- This topic has 41 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
When are the seven times we pasken like Beis Shamai instead of with Beis Hillel as we do all other times?
And are there any other exceptions other than those seven?
And when Moshiach comes, are we going to pasken like Beis Shamai across the board or will there be exceptions?
Beis Shamai says women have to clean for Pesach. Beis Hillel says… When Moshiach comes…
Naysberg: There is no source anywhere whatsoever for the popular idea that L’asid Lavo we Pasken by Beis Shammai.
And I think there are six (plus 18) quoted in a Tosfos on Sukkah 3a if I recall correctly. It’s those 6 plus the Shmoneh Asar Davar in the end of the first Perek of Shabbos.
How many times is R’ Shimon ben Gamliel’s name found in the Mishnah? What are the exceptions to the rule that the halacha does not follow R’ Eliezer? If R’ Yochanan and Reish Lakish have a machlokes, and Shmuel holds like R’ Yochanan and Rav like Reish Lakish, and it is a question of issur, who does the halacha follow? When mashiach comes, are we going to pasken like Abbaye? How many times does the Gemara record a person named Ravina disagreeing with Rava?
Who said there will be mitzvos when Masiach comes(Niddah 61,Yerushalmi Megilla). According to the shitta that there will be mitzvos the Rogatchover Gaon asked a question on a suyga and explained the chumros of Bais Shammai will be followed.
The idea of following Beis Shammai post-Moshiach, long predates the Ragachover Gaon.
Sam2: I believe People get from the mishna in avos 5:17 it says sofa l’skaeim.It is also brought down in the name of the Arizal.
Naysberg: There were times when Beis Hillel was chozer and went like Beis Shammai see Mishnayos Edius.
Sam4: I looked for it and asked several Gedolim what the source is. I was told by several that it is just said over by the Hamon Am and no Makor really exists.
sam4321 –
I wanted to reconcile the two opinions by saying that of course the Torah will apply, but we will have advanced so far in our lomdus by then that we will be able to get out of every mitzvah. :p
cheftze: the mention of the Rogatchover Gaon was not the source rather that he said it could only be the chumros not all their shittos.
yitay:lol,:)
I’ve seen it mentioned in Sefarim. I just checked up Reb Reuven Margalis, and he brings this from the Sefer Vayakhel Moshe (entry 54), the Chida (Pesach Einayim on Avos Perek 5 on that Mishna of Machlokes L’shem Shamayim), and the Malbim (Torah Ohr Chukas 147)
By the way, there is no doubt about Mitzvos after Moshiach comes. The question is about after T’chiya.
HaLeivi: Correct the gemara in Nidda(61) is talking after the Resurrection. Some learn and I think this is how the Lubavitcher Rebbe learned it, before Mashiach will be like Beis Hillel and times of Mashiach will be like Beis Shammai.After the Resurrection only the halacha will be followed which is both Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai which will be possible after the Resurrection. There are different limudim to what will be ,but I believe this is one understanding.
the mesilllas yesharim says that the halacha was nikva like Beis Hilell ‘la’ad ul’olmei olamim’, this sounds very much not like a change le’yemos hamashiach
Here are some sources (note 58) for the fact that Leasid Lavo the Halacha will be like Beis Shamai and a discussion about the reason for it:
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=16067&st=&pgnum=121
Sam2: “ There is no source anywhere whatsoever for the popular idea that L’asid Lavo we Pasken by Beis Shammai.”
Beware of taking these sort of statements too literally. As some have pointed out the “l’asid lavo” is discussing techiyas hameisim not the days of Moshiach.
After Moshiach comes the Sanhedrin HaGadol will reconvene and will have the power to reverse the ruling of any previous Sanhedrin HaGadol, including the ruling that we pasken like Bais Hillel over Bais Shammai. Whether or not the coming Sanhedrin will in fact rule like Bais Shammai will depend on the shikul hadas of the members of that Sanhedrin. There is no way to know whether or not any particular psak will change.
benignuman- What does confusion over the meaning of ????? ???? have to do with taking things literally? Did you look up the mekoros I cited? It’s actually relatively straightforward. Beis Shamai are ????? ???. When ???? will come the Sanhedrin will be ???? ?????. For more on the matter, go to the link I provided.
As for Sam asking ‘Gedolim’ and they saying it has no source and it is from the Hamon Am, maybe you should revisit your basis for qualification.
sam2- in kuntress divrei sofrim ois 15 reb elchonon discusses why losid lvo halach is like beis shamai.
There is no source anywhere whatsoever for the popular idea that L’asid Lavo we Pasken by Beis Shammai.
I think it takes a R’ Moshe Feinstein (at least) to make such a statement.
Kozov,
I read your source and my explanation is in line with it if you don’t take it too literally (the lasid lovo thing was only meant to clarify that we were discussing Yimos HaMishaich when the normal rules of halacha and nature will apply).
There is no way we can say with certainty what the future Sanhedrin HaGadol will pasken on any given issue. Just because Bais Shammai were sharper doesn’t mean they were always right (or else we would pasken like them now). Rather on every given issue the future Sanhedrin will render a psak (and paskening like Bais Shammai will once again be on the table).
DY: I know he’s not R’ Moshe, but I have a friend who asked Rav Chaim Kanievsky and that was the response he received.
If anyone could make such a statement today, it would be R’ Chaim, but apparently, there was some type of miscommunication.
DY: Or he doesn’t consider a source found in late Achronim to matter when no earlier sources mentioned it first.
He doesn’t profess to know by heart any Sefer. He knows all of Chazal.
Here is another source that the Sanhedrin will be ???? ?????:
??”? ??? ??? ?”?:
???????? ???? ???? ??? (?”? ?”?) ?????, ????? ???, ????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????. ???? ?? ??? ?’ ???, ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ???. ???? ????? ??? ?????? ?????, ???? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ?????, ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????, ????? ????, ??? ??? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ???, ?? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ??
Or he doesn’t consider a source found in late Achronim to matter when no earlier sources mentioned it first.
But why do you think the Rogatchaver Gaon would say or quote it?! And why do you think the ????”? himself would say it, if not for it being a reputable statement?!
Also, everyone should agree that just because something is found in Seforim, especially the Arizal (like the topic of our discussion), without earlier sources does not mean it isn’t considered a source. See the end of the ????? of ?’ ???? ????? to ??? ??????? starting with ‘???? ??? ??? ??? ????’ until ‘?????? ???’.
Some examples he brings are ????? ????”? ?? ????? ???? ?”? and on ????? ??? ?????? ?”?, see there.
HaleiVi,
He wouldn’t have said “it is just said over by the Hamon Am”, unless he knew that it wasn’t found anywhere. He could only know that if he knew all legitimate sources. Since as you say, he doesn’t, he probably didn’t say it. The only alternative I can think of is that he has somewhere in Chaza”l where it is implied that it’s not true, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
I didn’t think Sam meant that Reb Chaim Kenievsky answered word for word what Reb Shachter said.
I remember that when, oddly enough, they asked Reb Chaim Kanievsky what the source is for Avram Fried’s song, he said it is nowhere in Chazal but perhaps somewhere else. Eventually, someone had the brainstorm to ask Avram Fried himself. He pointed to a Chasam Sofer that it was based on.
benignuman-
just because Bais Shammai were sharper doesn’t mean they were always right (or else we would pasken like them now)
Actually that is not true. The Halacha was not like Beis Shamai because they were not the majority, not because they were wrong.
Sam-
Or he doesn’t consider a source found in late Achronim to matter when no earlier sources mentioned it first.
Or he didn’t know or remember. HaLeiVi I remember that as well. Hopefully this post will go through now that you brought that up.
Sam, you said you asked several Gedolim; what was their reason?
And actually, this concept, if not mentioned outright, is rooted strongly in ???? ??”?, as I proved before. Quite literally is the implication (-benignuman). If you would read what is explained on the subject it would become quite clear to you how aligned and firmly rooted with ???? ??”? these sources are.
Part ? with the footnotes for the entirety of it (in the link I provided).
Kozov,
When we say Bais Shammai was not the majority, that means that the majority thought Bais Shammai was wrong!
If we knew being sharper meant you were always right then we would always pasken like Bais Shammai and we would always pasken like R’Meir. But we don’t. The future Bais Din HaGadol which will have the ability to best discern who is right, will examine each issue on its merits and pasken like Bais Shammai where they were right and Bais Hillel where they were right.
To take the statement literally is just illogical.
ask your rabbi
benignuman- That is a good question. When you will finally read the explanation in the link provided, part ?, with the footnotes, especially 52 and 61, I am confident you will finally understand.
I read through the entire part ?, with the footnotes and I still think I am right.
All this means is that the future Bais Din HaGadol can overturn the halacha and be koveya like Bais Shammai, and given their additional gadlus in chochma it is likely they will overturn some of the psak. But it is unlikely that they will overturn all of it and certainly, short of removing their bechira and individual n’tiyas neshomo, there is no way to guarantee that they will pasken like Bais Shammai in every instance.
Benign, what do you mean by right and wrong? It is about Beis Shammay and Beis Hillel that it especially says Eilu Va’eilu Divrei Elokim Chayim. The Gemara says we Pasken like Beis Hillel because they were Aluvim.
Have a good look in the Maharal, Be’er Hagola.
But it is unlikely that they will overturn all of it and certainly, short of removing their bechira and individual n’tiyas neshomo, there is no way to guarantee that they will pasken like Bais Shammai in every instance.
No one ever said they will pasken like Bais Shammai in every instance. Like we say now, the Halacha is like Bais Hillel, but there are still exceptions.
As far as bechira goes, if a member of the Sanhedrin understands something a certain way, he ‘must’ pasken that way. That’s why ?????? ?????? argued with ????? in .??? ??, as explained in footnote 62. Does that in any way remove bechira?!
“No one ever said they will pasken like Bais Shammai in every instance.”
Oh. I thought that was what we were arguing about. I was saying that pshat is that in the future they will be able to pasken like Bais Shammai. You were saying pshat was that they will have to pasken like Bais Shammai.
If all you meant was they are more likely to pasken like Bais Shammai on any given question then we agree.
What I meant by “bechira” was how a given member of the Sanhedrin understands.
Oh. I thought that was what we were arguing about. I was saying that pshat is that in the future they will be able to pasken like Bais Shammai. You were saying pshat was that they will have to pasken like Bais Shammai.
I never said that.
It is definitely more than just being ‘able’ to pasken like Beis Shamai. That is not how to read pshat of ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????.
What I was arguing with you about was that Beis Shamai could hypothetically be right in every instance and the majority and halacha can still be against him.
If all you meant was they are more likely to pasken like Bais Shammai on any given question then we agree.
I’m glad you finally think at least that much. Because before, your opinion was clearly something else.
You said: “When we say Bais Shammai was not the majority, that means that the majority thought Bais Shammai was wrong!” you used that as a proof against my comment: “Actually that is not true. The Halacha was not like Beis Shamai because they were not the majority, not because they were wrong.” The indication is that you are of the opinion that Beis Shamai is wrong where the majority rules against him.
This, I refuted (besides the obvious question since when is majority opinion equivalent to truth).
A more honest and accurate expression would have been for you to say “I concede,” not “we agree.”
Kozov,
On any given question, Bais Shammai might be right or might be wrong. By paskening like the Bais Hillel, the Sanhedrin of the time was declaring that it held Bais Hillel to be correct and Bais Shammai to be wrong. I have not changed my view on that.
The Lubavitcher Rebbe Zt”l was explaining the statement that in the future we will pasken like Bais Shammai by arguing that in the future the Sanhedrin will have greater understanding and the Majority will agree with Bais Shammai who were sharper.
I thought you were arguing that this meant that in every case they will rule like Bais Shammai. I thought that position to be wrong and still do. Later you clarified “No one ever said they will pasken like Bais Shammai in every instance.”
If all you meant then was that they were more likely to pasken like Bais Shammai, then we have no argument.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.