[Avodah] new editions

[Chana Luntz]

RMB writes:
> ...
> :> Because I do not recall anyone in the previous discussion who
> considered
> :> the BY definitive. It's earlier than the SA, and far more
> theoretical
> :> than a presentation of halakhah ulemaaseh.
 And RAF replied:
> : The nosei keilim often use the BY to explain the SA, so they obviously
> : felt differently.

I would add, not just the nosei kellim, but the Rema seems to periodically
bring the Beis Yosef l'halacha.  

> I would say it's more concerned with existing shitos than the SA's own
> pesaq.

I'm not so sure.  An example I am thinking of (just because I happen to be
in the sugya at the moment) is Orech Chaim siman 313 si'if 6 (all about
binyan b'kelim).  The Beis Yosef himself says "Nireh" in relation to whether
the case needs to be one shedarko lhiyot refui (although indeed he then goes
on to say that this can be inferred from the Hagahos Ashri and the Kol Bo).
But he doesn't bring it l'halacha in the Shulchan Aruch preferring to stick
with the language of the Tur which leaves this out.  And the Rema then adds
it in.

 Of course, one shapes the other. But the chiluq we're discussing
> presupposes talking about a case where the two disagree. In which case,
> it is easily arguable that the BY was speaking lomdus, and the SA,
> lemaaseh.

Or perhaps the BY felt that his chiddush wasn't strong enough to be
transmitted as part of the final psak, but the Rema did.

The issue of where they appear to directly contradict seems less germane (he
retracted is another option) than where the Shulchan Aruch is silent and yet
an answer to the question can be found in the BY.  Certain Sephardim of the
"we follow Maran" type seem, from what I have seen, to generally regard that
as a kind of trump card, ie try the SA, but if not the SA but in the BY,
that will do instead (and even, if not in the SA and not in the BY, if in
the Kesef Mishna, that too will do).  I have certainly seen Sephardim use a
Kesef Mishna to trump some opinion of some Ashkenazi Achron, even ones as
authoritative as the Magen Avraham or the Taz.  That is certainly to my mind
treating R Yosef Caro as a rishon, and a super authoritative one at that.
But the again doubt an Ashkenazi posek would go that far.

> Tir'u baTov!
> -Micha

Regards

Chana Luntz