Talk:Pardes (legend)

Hello,

I rather boldly deleted the paragraph below from the pardes page and apologize if I have caused offence. It is just that it makes a few unsubstantiated claims, like "Laymen claim..." etc. and judgements ("false heaven") and is thus unencyclopedic and detrimental to the standards of Wikipedia. Please contact me if you wish to discuss the matter further.

All the best, Ignacio Bibcraft 22:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PaRDeS with regards to the study of Torah

It must be noted for the sake of Torah that the attainment in Torah starts from the Sod and ends in the Pshat. However, laymen claim the opposite and try to gain attainment in Torah by starting with the Pshat and ending in the Sod. This is a major delusion and results in the, of course unconscious and unintentional, creation of false heavens.

It's to be compared with trying to reach the fourth floor of a building without travelling trough the first three. Hence, this is impossible.

This is also claimed in the prayerbook of Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna, the Vilna GAON (one of the greatest authoritative figures in Judaism).

Needs work

First, the legend and the exegetical method are distinct. So we need either 2 articles or a different title. Second, the exegetical method needs to be expanded significantly and explained better, maybe with examples. Drash, for instance, includes halakhic midrash not just homiletic, see midrash. Thanks. HG | Talk 18:53, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right; this article needs a lot of work. But with respect to your points, this title is correct, because there already is a disambiguation page at Pardes and a page about exegesis at Pardes (Jewish exegesis). I'm going to try to improve this a little now, but I don't have much time to spare. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 19:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Malik, shanah tovah. I moved the exegesis stuff, thanks. But I don't quite see why this anecdote is an article in itself. Why not make it background the the exegesis piece, which should end up longer and richer anyway? I don't see how this can grow into a full article. Is it so notable? Sure it's quoted alot, so put it into the relevant (quoting) topics. Maybe merge into something on aggadah or Elisha b. A., as an example? Maybe I should post my first AfD? LOL. HG | Talk 20:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here's where it should be moved. This is an anecdote about the study of mystical doctrines, now best covered under kabbalah. The story doesn't have much history or notability except in that context, or for biographical/analytical pieces on the individuals involved. So, would you join me in proposing an AfD? HG | Talk 20:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

G'mar chatima tova. I largely replaced the article with a portion of what I had written about the legend at Elisha ben Abuyah. There could be sections about how the fates of the three rabbis have been interpreted. Or we could delete this article and editors can include that interpretation in each rabbi's article if they choose to. Obviously it's most significant with respect to Elisha. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 20:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed redirect

Based on above, I see that Malik et al. have written the legend up quite splendidly in the Elisha ben Abuyah article. I added a short item to [[Kabbalistic doctrines, to illustrate Talmudic concerns with mystical study. There it can refer to Elisha piece for more info. So there's no need to try to expand this. Instead, I propose to turn this into a redirect to the Elisha section. Thanks! HG | Talk 20:55, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]