- This topic has 43 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 4 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Is it safe to say that if one follows a p’sak of R. Yakov Emden zt”l, that he is on solid halachic grounds?
The Wolf
No.
Is it safe to say that if one follows a psak of shammai hazaken that he is on solid halachic grounds?
I would say it depends on the psak. Not all of his psakim were taken on by the rest of the people.
I’d say no. But that’s just my opinion. CYLOR.
It’s the same as R’ Moshe. The question can be asked, “Can you blindly follow a psak of R’ Moshe?” It all depends on what was accepted or not. Consider that R’ Moshe clearly stated that peanuts are not kitniyos and consider the fact that people DID eat peanuts and peanut butter on Pesach only until “recently.”
i dont understand the issue of course his pesak is reliable. the issue might be if you are applying it correctly, but in general who are we to be mevatel one of the gedoiley yisrael
Yes
Following the Psak of any earlier Acharon is never a good idea. Some psakim get accepted by the later Poskim, others don’t. Hora’ah should be left to Morei Hora’ah who follow the development of the Halacha to its conclusion.
Not without more info.
For example, is it a Da’as Yochid? Sha’as Ha’dichak? Hefsed Meruba? Who else agrees with the p’sak?
Eidiyos ?,?
?,? ???? ????? ??? ????, ???, ???? ?? ?????? ????? ?????? ????. ??? ??, ???, ??? ?? ???? ??. ??? ??, ??? ????? ??? ???????, ??? ???? ??? ???????; ??? ????? ???????, ??? ???? ???????. ??? ??? ???? ??? ?????, ???? ???????; ???? ????? ???? ?????, ?????? ????? ???????. ??? ??, ???, ??? ???? ??????. ??? ??, ???? ????. ??? ??, ??? ????? ???? ??. ??? ??, ???; ????? ??????, ?????? ??????.
Following any Posek blindly from a previous generation is not how our Mesorah and chain of Halacha works.
“a p’sak of R. Yakov Emden”
Rav Yaakov Emden is a das yochid amongst many achronim concerning a mitzvah that had been practiced but is no longer considered a mitzva in our day; Rav Yaakov Emden paskins in a long t’shuva that it is still applicable in out times. I assume that the Wolf does not want everyone to be machmir, only himself as a baal nefesh, to be able to be m’kayim this mitzva.
As BaalSechel and Sam2 said, our minhag is to ask your LOR, not to decide on your own to follow a psak from an acharon that was niftar more than 200 years ago.
You want to be choshesh for the Yavetz le’chomra? Go ahead.
I still say yes.
I don’t approve of the word “blindly” (two posts) being used here. It is a manipulative word used with the intention of disparaging before the discussion even begins.
Besides, the OP didn’t ask if it’s legitimate to follow all psakim of the Ya’avetz, just “A” psak. And even if he did mean all, I can say, “I am a descendant of The Shach, of the Ya’avetz, of the Gaon, of the Chasam Sofer, of Rav Shlomo Kluger, just pick one,and it is our family tradition to do this, this, this and this. And that is perfectly ok.
Look at the Teimanim (Rambam). Look at the Prushim from Sha’arei Chessed (the Gaon). Look at the Satmar (The rebbe died when? 32 years ago). Look at the Bambergers and Breuers. The examples are many more than I can list. There is no such a thing as a consensus that is binding. Not in halachah, nor in hashkafah.
Rav Ya’akov Emden was one of many giants who are worthy of being followed. It’s ok.
It depends who you are. if you are asking this questions to the cr
then the answer is definitly NO.
you should let your rav or posek decide for you.
Then you can say, “my rav told me to follow this psak of rav yaakov emden”.
Posed to the cr, this question is rediculous.
my only comment in this thread.
I think it depends on why you’re following the psak. If you’re looking for someone who is matir something, and R’ Emden zt”l is matir, I’d say no. We are not supposed to look around for heterim.
If your Rav told you to look up and see what R’ Emden held, then I’d say it’s fine. You’re not really looking to follow R’ Emden – you’re following your own Rav.
I asked my Rav a question concerning wherever I should listen to the Rashba or the Sages of Provence, on wherever it is ok to learn philosopy to study Masseh Merkava and/or Masseh Berishis, before you are 25 (mentioned in Artscroll notes on Talmud Chaggiga).
My Rav answerd you have to listen to the MODERN POSKIM (not the Rashba)–wherever he meant this just for this question or in other cases as well I am not sure. Though he did speak in a shiur he once gave that people should not listen to a Rov from the past, over a living posek today (wherever he meant this a halacha or maybe it was a Aggadata or Derush like a Brisker vort that or Rogatchover that is not followed always when it conflicts with Halacha).
old man, you may not just go and pick one Achron and start being meikal like him when others argue, unless you are a Rov and you learnt the sugya and you hold like him.
No.
You have no right to pick and choose halachos. It’s a mefureshe Gemara in Avoda Zara 7a:
??? ????, ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ??? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ??? ??????, ?’ ????? ?? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?????. ?”? ???? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????
If someone is greater you follow the one who is greater, and if not, then if it’s d’oraisa you follow the machmir, and if it’s d’rabbanan you follow the meikil.
There is an exception, and that is the Gemara which says in Eruvin 6b:
???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?”? ?????? ?”? ??? ?????? ?”? ??????? ?”? ???? ????? ???? (???? ?, ??) ????? ???? ???? ??? ?? ??”? ???????? ?????????? ?? ??”? ???????? ??????????
The specific application of the Gemara does not apply, as we know that a bas kol came out and paskened the halacha like Beis Hillel.
However, everyone understands that you may follow your rebbi’s opinion regardless of who agrees or disagrees with him, and that comes straight out of this Gemara. Since you are not picking and choosing, it is not hypocritical or wrong of you to follow your rebbi. If you would say “I’m going to be meikil like R’ Yaakov Emden over here” and “I am going to be meikil like the Noda biYehuda over here,” that is arbitrary and wrong according to both Gemaras.
These Gemaras refer to relying on someone. Each person who is at the level may come to a conclusion and pasken, even though others disagree, because that is his belief of the ???, and ??? triumphs all. But when one is not claiming to have figured out the truth, and certainly one who hasn’t learned a particular sugya in depth, is simply relying on others, in which case the above rules apply.
There are certain Poskim who were accepted by different segments of Klal Yisroel as “posek acharon.” The Shach, by the yeshivishe velt for example. That doesn’t mean we know he was bigger than the Taz. It means that he is our rav. And therefore in a case where we cannot figure out what the halacha should be we will take his word l’kula and l’chumra.
Some people hold the Mishna Brura is a posek acharon, or the Aruch Hashulchan, or the Maharsham. It’s the same thing. The rav that holds that the Aruch Hashulchan is a posek acharon will argue on him sometimes, but when he cannot be machri’a the halacha he will follow the Aruch Hashulchan l’kula and l’chumra.
If you wish to make R’ Yaakov Emden your rav and posek acharon, kol hakavod. But unless you follow him in every occasion that he disagrees with someone else and you aren’t capable of being machri’a not like him, you would be acting hypocritical, and you would be called a ??? according to the Gemara in Eiruvin.
This is why it is important to have a rav.
old man –
If he would have said he wants to follow all p’sakim of the Ya’avetz, I would have said yes.
Wold, no one gets it.
Yitay, yasher koach!
Mdd – My pleasure 🙂
I get it.
But I’ll play dumb.
Let’s assume that the sugya was learned through and through and the person has come to the conclusion that Rav Emden’s psak should be followed. The next theoretical issue to be resolved is “Does this psak pass the smell test? Is it reasonable in any way?”
It should be obvious to all that times change and our halachic behavior changes with it. This is why for many situations we ask shailos and don’t rely on a written opinion in a given sefer. As we know, many torah greats did not put their opinions down in writing for fear that one day circumstances would change and the psak wuld no longer be valid.
Tachlis, one must have “einav b’rosho”. Rav Yaakov Emden is worthy of following , no doubt about it. But always? Think twice.
So does one stand on solid halachic ground? Yes. But that’s not enough.
“for fear that one day circumstances would change and the psak wuld no longer be valid.”
More for fear for their lives.
cherrybim –
What does that even mean?
“for fear that one day circumstances would change and the psak would no longer be valid.”
More for fear for their lives.
What does that even mean?
It means that in the past,certain gedolei haposkim printed certain teshuvos. They were warned to rescind the psakim by subtle means like threatening phone calls in the middle of the night, setting their apartments on fire , and the like. Not pleasant, but true.
“Please do not call me a ba’al nefesh.”
Sorry, but depending one’s perspective; what appears as a chumra, many times is actually a kulah and conversely, what seems to be a kulah, may really be a chumra. However, I have always felt that the Wolf is consistently on the right track, both halacha-wise and hashkafa-wise. So Wolf, no matter what you may consider yourself, in my book, you are a ba’al nefesh.
Having said that, I may have misread your original post (between the lines) and my response was actually in jest.
“Is it safe to say that if one follows a p’sak of R. Yakov Emden zt”l, that he is on solid halachic grounds?”
If not a single Posek follows his opinion in a certain matter anymore, I would say you can’t.
Guys, Wolf made it clear yesterday or so (in another thread) that the subject he is opaquely referring to here is Rav Yaakov Emden’s position that one may commit suicide to atone for his sins.
To second what Kozov said, someone who holds like Rashi on the corporeality of G-d nowadays would be an Apikores, plain and simple.
Wolf my friend, I believe there are other less daunting ways to atone for your sins. We could start a thread on that.
Sam where is this Rashi?
Suicide is assur. Always. Rav Yaakov Emden’s position notwithstanding.
Kozov: On his Peirush on Avos by Chavivin Adam Shenivra B’tzelem and also quoted in the Machzor Vitry.
Shlishi: That’s not 100& accurate. Look at the Pischei Tshuvah on this Siman.
Wolf: In this case, one may not follow R’ Yaakov Emden’s position, even if one follows him for everything, because unless I am mistaken he based that position on the Sefer B’samim Rosh, which we now know was a forgery, not written by the Rosh, and actually was an attempt to undermine the Halachic system.
Shlishi, R’ Yom Tov of Joigny (a talmid of Rabbeinu Tam, writer of Omnam Keyn, Tosafist, Rishon) found circumstances in 1190 where he determined that suicide was not only mutar, but obligatory. He gave the psak to the Jews of York with him in Cliffords Tower, then he killed his wife and daughters and then himself.
I’m not giving my opinion, nor do I have one of my own; I am merely telling you that there is a clear and well known occasion – during a pogrom, no less – of a rishon sanctioning suicide.
As a matter of Halacha, suicide is assur. (It, essentially, is Halachicly equivalent to murder.) Now there are a very very small amount of extremely exceptional circumstances where it may be permissible, just as there are times when one may be permitted to kill someone else. That being said, Rav Yaakov Emden’s opinion on this issue (Shailas Yaavetz siman 33 1:43 is much more encompassing where he ostensibly permits it as an atonement for ones sin that is a capital crime) has no standing in Halacha, is considered rejected and comes under severe criticism from every subsequent poskim who discussed it (Igros Moshe C.M. 2:69.4, Yabiyah Omer Y.D. 2:24.8, Shevet Shimon 345, Chida in Birchei Yosef 345:3, etc), and may not be utilized by anyone.
Shlishi: In fact, in the case of Rabbeinu Yom Tov, the Jews of York made the Brachah of “Asher Kidshanu B’mitzvosav V’tzivanu Al Kiddush Hashem” before killing themselves.
The reason New York is such a humongeous Makon Totah with the largest Jewish community of chul, is because of the tremendous moser nefesh of the Yidden of York.
Shmoel: That’s… an interesting theory. I’m not sure why the Goyish name of a city that takes after the Goyish name of a city would have any bearing on why so many Jews live there. Isn’t it much more likely that it is because it was the biggest and closest metropolis in America when most Jews emigrated? Or are you saying that the city of New York was Zoche to have Torah in it because they were named after a city that slaughtered all of its Jews nearly a milenium ago?
Why isn’t the town of Jerusalem, NY such a humongous makom torah?
shmoel – wow. I guess New Paris, Indiana is such a huge place of Torah because of the gemaras and sforim burnt in Paris in 1242.
Or maybe The New Madrid Fault in Missouri and surrounding states will be the place Jews congregate in because of the numerous auto da fe’s that took place in Madrid.
Maybe New Hebron Missipi will give rise to a new yeshiva like the one my great uncle shmuel went to in Hebron that was attacked in 1929.
You have opened up a whole new world of interpretation to me. Thanks. One question, though. Is that Daas Torah? What do the gedolim say?
I suggested that in the tremendous zchus of the Yidden of York being moser nefesh their lives, en masse, rather than shmad, that New York became the great Makom Torah and Klal Yisroel it is.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.