<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/17/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Zev Sero</b> <<a href="mailto:zev@sero.name" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">zev@sero.name</a>> wrote:
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Richard Wolpoe wrote:<br>> Rav / Herschel Schachter states: /<br>><br>> . A matter of /halacha/ which has been accepted for centuries<br>> can not be overturned, unless one can demonstrate that there
<br>> simply was an error involved from the very outset.<br><br>> Given:<br>> [...]<br>> Question: how did the GRA revert it back to 2?<br><br>Nu, so who says the GRA had to pasken like RHS?<br><br>--
<br>
Zev Sero </blockquote></div><br>Ein hachi nami. After reflecting what bothered me so much about the Rav Schachter's article I realized that he was talking as if every premise was universally accepted - and that one who failed to accept his premises and suppositions was outside the pale
<br><br>I guess I feel RHS is coming across not acknowledging other "kosher" approaches - his way or the highway. Whether he intends to do that, I do not know, I have not verified this with him. I would say that we can quibble with the underlying premise in any given paragraph.
<br><br>It reminds me of how I feel when friends of mine claim that if one consumes haleiv hacompanies one is eating treif despite the fact that RMF has paskened otherwise.<br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br><a href="mailto:RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com</a><br>Please Visit: <br><a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>