Reply To: Rav Chaim: A Nebach Apikorus is also an Apikorus

Rav Elchanan brings the famous statement of Rav Chaim that “nebech an apikorus is still an apikorus”. To this Rav Elchanan asks several kashes. One is from a gemara in Cheilek in which R’ Hillel felt Moshiach came already in the form of Chizkiyahu Hamelech. According to Rav Chaim, why isn’t R’ Hillel an apikorus? To this Rav Meir Stern answered that since R’ Hillel was a bar plugtah with the other Amoraim, he had a right to argue. However, once the halacha was paskened not like R’ Hillel, subsequent generations can’t argue. And he compared this to any machlokes in halacha. We only go basar rov (Yachid V’Rabim halacha K’rabim) if one doesn’t know what the halacha is, but the yachid himself doesn’t have to go basar rov since he is a bar plugtah.

The Gemorah in Sanhedrin 99a quotes R. Hillel as saying “There shall be no Mashiach for Israel, because they have already enjoyed him in the days of Chizkiyah.” The Chasam Sofer (Teshuvos, Yoreah Deah 356) writes that while R. Hillel was not an apikorus for saying what he did, the question has already been decided and anyone who says the exact same thing today is an apikorus who denies the Torah.

Ramban, in Kisvei Ramban, vol. I, p. 345., writes to the Gedolim in France argues with them against a belief in corporeal Hashem. He writes that Scriptural and Aggadic references to Hashem’s form should not be taken literally. Yet regardless of any of the Rishonim’s belief in a corporeal G-d, such a belief today would be heretical.

So we see even in areas that are not halacha l’maaisa (i.e. belief in Moshiach or the form of Hashem is not something we tangibly express but rather simply think) one can be a heretic even if he find a source in the gedolim that once held it. It was okay for them to hold, but certainly not for any of us.