I stumbled onto this thread while looking for something else, and even though it is from three years ago, I cannot in good faith let the claims here stand without a response.
There are three lines of reasoning employed here to demonstrate that there is psak in hashkafa/aggadita:
1) The Gemara in Eiruvin paskened such an issue.
2) The Rambam routinely paskens such issues, and even codified the 13 ikkarim.
3) The Chasam Sofer’s explanation as to why R’ Hillel wasn’t a heretic.
I think the first two points can be addressed together, by pointing out that a conclusion is not the same thing as a psak. I concluded that I typed this but I did not pasken that I typed this. The fact that Beis Shammai/Beis Hillel or the Rambam reached a conclusion on a given matter does not make it a psak. It means that they think it to be true or even that they are sure that it is true. The Rambam in fact in at least five places writes explicitly that he doesn’t pasken these types of issues (which I have already quoted in two other threads). See Peirush Hamishnayos Sotah 3:5, Sanhedrin 10:3, Shavuos 1:4, Sefer Hamitzvos Lo Saaseh 133, and Maamar Techias Hameisim. Also, the Abarbanel notwithstanding, the very fact that the Rambam went against the rules of psak demonstrates that he was not paskening, but simply telling us what he holds. See also the Tosafos Yom Tov on the aforementioned mishnah in Sotah who is bothered by the fact that the Rambam in Mishneh Torah “paskens” like Rebbe and not the Rabbanan. After first suggesting that the Rambam holds that they are not arguing he says: ??? ?? ????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ???? ?????? ?”? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. And see also the Tzlach in Berachos 7b where he writes: ??? ??’ ???? ??? ????? ????”? ??? ??? ??? ?’ ?????? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ?? ????”? ????? ?????? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?? ????? ????
?? ?????? ???? ?????? ??????
??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ??? and R’ Akiva Eiger cites this and brings another proof to it.
Furthermore, it doesn’t even make sense that you can pasken something such as whether or not it is better to have been created or not or whether a ba’al teshuva is better than a tzaddik etc. because those things are metzius. A psak tells you what to do in a given situation. You can’t pasken what the truth is. If you say that they are paskenable then it will come out that certain things can change over time, such as whether H’ can have a corporeal manifestation or even whether H’ exists. This (certainly according to the Rambam) is untenable and would have grave ramifications for the existence of the religion.
Now the Chassam Sofer did in fact say this. But it must be pointed out that the Rishonim did not seem to agree with his understanding as evidenced from how they responded to the Rambam (see Raavad Hilchos Teshuvah 3:6, Kuntres Hara’ayos L’Riaz Sanhedrin Perek Chelek, Sefer Haikkarim 1:1).
And finally, see the last line in R’ Shmuel Hanaggid’s Mavo Hatalmud: ?? ?????? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ????? ?? ???? ??????