[Avodah] Arukh haShulchan and Halachic Process

[Micha Berger]

Beqitzur:

I see Chana Luntz as saying:
    Minhag chashuv = local pesaq
    Minhag garua = common religious practice

I am saying:
    Local pesaq is only called minhag in a non-technical sense of the word
    Minag chashuv = common religious practice, blessed by rabbinic approval
    Minhag garua = any other practice, religious or even a non-religious norm
       that has halachic impact

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 7:01pm BDT, Chana opens by quoting me and arguing
for her definition of minhag chashuv:
>> See the Rosh Pesachaim 4:3
>> <https://www.sefaria.org/Rosh_on_Pesachim.4.3.1>.
>> He defines a minhag chashuv as one "shenahagu benei hamaqom al pi TC veTC
>> nahag imahem".
...
>> That doesn't sound like the description of a pesaq, although I guess that
>> could be fitted into the meaning if we had to. Why "veTC nahag imahem" for a
>> pesaq?
> 
> I think it sounds exactly like a pesaq - and the reason for the " veTC nahag
> imahem" is because we know that an individual psak can be tailored for
> individual circumstances (shas hadchak and a whole host of other scenarios).

Whereas I am hearing the Rosh as talking about a rabbinically endorsed common
practice.

Like the Rama on milchigs on Shavuos.

A problem with your read is that this is a poor way of saying "general pesaq
not just for one situation". After all, a pesaq for kohanim by a non-kohein
could be a general pesaq, or one about some food the poseiq is allergic too.
Why not say "lekhol hatzibbur" or something that actually says what he means
-- and in fewer words.

> I know that isn't how we normally think about it, but it seems to me fairly
> clear that this is the way the rishonim thought about it.  And when you see
> that the gemoras about changing ones minhag in Pesachim 51a [when Raba bar
> bar Chana came from Israel to Bavel he ate certain stomach fat] and Chullin
> 18b [When Rav Zeira went up from Baval to Israel he ate from meat whose
> slaughter was too slanted according to Rav and Shmuel], suddenly make sense.
> That is, the basic rule that if you go to live somewhere new and you don't
> intend to return, you can change your minhag to the new minhag of the place
> you now reside (Chullin 18b), is somewhat bafflingly, unless you understand
> this way, expressed in relation to whether a certain type of cut renders the
> shechita kosher or treif.

Not sure why.

Any different then a story in which Reb Shmuel moves from Hungary to
Lithuania and starts eading non-glatt meat?

Where in either of those gemaros do we see that not eating bow-fat was
an issur gamur (like the way Sepharadim treet non-chalaq) rather than
a commonly practiced hanhagah tovah (glatt)?

The truth is that when a Sepharadi moved to Ashkenaz, before mixed
communities became a norm, he did change actual pesaq. I just don't see
any indication which scnario is being spoken about here.

Nor any mention of the word "minhag" in either, so even it were a change
in pesaq, it wouldn't show whether "minhag chashuv" refers to such things
or not. It's just about "chumerei hamaqom".

Now moving on to minhag garua.
>> The minhag [garua] is the one we are discussing here - one that 
>> appears in a certain place, or spreads from it and various scholars 
>> give it more or less weight.

> Again my minhag garua (or just plain minhag) seems to me to match the Rosh,
> as  brought by RMB:

>> Whereas the Rosh says a "minhag garua" is one "shenagahu me'atzmam davar
>> echad".

> As it is ordinary people driven, not rabbinically driven.

Yes, but the example isn't even halachic. It's just "what people do".

Like in the Shakh YD 214 s"q 7 (on se'eif 2) who you describe as:
>>>   is quite dismissive, saying a minhag garua is just people are 
>>> behaving this way (with the distinction that a scholar not from the 
>>> locale does not need to follow such a minhag except publically).

The SA is speaking about something they are nohagim on thier own as
a geder usiyag laTorah. Not pesaq.

The Shakh opens "mihu hainu davqa beminhag chashuv"!

He outright says this extra-legal practice is what minhag chashuv means.

And then goes to the Tosafos about minhag she'eino chashuv. And that
Tosafos is discussing a case where the minhag in question is whether or
not one normally carries things on their head, because that has implications
for hilkhos Shabbos.

And isn't that how the AhS uses the Tosafos?

>> And the AhS OC 320:12 cites the same Tosafos Shabbos 92b (d"h ve'im timzeh
>> lomar anshei) as distinguishing between minhag chashuv and minhag she'eino
>> chashuv. His case of a minhag she'eino chashuv is whether the fruit is
>> commonly squeezed in their specific locale. The application changes practice
>> -- whether or not sechiatah is allowed there, or whether it's shelo
>> kedarkam.

> It is an fascinating reference, but I confess I don't think the AhS here is
> using the terminology in the same way as the Shach or the Rosh does...

Whereas I am taking him as a ra'ayah for my understanding of the Tosafos,
the Rosh and the Shach!

Why say the AhS has a whole new shitah, when you could instead say that
the other sources should be understood as I explained them?

:-)BBii!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 The greatest discovery of all time is that
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   a person can change their future
Author: Widen Your Tent      by merely changing their attitude.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                 - Oprah Winfrey