The gemora seems full of contradictions. Tonite I leaned that one should not figtht against Evil Men
Sanhedrin (110a)With regard to the verse: “And Moses arose and went to Dathan and Abiram” (Numbers 16:25), Reish Lakish says: From here we derive that one may not perpetuate a dispute, as Rav says: Anyone who perpetuates a dispute violates a prohibition, as it is stated: “And he will not be like Korah and his assembly, as the Lord spoke by the hand of Moses to him” (Numbers 17:5). Even the aggrieved party must seek to end the dispute. Dathan and Abiram accused Moses and by right should have initiated the reconciliation. Nevertheless, Moses was not insistent on this; he went to them.
However The Mishna Berura and many others say that one should protest against evil doers and hate them until they are defeated and destroyed
Biur Halacha (1.1) And he should not be embarrassed - Refer to the Mishna Berurah quoting the Beis Yosef. Know that the Beis Yosef is only dealing with [a case of] where he does [an exclusively] personal Mitzvah and men mock him, for then certainly their is no thoughtful assumption to mock them, nor to quarrel with them. However, if he is in a situation where there are heretics who rise against the Torah, and want to pass certain rules in matters of the city, and through this, detach the public from the will of Hashem, and, if one would try to negotiate peacefully, they wouldn't listen to his words- the Beis Yosef wasn't speaking about an example like this at all. Rather, it is a Mitzvah to hate them and to quarrel with them and to contradict their advice in whatever way one is able. As King David said in the verse, "For indeed, those who hate you, O Hashem, I hate them, and with those who rise up against you I quarrel! With the utmost hatred, I hate them...."(Psalms 139, 21).
He warned the assembly, “Move back from the tents of these wicked men! Do not touch anything belonging to them, or you will be swept away because of all their sins"
ReplyDeleteThe next verse actually shows what Moshe was doing
And he is also acting on prophecy, not his own
Instincts
He says that he is carrying out Hashem's Will.
No contradiction. The Biur Halacha writes that one should first approach the wicked men and try to make peace.
ReplyDeleteThe gemora in Sanhedrin says not to perpetuate the fight - even after appealing to the enemy while Mishna Berura says to fight till he is destroyed
ReplyDeleteany commentaries in the 1400 years between the Gemara and the MB?
DeleteTechnically the MB was a digest of those 1400 years, right?
DeleteAnd anyway, live by the principle - fight the battles you can win.
Obviously, machazikin does not mean "perpetuate" but to "grasp" and encourage the machlokes. So it seems from the context and the Biur Halacha.
Delete"unknown" you are clearly ignoring wat the words say
DeleteThe MB - as far as I know - is not a digest of commentaries on the Gemara. Correct me if i am wrong.
DeleteRight. He's a digest on the various authorites that issued halakhic rulings since the Gemara.
DeleteThis is from Wikipedia, so not my own "scholarship"
DeleteThe Mishnah Berurah's "literary style can be described as follows: In relation to a given law of the Shulhan Aruch, he raises a particular case with certain peculiarities that may change the law; then, he enumerates the opinions of the Ahronim (the later authorities, of the 16th century and on) on that case, from the most lenient to the most stringent ; and finally, he decides between them.... Having displayed what we may call the "leniency-stringency spectrum", [he] actually offers the reader an array of conduct options from which he may pick the one that seems right for him. This choice is not altogether free, since [he] shows a clear inclination to one side of the spectrum - the stringent - and encourages the reader to follow it, but still, the soft language of the ruling suggests that if one follows the other side of the spectrum, the lenient, he will not sin, since there are trustworthy authorities that may back his choice."[2]
Not all of the Mishnah Brurah was written by Kagan: some parts were instead written by his son or various students, which accounts for the existence of several contradictions between different rulings in the text.[3]
also:
As such, the "yeshivish" community tends to follow its rulings almost exclusively.[5] However, R' Yosef Eliyahu Henkin ruled that the Aruch haShulchan should be regarded as more authoritative for a number of reasons: it is the later of the two codes; it covers the entire Shulchan Aruch and not just Orach Chaim; it takes Jewish custom into account; it was written by a practicing rabbi who thus had more experience with halachic dilemmas.[5] R' Moshe Feinstein also preferred the Aruch Hashulchan, for the last of these reasons.[5] Indeed, on a number of key issues, common Orthodox practice does not follow the Mishnah Berurah's stringencies.
Well there's one Aruch HaShulchan stringency I'm glad we don't follow. He says you wait 6 hours after the meat meal ends, not after you last ate meat.
DeleteYou have desert after a meat meal. You won't be hungry for 6 hours 😂
DeleteThere are stringencies in all codes. Some people want to be associated with the most stringent, others the opposite.
DeleteBut there are lomdish reasons why great poskim preferred the Aruch, it's not a question of how frum it is. The MB has become a default sefer , and the gadlus of the CC is the reason why. The personality of the Aruch hashulchan is less widely known. Everyone, even trad know the Chofetz Chaim.
Very few people know Yechiel Michoel halevi Epstein.
The MB has a few advantages.
DeleteOne is that it's got the Shulchan Aruch right there on the page. The Aruch HaShulchan refers to the various paragraphs in the Shulchan Aruch and quotes them but if you just want the Shulchan Aruch's psak, it's hard to find.
Two is that it's only 6 volumes which makes it easier to find the shelf space. The Aruch HaShulchan including the HeAtid volumes requires much more investment of space.
The Chasidim decided that the MD is the "posek acharon" and since they dominate Chareidi thought, that position has become widespread and the default assumption. So much so that the newest printing of the ASh has little footnotes showing where the MB's psak differs so you know to follow that instead.
Trying to decode your last paragraph:
Delete"The Chasidim decided that the MD is the "posek acharon" "
You mean MB?
And since when have the Chassidim followed the MB? They follow the Shulchan Aruch HARav
Can keep the Arukh next to the Rambam, and cut out the middleman.
DeleteThere is also the Levush, which has 10 volumes, and covers the Turim, halacha, kabbalah, philosophy, Chumash.. It is a very wide scope of Torah learning, but an abridged version would defeat the whole object of the series.
Delete