Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Breakdown of the Halakhic System - Two Earth-Shattering Shiurim - Exclusive
judeanoncapta:
--- Quote from: Lubab on July 01, 2008, 03:55:56 AM ---The Talmud itself prescribes this method for deciding the halacha. Generally the academy that is larger wins, or in some cases the academy that is more expert in the field. It depends on whether it's dinei mamonos or dinei nefashos whether it's deoraitta or derabannan.
These are the basic principles of paskening halacha. It's the ABCs, my friend. It's the stuff I learned in fourth grade gemarah class. If you don't know this stuff there isn't much room to discuss more complex matters.
--- End quote ---
Don't talk down to me. I'm speaking about the interpretations of that Talmudh. How do you decide whether Rashi or Rabbenu Tam's opinion is correct?
The difference is that Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel or Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose were arguing about what the Halakha is and Rashi and Rabbenu Tam are arguing as to what the Talmudh is saying. Therefore only one of them can be right. Get it?
Lubab:
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on July 01, 2008, 03:59:36 AM ---
--- Quote from: Lubab on July 01, 2008, 03:52:51 AM ---
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on July 01, 2008, 03:51:36 AM ---
--- Quote from: Lubab on June 30, 2008, 06:49:42 PM ---
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on June 30, 2008, 06:28:27 PM ---
--- Quote from: Lubab on June 30, 2008, 06:05:53 PM ---
P.S. JNC I got quite a laugh from your "beat to the punch". It's a lot easier to tear down the arguments you make for me than the ones I actually make so I understand where you are coming from there. I don't know who taught you how to learn like that but it obviously wasn't someone who really knew how Torah or Chassidut for that matter works.
--- End quote ---
My satirical explanation made about as much sense as yours did.
And the truth is that your whole view of the Torah shows that you don't understand how the Torah and talmudic system works. You wedidn't explain to me how a person who thinks both opinions are right can possibly give a psak halakha other than just picking the more stringent view in all issues.
Listen to the second shiur.
According to the Rambam's principle, if you can disprove what Rav Bar Hayim says in those first two shiurim to my satisfaction, I'll become a Chabadnik.
--- End quote ---
You obviously did not read my post.
I said how you pasken halacha. You generally go by the Rov. Further, if it is a deoratta we go lechumra if it is a derabbanan we go lekulah.
I think the explanation above is perfectly logical. If you don't think it is I'd like to know why SPECIFICALLY.
I will be happy to try and disprove that section and make you into a Chabadnik when I get a chance.
--- End quote ---
Go by the Rov of whom? Geonim? Rishonim? Achronim? All of the above?
That is ludicrous. The Talmudh is what decides the Halakha and if one interpretation makes the most sense, who cares how many other opinions disagree with it?
Your principle of going by the Rov when applied to hundreds of Hakhamim over thousands of years makes no sense at all.
--- End quote ---
I meant Rov i.e. the majority not Rov i.e. Rabbi.
--- End quote ---
I know what you meant. And I was asking whether you go by the majority of the Geonim, Rishonim, Achronim or all of the above.
And also, Lubab if you can only pasken halakhic based on a number system ie. finding a majority of great sages who lived in the past, how can you possibly apply halakha to a new reality, a new situation that those Rabbis never had to deal with, ie test tube babies, cloning, fighting a civilian enemy in wartime, qorban pesah etc?
--- End quote ---
I think the way it works is in each generation the Rov makes the decision but they cannot overrule an earlier generations's decision unless their yeshiva is bigger. I believe that's the way it works. But there most definitely are rules about how to decide this stuff.
Modern decisions? Are a bigger problem. There are very few people who really know how to pasken these days but everyone does have an obligation to pick a Rov (Rabbi) and stick to their decisions. It says that when a Rov Paskens that becomes the halacha even if he might have made a mistake because G-d gave the decision making power over to the Rov (Torah Lo Bashamayim Hi).
Of course the Rov must have a valid semicha and shimush and the Rabbi who gave him Semicha must have had the same.
I know there was a break in the chain of Semicha but I think we've had some pretty great Rabbis that were worthy to give semicha in the past several generations and if someone got semicha from someone who got semicha from someone who got semicha from someone very authoratiative like I dunno...the Vilna Gaon. Then we can rely on such a psak.
If you're sephardic you'll obviously go to a Rov who follows the Beis Yosef.
If you're not you'll go to an Ashkenazi Rov.
The Torah scholarship in this generation is pretty weak but I wouldn't say the halachik system has "broken down" because a Psak by a legitimate Rov is given the stamp of approval by G-d when He said the Rabbis are the ones who must decide the halacha, not Me.
Lubab:
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on July 01, 2008, 04:02:24 AM ---
--- Quote from: Lubab on July 01, 2008, 03:55:56 AM ---The Talmud itself prescribes this method for deciding the halacha. Generally the academy that is larger wins, or in some cases the academy that is more expert in the field. It depends on whether it's dinei mamonos or dinei nefashos whether it's deoraitta or derabannan.
These are the basic principles of paskening halacha. It's the ABCs, my friend. It's the stuff I learned in fourth grade gemarah class. If you don't know this stuff there isn't much room to discuss more complex matters.
--- End quote ---
Don't talk down to me. I'm speaking about the interpretations of that Talmudh. How do you decide whether Rashi or Rabbenu Tam's opinion is correct?
The difference is that Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel or Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose were arguing about what the Halakha is and Rashi and Rabbenu Tam are arguing as to what the Talmudh is saying. Therefore only one of them can be right. Get it?
--- End quote ---
Well, no. It's not true that only one of them can be "right". They can both be right and we will paskin according to the principles about how we paskin. There are rules about it.
Sorry to have talked down to you I lost my cool there, will edit.
MassuhDGoodName:
Re: "...And I don't know how this is relevant to an intelligent discussion."
Well...I disagree! 8;) :::D
judeanoncapta:
--- Quote from: Lubab on July 01, 2008, 04:14:57 AM ---
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on July 01, 2008, 04:02:24 AM ---
--- Quote from: Lubab on July 01, 2008, 03:55:56 AM ---The Talmud itself prescribes this method for deciding the halacha. Generally the academy that is larger wins, or in some cases the academy that is more expert in the field. It depends on whether it's dinei mamonos or dinei nefashos whether it's deoraitta or derabannan.
These are the basic principles of paskening halacha. It's the ABCs, my friend. It's the stuff I learned in fourth grade gemarah class. If you don't know this stuff there isn't much room to discuss more complex matters.
--- End quote ---
Don't talk down to me. I'm speaking about the interpretations of that Talmudh. How do you decide whether Rashi or Rabbenu Tam's opinion is correct?
The difference is that Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel or Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose were arguing about what the Halakha is and Rashi and Rabbenu Tam are arguing as to what the Talmudh is saying. Therefore only one of them can be right. Get it?
--- End quote ---
Well, no. It's not true that only one of them can be "right". They can both be right and we will paskin according to the principles about how we paskin. There are rules about it.
Sorry to have talked down to you I lost my cool there, will edit.
--- End quote ---
Lubab, when the Talmud quotes three braitoth one after another to explain what a Huliah is (in reference to the tying of tzitzith.)
וכמה שיעור חוליא תניא רבי אומר כדי שיכרוך וישנה וישלש
Rambam, Rashi and many other Rishonim say that this first Braitha means that a Huliah consists of three wrappings and although Rebbi could have just said shalosh Krikhoth, he was just using a figurative lashon in this instance.
The Raavad says that if Rebbi meant three Krikhoth, he would have said so. Rebbi specifically used this lashon because he was refering to wrapping the white and blue together three times and then wrapping the white string one more time making a total of seven Krikhoth.
תאנא הפוחת לא יפחות משבע והמוסיף לא יוסיף על שלש עשרה הפוחת לא יפחות משבע כנגד שבעה רקיעים והמוסיף לא יוסיף על שלש עשרה כנגד שבעה רקיעין וששה אוירין שביניהם
Therefore the Raavad understands this next line that one should not make less than seven or more than thirteen as referring to how many Krikhoth in each Hulia.
Rashi and the Rambam understand that line as saying that one needs atleast seven Hulioth of three Krikhoth each and no more than thirteen Hulioth of three each in each corner of tzitzit.
The Raavad holds than one can have as many hulioth as he likes or as few as one.
תנא כשהוא מתחיל מתחיל בלבן הכנף מין כנף וכשהוא מסיים מסיים בלבן
Now Rashi interprets this braitha as referring to the Gedhil as a whole that at a minimum the first Krikha and the last Krikha have to be white and it can be all tekheleth in between like the Rambam or majority tekheleth like Rashi.
The Raavad interprets this braitha as referring each Hulia requiring each one to start with white and end with white and of course this statement is the lychpin of his shita since if you interpret this braitha as referring to the Gedhil as a whole, there is no reason to look at the second braitha as referring to the Hulia because the seven number makes less sense if there is no reason to begin and end with white.
Lubab, the authors of these braitoth had one thing in mind when they wrote those braitoth or gave them over to their students. It's either like Rashi and the Rambam or it's like the Raavad. The authors did not have two interpretations in mind.
Just because you can come up with some mystical explanation showing the "inner meaning" Behind each shita, does not mean that they are both right. It just means you're creative.
The fact is that either the Raavad is right or he is wrong. Or Rashi and the Rambam are either right or wrong. Or do you actually beleive that the intention of the original authors was for the braitoth to be read in two ways and they meant both interpretations?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version