Sunday, 15 November 2009

Doctrine vs. Dissent 1

Here is a controversy between 2 Points of View.

This exchange is from way back in 2003 and I have changed the names to reduce the "personal" aspect and to focus upon the issues instead. No need for adding ad hominem attacks..

We will call the more Dissenting protagonist "R Shmuly"
And
The more Doctrinaire protagonist "R Binny"

The name of a Gadol is G'dalyah


Response to R Shmuly who states
R G'dalya apparently seems to reverse the Bavli re: burial on YT Sheini by invoking chillul YT as a concern - af al pi that the Bavli asserts that legabei Meisim YT sheini is considered kechol...

R Binny:
Do you really believe that R G'dalya reversed a BAVLI?!
...
Shmuly:
Well, If Rabbi X were to say that the gmara re: burying on YT is not applicable due to modern day refrigeration, the Torah world would be up in arms. While when R G'dalyah says it, it gets a pass. ...

Tell me here and now R Binny, of all the Torah-based and Kabbalistic reasons for not delaying a levaya that have nothing to do with the deterioration of the body! I'm sure you can come up with many more than
I can, and I can think of a few myself.
...
Point? We are not interested in the methodology of how a Halachah is
derived but WHO says it. This of course obviates the need for a concept of a 'To"eh bidvar Mishnah' which becomes impossible in this system. Because the Gadol trumps the P'shat of any Mishna anyway! So its pointless to ever challenge any Gadol! Yet the SA allows for just such a challenge!»

R Binny
Excuse me, I am in utter shock. Because R G'dalyah does, b'rov gadluso, claim
to understand the Gemara, you claim to understand it better and therefore
conclude that he reversed the Bavli?!

And, of course, you know as well as I do that we do not pasken on the
basis of Kabbalah.

And I imagine you know that the Gemara itself limits burial on Yom Tov where there are countervailing issues.

Your assertion is staggering.»

R Shmuly:
«If Chassimas Hatalmud is indeed the last word, then kfiyyas hamitta would
still be a chiyyuv for an an aveil, and kitniyuos and bigamy would be still be optional for Ashkenazim

R Binny:
«Aveilus is mostly minhagim, and no ra'ayos can be brought from minhagim.

Kitniyos and bigamy are still options. You will end up in cherem, that's
all.

Chasimas Ha'Talmud IS the last word. Beyond that there can only be
chumros.


Ad Kahn the original exchange


R Shmuly asked me to add a few points to bolster his arguments and to undermine R Binn's points. Stay tuned for further posts.


Note: Since I cannot readily contact R Binny, I have altered all the names to reduce any potential for personalities to intervene

KT
RRW

No comments: