I have no clue how the words of the Rambam (mentioned in its original by mosheemes2) have any relevance to the long discussion about chazal being right or wrong in some instances.All the Rambam is saying is that we have to believe that HKBH speaks to us through his Nevi’im and that the Torah is G-d given, to its last letter. I have no idea how this impacts the present discussion.
Now -as per our discussion. I think that people have an erroneous understanding of halacha and what halacha means.
In truth, halacha has no direct connection with reality. This sounds strange but ALLOW ME TO EXPLAIN.
We have a halacha of “bittul be’rov”, something can be “absorbed’ by the majority of what surrounds it.
SO, when a piece of pork falls into a pot of kosher meat and is “bottul” (whether Mi’deoraissa with one in two or mi’derabbonon as less than one sixtieth) and you end up eating the WHOLE pot, you are NOT considered having eaten tereifa. because, once the halacha tells us that there is NO treifa meat there, HALACHICALLY that piece of pork turns into a kosher piece. There are some discussions about the pace of eating but the actual Psak is clear.
The halacha of “chatichah na’aseh neveilah” rests upon the same reasoning- in the opposite direction.
Hence, reality is not what directs halacha. It is the OPINION of the Poskim that make it halacha.
That is what the story of “tannur achnai” tells us. Halacha is what the chachomim tell us , regardless of what reality (and heaven clearly knows better) is.
This is also why we can say ‘ele ve’ele divrei elokim chaim”. Both sides of the Psak are -from a halachic point of view- real. We ultimately pasken like one but both are -from a chachomim point of view- correct.
All this, however, relates ONLY to halachic questions.When we have the words of gedolim that do NOT have any relationship to halacha-then, of course, they can be wrong, whether it is science or matters that do not deal with a halachic question.
I would be happy to hear comments on this analysis.