The gemara says that if someone says mai mahnei lei rababanon is a apikoris.
1. Why is he a apikoris? Its not one of the ani mamins of the Rambam?
2. Is he really halachikly called a apikoris with all the halachik nafa minas that go with that?
Ari
Shalom Ari,
1. We can understand the Rambam's view based on what he says in his commentary to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 10:1), namely, that an "Apikores" is someone who does not value authority, but rather disrespects the Torah or those who learn it.
2. Frankly, I was taking the Gemara at face value. But is there a particular Halachah that applies to an Apikores that you believe should not apply to the fellow who says "Mai Ahanu Lan Rabanan"?
Bi'Verachah,
Yishai Rasowsky
Hi, I didn't actually see this email till now ( I must have missed it) and hope it's not too late to reply.
In terms of if such a person is a halachic apikoros its a bit of a chidush to me to say if he touches wine it becomes yayin nesech, and it muter to speak lashon hara about him and if he writes a sefer torah your chayiv to burn it. ObviouslyI am referring to a person who otherwise is shomer torah mitzvah and "just" has a krum hashkafa. Are there poskim/achronim who say that he has all the halachos of a apikoros?
Thanks
Shalom Ari,
It's great to hear from you again!
1. The law that an apostate Jew who touches wine makes it Asur appears in Yoreh De'ah 124. It says that only an actual Mumar renders the wine forbidden by touching it. But to me it sounds like the person you are discussing is not a Mumar at all; rather, he "merely" has mistaken beliefs, critical as those beliefs may be.
2. True, the Chafetz Chayim (Hilchos Lashon ha'Ra 8:5) does say that we may -- and should -- speak Lashon ha'Ra about Apikorsim. But, based on the criteria written there, one gets the impression that this is referring only to someone who denies Torah, not necessarily to someone who merely has mistaken beliefs. On the other hand, if, for example, you see someone is going to enter a relationship with the Apikorus, then you shold warn that other party (assuming that the potential victim might listen). In that sense, yes, Lashon ha'Ra for To'eles is Mutar.
3. The law that a Sefer Torah written by a Min must be burned is found in Gitin 45b and Yoreh De'ah 281. The reason given is that we assume he wrote it for idolatry. But the person you are discussing is not suspected of idolatry, so apparently this concern would not apply.
May you continue to attain greatness in Torah and Yir'as Shamayim!
Bi'Verachah,
Yishai Rasowsky
So in which way (if any) is he a apikoris al pi halacha? Can it be that really halachikly he is not a apikoris in anyway but he has a smell (rayach) of apikorsis for his krum hashkafas hachaim?
Shalom Ari!
1. He may not have a Chelek l'Olam ha'Ba. See Mishnah in Sanhedrin 90a, and Rambam in Hilchos Teshuvah 3:14.
2. He might not be eligible to serve as Shali'ach Tzibur. See Mishnah Berurah OC 126:2.
3. He might not be viable for a Shiduch or serving as a Melamed. See Chafetz Chayim, Tziyurim Be'er Mayim Chayim #17.
Wishing you continued Hatzlachah in your Torah learning,
Yishai Rasowsky