Let's backtrack a little bit. We looked at the Sifrei last week, but let's review it. And the Rambam says that toanei hanevuah, those who claim nevuah, נחלקים תחילה לשני חלקים, מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה and misnabei b'shem Hashem. You have that on the side? That's what we're backtracking, just a couple of paragraphs from where we reached last time. והנבואה בשם עבודה זרה נחלקת לשני חלקים. Hachelek harishon—so again, first the Rambam subdivides those who claim nevuah, those who claim מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה and those who claim misnabei b'shem Hashem. Now he subdivides מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה. והנבואה בשם עבודה זרה נחלקת לשני חלקים החלק הראשון שיעמוד נביא ויאמר שכוכב פלוני השרה עלי רוחניותו ואמר לי עבדוני בכך או דרשוני בכך וכן עם כל עבודת פסל או צורה מן הצורות ויאמר שהוא ניבא אותי בכך והודיעני בכך או ציווני להזהיר על עבודתו באופן פלוני כמו שהיו נביאי הבעל ונביאי האשרה.
So bekitzur, the first of this subdivision is where he attributes his so-called nevuah to the avodah zarah itself, to the kochav, to whatever is the object of the avodah zarah. V'hachelek hasheini, the second type of מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה: שיאמר חזון נראה אלי מהשם לעבוד עבודת פלוני או להוריד רוחניות פלונית באופן פלוני ויאמר אופן מאופני העבודה והמעשים שעושים אנשי אותה העבודה כפי הידועים בספרינו הרי זה גם מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה לפי ששם זה כולל האומר שהיא בעצמה ציוותה על עבודתה או באיזה דבר שיהיה או אמר שהשם ציווה לעבוד אותה הנברא.
And then he goes on to say what the din is. וכשנשמע ממתנבא אחת משתי הנבואות האלה ונתקיימה עליו העדות כפי דינה הרי דינו שיומת בחנק.
Why is the second one called מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה? He's not being מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה. He's alleging to have received nevuah from Hashem. He's not alleging the first chelek that the Rambam said, so he alleges to have received nevuah from the avodah zarah, from the kochav hane-eved. But the second case is he alleges to have received nevuah from Hashem. So why not call that a false nevuah, a nevuah, again, alleged obviously falsely b'shem Hashem? Why does he include it under this category? That's a peleh. If the category was called מתנבא לשם עבודה זרה, good. But that's not the category. It's מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה. That's a peleh. Let's keep reviewing. ואין לחוש לנבואתו ולא נבקש ממנו מופת. ואפילו עשה מופתים אשר לא שמענו מופלאים כמוהם כדי לאמת דבריו הרי זה נחנק ואין לחוש לאותם המופתים לפי שסיבת קיום אותם המופתים השם אמר בכתוב כי מנסה השם אלוהיכם אתכם וכולי. כי עדות השכל מכחישה נבואתו גדולה מכל עדות העין הרואה המופת לפי שכבר נתבאר אצל בעלי השכל שאין ראוי לעבוד ולעבוד זולת היחיד שהמציא כל המציאות ונבדל בתכלית השלמות.
There's an arichus there, no? והוא משעבד את הכל לפי שכבר נתבאר אצל בעלי השכל שאין ראוי לעבוד ולעבוד אלא להשם.
Doesn't it be kvaze, no? והנה אם נתבונן לפי שכבר נתבאר אצל בעלי השכל שאין ראוי לכבד ולעבוד אלא להשם.
And if we tofes that the Hakadosh Baruch Hu is, he's not holding by any perushim on the perek chamishah asar. What he's doing, suppose he's not holding any hakdamah to perek chamishah asar. It's like this, Rabbotai. בימי אנוש טעו בני האדם טעות גדולה ונבערו עצת חכמי אותו הדור ואנוש עצמו מן הטועים. וזו הייתה טעותם: אמרו, הואיל והקל ברוך הוא ברא כוכבים אלו וגלגלים להנהיג את העולם, ונתנם במרום וחלק להם כבוד, והם שמשים המשמשים לפניו, ראויים הם לשבחם ולפארם ולחלוק להם כבוד. וזהו רצון הקל ברוך הוא, לגדל ולכבד מי שגידלו וכיבדו; כמו שהמלך רוצה לכבד עבדיו והעומדים לפניו, וזהו כבודו של מלך.
Obviously that mashal and line of reasoning is as wrong as can be. But why is it so wrong? Now, the seif reads so off. The mashal is, no, the mashal is true. The mashal is correct, no? If the president sends the Secretary of State to talk to some foreign leader, and the foreign leader is mevazeh him, so he's being mevazeh the president. And if he receives him with pomp and circumstance, then he's being mechabed the president. So the mashal is true. Obviously this is, and not only is it wrong, it's not only wrong: כיוון שעלה דבר זה על ליבם, התחילו לבנות לכוכבים היכלות ולהקריב להם קורבנות ולשבחם ולפארם בדברים ולהשתחוות למולן כדי להשיג רצון הבורא בדעתם הרעה,
which is wrong, it's evil. But why? So the explanation is, the mashal is takeh inherently true, but the mashal is not a mashal. The mashal is inherently true. That is true. But the mashal is not a mashal. Why is the mashal not a mashal? At the end of the day, the melech is absolute, as a monarch with absolute power, and his avadim and omdim lefanav are his subjects. But at the end of the day, he's a person, they're people. It doesn't detract from recognition, acknowledgment of him and his kavod to be mechabed them. And the emes is, the melech may not think of it in these terms if he's stricken with a case of megalomania as melachim sometimes were throughout the course of history. But at the end of the day, the kavod is not really for the person, the kavod is for the institution. And the way the institution functions is the melech has his mesharsim and his avadim and his osei devaro. So you can show kavod for the institution by being meshabeach and mefaer the melech directly, or you can show it by the melech's proxies. There's an infinite gap. There aren't words to express the next thought. There's an infinite gap between Hakadosh Baruch Hu and everyone, everything. אם יעלה על הדעת שהוא אינו מצוי אין דבר אחר יכול להימצאות. ואם יעלה על הדעת שאין כל הנמצאים מלבדו מצויים הוא לבדו יהיה מצוי ולא יבטל הוא לביטולם שכל הנמצאים צריכים לו והוא ברוך הוא אינו צריך להם ולא לאחד מהם. לפיכך אין אמיתתו כאמיתת אחד מהם הוא שהנביא אומר והשם אלוהים אמת הוא לבדו אמת ואין לאחר אמת כאמיתתו. והוא שהתורה אומרת אין עוד מלבדו כלומר אין שם מצוי אמת מלבדו כאמיתתו.
Recognition of Hakadosh Baruch Hu in the form of worship is recognizing that ein od milvado. How in the world, there's no mashal for the king. Okay, the king is the king and he's sort of the embodiment of malchus, but so are his proxies. Well, so it's takeh, it's kavod for the king to be mechabed the king. It's kavod for the king to be mechabed the avadim. Worship of Hakadosh Baruch Hu is an acknowledgment, a recognition, an expression of the affirmation that ein od milvado. Where's the mashal to the king and his mesharsim? It's not ein od milvado about the king, the melech basar vadam. What's the mashal? Or we asked, the second of the two questions we posed is when the Rambam says, עידות השכל המכחישה נבואתו גדולה מכל עידות העין הרואה מופת שכבר נתבאר אצל בעל השכל שאין ראוי לכבד ולעבוד זולת היחיד שהמציא כל המציאות ונבדל בתכלית השלמות.
That's what the Rambam is explaining. That's why the Rambam is ma'arich. He doesn't just tell us שאין ראוי לכבד ולעבוד אלא השם. He's explaining what the sevara is. That's why the Rambam has to be ma'arich. That's why he's ma'arich. That's why the sevara is just. Avodas HaShem is a recognition and acknowledgment, an expression of that recognition and acknowledgment of ein od milvado. Kumdoyes that a misnabi, someone who's misnabi to be oveid avodah zarah, agam that he alleges that the source of that nevuah is HaKadosh Baruch Hu, he's not a misnabi besheim HaShem because he's a kofer baHaShem. A person says HaKadosh Baruch Hu told him then he makes up some sheker. Two days ago someone came with a nevuah that it's going to be 80 degrees yesterday in New York. Okay, so obviously he was a navi sheker. He's not a kofer. He's not a kofer. He's not a kofer. Just not to say you're going to give him shlishi in Sholosh Seudos either, but he's a navi sheker and he's going to get chenek and mista'ama he has a cheilek le'olam haba. I don't know why he wouldn't have a cheilek le'olam haba for that nevuah sheker as terrible and egregious as that is. The one who's misnabi for avodah zarah, agam that the lip service recognizes HaShem, but the tochen of what he claims is kfira. That's not misnabi besheim HaShem, that's מתנבא בשם עבודה זרה. Let's also revisit the again those last lines again for another let's try to be omeid on something else. I must say everything the Rambam ever wrote is so unbelievably tif. It's a mind-boggle. So you ask how is that possible? משל מה הדבר דומה. Let's say you dip your hand, let's say you touch the wall and every place you touch the wall you leave a red spot. How is that possible? The answer's very simple. Before doing that you dipped your hand in a bucket of paint, of red paint. So you have red paint all over your hand, so if you have red paint all over your hand, whatever you touch is going to be red. When a person is so deep and so profound and only דברים שיש בהם ממש, everything he says and everything he writes is going to be so deep and so profound. So noch a mool, these last few lines here: כעדות השכל המכחישה את נבואתו. Many, many years ago I heard, I don't know if it's true, I didn't hear from a reliable source, but it could be it's true anyway. I heard in the name of Rebbe Velvel Soloveitchik that he said if you want to discern whether someone knows how to learn, so ask him about the Bei'ur HaGra on Shulchan Aruch. If he tells you that the Bei'ur HaGra on Shulchan Aruch is that the Bei'ur HaGra gives mareh mekomos, the Shach and the Taz say... But he tells you in the Gaon's marei mekomos that they're gevaldig Torahs. So if you want to know if a person knows how to learn, ask him what the Biur HaGra on Shulchan Aruch is. I didn't hear it from a reliable source, but it's a good vort, so it could be that it is true. It's a very good vort, so it could be that it is true. You can say something similar about what people see or don't see in mofsim. What does the Rambam say here? כי עדת השכל המכחשת נבואתו גדולה מכוח עדת העין הרואה מופתו.
Again, we don't care how seemingly overpowering and overwhelming the mofsim are, because the edas hasechel is stronger. So what's the pshat in this? In particular, even assuming, even let's grant this, the edas hasechel is גדולה מכוח עדת העין. Maybe I made a mistake in my logical reasoning. Wouldn't be the first time. So what does the Rambam mean? Such a categorical statement. Sechel, at least some levels of sechel, not all levels of sechel. But the higher levels of sechel are a spiritual capacity. The Rambam says that's a person's tzelem Elokim מאת השם מן השמים. It's a spiritual capacity, higher forms of sechel, not lower forms of sechel. Higher forms of sechel are spiritual capacity. Sensory experience is simply something physical. What you see, what you hear, those are certainly not spiritual capacities, those are physical capacities. It can have spiritual implications, but they're physical capacities. So the vort is like this, the Rambam's saying like this. Let's say a person who's a baal sechel thinks something through a thousand times, checks it out with other baalei sechel, comes to a certain conclusion. Then let's say those same thousand people see an alleged mofes, again the eidus of which would contradict the edas hasechel. And again they sort of check themselves, they recheck themselves a thousand times, did we really see what we think we saw? They replay the film a thousand times the same way they rethought the maskanas hasechel a thousand times. And at the end of the day you have this irreconcilable contradiction. Says the Rambam, there's no reason to think that they're at fault in either. They're not at fault in applying the sechel, they're not at fault in... In the physical perception, but here's the vort. The physical perception because it's physical mitzad atzmo is fallible. Ma she'ein kein the seichel because it's something spiritual mitzad atzmo is not fallible. Okay, if I'm if I venture into things I know nothing about, if I'm intellectually lazy and because of that I don't exert myself to think as clearly and deeply as I should, so avada avada I'll make mistakes based on seichel. A person can involve some creative a beautiful world and we zicher can and do maaseh af. So that's poshut. But the point is that the seichel mitzad atzmo is not fallible. What's physical mitzad atzmo is fallible. That's why the Rambam says, if you have you hear this? You hear the vort my friends? That's why if you have this tarti desasrei, so it's klar that the eidus haseichel is gedola mikol haeidus. If I get eidus haseichel because I thought about it for thirty seconds while I thought about it for a second while texting someone on my phone, okay, so I don't know how much stock you can place in that eidus in that eidus haseichel. But no, I thought about it, and what's more I asked the Rambam what he thought about it, I asked the Vilna Gaon, I asked Rabbi Akiva, I asked Rav Chaim what he thought about that, so they're all maskim, they're all maskim. But on the other hand they all saw this mofes and they can't they can't say no, I they saw... No, the koach itself is fallible because it's something physical. It doesn't have to be that you were sloppy, that you were unattentive in applying and using that koach. No, the koach keshelo atzmo is fallible. It's something physical. It's something physical at the end of the day. The seichel is a koach eloki mitzad atzmo it's not fallible. So when a person is sure as a person can be that I applied, I used, I drew upon my seichel properly and he has enough seichel... and a person is sure that he saw what he saw, so at the end of the day it's poshut that eidus haseichel is gadol from eidus haeiyin. Repeat why physical is inherently fallible? Yeah, well maybe I'll try. I mean the way the Nefesh HaChaim representing the worldview that he does would explain it to us, but the Sifrei Chassidus say the same, it's not a question of whether he wore a gartel or didn't wear a gartel for him. Either way either way they say the same. The reason, why do we have, what does it mean when we're told about all these olamos, so many, so many olamos that we can't see? What's the pshat? So the answer is that the briah was created that way because as it were the gap between Hakadosh Baruch Hu and the physical world, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is אינו גוף ולא ישיגוהו משיגי הגוף ואין לו שום דמיון כלל.
The as it were to go from that, so it went incrementally, it went piecemeal. So what's the more spiritual something is, the closer, not in the physical sense, in a spiritual sense it is to Hakadosh Baruch Hu within the chain of being, and the more physical something is, the more remote it is and the more distant it is. Because again the more physical something is, as it were the more antithetical it is to what real existence is. Real existence is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Hakadosh Baruch Hu is eino goof. So even if you don't have that whole system Nefesh HaChaim tells us and the Sifrei Chassidus tell us al pi kabbalah. But that still remains the same, that HaKadosh Baruch Hu whose אין אמיתות בלתי לה' לבדו HaKadosh Baruch Hu who's tamim, HaKadosh Baruch Hu is not physical. Physical is the opposite. Physical by definition is imperfect, it has defects. That's the nature of the beriah. Rambam says that's why there are defects. He says why couldn't HaKadosh Baruch Hu create a world without defects? He says you can't ask that question. It's like saying why didn't HaKadosh Baruch Hu create a square circle? If HaKadosh Baruch Hu is going to create something physical, it's going to be imperfect. So for whatever reason, HaKadosh Baruch Hu wanted a physical world. Why we don't know. We don't know why He wanted anything. For whatever reason, He wanted there should be a physical world. A physical world by definition is imperfect, because physicality is the opposite of perfection, it's the opposite of true existence. So that's what it means. That's why edut hasechel is גדולה מכוח עדות העין. And that's why also, that's why because the Rambam here is talking about that it's a koach Eloki. That's why the Rambam doesn't quote the pasuk. We said well why does the Rambam have to quote the pasuk, why is the Rambam giving a sevara that not to be oved avodah zarah? Should have quoted the pasuk that there's never going to be even a hora'at sha'ah of avodah zarah. There it is. And the Rambam's whole point is you know this without the pasuk. That's gufeh what he wants to tell you. You don't need a pasuk for this. Yes, avodah zarah is a pasuk. There is a pasuk for this, but you don't need the pasuk. You don't need the pasuk for this.