Igros Moshe (O.C. I #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 (YD II #45): This that you apologize because you disagree with my reasoning and my position. I don’t know why you think you need to apologize. There is an absolute need for everyone to clarify the truth according to his own understanding whether that is a more lenient or strict position and even if it disagrees with the views of his teacher (rav) and surely those who are not considered his teacher. Look at what I wrote already in greater detail in Igros Moshe O.C. I #109): If you are perhaps apologizing because of possibly expressing yourself disrespectfully, but anyone who knows me knows that I am Thank G-d not concerned with what anyone says against me and surely not the words of a Torah scholar.
Who can disagree with him?
ReplyDeleteOn one occasion you told me (KA) that I can disagree with the CI.
On another, you said he (RMF) was not addressing me in this teshuva.
What basis do you want to disagree? - you know sources better? your analysis is superior? or that you have more ruach hakodesh? Or is it simply that your moral sense is superior?
DeleteVery good.
DeleteYour question would apply to 99.99% of the people who see that teshuva. And the ones who disagree, wouldn't have to rely on the teshuva.
But your broadside is effectively mocking Rav Moshe himself, who said you can disagree.
Nope! Rav Moshe says a talmid chachom who goes over all the sources and analysis and comes to a conclusion other than his can disagree.
DeleteIf you think that means that you can hear a question and after a google search of the internet decide that the answer is obviously different because it offends your sense of fairness or some other non Torah value system or that Rav Goren would agree with you than you are seriously mistaken .
It's a good script for a Yated article, but misrepresents what is written in those teshuvas.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe agreeing or disagreeing is hypothetical. Ie does student have the right or obligation to raise a problem or question or suggestion.
DeleteHe's clearly talking about students and he's also rejecting the idea that we have Gedolim anymore
How is what I wrote a misrepresentation? I was just quoting what he said in the Introduction to the Igros which I would suggest you take the time to read!
Delete"in the gemora where students question their teacher’s view."
DeleteHe's not saying that only Rav Hutner or satmar Rebbe are on a level to disagree or question..
Furthermore he says it's an obligation to point out any disagreement or questions.
You were suggesting that only a Gadol can do this
Incidentally, I had a similar discussion with Rav Nota Schiller zichrono levracha,
DeleteSome 30 years ago. About how to choose a Gadol.
He said that one needs to do it scientifically and to perfect one's intellect and self. He also had said in his lecture that we are to develop ourselves and be a critic of our leadership.
Whether practically that is done, I doubt very much.
Bava Basra (130) that Rava told his students that they were not allowed to rule according to a view of his that they disagreed with since a judge can only rule based on how he sees things. The same applies with issurim…. As long as a student could not find an explanation for difficulties he had with Rava’s understanding he is not allowed to make a ruling in accord with it - even though Rava was his teacher
Delete(From post on disagreeing with the CI)
One of me rebbes, a"h, once told me that his rebbe once told him that he could've, if he wanted to, disagreed with Rav Moshe, zt"l, but if he decided to, he'd need to write a bullet proof teshuva for the ages and show it to several colleagues before publishing it.
ReplyDeleteOk but that's a rosh yeshiva
DeleteThe question is whether a little guy like me can say, sorry your highness but I think your argument doesn't hold because of x , y and z. ?
It's all in how you phrase it. For example, "Excuse me, I read the teshuva but I also read something in the Gemara/Shulcan Aruch that seems to contradict the conclusion. Could you please explain to me how to understand it properly?"
DeleteIt's the opposite of "daat Torah" that Rav shach was espousing, where he made a statement and anyone who disagreed was a heretic.
DeleteOur mighty host is publishing the teshuva of Rav Moshe but cannot deal with the dissonance between this and the Daas Torah view of Rav shach. It's like a hakol kol Moshe, but hayad Yad Elazar.
There is a reason that Rav Moshe, zt"l, and Rav Shlomo Zalman, zt"l, and today Rav Asher Weiss, y"l, have found great acceptance in the non-Chareidi Torah community. They don't act like ayatollahs - this is my decree and you dare not question me!
DeleteWorking with intelligent people, you quickly learn that the biggest experts, when presented respectfully with dissenting views or data they might not have been aware of, are glad for the discussion because it means they will understand the subject better. That's how Torah should work too.
Not always.There were those occasions where the aforementioned got tough,& firmly (at least to lessers)laid down the law.
DeleteThat may not apply RAW, who is basically a Rabbinic politician