(c) Apr 18 2001 RashiYomi Inc. MY COLLECTED & INDEXED MAIL JEWISH POSTINGS-Ver #1
Individual Postings 1st appeared(& were copied in html form) on the Email List Mail Jewish

From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@saber.towson.edu>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 02:23:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: RE: Gematriahs

A thread was started some time back on following laws whose alleged
reason was a gematria (a numerical association of letters). During
this thread I brought a Malbim to show that we need not believe that
any Talmudic laws are based on gematria. Avi Feldblum responds
>>>
I do not see that you support in any way that Alex has incorrectly argued.
Alex has brought a clear Gemarah that can be easily explained as Alex has
assumed. You have brought one acharon that interpret's that Gemarah
differently. I can see that you may want to hold like the Malbim, and
therefore hold the opinion that there is no gemarah that rules based on a
gematria, but I cannot see any validity at all in questioning someone else
who choses to intrepret the gemarah as it is written to indicate that we
pasken based on a gematria.
>>>

Avi is right--I have left an important point out of my argument: Namely,
that Gematria is intrinsically not a valid method of derivation because
you can derive anything you want. All I have to do is find a sentence
whose numerical value equals some word or phrase and I have a
prohibition.  Consequently Gematria is not a logical method. By contrast
the other methods of Talmudic derivation (like the rules of style of
GENERAL-PARTICULAR) even though they may be complex and poorly
understood nevertheless, do have guidelines and rules and can only be
applied in specific circumstances

Nevertheless even though Gematria is TOO FLEXIBLE to be a rule **IF**
the Talmud had used it consistently then I would be hesitant to
criticize it.  It is for this reason that I brought the Malbim--the
Malbim showed that on those rare occasions that Gematria seems to be
used it actually is not.

Thus in summary my point is the following: (a) Gematria is TOO FLEXIBLE
to be a logical method of derivation--you can derive anything with
it(b)there are very few gematrias in the Talmud (c) furthermore there is
reason to suspect (a la Malbim) whether gematria was EVER used.

Based on the above I reopen my question whether we should explain a law
in the SA whose source is non talmudic on the basis of a a Gematria (the
reference is to eating nuts on Rosh Hashana--in previous threads we
tried to argue that the reasons were because of digestive discomfort)

Russell Jay Hendel;Phd ASA
Moderator Rashi is SImple
http://www.RashiYomi.Com/