tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post1650918706504646740..comments2024-03-29T12:21:24.976+03:00Comments on Daas Torah - Issues of Jewish Identity: Poskim today can not claim that earlier sources didn't know the metziius (reality)Daas Torahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07252904288544083215noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-64937382157502414802010-12-24T19:40:37.192+02:002010-12-24T19:40:37.192+02:00Again, if the Kloizenburger rebbe is referring to ...Again, if the Kloizenburger rebbe is referring to the CI's position, then he is saying that even when chazal or rishonim (and perhaps even a well accepted acharon) pasqens using reasoning that appears based on bad science, it is inappropriate for us to question the pesaq itself.<br /><br />To use the example of the dome of the sky and Rabbeinu Tam... Thanks to refraction, the sun really does appear to barely move up or down at the beginning and end of the day. During the period, the sun is actually below the horizon -- refraction bends its light to reach us. So, even during the equinox, the day is slightly longer than at night, with the added time being one in which the sun appears to flatten more than rise or set. IOW, even though Persian astronomy and the dome of the sky is entirely wrong, the visual phenomena it was created to explain are real.<br /><br />Even if the issue was ignored in Ptolemeic astronomy, causes math anomalies in Rambam's Hil' Qiddush haChodesh, and isn't taught today in elementary or HS.<br /><br />The halachic concepts of alos, sheqi'ah and tzeis depend on how the sky looks, not the explanation as to why.<br /><br />So it's possible to suggest that the bad science has nothing to do with Rabbeinu Tam's pesaq. But whether that's correct or not, it is still clear there is more going on about the relationship of realia and pesaq than we are able to second-guess.<br /><br />-michamicha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-10188708746980090552010-12-24T18:45:57.404+02:002010-12-24T18:45:57.404+02:00The citing of the CS is a non-issue if (as I said ...The citing of the CS is a non-issue if (as I said yesterday) the point of the teshuvah is that the halachic conclusion is authoritative, not necessarily that the science is accurate.<br /><br />While it's true that we know more science than Rashi, the Divrei Chaim is correct that we cannot understand the full import of his pesaqim and thus we cannot pasqen against the rishonim. This line of reasoning is consistent with the DC's words, and does not imply infallible knowledge by chazal or rishonim.<br /><br />-michamicha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-3166722774806581602010-12-24T17:29:46.745+02:002010-12-24T17:29:46.745+02:00The Chasam Sofer talks about Rishonim, not Chazal ...The Chasam Sofer talks about Rishonim, not Chazal IIRC.<br /><br />Also, did the Klausenberger Rebbe believe that there is a dome in the sky? Is that the R' Tam he is referring to? This is very difficult.sbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-78498979291404210792010-12-24T12:23:41.059+02:002010-12-24T12:23:41.059+02:00The writer is actually in some trouble himself, fo...The writer is actually in some trouble himself, for he refers to the Hatam Sofer who he claims to be part of this tradition - when the Hatam Sofer himself relied on modern scientific discoveries , and explicitly stated that Chazal were not aware of reality, in reproductive biology!Eddie in UKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7309929059139673041.post-55630902245123129712010-12-24T00:43:37.797+02:002010-12-24T00:43:37.797+02:00Am I wrong, or does the Kloizenburger Rebbe actual...Am I wrong, or does the Kloizenburger Rebbe actualy say something far more limited -- that one may not say a pesaq is wrong due to an error in metzi'us.<br /><br />After all, he is using the Chazon Ish as a reference, and the CI says that it's the authority of the poseiq that defines the law regardless of metzi'us.<br /><br />This smaller claim would imply that Hashem guides the poseiq to the correct answer, even if the poseiq basis his reasoning on a faulty assumption. Not that his assumptions are always correct.<br /><br />-michamicha bergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11612144735431285113noreply@blogger.com