[Avodah] eilu v'eilu

[Micha Berger via Avodah]

On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 01:43:24PM -0500, M Cohen via Avodah wrote:
: Interesting insights on eilu v'eilu (and other issues)
: From R Moshe Shapiro zt'l
: <http://j.mp/2j7eeOa> [On scribd.com -micha]

It is quite relevant to RZL and my slow-speed discussion on the topic.
Particularly, starting with pg 4, col 2, the par. that begins "This
brought up the subject of Eilu veAilu".

The discussion touches on the Chinukh #496 (quoted in fn 19), IM OC
haqdamah (provided in fn 20) -- both as saying that EvE means that's
what we hold like, even if they are wrong.

Although RDE himself notes that RMF appears to contradict this in YD
3:92 (fn 21) -- so I don't know why he posed to RMS Rav Moshe's position
based only on the haqdamah) -- both as saying that EvE means

In contrast, RDE ascribes a multiple Truths view to the Yam Shel
Shelomo (BQ, haqdamah; fn 22), the Ritva (Eiruvin 13b "EvE", fn 23;
which we discussed at length) and the French chakhamim in the
Ritva, R' Yaakov Kamenecki (Emes leYaaqov Devarim 25:1 pg 616,
quoted in the notes in fn 24).

RMS responded that everyone holds eilu va'eilu means a plurality
of truths, and the "emes" of the chinukh is "emes lehora'ah". When
RDE reiterated the first shitah, RMS responded with a "Chas veShalom!"

This is different than either RZL's *or* my position until now.

They then touched on the Maharal (Be'er haGolah, be'er 1), that EvE
is only for machloqesei Beis Shamai and BH, which RMS dismissed as
a chidush and a daas yachid.

And finally (pg 7), the discussion veers away back into disputes into
aggadita.

As I said, it's worth printing up, because all the references are with
paragraph or multi-paragraph long quotes in the footnotes.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision,
micha at aishdas.org        yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view.
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507