[Avodah] Minhag Yisroel

Thu Oct 25 16:16:33 PDT 2007

On 10/24/07, Zev Sero <zev at sero.name> wrote:
>
> Richard Wolpoe wrote:
> > On 10/24/07, *Zev Sero* <zev at sero.name <mailto:zev at sero.name>> wrote:
>
> >>> Meanwhile in the absence of a Sanhedrin by what authority did:
> >>>    1. Minhag Yisroel morph ma'riv from Reshus to Hova?
>
> >>     It's a neder.  "Kiblu aleihem".
>
> > I didn't make the neder.
>
> Your ancestors did.  A person has the right to make a neder binding
> on him and his future descendants.

And is a Sanhedrin needed?
So wjhy fan't the Jews of circa 1948 IMPOSE 5 Iyyar as a hhag for all of us
decsendents?I

> how can a neder over-turn the Talmud?
>
> Huh?  How does it overturn the Talmud?
>
> > Can I be noder against the Halacha?
>
> Of course not.  "Mushba ve'omed meHar Sinai."  You can't vow to eat
> pork, but you can vow not to eat beef, or to eat beef every Shabbos.

no this is shavau. neder is different.

>>>    2. Talmud Bavli acquire Halachic authority?
>
> >> As the Rambam says in his hakdama, Kol Yisrael accepted it as their
> >> authority, just as one can accept ones own posek.  Asei lecha rav.
>
> > So what?
>
> All Israel accepted it so it's binding on All Israel.

So let all Israel accept:

   1. 5 iyyar as a holiday
   2. Any out-of-use mitzva [so-called "mes Mitzvah"] remains status quo
   3. Therefore revivals of
   1. Shatnex chekcing and
      2. issur lashon horo were unncecesary since they went out of us
      anyway

  Later poskim
> were not accepted by everybody, so they're not binding on everybody.

who says Bavli was more accepted than later Poskim? the Rambam?  But Rema
says  we go bassar  basrai?  And  how says the MB is not  MORE popular than
the Talmud? or ROY?

>  most jews drive on Shabbos waht does THAT prove.
>
> Nothing at all.  But if all Jews agreed to drive every Wednesday,
> and accepted it on themselves and their descendants as a neder, then
> it would be binding.  And if all Jews agreed to accept RYSE or ROY
> as their rav and posek acharon, then his views would be binding on
> everybody.

and how is this survey conducted to ensure a fair vote?

> Anbd who is the Rambam to ictate Halachah!
>
> He's not.  He's giving the history of how Talmud Bavli came to be
> the last source that is binding on everybody.

Maybe he is wrong!
Bavli does not permi dancing, clapping or slapping on Yomt Kol sheckain on
Shabbos but Frum jews do it!

Bavli states [arachin 3] that women are as obligated in Megilah as men - who
follows THAT?

>>>    3. Zohar  acquire legitimacy?
>
> >> Why would it need to "acquire" it?  It is what it is, and carries
> >> its own legitimacy.  What would be a Sanhedrin's role here - to give
> >> it some kind of "haskama"?
>
> > So it has zero halachic significance then?  We certainly do not acrod
> > Halachic signifcance to Aggadic passages in Talmud [se Rambam] so why
> > Zohar?  it's jsut another book - or is it more? And if is more why? And
> > why not put on TEfilin on Hulo Shel Moed base dupon Zohar. Ois this
> > based upno neder?
>
> Because it has halachic passages.

So does the Agur. Howis the Zohar more important than the Agur in
determining Halachah?

>
>
> > So the Shulchan Aruch is NOT the book of Halachah. I can show you dozens
> > of books taht state it IS the book of Halachah. { e.g. See heshy Zelcers
> > Mihna companion on Niddah for example]  Are they all mistaken?
>
> If they say that it is the definitive halachic authority then they
> are obviously mistaken.  It's trivial to find cases in which we don't
> follow the ShA, even if by that term we mean to include the Rema.

Howis Heshy Zelcer MIstaken shwne pkaen
 he publishes that the shulchan Aruch is the repository of Halchah but the
Rambam is NOT mistaken that ALL of Israel accepted the Bavli therefore it is
binding on all of Israel?  Who has the authority to make these judgments. We
can show that Bavli was NOT accepted during periods in Israel from
documents  circa 600-1000.

>>>    6. Polygamy get banned?
>
> >> Originally a cherem accepted by particular communities, and continued
> >> as a minhag.  It's only binding on those communities that accepted it.
>
> > Why should a community bind me? is a community a Sanhedrin? Can
> > acommunioty BIND me to do 5th of Iyyar as a day of Yom Tov ceasing from
> > Melacha? If not why not? If it can ban me from a2nd wife, why can't a
> > community ban melacha?
>
> If they accepted it on themselves as their binding minhag, and you are
> a member of that community, then I suppose they could.

So how come we cannot promulgatge % Iyyar as a Holiday!  Why require a
Sanhedrin?
Why can[t the community issue a cherem, any ba'al that is mesarie to give a
get will have his original Kiddushin nullified retroactively by communal
fiat?

>
>
>
> >>> 7. Mechiras Hametz emerge?
>
> >> What's the problem with it?  Why would you need a Sanhedrin for it?
> >> It doesn't involve any change in halacha at all.  I guess I just
> >> don't understand the question.
>
> > I suggest you research the matter further as to how we seel hametz an
> > dhow the Talmud construes such a sale wand why the GRA objected to OUR
> > Sale as it exists now.
>
> If you think there are grounds for objection to our sale as it exists
> now, please mention them.  I'm not aware of any such grounds, or of
> anybody who objects.

today's Sale of Hametz is NOT based upon the Talmud - whose authorty I  have
qquestioned.
A valid Talmudic sale is when the property is ACTUALLY transferred.  The
idea of seeling Hametz via anagnet while it remains in place w/o actaulyl
transferring it is an abstraction of circa 15-16th centuries and was
objected to by many poskim - including GRA - as a ha'aram and not a valid
sale. Many of the Yekkes in my congregation woulc not accept it as a REAL
sale if it sits in the closed and all that trasnpires are a couple of pieces
of paper.

A Mechira Olamis of course IS a PROPER sale and the GRA would give it his
blessing.
I know other rabbanim Rabbi Mordecahi Aderet is one - who will NOT partake
of Hametz that has been sold by our means

>>> 8. Aveilus during Sefira become instituted?
>
> >> Minhag.  Which is why there's so much variation in the details,
> >> including on which days it applies.
>
> > So how does Minahg have authority?
>
> It does.  "A minhag brecht a din".

So start a minhag to have 5 uiyyar as a Holiday. Why need sanhedrin?
You could make a minahg of carrying a hnaky outside of the eruv too!  And
that amount be a minhag tht brechts a din, too!

 But by definition its authority
> is fuzzier than that of a din, because it emerges from the bottom up,
> rather than being imposed by a specific authority.

Who says Minhaggim are from bottom up? Menahcem Elon outlines a form of
Minhag that is top down. Ayein sham.  in fact it might be the MOST
authoritative of ALL minhagim!  [see Rabbi Yochan Pesachim 103 and 104 re:
v;'nahagu ho'om]

>
> > At any rate it has not been rule dupno by a Sanhdrin.
>
> No, it hasn't.  And therefore it isn't halacha, it's minhag.
> Minhag is *not* halacha, it's a separate layer.  Had the Sanhedrin
> enacted it it wouldn't be minhag.

Actaully Rambam says a ASanhedrin can impose a Hnahagga.r
And FAIK Rambam says that Rabbanim TODAY can impose Gzeiros and Takkanos,
but only not on a national level, w/o it become accepted natioanlly. But
that was even true of Ezra and HE lived in the era of a bona fide Shandrin -
so I am not quite sure what has changed.

> But if Minahg can establish Aveilus during sefira why not a
> > holiday on 5 iyyar?
> > Mah nafshach!
>
> Perhaps because those who started celebrating 5 Iyyar were already
> bound by the minhag to mourn during sefirah, so it's arguable that
> they had no authority to make a new exception to it.

so a New minhag can BRECHT a din but it CANNOT brecht an old minhag?
I would posit that the GRA's revival of 2 matzosGEBRCHTed the pre-existi9ng
minhag that  had been 3 matzos as testified to by the Beis Yosef!

 Whereas Lag
> B'omer may have been an exception from the beginning of the minhag
> to mourn.  Especially if it comes from RSBY's instruction to rejoice
> on the day of his "hilula", which was before any mention of the minhag
> to mourn.
>
> --
> Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
> zev at sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
>                                                   - Clarence Thomas
>

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071025/bbae5a12/attachment-0001.htm>