[Avodah] Seeing G'zeiros Everywhere

[Chana Luntz]

RRW writes:
> Just as Minhag is an elusive word, so is g'zeira. And So is the word
> doctor, it might mean physician, it might be a dentist, it might be a
> professor or it might be a former Met and Yankee pitcher!

This is a standard deconstructionist theme, that words are ultimately
empty of meaning. If you want to get into deconstructionism and Humpty
Dumpty (which was Lewis Carol's version of it, "words mean whatever
I say they mean"), you can do so, but at that point there is no point
talking about halacha, and you might as well go off and join the Reform.
After all, as I pointed out "melacha" is certainly an elusive word,
if you want one, so why not go on what one "feels" Hashem wants when he
wants us not to do melacha - and whatever feels right in terms of your
understanding of the word is what you should do (or not do) on shabbas.

Halacha is all about defining words (as is any legal system of course)
as precisely as possible. Melacha means what it has been defined to mean
via halacha Moshe m'Sinai, via the gemora, the rishonim, the achronim,
and you can't just decide to redefine it the way you want to without
taking all of this into consideration.

Similarly the word gezera. You need to work through the discussions of
the rishonim and the achronim in order to be able to argue your point.
I am not saying that you might not be able to argue with the summary
position given by ROY in his Klalei Horai which is "ain l'chadesh
gezerot achar chatimat hatalmud ... " but you are going to need to be
on his level of learning (or need help or support from somebody who is)
and be able to cite the rishonim and achronim who disagree.

Perhaps to get a better idea of what you are up against, here is Yabiat
Omer Chelek aleph Orech Chaim siman 16:

"Behold the matter is known from that which is set out in the Rishonim and
the Achronim shein lgzor gzerot meda'atanu like the Rosh writes: (perek 2
of Shabbat siman 15) to wonder on the geonim as to how they are able to
mechadesh a gezera after the completion by Rav Ashi of Shas, see there.
And Harav Hamagid (perek 5 of hilchot Hametz u'Matza halacha 20) writes
"sheain lanu l'gzor gzerot medatainu achar dorot hageonim ain sham.
And so writes the Ran in the Teshuvot Harivash (siman 390) bd'H Nashumv.
And so writes the Radvaz in Teshuva chelek 1 (siman 149). And in the
Yakar Tiferet (perek 1 of hilchot Terumot halacha 22). And so writes
in the teshuvot of the Ri meverona (siman 108) see there. And Maran
Beit Yosef (siman 462) bd'h Umashekatuv Rabbanu l'chalek he brings that
which is written in the Kol Bo, .... and he writes on this the Beit
Yosef that there is no reason to this minhag, to forbid ul'gozer gezerot
bedavar shelo chashashu lo chachmei hatalmud, v'lo chachmei haachronim
ad kan lashono;. And from what he writes "vlo chachamim hachronim"
we derive that there is coach byadei haposkim l'gzor gezerot achar
chatimat haShas (vgam hu hadin lo shalal ele achar dorot hageonim aval
hageonim atzmam yecholim lichadesh ligzor, vzeh shelo c'da'at haRosh).
And it seems that even though we are not able lchadesh gezerot achar
chatimat haShas in any event if there are chashashim for this the
poskim because they see that there is found a stumbling block in this,
and they are accustomed not to do any matter, they need to be concerned
for the minhag. But in this where even the rest of the poskim are not
concerned for this they do not have a concern about this minhag at all.

b) And even if there is agreement by the chamchmei dorot l'chadesh
gzerot in any event this is only where the chachmei hadorot stand up
and count and the majority agree l'gzor ul'taken but indeed there is
no coach l'shum chacham l'gzor ul'asur (al klal yisroel) and like that
which is written in the Teshuvot of the Rivash (siman 271) d"h "amar"
see there. And so writes the Rivash in his teshuva (in siman 125 and
241) sheain lanu l'gzor gezerot meda'atinu see there and he brings in
siman 4 Yad Malachi chelek 3 (klal 153) see there V'chen chazik bklal
ze gaPrach Yoreh Deah (siman 87 si'if katan 7)... "

As you can see from this, this topic is discussed extensively in the
rishonim and achronim. With the Rosh, inter alia stating explicitly that
we cannot make gezeros today. Your position is thus coming out against
the Rosh and others. Now since RRW versus the Rosh is, due to other
principles in halacha, not really a contest (or are you querying the "an
Achron cannot argue with a Rishon unless he can show other Rishonim that
support him" principle as well?), I think you need a bit more than that.
ROY had done some of the work for you, as you can see, by showing that
at least some others, such as the Beit Yosef, appear possibly to not be
quite as rigid as the Rosh. But as you can see, that does not seem to
really get you that far, certainly not where you want to get to.

> My tachlis is to rid people of rigid beliefs that fail to map reality
> correctly. Marc Shapiro found gazillions of exceptions to how people
> see the iqqarei emunah. His legitimate point is aisi that they are more
> fluid than we think

Marc Shapiro was looking at Rishonim versus Rishonim, and trying to show
that the Rambam was not necessarily the only Rishon in the equation.
That is quite different to a contest which sets the Rishonim against
what some people might want to say today (or even more, certain actions
by certain poskim or by various communities that you are interpreting
but nobody else does as conflicting with what the Rishonim are saying).

Now if you can accept that gezera has a precise halachic meaning, and
whether or not one can make a gezera today has been discussed within
the Rishonim and Achronim, you can then look at your list of "gezeros
everywhere" and see to what extent these actually fall within a different
halachic category (psak, minhag, chumra, whatever, which is how most
people understand the various items on this list - and is the way that
anybody challenged on any of this will justify them halachically, not
as being gezeros, but as having other, legitimate halachic sources).
But absent this not only are you accusing everybody involved in all of
these things, including all the poskim involved in promulgating any of
the things on the list as not knowing what it is that they are in fact
doing, but if taken to the logical extension you have taken it in the
paragraph I quoted at the beginning, we are truly in Humpty Dumpty land
and there is no point discussing anything, certainly anything halachic,
and we might as well shut up shop here on Avodah and elsewhere.

Shabbat Shalom
Chana