[Avodah] Peshat and Drash (Was: Re: Meshech Chochmah on Kedushah)

Micha Berger via Avodah avodah at lists.aishdas.org
Tue Apr 28 09:24:06 PDT 2015


On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 11:04:41PM -0400, H Lampel via Avodah wrote:
: But there were such instances where "one said this was how halakhah
: was understood miSinai and another says that this is new." One
: example (noted by the Chavos Yair in his Teshuva 192) is a 3-way
: machlokess in Zevachim 110b, where one Amora says Nissuch HaMayyim
: is miDrabannan, another says it is derived from a posuk, and another
: says it was a halacha l'Moshe MiSinai. Rambam (Temidim uMussafim
: 10:6 ) poskens it is a halacha l'Moshe MiSinai. This is consistent
: with the concept that, as the Rambam writes, "once someone says 'so
: have I received,' there is no more debate." The reason is that once
: one of our sages can demonstrate he is a recipient of explicit data
: originating with Moshe Rabbeynu, a HLMS, it is naturally accepted as
: fact.

I thought it was well accepted that the Rambam's position in HLMS
is inconsistent, that he mentions numberous machloqesin in dinim
he himself labeled HLMS.

I don't have time to summarize the Chavor Ya'ir teshuvah 192, but
I gave up waiting until I did. The examples are numerous.

Possible resolutions:

- No machloqesin in the essence of the matter, but there can be in
  details. (the CY's conclusion.)
- Im halakhah hi neqabel -- no machloqesin in something both sides agree
  are HLMS.

And what I suggested: That we should distinguish between disputes due
to lack of knowledge and formal machloqesin, with the Rambam saying the
legal term "machloqes" with all the usual rules of pesaq only apply to
the latter. Other disputes, while called machloqes in the colloquial
sense, are resolved using the rules of safeiq -- because (leshitaso)
ignorance does not create a real machloqes (in the technical sense).

And the Rambam here is saying that real machloqes is limited to
conflicting deductions and extrapolations from existing law to new
places. And thus disputes in laws that date back to Sinai can't
have real machloqesin.

I know I'm repeating myself, but it's been "forever" ago in email
list time since I sat on this post awaiting the time to study the
CY.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha



More information about the Avodah mailing list