Maimonides’ Thirteen Principles Are Not All They Seem

I didn’t read Marc Shapiro’s “Limits of Orthodox Theology”, but from the blurb, it sounds like the anonymous Hebrew pamphlet we recently posted here.

It is commonly asserted that Maimonides’ famous Thirteen Principles are the last word in Orthodox Jewish theology. This is a very popular notion, and is often repeated by scholars from all camps in Judaism. Yet such a position ignores the long history of Jewish theology in which Maimonides’ Principles have been subject to great dispute. The book begins with a discussion of the significance of the Principles and illustrates how they assumed such a central place in traditional Judaism. Each principle is then considered in turn: the reasons underlying Maimonides’ formulations are expounded and the disputes that have arisen concerning them are discussed in detail. Marc B. Shapiro’s authoritative analysis makes it quite clear that the notion that Maimonides’ Principles are the last word in traditional Jewish theology is a misconception, and that even Maimonides himself was not fully convinced of every aspect of his formulations. Although structured around Maimonides’ Principles, this book can also be seen as an encyclopedia of traditional Jewish thought concerning the central issues of Jewish theology.

The diversity of opinion in Jewish tradition on such issues as God, Creation, and the Revelation of the Torah is sure to surprise readers.

From book summaries I’ve seen (maybe somewhere here), not all of his points are valid, and some are self-admittedly conjectural, but enough suffices to make his point (and the book itself is probably even better).

Is Every ‘Melech’ in Megillas Esther Hakadosh Baruch Hu?

No, of course not. This doesn’t fit with half the pesukim in any discernible way. Chassidim separate the words, so when it says “King Achashverosh” made a feast for those living in Shushan, it means Avashverosh plus Hashem. Except this adds nothing, because Hashem does everything, anyhow, so you might as well take all words to mean Hashem.

As usual, people rely on a half-quote from a preacher.

Here’s the original Chazal, Esther Rabba 3:10:

אשר למלך אחשורוש, ר’ יודן ור’ לוי בשם ר’ יוחנן כל מקום שנאמר במגלה זו “למלך אחשורוש” במלך אחשורוש הכתוב מדבר וכל מקום שנאמר “למלך” סתם משמש קדש וחול.
In other words, not “Melech” or “Molech” or “Hamelech”, but only “Lamelech”, and even there, only when not accompanied by the specifier “Achashverosh”. And even then, it’s only a maybe; maybe Kodesh, maybe Chol.
Now we’ve narrowed down the list considerably, let’s see where it can or cannot mean “Kodesh”:
ויודע הדבר למרדכי ויגד לאסתר המלכה ותאמר אסתר למלך בשם מרדכי.
Probably not.
ויאמרו נערי המלך משרתיו יבקשו למלך נערות בתולות טובות מראה.
Definitely not.
ותאמר לו זרש אשתו וכל אהביו יעשו עץ גבה חמשים אמה ובבקר אמר למלך ויתלו את מרדכי עליו ובא עם המלך אל המשתה שמח…
ויאמר המלך מי בחצר והמן בא לחצר בית המלך החיצונה לאמר למלך לתלות את מרדכי על העץ אשר הכין.
Haman praying to Hashem, maybe?
וכל שרי המדינות והאחשדרפנים והפחות ועשי המלאכה אשר למלך מנשאים את היהודים כי נפל פחד מרדכי עליהם.
Maybe.
That’s it.
I figured I’d better say this now, so you still have time to prepare something else – unless you want to say Purim Torah.

How to Beat Heretical Thoughts

Rambam on Avos 2:14:

מה שתשיב לאפיקורוס… ואמרו אף על פי שתלמד דעות האומות לדעת איך תשיב עליהם, השמר שלא יעלה בלבך דבר מן הדעות ההם, ודע שמי שתעמוד לפניו יודע צפון לבך, והוא אמרו ודע לפני מי אתה עמל, רצה לומר שיכוין לבו באמונת השם יתברך.

Rabbi Nachman of Breslov says the same.

Sefer Hamiddos “Hirhur” 1:1:

על ידי ענוה ינצל מהרהורי עבודה זרה.

A letter from the Steipler Illuy (see also Chayei Olam Part One Chapter 27):

… עוד יש עצה בדוקה לבטל כל הספיקות אלא שהיא קשה מאד, דהיינו הענוה, דבזמן שהוא תופס עצמו באמת כאין וכדבר שאין בו חשיבות והוא נכנע לפני הקב”ה, פורחין מיד כל הספיקות, ולא איכפת לי’ בהם כלל, אלא שכאמור ענוה קשה מאד להשיגה באמת שלא בדמיונות בעלמא ואכמ”ל.

By the way, we referenced the above article in our free, special ebook on answering atheists. To receive the full Hebrew ebook, subscribe to Hyehudi’s Daily Newsletter here.

Satmar Is Inhuman!

Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum is known to have said visiting Kivrei Tzaddikim is only for people on a high level (like Tefillin, Eretz Yisrael… starting to see a pattern?), in “Al Hage’ulah” p. 166 (#108). Only those who can “connect” with the deceased should go.
N.B. This is not exactly the same reason given by the Maimonidean opposition to visiting gravesites…
[I don’t know if this was all a trick to stop people from going to Israel where most Kivrei Tzaddikim are located (and where they are kept up by the state).]
A recent column in Kedushas Tzion already pointed out how so much of Rabbi Teitelbaum’s statements run directly counter to all Jewish Mesorah, current and ancient, and this admonition against prayer is no exception. Nor did he bother making crucial distinctions in gravesite visitation.
But I wish to stress the aspect of cruelty here.
It’s like outspoken atheists who deliberately try to remove all living hope, especially from the terminally ill, the depressed, and the downtrodden, and replace it with “courage” these people simply cannot find within themselves (not on command, anyway).
P.S. What about the Arizal? See this.