[Avodah] Seeing G'zeiros Everywhere

[rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com]

RDR:
> (i) to whom did the author address each rule?»

Aha! this pre-supposes that the author intended this as a g'zeira which
may not always be the case.

But as you may soon see for yourself, perhaps the g'zeira might have
evolved from a P'saq INTO a g'zeira and intention is fuzzy
OR
Possibly a given poseiq REPORTS a pre-existing g'zeira w/o a clue how
it got there in the first place!

EG Hayei Adam or Sma"k reporting the g'zeira of qitniyyos but not issuing
it themselves.
-----------------------

RZS:
> According to RMF and RAK it is completely assur and always has been,
> and the poskim who permit it are simply wrong.

Ein hachi nami
No argument here
BUT

> The USA agencies
> that forbid it are paskening like them.

Lav davka that they continue to pasqen as RAK/RMF! Rather perhaps -
out of deference to the authority of those g'dolim - they continue to
hold that way anyway and therefore refuse to re-think this issue!

[Like RYDS says Mattan Torah closes off thinking outside a certain box]

Here I use g'zeira as 
"a bar or impediment preventing a party from asserting a fact or a claim
inconsistent with a position that party previously took, "

[Or iow refusal to allow the natural shaqla v'tarya out of deference to
an authority who already made a ruling.]

In simple legal terms words a Halachic "estoppel" *

The g'zeira here is about re-opening the decision 

Illustration 1
This is AIUI how Breuer's treats RMF's psaq forbidding eruvin in
Manhattan; they will no longer listen to any new arguments because they
deem the matter closed to debate.

Illustration 2
This is also true of Dr. Lamm's refusal to allow women to read the
Megillah @ Stern College, because the Rav had opposed this whilst alive.
IOW Dr. Lamm would not revisit the issue.

Illustration 3
Yekkes continue to follow the Heideneheim Masoretic text regardless of
new discoeries by R Mordechai Breuer.

Rabbi Wolpoe: What if there were no such estoppel?

EG
RHS ignored RYBS's prohibition Re: Eruv in Manhattan and re-opened the
issue and revised the p'saq and certified an eruv around YU.

So Gelatin's indeed WAS at one time a p'saq [historically speaking]
but NOW it has been estopped in the USA from being re-visited or revised.

If you can now find this common denominator as to
1 Why YU refused to revisit the Rav's decision re: Megillah, and
2 Why RMF's decisions are perpetuated by Manhattan and US Certifying
agencies, you have added a big piece to the puzzle

KT
RRW

*  [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estoppel
Estoppel in its broadest sense is a legal term referring to a series of
legal and equitable doctrines that preclude "a person from denying or
asserting anything to the contrary of that which has, ... been established
as [True]...]

Note: As a former insurance agent I had been trained in this law.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile