[Avodah] Sephardi-ism: some food for thought

[Chana Luntz]

I wrote:

> : I have no clue about R' Zevin but you are forgetting about 
> a whole range of
> : halachic concepts which we do find throughout the 
> literature operate to
> : mitigate or and in some cases overrule what might otherwise be the
> : straightforward psak - kavod habriyos ..., darkei shalom, 
> shalom bayis,
> : pikuach nefesh, b'shas hadchak ...                         
> even lifnin
> : meshuras hadin somewhat - these are off the top of my head...

And RMB, inter alia replied:

> I'm not sure I would lump all of these together. Hefseid 
> merubah is a chessed concern for the poseiq, but not a 
> halachic issue for the sho'eil. Darkei shalom, piquach 
> nefesh, these are themselves halachic mandates with their own 
> specific dinim that outweigh many other halakhos. The poseiq 
> isn't seeking a qulah, he's seeking a chumrah in a more 
> significant din.
> 
> Of your list, perhaps only kavod haberi'os (when it's the 
> sho'eil's kavod, eg Shabbos toilet paper) fit my intent when 
> I wrote of hefseid merubah.

I am not sure that is fully true.  While shalom bayis may indeed have a
halachic mandate, it is also (often) the matzav of the shoel that is at
stake, ie their relationship with their spouse.   Pikuach nefesh can
also be about the matzav of the shoel (although less often).  B'shas
hadchak is even more likely to be so and even closer to your hefsed
meruba example.  Think for example of the halacha that you can rely on a
minority opinion in such a circumstance.  Horaas sha'ah is one a case
that has generated has a certain amount of discussion on this list of
late, in the context of women an serarah (as in, preferring an observant
woman over a non observant man in a position of serarah).  That example
too shows how the matzav determines the psak.

Given the wider context, I would not describe hefsed merubah as "a
chessed concern for the posek", but rather that the posek is, in
formulating his psak, looking what one might call "situationally", ie at
the shoel within his context.  But I think that all psak is really like
that.  There is halacha in the abstract, but psak by definition is
applied, rather than pure, mathematics.  Now looking situationally does
not always result in being makil - it can also result in being machmir
if the posek feels that is what is required (baal nefesh machmir, which
is also situational, becomes directional if it is given as a specific
psak from one's Rav).  And all of the halachic concepts that I listed
are, to my mind, merely examples of the requirement to look at the
surrounding situation of the shoel that is driving the shayla.  I then
see the extreme cases that you bring, eg the obligation to seek out
snifim l'hakel to free an aguna, as merely the extreme end of this.  The
halachic system also tells us what situations are regarded as being
sufficiently serious as to exercise a greater gravitational force on
other aspects of halacha. This by the way is not axiomatic.  It is by no
means axiomatic that a woman being left as an aguna is in a worse
situation than many others.  There have been many many spinsters who
have led full and productive lives despite never marrying - and a true
aguna is arguably not any worse off than that.  The fact that the
halachic system deems the lack of hope of a true marriage as a greater
crisis than the mere absence of a marriage is a statement of value (to
which we pretty much automatically subscribe because we have been
brought up with it - ie we have aligned our moral views with the Torah
views).  It is also not axiomatic that hefsed meruba should count as a
situation that requires leniency - it is rooted in the idea that Hashem
has compassion on mamon Yisroel, but it need not be the case (and I
don't believe that concept necessarily took root in other religions).
That is why looking at these examples enable us to see some of the moral
underpinnings of the halachic system.  It is more than chessed, it is
midos in general.

 
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha

Regards

Chana