[Avodah] Ends-Driven Halachic Reasoning in the Aruch haShulchan?

[Micha Berger]

On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 03:15:35PM -0400, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote:
: I don't see a problem here, because we're not discussing a psak din
: but a takanah...

Not just a taqanah, a taqanah that needs an justification for why they're
not following the din deOraisa. And so simply saying "it's a taqanah" doesn't
really satisfy me.

DeOraisa, the employer would have the right to not pay the money. The
usual taqanah for conflicting claims would require he make a shevu'as
heises first. Here, we're putting the power to extract the employer's
money despite the deOraisa.

Had the taqanah not violated the deOraisa, but went "beyond" it, I
wouldn't have asked.

And as I said, had the AhS invokved hefqer BD hefqer, we would need no
excuse for how Chazal can move money despite the deOraisa. But he doesn't.

Instead, he says they came up with a justication that isn't real. That
opens a whole pandora's box of ascribing hidden "social justice" reasons
for legislation that has an explicit explanation already given. And
it makes it sound like legal mechanism can indeed be nothing more than
a hopp to jump through, rather than justification in-and-of itself.

So my question isn't "how did they make this taqanah", but "how can you
claim that they wanted to ignore a deOraisa because they thought they
had a 'more moral' alternative, and then just found some way to legally
justify it?"

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Live as if you were living already for the
micha at aishdas.org        second time and as if you had acted the first
http://www.aishdas.org   time as wrongly as you are about to act now!
Fax: (270) 514-1507            - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning