[Avodah] Halachic Texts: More Background

[Richard Wolpoe]

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Micha Berger <micha at aishdas.org> wrote:

>
> R' Prof Ta-Shma notes that someone reading a seifer can usually have a
> "feel" for whether it's a rishon or an acharon. He attributes this
> difference in feel to three qualities:
>


Several quick points:
The "top guns" at ner Israel when Iwas there could I d the author or a
Severa w/o seeing it first.
Anyone reading TEshuvos can esily see the difference between Rishonim and
Acharonim in that genre




> 1- They dealt not only with single sugyos, but with tying them together
> across shas and across time.
>
> 3- Rishonim didn't need to seperate the genres of pesaq lehalakhah
> ulemaaseh from peirush.
>
> 4- Attention to girsaos.
>
> No acharon consistently pulls off all three. Of course, one needs to
> take it on faith that Rashi does #1, but that's a different story. I
> presume RPTS's full argument is more convincing.
>
> R' Elyakim Krumbein, in his KMTT shiur on the Gra, notes that these
> three features are also found in the Vilna Gaon's writings. He ties
> things together horizontally to an extreme - eg his ability to relate
> every halachic claim in the Zohar to one in shas. And through time --
> that's the core of the biur on SA. The Gra also shows how every pesaq
> in the gemara is derived from an understanding of the mishnah. And of
> course, his lack of separation between pragmatics and peirush lead him
> to numerous distinct pesaqim.
>
> One might be able to argue that the Gra was treated like a throwback
> to the rishonim because experimentally, he proved himself capable of
> rishon-style work.
>
> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha
>
> --


OK let's say the GRA IS a throwback.  But things change.

Example it is one thing for the Rif to say:
You can overidee me by going back to Shas
And fro someone TODAY to do the same thing.
Why? there is about 1,00 years of more literautre and precedent in between.

Illustration: Rambam says t'eh bidvar Msihna includes Mishna, Gmara etc.
RY Karao adds one word "posqim"  Be'er agolah cites Rambam as his sources
but -
What changed?

Answer:  about 350 years of posqim!  In the Rambam's time few were
publsihed.

So if the Rambam goes back to the Gmara it is different than if WE do it no
matter HOW MUCH oa throwback it is.

IT is like Rabbi Eliezer at tanur achinai. once a decision has been rendered
you cannot even invoke a Bas Kol

Beis Yosef himself uses nimnu b'gamru to reject the Rif in YD 101. He says
simlar in other places ,too.  You simply cannot ignore this.

Bach shows that from Rav Ashi, cooking fowl with milk is ASSUR allbeit
miderabbanan. But Rambam and about a dozen other posqim rule otherwise!
The Be'er Hagolah even uses the Bertinoro as suport for this psaq although
it is clear that he quotes Ra Ashi the same way the Bach does.  The Bach is
clearly the simple read of the Talmud.  how do I know?  Even Reb Artscroll
says so [Hullin 104 ] in both English and Heb. Editions.  Now become a
throwback and ignroe the pos


t
-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080701/573474a4/attachment-0002.htm>