Timeline for Source that Gr"a finished the "whole" Torah?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2019 at 12:12 | history | edited | Al Berko | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body; edited title
|
| May 6, 2015 at 11:10 | history | edited | Danny Schoemann | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
"too" means "also"
|
| May 6, 2015 at 10:56 | vote | accept | yechezkel | ||
| May 6, 2015 at 10:56 | answer | added | yechezkel | timeline score: 10 | |
| Apr 25, 2015 at 17:17 | comment | added | yechezkel | @Isaac Moses unfortunately no.. He doesn't remember where he read it.. | |
| Apr 24, 2015 at 18:11 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackJudaism/status/591665790539210753 | ||
| Apr 24, 2015 at 16:48 | comment | added | Isaac Moses♦ | Did your friend give any indication of where he may have read this? Could he? Any information along those lines would make it easier to track this story down, if it's to be found somewhere other than in a recent conversation. | |
| Apr 24, 2015 at 16:43 | history | edited | msh210♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body; edited tags
|
| Apr 24, 2015 at 3:36 | comment | added | Shimon bM | IMHO, this question sounds a bit silly. It's one thing to say that the Gra studied every major text that he was taught to believe was part of "the masorah", but it's another to suppose that he thought that he had thus "finished", in a sense, with Torah altogether - that Torah is a closed, bound system that one could actually do a siyum on, rather than something of infinite breadth and scope. | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 21:58 | comment | added | ray | see rabbi chaim volozhin's hakdama on the Gaon's commentary to sifrei ditzenuta. it's printed also in the foreword of vilna gaon on mishlei in some books | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 20:41 | comment | added | warz3 | @Daniel good point, although I think his issues with Chassidus boiled down to very complex interpretations of certain point(s) in the writings of the Arizal as well as misunderstandings of their practices which might only disqualify parts (if any) of their seforim and not the seforim in general, but I don't know exactly what his issues were and how he held. | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 20:39 | comment | added | Daniel | @warz3 he might not have considered those "Torah" | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 20:39 | comment | added | warz3 | I've heard that the Gaon was able to take any law written in the Torah and bring up all the relevant oral law discussions (Shas) as well as the psak halacha. | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 20:37 | comment | added | warz3 | I'd be surprised to hear the contrary in as far as the learning, not the "siyum" per say. I wonder if this includes Chassidishe seforim, of which there were probably only a handful at that time? Chances are he read those too ;) | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 20:37 | comment | added | yechezkel | @Daniel I have a feeling that that wasn't included in the sium | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 20:35 | comment | added | Daniel | What about things that came after he died? | |
| Apr 23, 2015 at 20:23 | history | asked | yechezkel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |