Douggg wrote:

Hi R. Daniel, I know that you didn't mean it, but isn't what you are saying about perception in that manner, tantamount to saying the national revelation was an "illusion"? 
    
Ummmm...no.
 If I were talking to you in your presence, I would perceive, by my senses, you there with me, and not somewhere in Cleveland.     So I am thinking God is different in His existence than us.
Yes He is. G-d would never go to Cleveland. But take this example and see how you can fit in an "illusion." So you see how illogical your first question was. Perception is nothing near illusion.
If I weren't in your house, I was be saying "trinity" and be going that direction, but here I don't think I am going to be getting any "Amen!" shout outs from the pews on that train of thought.

Again illogical
So, here at MT, R. Daniel's house, may I suggest that God in His fullness is unexplainable and unknowable by anyone but God Himself?    Yes, we know some things about God, which He chooses to reveal to us, but we are limited.
That happens to be a very Jewish view! The Torah is G-d's wisdom. When we pray we speak to G-d. When we learn G-d speaks to us.
G-d revealed Himself to Adam, on whatever level that was. [Much greater than anything since.] That info was passed down to Noah, which is how Noah was a righteous man who walked with G-d. That info was then passed down to Abraham. Abraham expanded greatly his understanding of G-d's wisdom by investigating and analyzing the world around him which, needless to say, is all G-d's wisdom. 

R. Daniel, you wrote "we still consider the information to have come from heaven".   Yes, that is what I am saying, not to take away from what you referred to with Abraham.    I would like to get to the issue of the Torah and the tree of knowing good and evil - any connection?     I was thinking that maybe in rabbi school, that may be a topic.

I don't know how you connected these two thoughts but to give credit where due, the garden was full of trees. We only focus on two. One which imbued into its imbiber a category of wisdom and the other which infused the power of immortality. So, yes, we do say the other trees were also conduits for other categories of wisdom.  

If the law is not given, then good and evil don't have a reference.    But it seems to me that the law is not necessary unless there is disobedience - which before eating from the tree, there was not disobedience.       But upon eating from the tree, with disobedience,  the law became conscience.
Illogical again. Disobedience can only exist within the boundaries of law.   

So, in the formal giving of the law at Sinai, we have the good if the Torah is observed, and evil if the Torah is not observed - setting down "in writing" what is sin and what is not.     Connecting back to the tree of good and evil in the garden - and sin entering the world.
Based on the above, this mushing together of all the aforementioned thoughts obviously doesn't work. But yes, choosing the Torah life is choosing good. Anything else is under the umbrella of choosing evil. We don't need to conect back to a thing. We connect to G-d. Following G-d's wisdom connects us to G-d. Following the Torah follows G-d's ways. 
The tree taught us that if mankind had only 1 law he could still brake it. So to complain, "why so many laws" is not a complaint.



The last liberals the world ever saw were the Egyptians who sat Joseph's brothers down and fed them meat even though they despised meat eaters. Genuine liberals tolerate the opinions of others.

Today's faux liberals do not tolerate any other opinion and if one exists it has to be squashed.


Last Edited By: Rabbi Daniel Tue, 27-Jan-15 17:02:27. Edited 2 times.