Sunday, September 11, 2011

Rav Moshe Feinstein's view of Daas Torah

I would appreciate information as to the source of the following quote from the Artscroll biography (revised edition) that was recently published.  I have found nothing comparable to it in his published writings. I cite below a discussion I had with Rav Dovid Feinstein as well as the Introduction to the Igros Moshe and a teshuva which says there is no such thing as a gadol today that one can not disagree with. I added  a comment from the introductory essay from the 8th volume of the Igros which seems to directly contradict the Artscroll statement
 Igros Moshe (Reb Moshe - Artscroll biography 2nd edition 2011): There are people who maintain that talmidei chachom are not qualified to decide political matters that gedolei Yisroel should limit themselves to Torah and Halacha. Such people cannot be considered within the Torah camp. One might well say disregarding the advice of a talmid chachom is far worse than violating a commandment. One who violates a commandment because he is too weak to resist temptation at least knows that his action is wrong. By contrast, one who ignores the advice of a talmid chachom denies that a Torah scholar’s wisdom is superior. This is a far more serious breach (page 224).
===================
Rav Dovid Feinstein (personal communication): In response to the question of whether his father ever justified his halachic decisions Rav Feinstein told me the following, “I never heard my father claim that his authority was from Daas Torah. He always insisted that the authority of his rulings was because they involved correct reasoning.”

Igros Moshe(Introduction): And therefore I also found it appropriate to publish my teshuvos,  since I am merely clarifying the halacha and every talmid chachom and posek is able to examine my words and decide for himself whether to make halachic rulings in accord with my views. They can see that I did not blindly rely even on the writings of our great rabbis. I analyzed them with all my strength to understand their correctness - as we find stated by Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Similarly I request that all those who read my writings that they should carefully examine my words and only then [if they are acceptable] to make practical rulings in accord with them

Igros Moshe(O.C. 1:109): This that you apologize for disagreeing with me in a halachic issue – this is totally unnecessary. That is because this is the way of Torah that it is necessary to establish the truth. Chas v’shalom to silence one who disagrees with you – whether he is being more lenient or more strict. [While there is a discussion about disagreeing in a formal court session Sanhedrin 36 where the court is deciding on the guilt or innocence…] it is not a problem to disagree with the gadol (greatest scholar) when he is saying something in the course of teaching the material or even if he is making a practical halachic ruling but he is not part of a formal court. We see this in many places in the gemora where students question their teacher’s view. … It is obvious in these cases the rulings were not part of a formal court session. Furthermore it is apparent that there is no one today who has the status of gadol for this law that no one can disagree with him… Therefore even if you consider me to be a gadol – it is permitted to disagree with me and consequently it is required that you express your opinion and there is no need to apologize. Nevertheless regarding the halachic question that was raised, my view -that I wrote that it is prohibited - is the correct one.

Igros Moshe (Y.D.3:88): Is it permitted to argue with the words of our Sages in public – even in their communities? You are concerned about the permissibility of moving to Bnei Brak because there are times when you will be disagreeing with the Chazon Ish zt”l. I really don’t understand why you are concerned. In fact the opposite is true. [click link for rest of teshuva]

From 8th volume of Igros Moshe (hat tip to Yoni), "Active involvement of gedolei Torah in politics also in Israel aroused his opposition. He used to say that greatness in Torah is not combined with expertise in politics"

18 comments :

  1. R' Moishe like his namesake was the anav mikol adam which explains his humble style. Maybe he is saying there is such a thing as Daas Torah once most of the public accepts it as a consensus. This is how we know who the gedolei hador are in each generation and if each individual psak is binding. Most of the velt for instance was not mekabel R' Moishe's shita on opening potato chip bags on Shabbos even though he was the gadol hador AND the posek hador.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm pretty sure the quote from Rav Moshe's biography is from a speech Rav Moshe gave. It is also in the first edition of the book "Reb Moshe" that you cited, published in 1986, on Page 123.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Igros Moshe, Even HaEzer 2:1

    "My outlook is based only on knowledge of Torah whose ways are truth, without any influence of secular studies."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Igros Moshe, Even HaEzer 2:1

    "My outlook is based only on knowledge of Torah whose ways are truth, without any influence of secular studies."
    ==================
    He wasn't saying that therefore he was always correct or that his views were superior to others as you can see from the other quotes. He was responding to the Satmer argument that even the Catholics knew that artificial insemination was prohibited. Rav Moshe said you don't bring proofs from non Jewish sources to establish halacha.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Joseph said...

    I'm pretty sure the quote from Rav Moshe's biography is from a speech Rav Moshe gave. It is also in the first edition of the book "Reb Moshe" that you cited, published in 1986, on Page 123.
    ================
    thanks. so what was the rest of the speech and what was the context? There is no source given in the biography

    ReplyDelete
  6. What does Satmar have to do with secular studies? There are no secular studies in Satmar; similar to Rav Moshe saying he didn't learn any secular studies, and therefore is better off for it.

    What does that teshuva say about Satmar?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sam said...

    What does Satmar have to do with secular studies? There are no secular studies in Satmar; similar to Rav Moshe saying he didn't learn any secular studies, and therefore is better off for it.

    What does that teshuva say about Satmar?
    ===============
    It was not about secular studies but non-Jewish views.

    The main discussion of the issue in found at the end of the Dibros Moshe on Kesubos. There are three extensive teshuvos on the subject.

    I was told that the reason that they were put in the Dibros Moshe rather than the Igros Moshe was because someone called up Rav Moshe and told him that his apartment would be blown up if he published another teshuva on the artificial inseminsation in the Igros Moshe. He took the threat seriously. It is interesting that the new 9th volume which says it took halachic material from the Dibros Moshe does not include these three teshuvos.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The teshuva in EH 2:1 states it is in response to disagreeing with the Satmar Rebbe zt"l? Otherwise how do you know that?

    ReplyDelete
  9. My question is ,even if therebis a concept of dais Torah ,whom do you follow? It seems that you can get any daas Torah you want nowadays.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The Satmar Rov read math & science books in the beis hakeesay.

    He was tichtig way beyond the Satmar chevrah you bump into.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thank you for publishing these quotes. May they be spread far and wide.

    ReplyDelete
  12. To Euclidian:
    How do you know this is true?

    And, what language would he have read them in, given that he did not read English and certainly would not read lashon hakodesh in the Beis Kiseh?

    ReplyDelete
  13. >I was told that the reason that they were put in the Dibros Moshe rather than the Igros Moshe was because someone called up Rav Moshe and told him that his apartment would be blown up if he published another teshuva on the artificial inseminsation in the Igros Moshe. He took the threat seriously. <

    With all due respect, what kind of leadership is that??

    ReplyDelete
  14. Regarding gedolei Torah deciding political matters, check out what it says here:

    http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=922&st=&pgnum=33

    ReplyDelete
  15. Can someone either translate or give an even very brief synopsis of what the recently added Igros Moshe on this post is stating?

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  16. In this new volume there is a teshuva about voting in israeli political elections.
    Btw, isnt the fact that all gedolei yisroel from the chofetz chaim to the chazon ish, the brisker rov, the steipler, reb elchonen got involved in political decisions enough proof that it is appropiate?
    (All the teshuvos you posted are regarding Halachic sheilos)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Reb Doniel:

    I recently saw a T'shuvo, I believe in Chelek Daled, in which somone from B'nei Brak asked R' Moshe if he was allowed to be Cholek on the chazon Ish, since he lived in the same place. R' Moshe responds that the beauty of torah is not inside it's inflexibility, but one has a Chiyuv to argue a legitimate claim on a P'sak Halocho. (He then goes to say that it must be B'kovod, qouting from the Gemoro in which R' Yehoshua Ben Korcho got sick from saying 'Boshani Midvorecho, Beis Shammai).
    That would be a nice addition to this article.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Chaim - It was a letter to Rav Binyamin Silber. I have posted it before but will provide a link.

    http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2010/12/rav-moshe-feinsteincan-one-disagree.html

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.