[Avodah] psak and rationality

[Micha Berger]

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 03:44:22PM -0400, Rich, Joel wrote:
:> The CI is on AZ 9a, writing about tereifos. He says that nishtaneh
:> hateva since 4000 AM doesn't mean halakhah chaneges. Note that his
:> reasoning is NOT that Chazal erred; but still, the fact that the biology
:> or zoology is NOW incorrect does not impact halakhah.

: So he would agree if we could specifically show teva did not change,
: that halacha would reflect teva?

I don't now if he would admit that possibility. However, I was assuming
that someone who bought into the CI's notion of 2000 years of Torah in
which halakhah is *defined* in a qualitatively different way but did
believe in the possibility (which might include the CI, or not) would
say that the definition stands.

Much the way the Rambam says that a beis din hagadol (or a universally
accepted pesaq; e.g. Talmud Bavli) similarly defines halakhah, and thus
hilkhos tereifos stand even where biologically inaccurate. I see the two
positions only differing in whether the definition phase ended in 4000,
or with Ravina veR' Ashi.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Take time,
micha at aishdas.org        be exact,
http://www.aishdas.org   unclutter the mind.
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Rabbi Simcha Zissel Ziv, Alter of Kelm