo TMNy CMA) pmnA “TB BV 9 . [Sermons] ND 12 pow N>w om AND 12 PONY °D IDA AN aNd) Mya wo PD am qr ron re = yyy 7 3mm mp aw qT'N MD Yam anda) Monn 79D * sryand Pap BIW AT myn (fw) TT eWN pI I) ToD 99m Mat TON OND [oaN7A 393 WN MD = WaT BAY 99 mM." ‘TWD pwn ony %9p BIA 2399 MN ‘np °D MOMMA 9 T= ‘Dpy? arm 99 noxn po ynby’ yyy AN ND yaw TONY myomt nym 9p MmNMa DPAMIA ya DAN 9 DI NYA “NYPD 1B proa wr 930 MPT 9p Ady Nov" yp nD an9 C1 pon) Hn Ary DMO’ JWMBN MT yn Nw %D pow TwND DprA YT 27TH PR MPapM AMHMN pw NIM TN DVI AyaPA Sana pra xv rin npyyn TpIya DMPA DNV DYpIODY wrVD > ‘BaD vn YT TyTN 999 DAD v» San ,OPA noap oYRD TAA DMaN “yan Naty vw» moar * 49) wApHD DAA DNIT afd wap BMA %>y 2 pM ATMO ND yy DDT ya) mdorVA NTT NA 9p PNT BVA WaNw..2'9 YY NID? Toy DreTMR DMN NON NY TANAD AAI NAN. > YN DIO da WIT NapD? yay May NON IPI ANDR pre 1 pnM’ paw 99H DNATA $90 M9 NAVA TAA. BAI nar on NON 72ND DA _waI MAT? "nypoa" qn MPy" pad IND PR TOM dV ya WAN NATH wy AM wo! tong na yeaa o'va kum 5y AB Y9 [4307 and 7aN (ro 7) JV BAN -PoN? poo won? Ian OT PR ,aAETTN yaywTI‘Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. Ray Shapiro replied that this was indeed exactly the same issue. The Ramban was saying that from the point of view of his opponent who rejected the validity of Torah if the simple surface meaning is not comprehensible than the whole statement can be rejected. Of course for someone who accepts the validity of Chazal the statement would not have been expressed that way. From the perspective of Alu V’Ailu meaning both sides are correct, how is the Gra’s attack on the Rambam to be understood? The Gra said that the ‘Rambam in his rejection of Shaidim etc was rejecting Chazal and that he had done this because of the influence of Philosophy? This would seem to saying that the Rambam was wrong and not that the perspective was incorrect? [The Rambam does not accept the validity of all that Chazal say. One clear example is his rejection of the validity of witchcraft, astrology and incantation which are described frequently in the gemora. This is stated clearly in his Commentary on the Mishna (Avoda Zara 4,7) *. He 29.7) Jy AMD ADM (A) A AMAp mywBA wr) Bram * amb mM Dan poOND PX Moen sy Devan nye ond wy PaoMy NB. Ino pry Sax MevAyON Bm ma anw yn UND 299 AT OWN ON DION TAY AT NNT ‘ere przwnon nn DTT Daa oD $m nd ra DANE D9 Jam7 nap BrrONA waren V2 Tp 7B ITA PR DHMBN wy On cah2 WMT Typ PMNON BMY NON DPMON OMIT ONY DAVIN Xoo mma mem DIN wy MIT DAV DAM OD bia Day Aan Mat OM an 99 mM wD oMVy> om DON MNP MONA AT PIA wa NaN A Sa emapi Dm 7 pom BMAD NY WAN MAX NSE MOI pase poraa ym noon yo vaya DrPINA pW Moa noprpon ya BBD tan>w BM Dn BAY Moya DAP poMM DATA prem BASDA TaN MANA mora mMyawAM qrwaM ATA FNM Denon Tow DAD aM Sy vA py MPNyA aM pms ANMOM Oey AANA WeMNA TMA naywew A NAVI ROA Ma wR aTaMw MN Mey Dra May IY oM Tw ANWAAA VMN b¥ea yavA MoMA Nowa MAN’ yp onda ponm ram 20 w99 aso MepH yn mon astIN otha MN qu AD ‘aba MM DY ayo aston MA SAAN A NPI may 13 PA DYpIMA binoa ‘anna wR pras!A MB May BA wR MOA TT 31on 9 28 39 1397H PANN Bor Ty DIpPM yo TaMe 1D 203 MYT ON BODAION BANPAN Deo AIM TATA am ‘pr > win ¥y MY Mey Wy MAAN DYpDA Myson ND noo wypoa mops vnyan asian enw 991-99 MMMM To ‘1p noymMn yo wam pr 7p WMA AMY W AYN eA Nw OVI DMN Mnysn > ON TMA yINT yap POA my DNpIN dN BTID DAMA? DLApPNOVA MTA TIN, prow pm now TT New yawM Modan nop AEN DIME yO Ta Drsry>% PAY nM .ond FM BYMMN Mp. ‘eronm jyan TH PAM AV Dad! MH y rMNPY D-nINNy woe qd Twn NP TON PyMAOANN PavInY mn2 AID DNW Nd n) mn nwo” 2a? DmoTM pam May ya won BM JA 31 Aw NT enon One SATO! MN PAY MMA AD MD _ MTA gna noynn wre 29 9y moyny NOV oe DHVANA TOON DoDD Ian Dran 99 DANI Jew" DOP NM apy a wD ND 99 TOAD 1 -N9 mH Wa DIODIP Sen DaNyD 9p OM VY TM Tw BON yo 1292. eNO ya. NAVD YAM DNATA powBA 99 7m MONE DA yo NIN PN YIN MINN SAN Asn TaN arom noon *ya Sax nD INT PAW BDpM Dvn Soom pw mn Moy DNATA APA PVv NMA MeN WP AM 2371 99 YwoN AYM MN ja ww_Ww yam InN NIN NOM MT ‘pibann yx 59 99 MyMtva MIN MBN wT aBM 49923 MBNA -PpP8 "A Dy Tan Do ypvxv 72 pwn YY ne G24] vryp "0 TY NaN TW) Nha ™ Bip dyin aah paw Bry Nava PANN Wey windy aM PY Dram nnayT 99 nYwnA Moa 2°) DIO :.. sPrOD DANA smn mW DION AANA MAY Yop pM YAW BAN 99 FON Dror’ mow. ,wevIw and ps NTO MN TOR NIM sive TapAp 9p TMe woM AAD FAN APB HIN aN MEPL DTD Nooo ON MBN DVR MoV > ‘oa _MwYE ATA eM mma toon Gn pomy:ne mae) 12 MOA AANy AMD pane NA AP) nM TT NAT Tay BY roo NON) Naw pa TOPMA DV ADAT yor” NNN Ny Taw kava TEM (AE PMD) AM PA YwAN pr ¢n ATA) ropa AMMAM -AD DVD ya NIP? De Er prin mp T4902) 22) Drenhy mmypa AAW pap pr OV IMME DAMN MTT 9Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Daniel Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. Rema,*. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah 179) permits uttering an incantation on the wound from a scorpion even on Shabbos even though this type of remedy is ineffective since the person is in mortal danger. The Gra cites the Rambam “(Mishna Torah Avoda Zara 11, 11) as the source of this statement of the Shulchan Aruch. He adds “This is the same view as the Rambam expressed in his comments on the Mishna (Avoda Zara 4, 7)*’ However, everyone 3773 dan NoBIN wre ANP? ana MON Wooo ABDyD NA pho NA Dna poo BN YIM yowSD OME wApYA mA, No nos nna vr NON ToUND UA UNIT So NPR BNOAD -moNn *9y3 90 NON MTN Bnw wsVOWEN ya yw MD ‘na yeypa an 9m eon nT oP] MT THY AA TO) ND” ‘ph org) ensw “TnTw wren Bram Mat Int 2D PAN (0 nyan) ‘aaa TaN AMAA yD yin DMV DIT DAD Mw TIA Nb 938 (2 naan) *wop NP-TDR NM Ma DID NED YO a9 do ann WA DIAM ANN NEN] NOMS OTN MAL 330 yp 7 PR AD ND SAN ON IM UTD TA ONY TPN sam vant mm yop TAY (abp at-N now) wend nea amy smog [moana ND "Tiopa NP TaN AM AY Toy Lo A aT no mA mp prow px (2) MINT w"RD ND mod BIND PRD “pha 18 2npy wawWW 7 (WP “T-NMD ME ATID Madn) HM TVD anyt 39 mo naw Ye own IPD 99 wind? IMD vm ann prom dann nib dyMM ANT PAY 19 9Y qN a> prin 5p apr qron NYU M19 TNA 23.99 yay nw noo (Gn) ME May mPwON wIPN) Dam 3ap SAN BabA POND p mayeN yy Daven nye nn wre pavInY FMAM IMD pay DAN MNDRYEN DIN ma ANT TP NY NP AE ANN AN IBN PANY ENT re wraeno Dn? nor oMaTaN TMB STH no Ara Das D2 Jam a0 DrPONA Draven °D 3p > ABT PN DYMBN DAY DN ‘cada mn TaD MON OAV NOR BMNBR DNaT BAY DAVIN Nye mina wos pend Dor Mat ony BIT BMA pions on? mma may BM aon Sp nya I? BMVwY> Dom DONS MATPIN NOW. AE ap DD May SN STD map UMyO Sy pom BMAD MY waN OMN NAVD ADA roam pap ym monn ya vaya DYPPNn yn Noa NypHpoA ra Dnap Tangy BM und BB mp9 Bnd Pom” Daan brrom prasan van nmannn mgt myaonm qywoM wasn Aaym wenn now pave an 9p wroR pis mPAyA MAM ‘Dme nnnom DMS naa Mena AMMA neyow ma RAND PRDIA Ma PONth apn AN MeXy DIDI IMAP apy OM oa MENT YMoTPA pie yabA NOS nena “NaN 12 yan pom MowM Yo MND Ao AWN yn aYPBN aA, ommD ‘TMX qa Yo Sayan MN BY mPSN a>IA ANY PaPaA 3p Nhe 1a pA DPT hvoa amma wx pasta ma MBy BA Aye MBN MY {xn 9p nv 2Y9 1aPTNN 7D THA DEVO Ty DIPPM YOR “NAN 12> 203 Trew BAN DODNFON BANPIA Dob AIM NANA wam pr p Wan 99 ME MyM yy MMA DypDA POA MID noo pipaa mopan m9an aaWIN HMw SOI 99 NoyINA TA ‘Prom ye wWam pp wi TMs Ny AN Aw proven yo 19 Toy mB praoIaA MAMA anh 999 3yeA A. prog AMay AIM DIVA WR 99 Tw aD DTA | IN ‘wopreo tnbon ayaa pn 72 ning 7maa MeN Ie MY MN after the Rambam disagree with him, This is because there are many gemoras describing use of Divine names and witchcraft. He was influenced by philosophy. Therefore he writes that witchcraft, use of Divine names, incantations, demons, and charms are all false. His view is completely erroneous since we see many descriptions in the gemora of these things. Even the Torah itself gives examples such as ‘Moshe’s staff turning into a snake. The Zohar also | describes these things. And there are too many cases ‘to enumerate dealing with incantations. Philosophy has warped his understanding so that he describes all these gemoras as meaningless or interprets them not according to their plain meaning. I don’t accept the philosophers or their approach. To the contrary, all Of these stories are to be taken literally. While they in fact have a deeper concealed meaning it is not that of the philosophers which is merely a superficial understanding but rather that of the kabbalists”. It been claimed that these are these words were AT My -YO mn A} NVA PrP DNATA WP I>yaNM MPD VATA ma ana) marion 2133p DAWA DNPAW 195 BMY oN DN vwpmy> no N~A DIMAN MNpsA °D DAY TIN PIMA "By PBA ynr oMpM AP DNA DRM? DpHOw’D AMMAN Ad ‘pennn ym now 737 ye VM Mann ADP AT DAMNTTD -Byronm moven yo yo BPyy Bnew PHyONN WAY 19 12 (PANN TNA WAN Span wa INIA BAT Pon TAN NIM JRv vaUM DNgUn DMN DMT DMN wD MPT yon wa ‘Danma ya Jo YeyIy wa BAY YP Nd NyyIN DAI wR AOR nye noyin Na 291 BAY PY 30M BA WH Ay 7D BAD NeVN SH NVA ION 77a ton waysA noX mixoynD OAD AMY AN Sow BMA omega 2 Yo) Ta Wows Pay AN OP |MN DMM MPD ‘emoM JyMA Ts pam Av Daan Mn dy rMHyw DnIMAy Yow yuo Tern NY NN PaOsNN PIN 12 AID OT NI _bna DsMyeA NYT MM wad mawa mya wenn Top 737 1 oro Bho PR DANN wT D93 oMaTA TAN DPM noyin wpa 1a vy AN IA AR MIWA WN ITH AW wwe BOONTON A DynyIM DANI HTN 2a PyAwY 295 ANBN ProND yRV np Sava NNN Op MANA ya WS yD Loma wT _pnnaxn DMR phen yarn 992 prpan” 230-231 972 pon D»pDINN NIT © ‘Semwn Nin nD Wr Yan? vrPD Nin THaDA TTA AM ANT nama yn ypoM Mw MN “Wao Wren ANN wan TI 7D AeA DVI NAAN? OY TWwaN RATAN 2e pnp pawn Damn vy nyt mw ANEW NyTA Sy M>yTD ApND Nean bv Inv 9p DarwA wT 1A DNATA sa 9y Na BYR AAW BAIT MTN MATA AAA 5 pawn 99 DA ow Jawan PAPA MoD AW YAMA Fe pMDI Toye > mann 2 MxypwD NW A IHNdND TN VHA TaD |mVvs ND ONN TMD Ton 2X NANy YM Ya Ted’ OMT MP MPM omy wo wD WAN" roVOM DMA NM MAM Ta ~{o%>pv rDyEM by pm popn 3Bvd ABYPNA) 10Meeting between Rav Moshe Shapiro and Danie! Eidensohn Observed by Rabbi Chananyah Greenwald. inserted by someone else and do not reflect the Gra’s view who consistently defends the Rambam everyplace else, Rav Shlomo Luria®, however, saw the original manuscript and has verified their validity. It should be noted that the Gra had a very high regard for the Rambam. The Gra‘ was once asked to stop a group was studying the Moreh Nevuchim. (t9 preg ma maw yyy droyn yon? 31 MND) IDA MD © > 311 anzy anzon Non pony omy MBN IHN sD TT 95 dom Ph Nun nsoD om TN NNN wR) MS AM mwa ma anzon 9% anon avn 9x LAM we TEP adm nfoan ans apn oY Aya spryion 9 ,2n Bann pawn pean IM Aw" ‘n BRN Drmgon pry ym yw van ama AyANA DV? yma wean aw? Ta? TWN YY Py? drew Mn Nw ,nayMa 90 mby Noon Tamm TRY yond whims TaD AN ‘npn TWN mana ‘napa Ty qyoIny APO THD TP -THY 9D TON NT THON Sec prorrpn yam Amo PENA pea MAN MyyoD TAN a aya pring Jr n> Nad me THY "Ad NAIM MAD >" yp »O 7) NéaN AMOR wD °D NPN DNA NMA DN, fon van Aon qne> Paya PM DTaDTA Sp SA PRAT VD OPO han 9v pha qua mand wore DAT I TANI WP 99 AM cyan ann ny PPD quay TaN 99 99 7a ‘NAM OMY" yma pean som “aonxoo AOyPLL_’MD DONB_A Anna afin naa wes A inmna "pean yor van BOTIDN, Pima nN Yon SA Man PMD DPD WN wa Maw upAN mw aan} Nv 99 DWT aD PMD aD YT IT ANN wan eva 2'p nn) v*D 2" nod YHNIs DIT NIM BD, 2°-Ntan prop DMT MOD 9y ApIN waT (tat) MBN TMP. sok MAND MN oN BMT INS DA NMaM v3 99 79 Im WH NY SON ZOO AaIMY AA DAV * noTMD Ba WY ap hse WHIM jDYD Ty Py POA eNO pha NaNO AD UTI denny 999 pao BIW Ata pe ,phsa pS NA Mya) TPN jaay omen nave) Noon Won BeVr ‘m [oD DMA NM p23) ta WMI AND hp MND naw? YETTA wa bem) denny jason rep pon me Neu wre Ten p99 Wty MayMA (PD I") TY pM Jan ho Urned on22 AT ynre won Da Nar KIM man tae yf AaM .DAoIA NN OeEA) 8M NY ,OTAN TN IT ND pia nrnan 93 I] AX) MONA NTI 'y 2h "ON MN wan mom hoa AD TMMET NVA IND 9p CaM ’9) THON (ona 3 maa papa TTD deve? "D AM AD ATH HD TOD (TD qT) IMD MVD” ma nn inn yh pean HN oN PON MPN TWN] AVM 37 aoa Wn wwe {OIA TNA PAIN a mA MND OTIPH TaN, A ana Na TON NID Yow YH aN mM Bye DpAD KANN wap Dre Pay TT TON 9p DIAM IMAM Ad PT MT 2272 ono? pHaMv wp DOM mrs roa ona DTD shoo) DPamn Na a aN Pyr MoV ADIN AN AANA Aa NAAM brer TaBA YM] TY pA Inna wy MMNT MIM 7 TOR. mavima 1 NM BARNA 9p (pot "Ta NP) Compr ’2) yA fg mama Bw n>) AD AOPRT WN A NANT NO WPT oy ame von maa ham nx Mad waa YN WAM’ AN 48) nop AN AMIN DAN ML NI DBT pm ny pI 2273) Dw 2) NOV SadaN Nyy pao MAM wT Pa eT vray Sy Np Tn aM pom NoubAA Saba NIN (oeran oa mm MoT DIwpA Ta He answered that he wished his place in Gan Eden would be near that of the Rambam.} Rav Shapiro replied that the Gra was not claiming that the Rambam had a false position. His objection was that the Rambam, because of the influence of philosophy, was using exclusively the perspective of pure Truth. From the perspective of pure Truth, things like witchcraft do not have any existence, The only problem that the Gra had with the Rambam was that since Chazal do discuss these things, we see that it is erroneous to ignore their perspective from which these things do have validity. [I mentioned this later to Rav Stembuch who said that this is obviously the correct understanding. Rabbi Greenwald noted that this is found in Obr Gedaliyahu Purim page 87 footnote #2 that this was the explanation of Rav Chaim Brisker and the Kodgnitzer Magid.) Rav Shapiro ended the discussion after about 45 minutes and commented that I should go ahead and write the sefer but that I should not be machriya between the different positions. uw