Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site npois.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ahuta!npois!adam
From: adam@npois.UUCP (Adam V. Reed)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: Lo Tigra
Message-ID: <249@npois.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 20-Mar-85 13:50:15 EST
Article-I.D.: npois.249
Posted: Wed Mar 20 13:50:15 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Mar-85 03:29:57 EST
Organization: ATTIS, Neptune, NJ
Lines: 56

I wrote:

>> If I could not understand a Mitzva, then I would not be be able to carry
>> it out "with all my mind" anyway. So an "observance for observance's
>> sake" would not be much good in any case.

Eliyahu Teitz asks:

> To which mitzva do you refer when you write 'all my mind'?

To all of them: I used Biblical language because I don't like to repeat
myself. As I wrote earlier, I view the impact on human beings as the
essence of any mitzva, even one originally taught by means of a specific
example. Re-enacting the original instructional example may not be enough
to carry out the mitzva today, since the original human impact of that
specific action may have been vitiated by social or technological change.
Thus, if one does not understand the human impact the mitzva was
intended to have, one cannot truly carry that mitzva out.

Teitz also asks:

> What do you do with the mitzva of 'Lo tigra', that you should not
> diminish the number of mitzvot?

I interpret that to mean that I should watch out for cases where the
number of mitzvot would be diminished, were I to restrict my observance
to a specific instructional example whose impact has been vitiated by
social or technological change.

Consider, as an example, the mitzva originally taught through the
example of leaving the corners of the fields unharvested. The human
impact was to assure that the majority of the population, which was then
engaged in agriculture, would make food available to the poor (widows,
orphans etc.) who would have otherwise starved. Today, the majority of
the population is no longer engaged in agriculture. Thus, those Orthodox
who claim that this mitzva is binding only on those who actually own or
work in the fields, are in effect "diminishing the number of mitzvot" by
discarding the mitzva that the majority should contribute to feeding
those who would otherwise starve. And since the majority of the poor
today live far from cultivated fields, even those Orthodox who observe
the original instructional example literally are in effect discarding
this mitzva, since they are not making the food available to those in
actual danger of starving.

Humanistic Jews, unlike the Orthodox, do not discard a mitzva when the
original instructional example has been vitiated by social or
technological chage, but instead find and carry out equivalent
contemporary ways to carry out as many of the Mitzvot as possible. I
personally observe the above mitzva by contributing to an institution
which carries out research in food science and agricultural technology.
The Orthodox would no doubt claim that I am the one in danger of
discarding mitzvot, by abandoning the traditional way of carrying them
out. My personal opinion is that my interpretation is the one closer
to relevant Jewish traditions.

						Adam