We'll continue a little bit with the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim today, the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim and so often, even though obviously the Rambam does enumerate thirteen, so often we sort of group those thirteen into three super-categories which correspond to the Sefer Ikkarim's only three Ikkarim. De-haynu, that the first five relate to Hakadosh Baruch Hu, then the next four, נבואה תורה מן השמים, and then the final four revolve around s'char ve-onesh. And obviously on one level descriptively that is accurate, but ma'aseh it seems like that the pshat in Yud Gimmel Ikkarim is that all the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim are about Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It's about Hakadosh Baruch Hu himself and it's about how Hakadosh Baruch Hu relates to the world. So all the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim are intended as delineating what our emunah ba-Hashem is. Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Kadmon, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Echad, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is eino guf, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is menabeh benei adam, etc. Itachen that at least one of the questions which is raised with regard to what the Rambam didn't include in the list of Ikkarim would possibly be answered. I think either way that perspective is the correct one, but one of the questions that's raised is why did the Rambam didn't include the Bechira Chofshis amongst the Ikkarim? Now ironically, in the Yad in Hilchos Teshuva, so he again, in Perush Hamishnayos he was writing in Arabic and in the Yad it's his own loshon, Loshon Hakodesh, so not that the diyuk is in the words, but in the Yad in פרק ה הלכות תשובה הלכה ג so he refers to Bechira Chofshis and says עיקר זה עיקר גדול הוא עמוד התורה והמצוה. The fact that there is that we have Bechira Chofshis. So the lichora the perspective on the fact that the Rambam didn't include it is, A, again, number one what we mentioned from Rav Chaim last week, that the Ikkarim are not the foundations but the fundamental elements of belief, and what we're understanding today as well, they delineate belief in Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Ina hachi nami in terms of that it's axiomatic to Torah, because as the Rambam explains in Hilchos Teshuva all of Torah and Mitzvos becomes nonsensical if a person is programmed, but in terms of delineating our belief in Hakadosh Baruch Hu, so one can understand how it isn't included in the list of the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim. Rambam also has a mashma-us in the Yad, the closest, it's not exactly the same, it's almost the same, but the place where you find the Ikkarim listed together, almost the way it is in Perush Hamishnayos, is in פרק ג הלכות תשובה when the Rambam is detailing those שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא. So the Rambam mentions מינים אפיקורוסים כופרים בתורה כופרים בתחיית המתים והכופר בביאת הגואל.
And when he then spells out who's considered a min, who's considered an apikoros, so you have the Yud Gimmel Ikkarim, well almost, here in פרק ג הלכות תשובה. What's remarkable is that the unmistakable mashma-us. אלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא ונכרתין ואובדין ונדונין על גודל רשעם וחטאתם לעולם ולעולמי עולמים המינים והאפיקורסים הכופרים בתורה והכופרים בתחיית המתים והכופרים בביאת הגואל
etc. But if you look back to the previous halacha, so toch k'dei dibbur at the end of Halacha Hei, this is Halacha Vav we're just reading, the Rambam writes וכן חסידי אומות העולם יש להם חלק לעולם הבא. And then within the same breath the Rambam goes on to say אלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא. The simple mashmas is that the Rambam thinks that belief in the yud gimmel ikkarim is required from all of humanity, it's not just required from Jews, but required from all of humanity. And that's why lichora, when the Rambam illustrates at the end of Halacha Ches, vehaomer shehaborei as one of those who's considered a kofer batorah, that האומר שהבורא החליף מצוה זו במצוה אחרת וכבר בטלה תורה זו אף על פי שהיא היתה מעם השם כגון הנוצרים וההגרים.
So it's not only that the Rambam is giving that example of the belief of Christianity and Islam to tell us to keep away, but he's saying that these people, the notzrim and the hagarim, they are examples of kofer batorah and the context is they are examples of kofer batorah who therefore forfeit the chelek in Olam Haba. Again, it wouldn't be totally totally conclusive, it's very suggestive, but the juxtaposition of חסידי אומות העולם יש להם חלק לעולם הבא with ואלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא. Now it's true that it's true that there are a couple of examples here in this list in Halacha Vav which only apply to Jews, haporesh midarkei tzibbur for instance. But the fact that everything else is applicable to Jews and non-Jews alike and the Rambam has no disclaimer, he just says chasidei umos haolam potentially יש להם חלק לעולם הבא and then ואלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא, that's the pshat that the Rambam holds that the yud gimmel ikkarim, belief in that is required from all of humanity. In terms of what prompted the Rambam to compile the list, so we've commented a little bit about it last week, but just to continue a little bit, the Rambam writes elsewhere, taking liberties with what the Rambam writes, a person can be, can drape himself in a tallis and can wear not only tefillin shel Rashi and תפילין של רבנו תם and make sure that he only eats glatt kosher vechulu vechulu and say all of Sefer Tehillim every week vechulu vechulu, and if all of that is directed to avodah zarah or something, is directed to some imaginary or real other than Hakadosh Baruch Hu, so obviously not only is there no chasidus which is thereby being expressed, but on the contrary, it's all totally negative. So the lynchpin of everything we do and for that matter the goal of everything we do is התקרבות להקדוש ברוך הוא, yedias Hashem. Again, whatever that means, but now is not the time, but if a person has Rachmana Litzlan, a distorted image of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, so then everything, the meaningfulness of everything hinges on that, hinges hinges on that. The Rambam writes, he says if you look in the Torah, so when the Torah speaks about Avoda Zara, so the Torah when speaking about Avoda Zara, davka in that context the Torah describes Hakadosh Baruch Hu kavyachol as getting angry, that's charon af. השמרו לכם פן יפתה לבבכם וסרתם ועבדתם אלוהים אחרים והשתחויתם להם וחרה אף ה' בכם.
The Torah kavyachol describes Hakadosh Baruch Hu as as getting angry, and also it's it's davka in the context of Avoda Zara that the Torah describes Hakadosh Baruch Hu as being a Kel Kanna. In Aseres Hadibros, לא תשתחוה להם ולא תעבדם, Kel Kanna, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is a Kel Kanna. So says the Rambam, hagatzecha. Again, this is the Rambam leshitoso that that the original ovdei Avoda Zara and the Avoda Zara that the Torah is targeting are people who were monotheists, dehinu they believed in Hashem Echad, but as the Rambam describes in Perek Aleph of Hilchos Avoda Zara, they thought that that just as the the president wants you to to be mechabed the ministers and the and the cabinet secretaries, so too Hakadosh Baruch Hu, da'atam hara'ah they thought that that Hakadosh Baruch Hu wants us to direct acts of of worship to the Chama and the Levana and the השמשים העומדים לפניו במרום. But the original ovdei Avoda Zara, the Rambam says, that's what the issur Avoda Zara targets, kol shekein once it deteriorated even even to be something worse, the original ovdei Avoda Zara were monotheists, they didn't even think that Hakadosh Baruch Hu had delegated power to the the sun or to any other heavenly bodies, they just they thought and practiced that one was supposed to direct acts of of worship and reverence to the to the heavenly bodies. So the Rambam says, so that the Torah describes again in in terms of on one level, on one level in terms of recognizing Hashem Echad, so their belief was correct on on one level, and אף על פי כן the Torah describes that in in such starkly unequivocally harsh terms, again וחרה אף ה' בכם and ki Kel Kanna. So says the Rambam it's a בן בנו של קל וחומר when a person when the distortion, Rachmana Litzlan, is relates to to Hakadosh Baruch Hu himself. So it's the there's nothing more crucial, nothing more critical, nothing more more pivotal than than correct emunah b'Hashem. That's what the Rav emphasized, and it's a very very important to to recognize this point that that for the Rambam the yud gimmel ikkarim was a matter of halacha. It's not that that heyos that the Rambam was also a ba'al agadda, was also a ba'al machshava, but the yud gimmel ikkarim for the Rambam was a matter of halacha. There are categories in halacha, there are categories in halacha of of minim, of apikorsim, legabei moridin ve'ein ma'alin, again in theory not in practice bazman hazeh, legabei hashavas aveidah, legabei whether you can eat from from shechita vechulu vechulu vechulu. So it's not just that that this belongs to the tchum of of hashkafa, of agadda, no the yud gimmel ikkarim is a matter of of halacha as well. The pashtos says, in addition to again all those obvious areas and applications, it should also have implications for the following. There is one very fundamental machlokes between the Rambam on the one hand with the Chovos HaLevavos and the Ra'avad on the other hand. Chovos HaLevavos writes at the beginning of the sefer that if you have someone who, because his intellect is not capable of conceiving of and therefore believing in an incorporeal, in something incorporeal, his intellect just doesn't, he's not, he's not capable of belief in something that isn't visible, that isn't tangible, but that isn't corporeal. He can't be massig רבונו של עולם בלא גוף. Chovos HaLevavos says if such a person takka can't, so he can't. So that, so then leave him alone, he's okay, he's he then is allowed to operate with that obviously fundamentally incorrect conception of the corporeal, Rachmana litzlan, Ribbono Shel Olam. And the Ra'avad also very famously in פרק ג הלכות תשובה says that avada the Rambam is right, but if a person is wrong on that score, he's not a min. But the Rambam insists that that's not the case. The Rambam insists that to have emuna b'Hashem means, entails, requires that a person believe in, in again the fact that HaKadosh Baruch Hu is eino ba'al guf. So what happens then if you ask the Rambam, you come to the Rambam, Yelamdenu Rabbeinu, and you say that this person, never, maybe it's I don't know, mental retardation, whatever it is, Rachmana litzlan, but you have a person who takka matches that description of the Chovos HaLevavos and cannot conceive of an incorporeal Ribbono Shel Olam. So pashtos is that for the Rambam this now becomes the standard to determine whether or not a person is a bar da'as, whether or not in terms of cheresh shoteh v'katan, in terms of what level of understanding, of intelligence a person has to have to minimally in order to be considered a bar da'as. So pashtos is that here too this machlokes between the Chovos HaLevavos on the one hand with the Rambam on the other hand will have, will have repercussions. But for Chovos HaLevavos who says that bedi'eved when a person is not capable of it, so then he can, he can operate with such an emuna and that's considered emuna, right? What Chovos HaLevavos is saying is that for someone who, someone who can't believe more, so then that is emuna, that is acceptable emuna for that person. And the Rambam says no, it's not emuna. So you'll ask the Rambam, well what do you want from him? The Rambam says I don't want anything from him. Al pi din that person would be a lav bar da'as in, in according to the Rambam's scheme. The Rambam writes in one of the Igros, I think maybe to Geras, Nissim, I forget where it is, the Rambam writes in one of the Igros, he says you'll notice that in hakdama to Perek Chelek when I listed the Yud-Gimmel Ikkarim, he said I didn't write the same lashon that I wrote in the Yad, right? In the Yad at the beginning of Yesodei HaTorah, the Rambam says יסוד היסודות ועמוד החכמות לידע שיש שם מצוי ראשון. And then he after the few halachos that describe HaKadosh Baruch Hu, he again he concludes and says ידיעת דבר זה מצוות עשה. So the mitzva requires yedi'ah. The Rambam says in, in Perek Chelek when, when I was delineating what the baseline of emuna is that a person is can be a ben Olam HaBa, so I didn't say the mitzva is leida, I just said the mitzva is the requirement is l'ha'amin. Haino that leida... derivable and logically dictated and the Rambam says that's not required. I didn't - that isn't the bar that I set in the hakdama to Perek Chelek. The bar that I set in the hakdama to Perek Chelek is much lower than that. It's just that a person is required to maintain these beliefs. Rambam also writes in talking about these inyanim a tremendous, tremendous yesod that's nogaya to ikrei emuna, it's nogaya to everything in life. He says not everyone is philosophically inclined and not everyone is either going to have the capacity or the education or the inclination to correctly be able to be יורד לעומקם של דברים של עיקרי אמונה. He says and no one is - nothing is expected of a person that he's not capable of. But what every person is capable of is every person is capable of recognizing what his own limitations are and then seeking out people who are more qualified in that area. Again, the Rambam happens to be talking about the yesodos ha'emuna. So he says, is everyone necessarily capable of figuring everything out and understanding what's proper belief, what's improper belief? No, not everyone is, he says. But such a person is supposed to recognize his own limitations. And for that, the Rambam says, that there's no excuse, he says. It's not a defense. It's not a defense. In other words, when you ask the Rambam, why do you think that we should so harshly treat someone who makes an honest mistake? He honestly thinks that such and such about the Ribono Shel Olam. Okay, so Rachmana litzlan - a heterodoxical belief. But that's what he honestly thinks. Beshum levav, that's what he honestly thinks. So the Rambam says no one's gonna - he doesn't have to give a din ve'cheshbon for not being a philosopher. He doesn't have to give a din ve'cheshbon for not being so adept in rules of logic. But there's no excuse for not having the self-awareness to recognize one's own limitations. And that's what the Rambam writes there. The implication, agav, which the Rambam doesn't elaborate, but the clear implication is that lu yetzuar you would have someone who is let's say a Rambam-ist or a Kuzari-ite or whatever they may be and he isn't necessarily so philosophically inclined and he has no access to anyone, so then there is an honest Rachmana patrei there even in inyanei emuna. But there's no onus Rachmana patrei, says the Rambam, when Rachmana litzlan a person just oversteps his own boundaries and a person במופלא ממך אל תדרוש and a person Rachmana litzlan ignores that and במופלא ממנו הוא דורש and then he takeh makes an honest mistake. So that the Rambam says the Torah doesn't - the Torah doesn't excuse. I think once upon a time, I think we understood that yesod much more - it was much more intuitive and that was a much... if one wants to understand how so much of the confusion that exists today has arisen and Rachmana litzlan continues to arise, an awful lot of it is attributable to not knowing and living by this yesod of the Rambam. No one of us is gonna have to answer for having an IQ one point higher than the IQ the Ribono Shel Olam gave us. No one's gonna have to answer for not having abilities that we weren't given. But we do have to answer if we undertake to do things that... The Rambam's lashon in this thing the ikarim so after listing the yud gimmel ikarim so the Rambam concludes and writes וכבר הארכתי בדברים מאוד ויצאתי מעניין החיבור. He says I I I digressed quite a bit ולא עשיתי זאת כי אם מפני שראיתי בזה תועלת באמונה לפי שאספתי לך דברים רבים מועילים המפוזרים בחיבורים חשובים הצלח בהם וחזור על דברי אלו פעמים רבות והתבונן בהם התבוננות טובה ואם פתתה אותך חריצותך שהבנת עניין זה פעם אחת
o meah הוי יודע שהטעו אותך למחשבה. A person thinks after learning ten times the yud gimmel ikarim as as pshat so learned he's hallucinating. Right before this paragraph after listing the yud gimmel ikarim so the Rambam adds וכאשר יהיו ביד האדם כל אלה היסודות ואמונתו נכונה בהם הרי הוא נכנס בכלל ישראל וחייב לאהבו ולחוס עליו וכל מה שציוונו ה' על אהבה ואחווה זה עם זה ואפילו עשה כל שהוא יכול מן העבירות מחמת התאווה והתגברות הטבע הגרוע הרי הוא נענש לפי גודל חטאו ויש לו חלק והוא מפושעי ישראל ואם נתערער לאדם יסוד מאלה היסודות הרי יצא מן הכלל וכפר בעיקר ונקרא מין ואפיקורוס וקוצץ בנטיעות.
So the Rambam says that all the מצוות בין אדם לחברו that are distinctive to relationship bein Yisrael l'Yisrael so none of those mitzvot apply to someone who's kofer in any of the in any of the yud gimmel ikarim. The Rambam doesn't mean in terms of what is his kiddushin or not kiddushin but on a certain level he's not nichnas bichlal Yisrael on a certain level he's not nichnas bichlal Yisrael. Where did the Rambam get that hagdarah from? Again okay that he's not a ma'amin he's a kofer where did he get that that he's not nichnas bichlal Yisrael? So the pshat says I think the Tiferes Yisrael already says this. The first mishna in perek Chelek has a very funny lashon. The first mishna in perek Chelek how does it go? כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא. Okay so you read that so you give a sigh of relief. And then right away ואלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא. So what do you mean כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא? In neshima achas the mishna's about to tell us that it's not true that כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא rachmana litzlan that ואלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא kofer bitchiyas hameisim etcetera. So what do you mean kol Yisrael? Oh so that's what the Rambam says. כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא ואלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא
and so you see that that the hafka'as shem Yisrael and that's taki so the mishna is is it's not that the mishna is saying something and then right away as it were contradicting it no. כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא ואלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא
and so you see that that the hityachasut to them is not as is not as Yisrael. The lashon here is also very important. The Rambam says ואם נתערער לאדם יסוד מאלה היסודות. Right? Rofei, right? Nirtamatem? Rofei. Rofei means it's very soft. It means to loosen one's grip and hence by extension to be lazy. Dehainu, a person doesn't have to be an avowed Rachmana litzlan atheist. An agnostic is also נשרפי לאדם יסוד מאלה היסודות. Maybe yes, maybe no. He's noncommittal. He's noncommittal. And that's also the wrong side of the fence. And bikhlal that, and it's important to understand. Someone who says that he himself, he personally believes in the Yud-Gimmel Ikkarim, that he defends the legitimacy and the right of others to challenge the Yud-Gimmel Ikkarim, any one of them, Torah min hashamayim or any of them, that's also kefirah because when something is absolutely true, there's no, two plus two is four, but I respect your opinion that you think two plus two is five and that's part of being tolerant, inclusive, vekhulu vekhulu. No. If two plus two is four, it's an absolute truth. So if you say two plus two is five, that's wrong. That's unacceptable. That's false. And you're leading people astray in telling them that two plus two is five. It's not. It's not. Two plus two is four. When a person says I personally believe in the Yud-Gimmel Ikkarim, but I recognize and respect yenem's right to say differently, so that means that he doesn't have this categorical belief that this is absolutely true. He has a very relativistic belief. That's not what the Rambam is talking about. That's what it means in nishrafei l'adam. That's what it means when the Rambam writes in Perek Aleph, כל המעלה על דעתו. כל המעלה על דעתו doesn't have to be that a person decides that Rachmana litzlan that there's a second god or something. כל המעלה על דעתו, a possibility. No, the Rambam says that's also, כל המעלה על דעתו is kofer b'ikkar. In general, whatever a person is learning Torah, it can be Ha'ish Mekadesh, any chelek of Torah. So there's that koved rosh that's required. It's a koved rosh that's required to do our best to be mechaven, to מכוון לאמיתה של תורה, not just sort of spin out explanations. There's an achrayus and the koved rosh should reflect that achrayus to try to understand, to try to penetrate l'amittah shel Torah. So that's true whatever one is learning. Im kol zeh, with the appropriate koved rosh, okay, so a person will try to understand the pshat in the Rambam and maybe say a chiddush. Again, it has to be done responsibly, but all of this is magnified a hundred times over in terms of dealing with... To understand, to understand as correctly, accurately as possible and not not without without without chiddushim. It's not nitan to be mechadesh, we just try to to understand as carefully, as conscientiously as as possible. The Rambam writes in Mamrim in perek gimmel that when you have a second generation and beyond of people who are kofrim, he says הרי הוא כתינוק שנשבה וראוי להחזירן בתשובה ולמשכן בדברי שלום עד שיחזרו לאיתן התורה.
So the the absoluteness is about the falsehood and and the dangerous falsehood of kfira. Obviously the Rambam says you have someone he doesn't never was never mischannech, he doesn't know, so aderaba, it's a mitzva to try to to be mekarev and try to and try to teach the person and expose them to the light and to the beauty and to the emes of Torah. Okay, so maybe next time we'll we'll actually begin the Ikkarim.