<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Micha Berger <<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org">micha@aishdas.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
BTW, pesaq doesn't always go to the most brilliant. When was the last<br>
time you heard that we pasqened like the Rogotchover on something? Not<br>
that I would sayu there the issue was a lack of yir'as Shamayim as much<br>
as a lack of contact with nispasheit bekhol Yisrael.<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
Tir'u baTov!<br>
-Micha<br>
<br>
--<br>
Micha Berger </div></blockquote></div><br><br>True but [at least until the advent of the MB ]when was the last time anyone cited the poseik's yira's Shamayyim as a reason to follow him?<br clear="all">
<br>JR:<br><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">The cognitive dissonance comes when the answer is "sorry, my hands are tied" rather than "here's why I don't think the ratzon haborei is served"<br>
</blockquote><br>Stole my thunder<br>If Micha's model of fuzzy is good, then feminists would have far more resonance in claiming it is a form of misogyny for poskim to feel constrained from solving the Aguna issue. OTOH, if you say precedent IS BINDING, then poskim would have had an objective reason for not complyingto Aguanh advocates all along. That is part of my mah nafsahch, not that p'sak is Boolean per se, but that either precedence is binding or it isn't. If it isn't, or even if ti is only PARTIALLY binding then then eis la'asos! And poskim would have more than yir'as Shamayyim impelling them to free agunos, it would be tsa'ar ba'alei Chayyim of the highest order! <br>
<br> <br><br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br>RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com<br>see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>