<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/23/07, <b class="gmail_sendername"><a href="mailto:T613K@aol.com">T613K@aol.com</a></b> <<a href="mailto:T613K@aol.com">T613K@aol.com</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;">
<div><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><br><div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">The area of disagreement is not whether halacha underwent some historical
development -- the Gemara itself says that it did, when it describes the reasons
and circumstances under which various derabanans were promulgated.
Everyone knows that the mitzvos of Chanuka and Purim, for example, were the
products of certain historical events. </font></div></font></div></blockquote><div><br>Can we make the 5th of Iyyar a holiday like Purim NOWADAYS?<br>Apparently as quote to me RYBS refused to allow birkas Hallel on 5 Iyyar. As per Rabbeinu Tam it would be OK to do so AISI.
<br><br>[fwiw persoanlly I treated 5 Iyyar like lag ba'omer]<br> <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">
<div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">The area of disagreement concerns the question of whether the entire
corpus of halacha is entirely man-made, subjective and random.
Right-wingers would say that only /allowable/ developments occurred over time,
and that there is a system of rules under which not all developments are
allowable. </font></div>
<div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"></font> </div>
<div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">Even when two poskim disagree on a given psak, they do not choose from an
infinite array of subjectively chosen possibilities when they arrive at their
respective decisions, but from an allowable range which is distinctly finite and
bound by known rules.</font></div></font></div></blockquote><div><br>agreed there are limitations see below <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">You can play a hundred games of chess, according to the rules of chess,</font></div>
</font></div></blockquote><div><br>Are the rules themselves fixed? - see below <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><font color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2"><div><font style="background-color: transparent;" color="#000000" face="Arial" size="2">
and from the same initial setup you can arrive at a hundred different final
chessboard arrangements, but all of them will be derivable from the same
rules. A chess player can glance at the final chessboard and tell you
instantly that in one case, the final board was not a possible outcome of the
rules of chess and that his three-year-old must have put pieces on the
board after the game was over. (The three-year-old in my analogy is a
Reform or Conservative rabbi who isn't happy with the allowable range of
chess moves and doesn't really care how he gets to the final board as long
as he likes the way it looks.)</font></div></font></div></blockquote><div><br>Ture R & C rabbis hae a deinite agenda. Many Argue that ther are many O rabbis who also decide the issue BEFORE looking up the sources!
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><font style="color: black; font-family: ARIAL,SAN-SERIF; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
<b>--Toby
Katz<br>=============</b></font></div></blockquote><div><br>OK let's concede teh following<br>GIVEN: Halacha can Evolve<br><br>Question: Can the RULES for making Halachah evolve?.<br></div><br>Illustration:<br>Given the Talmud's authority in Halacha cannot be over-ruled. [we can quibble about this but let's leave it alone arguendo]
<br><br>Question:<br><ol><li>Can OTHER texts be simlarly authorized e.g. the Shulchan Aruch?</li><li>Can other texts be included - e.g. Mishna Brrurau</li><li>Can we SUBTRACT texts? e.g. the ein mihspat ner Mitzva uincludes the Semag as 1 of the big 4. Who learns Semag anymore?
<br></li><li>Or is it NEVER about texts per se? <br></li></ol>I think the point about the chess match is that the rules themselves are not 100% stable.<br>When you had a Sanhedrin, IT was the stabilizing uniifying force.<br>
</div><br>I hve bee n on a quest for about 10-20 years to find a definitve set of rules for making Halachah. Not only have I falied to find agreemnt, I cannot find a single text taht says this is how it is SUPPOSEd to work. yaakov Katz and Menachem elon have outlined how it HAS worked. But I know of no defeinitve mongraph on HOW TO MAKE HALACHAH
<br><br><br>And think about this:<br><div style="margin-left: 40px;">Can you ever over-rule a Rabbi's pesak based upon some meta-rule of Halacha that was not respected? IOW rabbis are not only making pesak on an issue, they are also defacto ruling on HOW to make pesak!
<br></div><br>Iillustration: When I made any decisiosn regarding to shul minhaggim or nusach, I would search for a precedent and I would ONLY consult with rabbonim who were familiar with the German Minhag.<br><br>[See NishmaBlog's survey on a related matter]
<br><br><br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br><a href="mailto:RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com">RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com</a><br>Please Visit: <br><a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>