[Avodah] [Areivim] Following Aruch HaShulchan over MB

[Richard Wolpoe]

On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Moshe Feldman <moshe.feldman at gmail.com>wrote:

> Article in Yeshurun by R. Eitan Henkin at p. 159: both R. Y. E. Henkin
> (as reported by many of this talmidim as well as his grandson) and R.
> Moshe Feinstein (as reported R. Dovid Cohen of Gevul Yaavetz; see also
> Or Hamizrach, year 31, choveres 1, p. 324) said that where there is a
> machlokes of AhS and MB, the AhS should be followed.  R. Henkin
> considered AhS "the most important of the later poskim."
>
> Shavua tov.
> Moshe
>

Rabbi Harvey Senter is a Talmid of RYBS and the founder of Kof-K.  He quoted
the Rav who quoted his grandfather that the AhS wast"*The* poseik hador"

In Lita, the legacy of Poskie hador goes roughly as follows:

   1. R. Yitchok Elchanan Spektor [Kovno]
   2. Aruch Hshulchan [Nevardok]
   3. R. Hayyim Ozer [Vilna]

There were perhaps greater lamdanim.  R. Hayyim Brisker probably was deemd a
bigger illuy than any of the above, but I am not familiar with his Teshuvos
as being widely accepted [unlike his father th4e Beis Halevy.]

The MB no doubt as a Sefer was weidly promoted by Roshei Yeshiva - perhaps
for many reasons.   This is not the first time that a Sefer that has been
promoted mostly as a superior textbook has superceded perhaps superior
"poskim."

Illlustration: The Maharam miRothenburg commisioned the authorship of
Hahgahos Maimopniyyos on the Mishneh Torah because of the tremendosue value
of the Sefer as a textbook. In no way was the Maharm going to chnage his
PSAK based upon the Mishneh Torah, it was simply in defernce to the
superiority of the composition.  And that is exactly WHY Hagahos Maimoniyyos
was commisioned, to accomodate LEARNING the Mishnh Torah w/o scarificng
Ashkenazic practice. Anyone can connect the dots to other Seforim similarly
composed.

FWIW, Asie from Rabbi Senter's testimony, the few surviving Litvisher
Rabbonim whom I met in my youth were unifromly devotees of the AhS.  And
from most Semicha Students I have talked to, MOST have confirmed that the
AhS teaches a DERECH in Psak - like R. Haayyim Brisker teaches a Derech in
learning.

I have not met anyone who has told me that the MB has taught them a Derech
in learning, but they have learned it for beik'us and for Halachic
Principles.  As a limud it is immensely popular.

To me it is like Rashi and Gmara. If you are first sitting dow nto learn
Gmara learn it with Rashi. If you are interested in getting the PSAK from a
daf, you will probahbly consult Tosafos, Rif, Rosh, Ran etc.  Similarly if
you are sitting down to learn Orach Hayyyim perhaps,the MB is the most Rashi
like. But if you want an in depth view, then I would say see
BY, Taz, MGA, AhS, etc. [I also would say the Levush is the most under-rated
of all of the above]  And of all the above the BY and the AhS will most
likely give you a derech in p'sak.

To reiterate, when I was once learning Kitzur SA a fellow remarked:
"Hassidim learn Kitzur"
I replied: "you mean they PASKEN like Kitzur?"
"No, they jsut LEARN it"
IOW it is the text of choice.

The BY paskensare  MORE like the Rambam than he does like the Tur but he
built his magnum opus around the Tur instead.  And in his hkadamah he
explains why.

I think this is part of the nature of popular mis-conceptions...
That said, certainly one can be SOMEICH on the MB. But I could probably say
the same for the Kaf haHayyim.

-- 
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/20080803/6d5086f2/attachment-0002.htm>