Originally published 4/12/08, 11:18 PM, Eastern Daylight Time
Given the Raaviya takes a very Liberal view regarding Hasiba [Reclining]. He declines to recline because, after all, in our day and age, we do not formally dine on cushions on the floor! This position is well and good - but is it a a truly Orthodox position to do away with a time-honored Halachah in the Talmud merely due to changed external circumstances?
The Bavli gives very demanding parameters, lean to the right not the left, lest one choke etc. Hasiba is very formal and very specific. How did the Raaviya ignore this? Was he acting like a proto-Liberal Rabbi?
A change occurred to me last year. Whilst slugging through the Bavli's 10th chapter of Pesachim [arvei pesachim] I took a short-cut detour and I did the much more compact Yerushalmi instead. There it was - Lo and Behold:
Given the Raaviya takes a very Liberal view regarding Hasiba [Reclining]. He declines to recline because, after all, in our day and age, we do not formally dine on cushions on the floor! This position is well and good - but is it a a truly Orthodox position to do away with a time-honored Halachah in the Talmud merely due to changed external circumstances?
The Bavli gives very demanding parameters, lean to the right not the left, lest one choke etc. Hasiba is very formal and very specific. How did the Raaviya ignore this? Was he acting like a proto-Liberal Rabbi?
A change occurred to me last year. Whilst slugging through the Bavli's 10th chapter of Pesachim [arvei pesachim] I took a short-cut detour and I did the much more compact Yerushalmi instead. There it was - Lo and Behold:
Q; Why must one do hasiba at the seder?
A: Lest one eat STANDING UP like a servant!
A: Lest one eat STANDING UP like a servant!
Could this alternate Talmudic source have coincided with the Raaviya's position?
Today, I ate my second S'eudah with Rabbi Dr. Kanarfgoel, a PhD in Jewish Medieval history and I mentioned this idea. While he did not respond specifically, he noted that the Raaviya was the FIRST Ashkenazic source to have a complete Yersushalmi at his disposal and he used it widely!
On a completely different topic, we have manuscripts in the Rambam's own handwriting. At times, he crosses out a Halachah and replaces it with the alternate read in the Yerushalmi. The Rambam USUALLY is very RIF-centric, but at times he follows Yerushalmi, probably AFTER considering the RIF first as the likely Halachah [as above]
==========================================================
What does this portent in the future? As Artscroll Shottenstein is publishing a user friendly Yerushalmi, people may see many concepts in a brand new light. Granted that MOST commentaries attempt to get the Yerushalmi to jibe with the Bavli, nevertheless, there will be brand new insights garnished from sources perhaps more ancient than the Bavli. Will this bring about a Sea change not only in how people view the Talmud, but will it impact pesak -as it apparently did for the R'a'aviyah and the Rambam?
--
RabbiRichWolpoe@Gmail.com
5 comments:
Probably won't result in much of a change. Whenever the Bavli and the Yerushalmi disagree, the Bavli always wins and in this case the Bavli does say what one must do to recline.
I suspect the usual will happen. When the Yerushalmi is stricter, we'll get hit with a new chumra and when it's more lenient, we'll be reminded that it's not the final authority.
Of course, the effect of the greater accessibility to the Yerushalmi will be more muted due to the overall of the significance of the Shulchan Aruch in psak. In other words, the rishonim had more flexibility in adopting new sources into their psak, which means that the discovery of the Yerushalmi could have more effect on the Raavya. Yet, notwithstanding that there could me a more muted effect on the discovery of new texts from poskim and meforshim before the Shulchan Aruch, a similar issue involves the discovery of new sources post the Shulchan Aruch. This does not just concern the discovery of new manuscipts. As more and more sefarim become more accessible, we can wonder what the effect will be on psak as practiced in the general community.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Absolutely none. If there was any impact, I'd be enjoying kosher-for-Pesach peanut butter with my matzah, but I'm not, am I!
In today's halachic climate, the answer to the question is first determined, then supported by supportive sources while contradicting sources are either not mentioned, ignored or discredited.
But is this process of halachic determination one to be commended, supported, admired.
Let us take a look at the question of eating pot roast at the Seder. On the surface, it would seem that everyone would say it is forbidden, eventhough it is not actually fire roasted. In fact, that is what the Magen Avraham says. Yet take a look at the Aruch Hashulchan and he say why not, basically stating he can't understand why the Magen Avraham would be machmir. Now, look in R. Shimon Eider's book on Pesach and you will find that he doesn't mention the Aruch Hashulchan -- and many would just say that pot roast is absolutely assur. But I think that as more people develop the ability and interest to look in sefarim, you may start to find people applying the Aruch Hashulchan more and more.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
The "frum" sources don't like the Aruch HaShulchan because he has a nasty habit of pointing out that many chumros don't have a basis, they're just there and without any real justification.
It's always hard to be "frummer than thou" when someone who is well versed in the authoritative sources can point out you have no support for your point.
Post a Comment