Oomis…forgive me, are you disagreeing with the array of sources above? Care to explain why?
The entire premise of the Rashbah is that our mesorah – even things without sources, as per the Heshiv Moshe – is ultimately something to be wary of rejecting. Hence, the Minchas Yitzchak, The Ben Ish Chai, are wary of eating the first piece of challah. Dayan Fisher disagreeed with them on a Halachic basis (based on a Gemara in Horayos. But I don’t believe that’s where you are coming from).
And perhaps you can source the custom of giving “the spitz” to a pregnant woman? And if you can’t…well, I suppose you should consider it silly as well.
Do you disagree? Why? You seem to respect “valid halachic sources”; does the Rashbah make the par?
The concept is that often old wives tales are often based on something. That is precisely what the Rashbah is saying. While the Remah limits it, the Heshiv Moshe does not. There is certainly room for debate here; but you don’t seem to be basing your point on anything. You seem to be rather flippant with Halachic sources.
—
Again, based on your professed respect of valid Halachic sources, chazal teach us not to teach (emphasis on teach) women Torah to the fact they are Kaley Daas. This is gemara in Sotah, 6a.
Presumably that is a valid halachic source.
This is written in Shulchan Aruch that a woman indeed gets schar for learning Torah, yet it advisable not to do so because most women are Kaley HaDaas. Therefore chazal advised not to so; yet the Remah that women must learn what Halachos are relevant to them. The Chafetz Chaim adds that this applies to anything which brings to Yiras Shamayim.
Clearly that has nothing to do with Zekenos in the mesorah in regards to how to act (such as not eating the end piece of the bread) as this a Halacha which is relevant to them, and hence it is part of their limud. This would apply to any principle of Emunah, as well.
In addition, the concept of Kaley HaDaas is not relevant to keeping a chain of a clear halachic psak; rather, halachic analysis.
The concept is if a woman is sufficiently capably of totally disconnected her emotions from intellectual analysis. Not that she is not capable of intellectual analysis, but as the power of her emotions in influencing her final conclusion. This is something that we see – and appreciate, I should hope – in day to day life.
How exactly to apply this principle is a subject of debate. Not random flippancy.
For further edification, may I suggest Rebbetzins Heller’s excellent “Our Bodies, Our Souls”. She rights extensively about Klaley HaDaas and explains it rather clearly. Or she merely an old wive, as well?
Perhaps a little more respect for valid halachic sources would be in order? Or at least, why you wish to write as you do and still profess respect for “valid halachic sources”?