[Avodah] Characterizing our era

[Lisa Liel]

On 8/12/2011 4:01 PM, kennethgmiller at juno.com wrote:
> R' Micha Berger wrote:
>
>> In the past I suggested two different lines -- the SA for Seph,
>> and the Mappah for Ashk. The SA (speaking inclusively) recentered
>> halachic discussion around a new book, ...
>>
>> This potential post-acharonic period lacks a similar book. While
>> the MB is rising to that role, it's only one of 4 Turim.
>
> Perhaps the MB is not merely *rising* to that role. Perhaps it is filling that role *precisely*.

The Mishnah Brurah is nothing of the sort.  Even the Shulchan Aruch is 
severely lacking, given that it's only on the Arba Turim.  The Aruch 
Hashulchan at least covers the "fifth Tur" in Aruch HaShulchan HeAtid.

> Consider the comparison **you've** made between the Tur and the MB: The Tur (and it's relatives, such as the SA) were the standard-bearers for centuries. The a major upheaval occurred, in which a new standard-bearer appeared (the MB), which focused only on a particular section of the prior one, concentrating on those halachos considered most relevant for the times.

The Mishnah Brurah leaves out everything about kashrut and taharat 
hamishpacha.  How is that including everything that's relevant for its 
age?  Not to mention that the material of the "fifth Tur" is extremely 
relevant for us today.

I heard a story, btw, that the Chofetz Chaim was actually planning on 
continuing and doing Yoreh Deah next.  But he was asked by a number of 
Rashei Yeshiva not to, because it would make it too easy to learn the 
laws of kashrut.  It may be apocryphal, but then again, it may not be.

> Is this not exactly what the Tur did to the Rambam?

I don't think so.  There were no korbanot at Rambam's time, either.  And 
no agricultural laws to be kept (with a few exceptions).  But he 
included them just the same, because it's 100% relevant to us.  The Tur 
did not.  Neither did the Shulchan Aruch.  Sometimes I honestly see 
where the Rambamists are coming from.

Lisa