[Avodah] Should Shiurim be Corrected to Archeological Data

[Arie Folger]

There are essentially three positions possible, one of which can branch out
in at least two but really many more:

1a) All the shiurim are connected and they are small (Rav Chaim Noe, small
dirham shiur)
1b) All the shiurim are connected and they are large (Noda biYhuda a.k.a.
Chazon Ish, even though CI himself held like a variant of view #3)
2) All shiurim that can be connected to realia are connected to realia even
if their ration then conflicts with Chazal. I understand that this is the
AhS RMB is citing.
3) Some shiurim are connected to realia and some are standardized. This
view can then split up based on two factors, first of all which are the
shiurim that are connected to realia and which not (Rav Zalman Koren claims
that CI held that the kazayit is an exception and is connected to olives,
but almost all other shiurim are standardized), and secondly whether those
shiurim that are standardized are small, large or connected by ratio to one
of the basic realia-based shiurim.

So you tell me that AhS has a different approach that CI. I think that we
can accept that. But it isn't a stira of any shitta.

Arie Folger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20190224/8fa93a50/attachment-0003.htm>