[Avodah] Women's zimun

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, November 7, 2007 10:12 am, Richard Wolpoe wrote:
: However. if you accept a heuirstic POV of how to decide matters pasken
: then you are ALWAYS [at least potentially] bringing your own spin into
: any text! Objectivity gets trumped by subjectivity!

Not really.

I actually think that limited your structure to which rules trump
others gives you MORE room for subjectivity. There is no guidelines
provided by differential less than all or nothing. And so if you can't
prove either side of a machloqes by the rules, a person has full
autonomy to pick whichever sides he wants. I'm saying that the poseq
would be weighing factors to get a preference, and thus one side can
"win" even when it's shy of "A trumps B".

: Shitas Dr. Meir Shinnar: let the text speak for itself - do not READ
: INTO IT, do NOT bring one's prejudices into it. Do not presume one's
: shitos MATCH the text, etc.

: Shitas R. Micha Berger:  View any text with one's learned
: pre-conceived notions and see it through THAT prism

And so, I would say that shitas RDMS is that if the text doesn't speak
in absolutes, the question isn't halachic, do what you feel is right.
However, I would say that one's notions created by earlier learning
override other concerns -- to the point of mandating a given answer.

: e.g. Mamleches kohanim via the prism of Mussar school is then  about
: self-perfection and NOT about a Preistly Kingdom!

Kingdom of Priests! You're basing yourself on bad diqduq. At least use
"Goy qadosh". See -- Hashem requires BOTH. (I'm repeating myself out
of frustration; you're blatantly restating something without even
addressing my rebuttal.) Nor is that pesaq halakhah. Don't take rules
of pesaq and apply them to aggadita.

: There is no way to havea meeting of minds with these two contrary
: pre-suppositions.  There would probably be disagreement about text
: 90%+ of the time.

You are confusing heuristics with anarchy. I'm going to reuse stuff
from a private email; apologies to RRW, but it's new to the rest of
you.

The problem with trating pesaq as an algrorithm is that you're
limiting the rules of pesaq to only mean those that are absolute. A
trumps B, so we rule X. If C comes along... the fact that B is also
there is
irrelevant -- it was trumped by A.

But if C and B both mandate conflicting answers? No rules.

And if A doesn't trump B? Also no rules. There is no "following A is
*more important* than following B" -- you are giving an all or
nothing.

In short, your opening question is that there is ample proof the
system isn't algorithmic, but since you insist it is, you're troubled.
You then confuse using a weighting system with anarchy. Learn how most
digital thermostats are programmed; intensity of mebership in the set
"too hot" makes a more efficient thermostat than treating it as a
boolean. And yes, if the heat goes on when the temperature is rising,
you know the system is being violated.

And yes, by including aggadic values in the heuristic, it makes a
difference whether one's world view is O or not. C's values aren't
always ones I could include in eilu va'eilu. (Not to mention their
giving weight to non-existent rules, the use of partial quotes to
prove the opposite of the text's thesis, etc...)

The concept of halakhah kebasra'i is often cited as the reason why the
Bavli has more authority than the Y-mi. RRW would take this to mean
"Bavli trumps Y-mi". Which then is disproven by how Tosafos treat
mayim acharonim. And thus, RRW is left with a question.

My take: Y-mi pesaqim carry less weight than Bavli, so that if all
else were equal, Bavli would "win". The weight given this rule in
Ashkenaz is far far lower than that given in Sepharad. Or, another way
of putting it aliba deR Dr. Agus -- both give the rule the same
weight, but in Sepharad, its being minhag avos means that in practice
the "follow Bavli" rule ends up with both weighting, a greater total.

But it means that if the Y-mi was meiqil, and the case at hand has
factors not discussed in the Bavli's textbook case, and minhag avos is
meiqil, I might choose to be meiqil. The Y-mi isn't trumped, dismissed
altogether.

That is lemaaseh how halakhah works. Rather than RRW's questions being
questions, I see them as proofs. Exceptions will always exist, as long
as there are cases where "A almost always outweighs B" can encounter a
"B outweighs C, D and E".

However, you just can't pull out the significance of things willy
nilly. It's not simply personal opinion. There are textual rules that
have textual weights, there are mimetic histories of how seriously
various issues have been treated, and there is the desire to actually
help people become yereim usheleimim. (Such as chassidim looking for a
means to allow clapping on Shabbos along to a good hartzig niggun, or
helping a couple become parents.)

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             One who kills his inclination is as though he
micha at aishdas.org        brought an offering. But to bring an offering,
http://www.aishdas.org   you must know where to slaughter and what
Fax: (270) 514-1507      parts to offer.        - R' Simcha Zissel Ziv