Sunday, October 27, 2013

Rav Eliashiv: Reliability of psakim said in his name

Due to the recent discussion regarding the reliability of teshuvos said in Rav Eliashiv's name, I just noticed the following on Seforim Blog
  1. ר' דוד אריה מורגנשטרן, פתחי דעת, הלכות נדה, [הלכות נדה לפרטיהן עם מקורות הדינים והכרעות הפוקסקים, ובו נתבררו בהרחבה צדדי המציאות וההלכה בנידונים רבים], 397 עמודים.
"Worth noting is the introduction of this work where the author, Rabbi Morgenstern one of Rav Elyahsiv's main students, talks about being careful about relying on the Pesakyim quoted in the name of R Elyahsiv in various recent works."

37 comments :

  1. RDE:

    Where does "Kovetz Teshuvos" fit into this question?

    Is there any doubts as to its reliability?

    (I'd like your opinion on this.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have some material which I hope to add soon that addresses your issue

      Delete
    2. Any idea when we might be seeing these other sources?

      Delete
  2. That goes for rabbi hair Hoffman who inc
    reduously

    That goes for rabbi hair Hoffman who incredulousy quoted a 2cnd hand peak from Rav elyashiv recently about epstiens gittin


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rabbi Hoffman quoted a first-hand psak from Rav Eliashev about Epstein that his colleague heard first-hand and told him directly.

      Delete
    2. nope! we are talking about two different things.
      1) People of questionable reliablity who publish material that state views that are in variance with reliable sources. Either they delete, add or misunderstand

      2) Rabbi Hoffman is quoting someone who he knows well and views his friend as a reliable source - both in terms of ability to understand and the ability to tell it over

      Delete
  3. Which "Godol" was it that said that unless you heard him say it himself not to believe he'd said it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. that statement was attributed to R' Hutner.

      Delete
    2. This is rather a strange statement. If you accept it as true then that means you can only believe it if you heard it directly. Attribution can not be believed!

      Delete
    3. Perhaps the statement was made to his talmidim and close circle. But the statement itself is interesting, since it suggests that transmission of authentic statements can be distorted even in a short space of time.

      Delete
    4. Rav Moshe Feinstein writes in the Igros that many things are said in his name that he didn't say.

      The Gemora says that if you want people to pay attention to a view that you think is correct it is permitted to say it in the name of gedolim.

      Likewise the Chasam Sofer once criticized a rabbi for ascribing his views to the Chasam Sofer. "I have no problem with you saying something that I said is your view. But don't say that your views are my views."

      Delete
    5. "The Gemora says that if you want people to pay attention to a view that you think is correct it is permitted to say it in the name of gedolim."

      I am very curious where this is said and in which context?

      Delete
    6. I'd like to clarify your point in the middle paragraph:

      Are you saying if I make something up, but sincerely believe it to be accurate, that I may say I heard it from the mouth of Rav Elyashiv.

      Could you please cite the gemora?

      Delete
    7. Pesachim(112a)
      פסחים קיב.

      אמר לו: אם בקשת ליחנק - היתלה באילן גדול

      רש"י מסכת פסחים דף קיב עמוד א

      אם בקשת ליחנק - לומר דבר שיהיה נשמע לבריות ויקבלו ממך.
      היתלה באילן גדול - אמור בשם אדם גדול.


      It is brought by Magen Avraham 156

      Delete
    8. The reading by Rashi seems to depart from what the pshat meaning of the statement is.
      Rashi is giving a carte blanche to pseudodepigraphy.

      What was the intention of the statement in the Gemara - to be hanged, do so on a a big tree (ie talmid hacham).

      Delete
    9. I haven't had a chance to look up the gemora, but as you present it Rabbi MJ Broyde was spot on with Hershel Goldwasser thing. I don't remember you (or him for that matter- he's incredibly knowledgable) or anyone else bringing this up. Also, at this point, why trust anyone (including you) about anything you quote?
      Rav Chaim said "I saw the Charon ish walk Rav Shteinmin to the door..." Maybe he's just lying so we will think the Charon Ish would agree with him? But if his opinion wasn't strong enough to convince some people, what is trying to add by informing us of the Charon Ish's opinion?

      Delete
    10. Gershon, this is the reverse of the "Kuzari" principle. Kuzari principle suggests that people wlll not believe a story unless it really happened. Rashi's reading of the Gemara [which is pretty much canonical] is refuting the Kuzari principle - he understands it as saying the opposite, i.e. if you want to slip in a pork pie [lie] just remember to say it in the name of Gadol. Then you will have much more credibility.

      Delete
    11. RDE,
      Do you agree with what I said?
      Also, you seem to say that Rav Moshe and the Chasam Sofer were a bit annoyed (I am making that inference, but correct me if I'm wrong). Did they feel this was appropriate and just disagree with the judgment of those who applied this gemorah (as you say it is to be applied)? Or, did they disagree with this gemorah (as you are learning it) and were annoyed that people were lying?
      Thanks,
      Gershon

      Delete
    12. The gemora in Pesachim is describing a situation where you are convinced that you are correct and you need to convince other people to prevent them from sinning. You don't have a source in the Igros Moshe or Shulchan Aruch - but you are still 100% convinced you are correct. The gemora is saying to claim that a gadol said it.

      The problem obviously is that claiming that your views are so solid that every gadol would obviously agree with them - is the problem. If you tell people that Rav Moshe said not to use an ipad on Shabbos - it is reasonable that Rav Moshe would have agreed even though he never saw an ipad. The problem arises if the gadol would not agree with your position. The poskim don't approve of citing them as their authority when they don't agree with the position.

      Another problem that often arises, is that person reads something in the Igros Moshe - years later he would poskin from his memory regarding the issue and simple say that is Rav Moshe's view. Unfortunately his recall was faulty or he didn't understand it properly in the first place.

      In fact one of the important consequences of my Yad Moshe - is that it is much harder to simply claim that a view is that of Rav Moshe - because it is relatively easy to find the original. In the old days rabbis would regularly claim that they saw something in the Igros Moshe and it was just too time consuming to find the original teshuva - and they got away with saying incorrect interpretations.

      In sum, everyone would agree with this gemora in some circumstances. The problem is that many times the gadal being falsely attributed with a particular view that he disagrees with - would not approve of it in that case.

      Delete
    13. In the same Gemara, R' Shimon bar Yochai is asking R' Akiva to teach him Torah, and threatens to go to Arkoyos (roman authorities) if he refuses.

      Delete
    14. A problem with this Gemara (lefi Rashi) , or how it can be misused, is that it is a subjective issue, what does one think might be worthy of a Rambam, or Vilna Gaon, or even Moshe (de) Leon.
      So there is no check on anyone who uses this - can attribute hsi own chiddush to anyone he likes (as De Leon was accused of doing in Rashbi's name), or even claim it is a halacha L'Moshe miSinai.

      Delete
    15. I looked up the morgen a room 156. He also brings down that this behavior (claiming someone said something you didn't hear him) causes the shechina to leave. He also brings down that not quoting something in the name of its source is a lav (mitzvas lo saaseh). Presumably intentionally misquoting someone would be at least as bad (just my guess lmk if you disagree with my assumption). At the very least it's a machlokes in gemorahs. So why are we presenting it as permitted. It's a safek issue and may also cause the shechina to leave us...

      Delete
    16. Machatzis hadhekel their suggests that the gemorah is only referring to a case where you know the Adam gadol wouldn't mind. Presumably that would be a very rare occurrence even if we pas ken like this pshat in the gemora.

      Delete
  4. Therapist in JerusalemOctober 23, 2013 at 8:08 PM

    Funny. I myself have direct experience with Rav Morgenstern ignoring Rav Eliashiv's psak to report sexual abuse of children to police.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rav Eliashev said it can only be done if there's raglayim ladavar.

      Delete
  5. I went to Reb Elyashev zt"l to talk about coerced Gittin, and he told me that he had already published his opinions. I told him, "I like to hear it directly."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah he did, in the Piskei Din, unfortunately not in the Kovetz Teshuvot where the editors have clearly added to his words.

      Delete
    2. Baloney. They added nothing. You've got a vivid imagination.

      Delete
    3. Tzadok, you still have never answered the begging question:

      The Piskei Din cannot be used as valid evidence, because we don't know if the circumstances were identical.

      The Kovetz Teshuvot was printed for many years while Rav Elyashev zt"l was still alive. Show us the slightest evidence that Rav Elyashev zt"l or (even a TALMID MUVHAK) ever claimed the contents of the sefer were falsified. If you can't show us such evidence, then you're simply trying to fraudulently nullify his PSAK.

      Delete
    4. The Piskei Din cannot be used as valid evidence, because we don't know if the circumstances were identical.
      We know the precise circumstances in the Piskei Din. The circumstances are recorded there.

      The Kovetz Teshuvot was printed for many years while Rav Elyashev zt"l was still alive. Show us the slightest evidence that Rav Elyashev zt"l or (even a TALMID MUVHAK) ever claimed the contents of the sefer were falsified. If you can't show us such evidence, then you're simply trying to fraudulently nullify his PSAK.
      Are you being intentionally dense? The blog owner had done precisely that in this post. First he brings the words of a Talmid Muvhak, as well as the words of Rav Eliashiv himself as recorded in his biography.

      Seriously man, you need to know when to give up.

      Delete
  6. Michael tzaddok just explain how you made false allegations calling rav gestetner corrupt and have never supplied any evidence to back this up. I will continue demanding an explanation until you give one that is acceptable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ghost of Langer PastOctober 27, 2013 at 11:31 AM

      Gestetner is the sole signatory on his psakei din. Something that the entire khareidi world was outraged about when Rabbi Goren did it. It was the main halakhic basis for saying that Goren's psakei din were passul. Therefore Rav Elyahsiv's rulling should equally stand for Gestetner and all his psakei din are also passul.

      Delete
    2. Rav Gestetner told me he has a Beth Din pasken but he takes the heat, and there is plenty of it.

      Delete
    3. Ghost of Langer PastOctober 29, 2013 at 9:27 AM

      Rav Gestetner told me he has a Beth Din pasken but he takes the heat, and there is plenty of it.
      That's very nice. It is the exact sentiment given by Goren. However Rav Shach, Rav Auerbach, Rav Elyahsev, the entire Khareidi world as far as Rabbanam and Gedolam said that it was a forbidden position and that all of his psakim were botul because of it. Therefore it is a clear sign of corruption, and a clear violation of Torah.

      Delete
    4. I spoke to many gedolei hador many times and asked them their opinions on various things and nobody told me to wait until they could find three people to make a Beth Din.

      Delete
    5. Ghost of Langer PastOctober 29, 2013 at 7:00 PM

      I hope you see the difference between an opinion from a single Rav and a Psak from a Beys Din.
      Further are you saying that the Rabbanam and Gedolam were wrong for condemning Goren?

      Delete

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