<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Micha Berger <<a href="mailto:micha@aishdas.org" target="_blank">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;">
On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 12:02:04AM -0400, Richard Wolpoe wrote:<br>
: <br>
: G<br>
: 1. Once the Ga'onim required lechem mishan the sugya had to be<br>
: retrofitted to match noramtive Halacha AS PRACTICED OR<br>
: 2. The Rosh [and others} might have realized that the Talmud never<br>
: EXPLICITLY required lechem Mishan on YT, but it was always assumed to be<br>
: there - albeit IMPLICITLY. This Sugya must have not held it to be<br>
: noramtive, and Behag would have concurred. But the sense of Shab as awhole<br>
: might have beeen otherwise<br>
<br>
I want to draw attention to the words RRW capitalized in possibility #1.<br>
<br>
There are two kinds of precedent: mimetic and textual. IOW,<br>
1- the weight of halakhah as it has been practiced by centuries vs<br>
2- the weight of halakhah as sefarim have described it for centuries.<br>
The latter would usually / always? intersect with a third issue:<br>
3- an informal azlinan basar ruba -- the long history of pesaq<br>
means that a poseiq-counter is bound to find that the majority hold<br>
that way.<br>
<br>
<br>
When dealing with the question of throwbacks, we need to speak of all 3.<br>
<br>
1- The Gra only violated mimetic precedent when he believed it to<br>
be provably wrong. </blockquote><div><br>Is this a fact? have you surveyed all of the GRA's objections to status quo? is this a nimnu v'gamru? --smile--<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
It would seem he holds that mimetic precedent really only has enough<br>
weight to stick with existing practice even if the practice seems valid,<br>
but weaker than the one you would otherwise choose.</blockquote><div><br>I don't get this. Posqim have uniformly required tallis gadol for all inlcuding Rema and Mishna Brura. how come this status quo is not subject to revision as a minahg Ta'us?<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
2- If it's possible for someone to be assessed at being at a rishon's<br>
level, then the textual precedent issue is null. Moreso, it's entirely<br>
reversed -- he would be like a later rishon, and halakhah kebasrai.</blockquote><div><br>This has nothing to do with a Rishon's level. It has to do with settled law. Rabbeinu Tam is on a Rishon's level, too is that mean I may make a bracha on his Tefillin INSTEAD of Rashi's? if not why not? <br>
<br>Alternatively may I eat hametz after hatzos on erev pesach beusase the ba'al hama'or paskens it's a valid form bf bi'ur/? If not why not? <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
3- There isn't really a rule of rov poseqim when no one enters the room<br>
for nimnu vegameru.</blockquote><div><br>Who says? <br></div><div><br><ol><li>The Beis Yosef in YD 101 says there IS and tha's how he rejects the Rif </li><li>MB uses Rov acharhoim in MANY places as HIS sources in Sha'ar Hatziyyun such as BE'tzitzis</li>
<li>Kaf Hachayyim rejects GRA because Rov acahronim use 3 matzos. ayein sham</li><li>Maggid Mishnah supports the Rambam's p'sak on Bracha on Neros Shabbas [hil. Shabbbos 5:1] as based upon Seder Rav Amram Ga'on AND Rov Acahronim - albeit HIS acharonim are not ours.</li>
<li>Rabbi Yochanan uses the term "v'nahagu ha'am" to argue on a Tanna in a Mishneh [pesachim 103/104<br></li></ol>Ther are many more. Aruch Hashulchan constantly uses Rov Posqim, although he radically dissents re: Fasting ONLY until sheki'ah nad not Tzeis and I on't get it because Tur, Mechabeir and Rma all pasken tzeis to finish off a ta'anis<br>
</div><div><br>But gneerally, AhS actully SAYS taht Rov Posqim is a determining factor<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:33:11PM -0400, Richard Wolpoe wrote:<br>
: The GRA did not jsut rule against minhag he ruled against widely accepted<br>
<div>: P'sak. This is tantamount to What R. Eliezer Hagaodl did with his rayos. I<br>
: fail to see any hilluk in how the GRA rejected the consensus of Posqim and<br>
: Rabbi Eliezer rejecting the consensus of his peers.<br>
<br>
</div>R' Eliezer's raayos weren't formal process vs precedent, it was miracle<br>
vs formal process. The tanur shel achnai story speaks to the inviobility<br>
of process -- even HQBH doesn't trump the rules. Not the relative importance<br>
of two elements of that process.<br>
</blockquote><div><br>No, the story says that you cannot go against the Rov because of the importance of Acharei Rabbim lehatos. This is emphasized by Rosh re: CHAD biTREI is bateil EVEN re: hametz andh matza on Passover because acharei rabbim TRUMPS the rule of hamesz eino baeil afilu be'elef which he applies only inthe cases nosein Ta';am. Otherwise, Acharei Rabbim lehatos is a mitzva fro mthe Torah to follow.<br>
<br>[But Rema DOES exempt following one's rebbe in Choshen Mishpat 25 so the immediate Talmiddim of the GRA woud probably be exmpet from my rants]<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
...<br>
:> One could attribute this to today's poseiq not being a throwback. Thus,<br>
<div>:> he has neither lesser wisdom nor precedent to confine him.</div></blockquote><div><br>Rabbi Eliezer's greatness is not the issue. it is goign agains the Rov. making some posqim on a higher madreiga than others is a bit tricky. Certainly the Chayei Adam did not perpetuate the GRA's unqiue psakkim into mainsteam hlacha, even though hhe was a big fan. See below that I am NOT atttckign the GRA for stating his position, I am attacking those who FOLLOW IT.<br>
<br><br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><br>
<br>
: So who says WHO is a throwback. Is Rambam a Trhowaback? Tosafos? Tosafos<br>
: essentially jsut did waht the Talmud did, except in France. They<br>
: dialectically threw texts together ina eiseive and urminhu style. Soes<br>
: folowing Amoraic Style give Tosafos Amoraic power? some say yes! That is<br>
: how Tsoafos can be mevateil mayyim acharonim and the issur of clapping on<br>
: Shabbos<br>
<br>
</div>We don't refrain from mayim acharonim because of Tosafos. Tosafos<br>
post-date and try to justify the practice as being derived from some<br>
(unknown) pesaq, by showing it isn't necessarily a minhag ta'us<br>
</blockquote><div><br>Who says? Tsoafos might be justifying it in HIS day, but now we do it BECAUSE of Tsoafos.<br>I posted on this. I called my Yekke friend on this and he said the heter to skip it is IN THE GMARA. I said it is not. He siad the BOYS ONTHE PAGE - meaing the fct taht Tosafos said it ON THE PAGE was his reatonale. This fellow is a prety big lamdan and studedi fro YEARS with R. Yaakov Kaminetsky.<br>
<br>Aderabb, I questioned RMF/IM orach chaim #2 100 re: dancing because RMF wonders how come people dance on Shabbos agaisnt a Mishna? The answer is simply they follow Tsoafos!<br>But I noticed that Rema is only reluctant to go along with this. [see Orach chayim 339]<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Consensus tells us who is a throwback. The same concept of consensus<br>
you're worried about protecting on a practice-by-practice level.</blockquote><div><br>Youcannot have it both ways. if consensus says GRA is a trhowback than ti MSUT habe noramative power. BTW, I don't know where the consensus is that the GRA is a throwback. Sounds like a post facto justification for MANY upsetting statemetns - kind like your take on mayyim ahcaronim<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
...<br>
:>: Nah. Gra dies 1797, Napoleon invades Russian Emptire in 1812 The ghettoes<br>
<div>:>: only BEGAN collapsing 15 years after Gra's passing.<br>
<br>
:>: Gra knew his pesakkim were private. He never even tried to popularize<br>
:>: them. Those who reached back to the GRA to create a new Halachic norm<br>
:>: really wer quite radical to abandon Minhag Avos.<br>
<br>
:> These two paragraphs largely cancel<br>
<br>
<br>
</div><br></blockquote><div><br>NO they cancel each other out this way<br>GRA deviates from settled law and status quo - let's say about 200 times...<br>BUT he keeps it to himsef and WARNS people NOT fo follow his p'sak [witenss chayei Adam]<br>
But his talmiddim take HALF of wat he says and uncacnels it. Maybe the GRA would have bee nalaremed if he knew Maa'seh Rav would be published Read on! <br>A Friend of mine was telling people to follow RYBS's minhaggim and the Rav said to him: "Who told you to spread th Gospel?" IOW wah'ts the point of chaing OTHER people's Minhaggim. BTW, one Rav in Teaneck holds THE RAV as greater than the Kessef Mishanh, talk about throwbacks!<br>
<br>BTW, I am not sure aboutthe fasicnation wtih tthe GRA's hiddushim. I show about 5-10 things "wriong" with current paractice<br><ol><li>issur of Zli keidar</li><li>no Tallis for bachurim</li><li>No issur Of music in Sefira </li>
<li>Zecher/Zeycheri<br></li></ol>And I'm considered a radical! The GRA says about 200 things are wrong and he is a Ga'on!<br>I guess to be promoted to become a throwback will require me to upset naonther 150+ plus status quo practices in order to earn any respect for the first dozen of so!<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
I think we're being overly precise. The fall of ghetto life started well<br>
before the actual fall of the ghetto. which was the motivation for the<br>
birth of Chassidus. </blockquote><div><br>Says you. But I am not buying. I claim that the revolutionary spirit of the 18th century was a prelude to the revolutionary spirit of the 19th centruy nd had little to do with gheetoes. The Zeitgeist in many communioties was out with the old and in with the new.<br>
<br>Ironicaly the LEAST ghetttoized commmunity ,viz. Germany, -had frum Jews sho stuck with the Minahgim of Irishonim it was the STILL gehtto-ized communites of Eastern Europe that abondoned the Minhag of Asheknaz taht was perpetuated in Cracow by Rema,etc.<br>
<br>Ironcially a current Yekke is more like the Rema than the average Jew from Cracow. It is intersting to note that pre-HOlocaust Cracow had very few palces daveing Ashekanz but NO ONE would dare mess with Asheknaz in the Remu's shul. I wonder why?<br>
<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Similarly, the shift to Gra-style or Besh"t-style<br>
pesaq etc... also took a span of time. Overlapping and slightly behind<br>
the span in which the culture shifted.</blockquote><div><br>Shifts are shifts. I claim that once you start shifting you create slippery slopes. <br><br><br>What bothers me is NOT that shifts were proposed but that Jews found it so easy to abandong Minhag Avos. But why shouold I be surprised? how many Ashkenazim in Israel who speak modern Ivrit still daven in the old havaras AShkenaz? I acatulyl met a few yekkes that do. But most gave up their ancestral Ivir quite readily - accept possibly for some Yiddish speaking Hareidim... <br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
<br>
:> That's not the question. The question is whether what the Gra said still<br>
<div>:> within the eilu va'eilu of halakhah.<br>
<br>
: Wlle whose eilu v'eilu do you accept?<br>
<br>
</div>My rebbe's. Like any other matter of pesaq.</blockquote><div><br>Have yo uasked your rebbe if he considers' the GRa's positions as being - say a little bit agaisnt status quo? And does your rebbe use 2 matzos or 3 at the Seder. And why2 Does he pasken like Gmara over posqim?<br>
</div><div><br>FWIW, I am not questioning the GRA's right to argue. Rabbi Elizer was in eilu v'eilu and so was Shammai and his Bayyis. What I am syaing is if you can overturn sttled psak then why NOT follow Beis Shammai? his was Eilu v'eilu par excellence! <br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
: Rabbi Rackman's hafka'as Qiddushin? Arguably not as radical as you would<br>
: think.<br>
<br>
Sidenote:<br>
Who before RER had a case-by-case hafqa'as qidushin with no maaseh? All<br>
the precedent cases were:<br>
1- taqanos, a general rule "we invalidate any marriage where the chasan<br>
does does XYZ" and<br>
2- involved a maaseh related to qiddushin (that otherwise would be<br>
valid, eg meqadeish bashuq) or gittin (that otherwise wouldn't, such as<br>
if he renegs on the get before the shaliach leholakha gives it)<br>
</blockquote><div><br>Good point. But if you throwback and forget precedent why NOT re-interpret fro mscracth! That;s the whole point! You either accept settled law as normative or you allow Rabbanim/Posqim to read into Autoritative texts as they deem fit.<br>
The Meharshal's position was that you can go back to Talmud and ingore Codes. And thsi is the foundation for Golnkin's masorti movement In israel NOT the Positive Historical School,but the ability to overthrow normative practice via re-investigation of sugyyos in the Bavli!<br>
<br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
...<br>
<br>
: But you are missing my entire point. I am not saying the Gra created yesih<br>
<div>: mei'ayin I AM saying he opened a can of worms /p[androa's box/ slipery slope<br>
: etc. ready-made for future abuse against the system.<br>
<br>
: Even if every argument is 100% trued ,he destabilized it.<br>
<br>
</div>It seems the potential for that seems to also go into the consensus,<br>
That the person in question is so clearly sui generis that they had no<br>
such fear.</blockquote><div><br>Maybe. But that is OK for his immeiatge cirlce or hevra. For the average Yid to jump on the bandwagon I posit is NOT an assertion of the GRa's greatness but an assertion of KEIN Titosh toras Imecha, it's a fig-leaf fro radical shitck within a quais halachic framework <br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
And in practice, giving the Gra authority in this way didn't leave us,<br>
300 yrs later, with an unstable system.</blockquote><div><br>I beg to differ but not online. let me say this, the 18th century set-up the 19th century and hameivin yavin <br><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
In fact C, the "halachic" movement that is outside of normative pesaq,<br>
needed to turn to Historical School, an offshoot of German R, for its<br>
historical underpinnings. It couldn't find anything within O.</blockquote><div><br><br>First This is an over-simplification. I used to thin that the C movement was ONLY from the less radical R movement. That is not 100% true. It also contained the far left of the neo-Ortho's and my source is Judaism as a Civlization by M Kaplan<br>
<br>Secondly see about Golinkin above. Reform Judaism STARTED by sighting Gmara and ignoring Posqim. M Kaplan said the same, he liked Gmara and detested posqim [from the ORtho bio of M kaplan]<br><br><br>[I am also working on a hypothesis that Z. Frankle and H. Graetz were of two differnt minds re: Tradition. Suffice ti to say, that Frankel was more respectful of Tradition than was Graetz.<br>
<br>I spoke with a bar-Ilna guy about this and he said there was a BIG difference betwen the 2. This was weeks after reading the Hirsch Bio. I thinnk Hirsch missedthe subtlety of the differnce and lumped all rebels together. This was unfortunate but ein kan mekomo<br>
<br>BTW, I do NTO know waht Z. Frankel was like as a person. Maybe he was a big rebel inhis person. I am only looking at his publicatoins as best as I can and mostly throught wndary sources/. <br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
<br>
...<br>
<div>: But the GRA is a somebody. and by showing that not dozens but operhaps<br>
: hundreds of minhaggim, psesaqqim and mietmietcs are questionable if not<br>
: wrong is even MORE disturbing.<br>
<br>
</div>Dozens. Maaseh Rav isn't that big.</blockquote><div><br>Yyou are right Mas'aseh Rav does not ahve 200 changes. It actaully has ONLY 303 paragraphs! <br></div><div><br>RYBS's lists 100 differerences in Customs in the YK machazor. I assume most are based upon the GRA and that the Mas'seh RAv is not exhaustive anyway.<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
: Maybe in 200 years from now, my proposals wil seem like old hat too!<br>
<br>
Of course they will. We will have a beis din gadol mimenu bechokhmah<br>
uveminyan, and all the authority of real nimnu vegamru of a body sitting<br>
on Har haBayis that can make binding taqanos etc... BB"A!<br>
<br>
Tir'u baTov!<br>
-Micha<br>
<font color="#888888"></font></blockquote><div><br>My point is that if the GRA lived today, you would find him to be far more distrubing to status quo than Wolpoe. <br><br>You seem to quibble with every minor point I have against accepted rpactice but find it cool that the GRA goes agasint perhaps 303 prevalent practices pertaining to his period.<br>
<br>But The GRA and I have something in common,<br><ol><li>The GRA wants to throw out some.much of Ashkenaic Rishonic practice in favor of a More Talmudic practice</li><li>I want to throw out some of Ashekanzic Acharonic practice in favor of a more Ashkenazic Rishonic practice. {KAJ has bee naccused of davening "minhag Rishonim]<br>
</li></ol>Example Tur spedifices do NOT change MoshavYekaro to Kidei Kevodo. I didn't find much dissent inteh nos'ei Keilim. But Gra makes this change anyway<br><br><ol><li>The GRA probably would have liekd to go back to the era of of the Rif</li>
<li>For me I would prefer maybe the Maharil-Rema, because they raithfully practices the OLD Oral Asheknazic tradition.<br clear="all"></li></ol> </div></div><br>-- <br>Kol Tuv / Best Regards,<br>RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com<br>
see: <a href="http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/</a>