I don't know the process by which poskim make rulings, but there is no law saying he can't diverge from the MB. rav Yosef diverged from Ben ish Chai, and tried to restore the rulings of rav Yosef Caro. Rav Mordecai eliyahu did the reverse.
Of course he can but he doesn't want to because it is a widely accepted view and as Rav Moshe said since it was composed by a committee it has greater authority
Do please help. Me to understand this more clearly.
We have reliable traditions that both rav Henkin and Rav Moshe preferred the Arukh haahulchan to the MB. the reason given is that Rav Epstein was a communal rav, as opposed to a rosh yeshiva. Is there a hierarchy of preferred source or was the committee statement just about the authority of the MB? And why is committee such a big deal? In any case, rav Chaim ozer didn't always pasken like the CC, nor did the ohr sameach.
Interesting. Did R' Moshe say that in his p'sak? And does every p'sak that a Posek wants to be considered "Daas Torah" need to say "this is Daas Torah'"? And if not, how does one know the difference?
Rav Moshe states explicitly that his views are fallible and that the term eli v'eilu v'eilu means that theview is the result of a person's best efforts even though it might be wrong
There is part of the Talmud, based on explicit pesukim in the Torah, called Horayos. If a fully convened Sanhedrin makes an error, they are liable to bring shogegot sacrifices. Hence infallibility does not exist in the Torah. That only means the possibility of error exists. There are also zadonot, deliberate false rulings or sins. Then there's the issue of bribes which blind even the wise and pervert the words of tzaddikim.
He is finding room for leniency in an emergency situation. Better a semblance of a minyan than none at all, and what's wrong with relying on the Gra? Rabbi Rackman claimed that rav Moshe Feinstein had a teleological approach to halacha. Nobody has been called a conservative for leniency on minyanim, but releasing agunot is more controversial.
The issue I am raising is whether for Minyanim, and other areas, Rav Moshe would find room for leniency based on societal need? e,g, milk, non orthodox marriages, etc.
The chapter in his book is called Halachic progress, is an analysis of Iggerot Moshe. my understanding is that he praises Rav Moshe for opening the door - and warns that some might wish to close it (Chareidi right), and others may open it further (himself, RSK, NG).
Does he have a precedent to support him?
ReplyDeleteMagen Avraham and Gra
ReplyDeleteI don't know the process by which poskim make rulings, but there is no law saying he can't diverge from the MB.
ReplyDeleterav Yosef diverged from Ben ish Chai, and tried to restore the rulings of rav Yosef Caro. Rav Mordecai eliyahu did the reverse.
So why is that not considered "Daas Torah"?
ReplyDeleteIt is a personal opinion which could be wrong
ReplyDeleteDaas Torah is an absolute claim that this is The view of the Torah
Of course he can but he doesn't want to because it is a widely accepted view and as Rav Moshe said since it was composed by a committee it has greater authority
ReplyDeleteDo please help. Me to understand this more clearly.
ReplyDeleteWe have reliable traditions that both rav Henkin and Rav Moshe preferred the Arukh haahulchan to the MB. the reason given is that Rav Epstein was a communal rav, as opposed to a rosh yeshiva.
Is there a hierarchy of preferred source or was the committee statement just about the authority of the MB?
And why is committee such a big deal?
In any case, rav Chaim ozer didn't always pasken like the CC, nor did the ohr sameach.
Lesser people than Rav Moshe have used Daas Torah to describe their views. Greater peopel from previous generatins, did not use it.
ReplyDeleteInteresting. Did R' Moshe say that in his p'sak? And does every p'sak that a Posek wants to be considered "Daas Torah" need to say "this is Daas Torah'"? And if not, how does one know the difference?
ReplyDeleteRav Moshe states explicitly that his views are fallible and that the term eli v'eilu v'eilu means that theview is the result of a person's best efforts even though it might be wrong
ReplyDeleteThere is part of the Talmud, based on explicit pesukim in the Torah, called Horayos.
ReplyDeleteIf a fully convened Sanhedrin makes an error, they are liable to bring shogegot sacrifices.
Hence infallibility does not exist in the Torah. That only means the possibility of error exists. There are also zadonot, deliberate false rulings or sins.
Then there's the issue of bribes which blind even the wise and pervert the words of tzaddikim.
He is finding room for leniency in an emergency situation. Better a semblance of a minyan than none at all, and what's wrong with relying on the Gra?
ReplyDeleteRabbi Rackman claimed that rav Moshe Feinstein had a teleological approach to halacha. Nobody has been called a conservative for leniency on minyanim, but releasing agunot is more controversial.
R. Rackman thought Rav Moshe was too lenient for Agunah
ReplyDeleteor not lenient enough?
ReplyDeleteThe issue I am raising is whether for Minyanim, and other areas, Rav Moshe would find room for leniency based on societal need? e,g, milk, non orthodox marriages, etc.
nope he said he was too lenient
ReplyDeleteThe chapter in his book is called Halachic progress, is an analysis of Iggerot Moshe.
ReplyDeletemy understanding is that he praises Rav Moshe for opening the door - and warns that some might wish to close it (Chareidi right), and others may open it further (himself, RSK, NG).
Nope that is not what he says
ReplyDeleteIt is your view not his