[Avodah] chumrot of sefardim

[Chana Luntz]

> The question of when one can defy local pesaq (chumrah type
> 3) on the grounds that it is really a kind of doubt (chumrah 
> type 1), as RnCL takes for granted, I will leave to others. 

I only take it for granted because there appear to be enough sources
that state this as fact.  For example, the Pri Megadim I quoted in my
previous post.  And ROY's piskei teshuva are littered with it - for
example, take the teshuva on allowing a sephardi fellow to eat non glatt
meat at a Sephardi family simcha  in Chelek 5 Yoreh Deah siman 3 that I
have an commented on in Avodah vol 16 #140 and 142 where the safek sfeka
that allows ROY to permit is based on a) maybe the animal being eaten
did not in fact have sirchos [safek in metzius] and b) maybe the Rema
was right and such sirchos are mutar (safek in psak).  Note however that
he needed both sfekos because we are dealing with a d'orisa [treif meat]
which meant that on merely one of the safkos we would go safek d'orisa
l'chumra.

I 
> do not know when one can simply ignore a rejected shitah, and 
> even pasqen lequlah on de'Oraisos
>  -- clearly NOT safeiq behavior, and when we treat a 
> machloqes like a safeiq. I have asked this on-list before.

I am not sure I understand what you are asking here.  If you are asking
when you can go against local psak when there are others who pasken
differently I see two aspects that seem to come up:

A) the calibre of the other psak and the extent of its acceptance. Ie it
can't just be a psak from anybody.  At one end of the spectrum there is
something like the Rema/Mechaber, where each holds sway over a goodly
portion of world Jewry.  On the other there might be some obscure rishon
or it might be a shita that is roundly condemned by other rishonim and
universally has never been adopted.  Within that spectrum one can ask
where one draws the line, but only at the margins (My best guess would
be something like -  if a shita is mentioned in the nosei kelim to the
Shulchan Aruch, it is already something of an acknowledged shita, If
only mentioned in the Beis Yosef, less so, if not even mentioned in the
various commentators on either the Rambam, Tur or Shulchan Aruch, your
on weak ground, but I would be interested to know if anybody else has
heard of a rule of thumb like this).

B) there almost invariably is associated with this kind of psak words
like, bidieved, b'sha'ah hadchak, shalom bayis, eiva etc etc - ie
extenuating circumstances.  The psak I referred to above regarding the
non glatt meat is a classic example - it was, after all, a family
simcha, and the family would likely be insulted if the fellow would not
eat or would ask for different food.  It was not discussing the
standards required for what the fellow brings into his home.  It is
quite clear that ROY would never permit non glatt meat to have been
purchased and eaten by this fellow at home.  Similarly the Pri Megadim
talks about bideved getting hana'ah, not about what to do l'chatchila.
What is considered sufficiently extenuating to trigger this is of course
a question but that seems to me to be precisely what one needs a major
posek for. Ie this is never used to permit in circumstances that might
be deemed to be normal but only to permit in non ideal environments or
where other considerations need to be taken into account, such as
interpersonal relations (in other words, a heter).  That is why it is
invariably used l'kula, not l'chumra.  This is different from being
choshesh for other shitos l'chumra, which is inevitably being done in a
l'chatchila environment, where one is trying to go beyond the din
(whether zehirus or prishus or whatever the motivation).

If you are asking something different, I am not sure I understand what
it is.
> 
> Tir'u baTov!
> -mi

Regards

Chana