[Avodah] WTG

[Micha Berger]

On Sun, April 13, 2008 10:44 pm, T613K at aol.com wrote:
: In  Avodah Digest, Vol 25, Issue 124 dated 4/4/2008 "Stadlan, Noam"
: <nstadlan at cinn.org> writes:
: ....In other words, RHS decided that WTG was wrong, and ruled
: accordingly on the halachic issues in question....

: This is a pretty good description of how da'as Torah works, if anyone
: is still wondering about the definition of that term.  The "personal"
: opinions  of a big talmid chacham are never just personal, and tend
: to gain wide acceptance among those who respect him and who accept
: his authority.  Some of those who move in YU circles seem to be
: allergic to the very idea of "da'as Torah" but whether they use the
: term or not, that's what they're following when they accede to the
: psak of a Torah scholar whom they respect and whose wisdom  they
: acknowledge to be greater than their own.

I think a stronger example of MO daas Torah is when two YU guys pick
at the words of Qol Dodi Dofeiq to decide if we're supposed to back
land for peace or not.

You are blurring over the critical issue of topic. No one questions
the role of the poseiq to pasqen, and most of us do not dispute the
role of "Torah values" in determining between two textually valid
pesaqim.

The machloqesin arise when you get into balancing strength of sevaros,
sources in sefarim or minhag avos against such values.

Daas Torah is when the idea is used when the question isn't halachic.
I posted a short while ago the notion that there is a spectrum between
chiyuv and issur of more and less advisability. This would seem to
imply that every question is halachic, or at least touches religion.
However, that's a question of impact. When in that gray zone, the
questions are usually about the metzi'us, not the merit of the
metzi'us.

As for what is DT, I highly suggest reading
<http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/observ-on-daat.html> which does a decent
survey of the debate in the journals up to its time. If you have more
time, R' Alfred Cohen's (ed RJJ Journal) article is available at
<http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/cohen_DaatTorah.pdf>.

The article, in passing, also makes a distinction between global
communal leadership, neighborhood leadership (should the gedolim step
in on an LOR's turf, or does he know the people better) and in
personal questions.

But I think MO more objects to the assumption that a particular set of
rabbis have DT to the exclusion of theirs, and the concomitant claim
(which is both cause and effect) that DT leads to agreement on all
essential matters. Because, after all, it guarantees the one right
answer. This defies eilu va'eilu and much of the notion of halachic
process, mandates changing history to today's DT-backed answers, and
(most irritating to MO) implicitly delegitimize the possibility of MO
and their rabbanim representing another derekh.

Until one tries to divorce oneself from that emotional issue, the MO
Jew can't really assess the ideas of the debate.

That kind of da'as Torah, as in "da'as Torah has spoken", runs counter
to the entire enterprise of the halachic process. Because there is
machloqes on very basic issues, and on very pressing communal issues,
and has been since before Batei Hillel and Shammai disagreed on
inyanei yuchsin.

And IMHO, there are many questions for which asking a career counselor
or someone you choose to be your professional mentor may give you more
clarity than your rav. No less than heading for your doctor or your
general (to cite the gemara's examples). It's only on the occasion
where you can't see which job would offer more opportunity for avodas
Hashem than another that I would think a rav's help is primary. Do I
take a job that allows me to be home evenings with my children, or one
that starts later and allows me to maintain my morning seider?

I want to close with a quote (taken from the aforeposted URL for RAC's
article) from the Baal haTanya, Igeres haQodesh #22 (note: a
chassidishe source no less!) Things were changing in the early days of
Chassidus, and the BhT was no fan of what would grow into daas Torah:

> My dear friend...."Remember the days of old, understand the years of
> every generation" – has there ever been anything like this since the
> beginning of time?! Where, in all the books of the scholars of Israel,
> whether the earlier or later ones, have you ever seen such a custom
> instituted, to ask about a secular question, such as what to do in
> some mundane matter, even from the greatest of the early wise men of
> Israel, such as the tannaim and amoraim...but rather [people would
> turn to] actual prophets, such as there used to be, such as Shmuel
> the Seer, to whom Saul went to ask about the donkeys which his father
> had lost. But in truth, all matters relating to a person, other than
> something having to do with Torah or fear of heaven, are not
> apprehended other than through prophecy, and not by a wise man. As
> our rabbis have taught, "Everything is in the hands of heaven other
> than fear of heaven..."

> And when our rabbis zt"l said that people "derive benefit from him
> [from a talmid chacham] by advice and sound wisdom," this refers to
> words of Torah, which is called "sound wisdom".

Then RAF continues by showing a ra'ayah for DT from the Me'iri...

SheTir'u baTov!
-micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "Man wants to achieve greatness overnight,
micha at aishdas.org        and he wants to sleep well that night too."
http://www.aishdas.org     - Rav Yosef Yozel Horwitz, Alter of Novarodok
Fax: (270) 514-1507