@yankel berel
I think we settled on a lot of point already, great.
> R chaim kanievsky did not have smiha and certainly [over]qualified as a talmid haham al pi hahalaha.
of course. I reviewed a little of modern history of “rav” and it seems that it was “exceptional T’Ch in _his_ generation” in the times of Sh’A and became a “knowledgeable in Torah” by Mishna Berurah. R Chaim qualifies for both, of course.
> Muflag behohma bedoro is found in shulhan aruch hilch kvod rabo in YD .
I think YD refers Muflag re:standing up, while reserving “Rav” to the primary teacher. Given changes of “rav” by now, your inference looks reasonable.
> RCV is not gadol meraban shmo .
In my mind, he does, given his role in establishing _the_ yeshiva and the role yeshivos play now. (yes, “yeshiva” changed the meaning faster than “rav” but still).
Interestingly, there are sources that stress danger of over-titling. R Akiva Eger, I think, minimized his own titles and maintained that you can be a Rav or a Gaon but not both … with danger being once you give all titles to person A, then person B also demands them, and ein ledavar sof, and public becomes mislead who is a real T’Ch. R Akiva Eger lost this battle by now just by looking at how we dress…
Introduction to “Making of the Gadol” offers a great solution – the author uses R in front of all names giving permission to the reader to choose between Reb/Rav/Rabban/Rav Gaon.