I was asked to write this sefer by an avreich who realized that Rav Moshe’s teshuva regarding utilizing irreligious members for a minyan was based on Korach and wondered if were possible to write a sefer associating the parsha with Rav Moshe’s pesakim. He asked me because of the work I did with Yad Moshe – my topic index to the Igros Moshe.
Regarding my translations they are not to be viewed as authoritative to utilize for practical rulings, . While I have tried to faithfully convey what is in the tshuva. I did not translate every word and have also taken the liberty to use paraphrasing which most would use to express the ideas . In addition I have skipped large discussions of esoteric halachic points in which his goal was to reject alternative views. In sum, a posek needs to read himself the Hebrew original to understand his reasoning which he says is the most important contribution of his answers
There is also the question of consistency. For example "I asked Rav Dovid about an apparent contradiction in the Igros Moshe about the nature of Aluminum. Rav Moshe had poskened it was not a metal that required tevila but that it was a metal in an airplane to convey tuma from a meis. He acknowledged the problem but said the practical questions need to be answered even if it leads to contradiction."
Associated with this is an old history regarding the use of the Igros Moshe itself. I first started compiling citations to the Igros Moshe while living in Flatbush while I was working on my PhD in Psychology. I had a difficult thesis adviser who not only was very critical but she also took a long time to read revisions. In order to do the statistics, I had purchased a computer and found that there were long periods of inactivity. I had recently started studying the Igros and saw many things I would like to study in the future when I was finished with my degree. I typed the citations in my computer arranged it by different topics and sorted them alphabetically. As time went by I realized I had a lot of material. When others saw what I had produced they requested copies. I did this in English as this is my native language and it was easier to create relevant topics. I eventually had enough material for a pamphlet and decided to print it as a paperback – which was the most affordable option. After I published it I was told by Rav Bluth, who was Rav Moshe’s shamash, that Rav Moshe had prohibited indexing or translating the Igros Moshe.
This in fact is discussed in the Igros Moshe but it gets more complicated. After I was told my index was prohibited, my brother-in-law told me to contact his friend Rav Fuerst, who was also a close student of Rav Moshe. He told me that Rav Moshe was not against an index and that he in fact had at one time been working on one himself and when Rav Moshe found out about he said it was a good idea. I was told by a member of Rav Moshe’s inner circle that a number of years before someone (Rav Aharon Rakefet) had written a summary of the first five volumes in English as well as a Hebrew index to the Igros Moshe. Rav Moshe was against this not only because it was in English but it summarized the conclusions. In the letter that Rav Moshe sent to Rav Rakefet he even threatened to sue him in secular court if he dared publishing his summary. Rav Moshe said in the Igros there is no one today who can create a new Shulchan Aruch.
An additional hurdle came when I received a phone call from Mordecai Tendler saying his father was upset that I indexed the Igros without permission from the family. In essence he claimed the Igros was family property. I consulted a lawyer who told me that they had no rights over indexing – even though it was common for the families of famous people to be overly possessive of what they thought were their rights. Eventually the issue was resolved simply by my agreement to notify them of a future edition. .
There was also a sefer on Hilchos Shabbos which cited the psakim of Rav Moshe. Nonetheless Rav Moshe gave a haskoma to it. Rav Moshe Goldberger who was Rav Moshe’s student asked about why he approved of the Kitzur dinim though he opposed translations and summaries of the Igros. Rav Moshe responded with a letter which was published in vol 8. That the problem was to detatch the psak from its source and reasoning. In fact Rav Moshe notes that a Rav can only posken on an existing case but that he was supplying the reasoning in the Igros and thus a person could use the reasoning to posken for themselves. He also, however, said that it might be possible to rely on his conclusions for future cases even without understanding his reasoning. This raises the question of the meaning of utilizing the Igros Moshe. Is it to be viewed as receiving a psak from Rav Moshe or is it the psak of the reader? I have received conflicting responses from major rabbomim to this question. As a relevant side note Rav Moshe says that rabbinic journals are for the masses while the responsa literature is for serious rabbis. Realistically the Igros was widely read by yeshiva students much more than rabbinic journals. In summary. Rav Moshe did not want his conclusions separated from the reasoning in the Igros and he believed that only serious scholars read the Igros Moshe. It is interesting to note that in the more than 30 years I have been involved with the pesakim of Rav Moshe, the primary problem is not the masses reading the Igros, it is rabbis claiming in Rav Moshe’s name rulings that they either misunderstood or madeup and claimed falsely that Rav Moshe said it. This is one of the most important benefits of having an index to the Igros since the actual psak can readily be found.
The concern to prevent the masses from gaining access to the Igros was reflected in my selling of my index. Rav Dovid Feinstein asked that it be kept behind the counter in the store and it only be sold to those who asked for it. He also told me that a Hebrew index was more appropriate than an English one so I translated it into Hebrew. That is why it is available in both Hebrew and English. Rav Rakefet said that because of Rav Moshe’s objections he did not follow through with publishing his index to the first five volumes, which in fact was in Hebrew carefully citing where it came from. He said he never went back to index the rest of the Igros and thus I had no competition. When the additional volumes came out I indexed them even though there was some question about the seven eighth and nineth volumes. (See my interview with Rav Ephraim Greenblatt on my blog) When the sixth volume was published, Rav Moshe was weaker and even had a pacemaker installed. Nevertheless he claims he supervised everything. Rabbi Meir Zlatowitz told me very bluntly, “Your job is to make an index to the Igros Moshe, the Feinstein family decides what is published in the Igros. “ Rav Berkowitz said it slightly differently. “While the first volumes are the letters and thus the actual words of Rav Moshe, in later volumes he is often quoted or paraphrased so you can’t necessarily make conclusions based on the phrasing or words used. I was also told that Rav Moshe rarely changed his views though he was said to alter the wording sometimes from what he wrote in a letter and what was published. I have told by a number of scholars that there are differences between the text in the original large volumes and the later small volumes. There are also those such as Rav Spira who have found variations between the American printing and the Israeli printing. Of course as Rav Moshe himself wrote in the Igros Moshe there are many things said in his name that he never said, There are also many madeup stories such as the claim he vomited milk he drank after being informed it was not cholov Yisroel milk. Rabbi Rappaport (an editor of Igros Moshe) told me that he heard that Rav Eliyashiv wanted to ban one of the volumes published after Rav Moshe’s petira claiming that there was material being published that Rav Moshe obviously and deliberately omitted from his earlier volumes He said he was able to show that the new material was consistent with earlier volumes and thus it was not banned
An additional point needs to be made regarding the use of the Igros Moshe. There are often competing claims regarding Rav Moshe’s true view. For example in the Igros he says it is permitted to use paper towels to cleanup spills on Shabbos. A student of Rav Moshe told me that Rav Moshe said it was prohibited. I asked a number of poskim. One said Rav Moshe changed his mind because the heter was a mistake. Another said the gold standard is what is in the Igros so unless I have a letter from Rav Moshe saying he changed his mind the original psak is authoritative. A third posek said simply that the nature of paper towels had changed originally they were harsh and not very absorbent but now they are like cloth and very absorbent. The heter was only for nonabsorbent towels. The obvious question is why didn’t Rav Moshe or his sons clarify the issues? In the yeshiva world there is not a high level of reliance on the Tendlers. On the other hand there is a problem that the Feinsteins don’t like getting involved in disputes. For example I was told that Rav Dovid was asked to clarify a number of issues such as time of death after Rav Moshe’s petira replied “Let them think whatever they want Feinstein’s don’t get involved in disputes. This seems to explain Rav Dovid’s explanation cited by Rav Falk in in his sefer on modesty as well as his conduct in the Kaminetsky Greenblatt Heter.
One of the most important issues arises in light of his almost universal acceptance as the posek – Was he Daas Torah? I was told that he had resolved a major dispute involving the Chassidic community by announcing with his ruling that it needed to be accepted because his view was Daas Torah! I asked Rav Dovid Feinstein about this. He replied that he had never heard his father voice the claim that his view had the authority of Daas Torah. In the Igros Moshe he wrote that it is not only possible to disagree with him but that there is nobody today that you can’t disagree with. He even said it was possible to disagree with the Chazon Ish and further sometimes even Rishonim concerning matters that their view has not gained wide acceptance. However I was told by a member of his family that when Rav Tendler his son in law proposed making a medical school to which Rav Moshe disapproved, he said "Since my view is accepted by the Jewish people and is Daas Torah I forbid it!"
While Rav Moshe did not claim he was Daas Torah or was infallible, where did his rulings come from. I once discussed this Rav Rottenberg who was a close student of Rav Moshe. He said “I once had a question regarding when to date the Kesuba. It was published in the Igros Moshe. Before the meeting with Rav Moshe I of course reviewed all the relevant sources. When I objected to Rav Moshe’s ruling he told me ‘if you review the sources you will see I am correct’ I of course had already done the review and I still disagreed. People claim that Rav Moshe poskened directly from the gemora. They are wrong, he poskened from Heaven.”
It is important also to know that there are many letters of Rav Moshe that still have not been published. He also gave individuals rulings which contradicted what he published. For example he says in the Igros that there is no justification for shaking hands with women, though I was told by a knowledgeable rabbi that he gave a heter to his brother who is a businessman.
In general I have associated a teshuva with the verses used to support it in addition I have added additional material from other commentaries which I thought would be of interest. Obviously I have only included a small number of teshuvos. These are the ones I have received the most interest or are hard to find. I also have typically omitted much of the esoteric reasoning. Thus it is important to read the Hebrew original to understand ir properly. My comments and conclusions are not to be viewed as authoritative sources.
