Anonymous

Shulchan Aruch: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
→‎Shulchan Aruch: authorship, audience
(→‎Kessef Misnheh & Beit Yosef: klalei hagemara, spectrum of shitot)
(→‎Shulchan Aruch: authorship, audience)
Line 37: Line 37:
# When faced with a Bedek HaBayit that permits something prohibited in the Beit Yosef, the Kenesset HaGedolah argues it doesn't indicate retraction: the Beit Yosef is a comprehensive compilation of all the opinions, so he was just filling it in but doesn't necessarily hold of it.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Beit Yosef 37)</ref>
# When faced with a Bedek HaBayit that permits something prohibited in the Beit Yosef, the Kenesset HaGedolah argues it doesn't indicate retraction: the Beit Yosef is a comprehensive compilation of all the opinions, so he was just filling it in but doesn't necessarily hold of it.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Beit Yosef 37)</ref>
=== Shulchan Aruch ===
=== Shulchan Aruch ===
==== Purpose ====
# The intention of Maran and the Rama was for Shulchan Aruch to serve as a tool for review by those who have already learned the Tur and Beit Yosef. The purpose is not to rule from the sefer itself. The Sma<ref>Sma Hakdama</ref> laments how in his day, centuries ago, many people wanted to learn the entire Torah on one foot and would rule from the Shulchan Aruch alone. The Beit Yosef himself<ref>Shu"t Beit Yosef Even HaEzer Dinei Gittin Siman 4</ref> himself makes this point. As the Sdei Chemed<ref>Sdei Chemed KHP 13:2</ref> puts it, if you don't know the source you won't understand the din. The Acharonim, notably the Maharsha<ref>Chiddushei Aggadot Sotah 22a</ref>, term such mistaken people "destroyers of the world," but nowadays with the many commentaries on the page of Shulchan Aruch, there's a strong argument to be made that this isn't as relevant of a concern, because the reasoning and source will be explained among the commentators, as well.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva Yoreh Deah 242. Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 1) and Matnat Yado ad loc.</ref>
# The intention of Maran and the Rama was for Shulchan Aruch to serve as a tool for review by those who have already learned the Tur and Beit Yosef. The purpose is not to rule from the sefer itself. The Sma<ref>Sma Hakdama</ref> laments how in his day, centuries ago, many people wanted to learn the entire Torah on one foot and would rule from the Shulchan Aruch alone. The Beit Yosef himself<ref>Shu"t Beit Yosef Even HaEzer Dinei Gittin Siman 4</ref> himself makes this point. As the Sdei Chemed<ref>Sdei Chemed KHP 13:2</ref> puts it, if you don't know the source you won't understand the din. The Acharonim, notably the Maharsha<ref>Chiddushei Aggadot Sotah 22a</ref>, term such mistaken people "destroyers of the world," but nowadays with the many commentaries on the page of Shulchan Aruch, there's a strong argument to be made that this isn't as relevant of a concern, because the reasoning and source will be explained among the commentators, as well.<ref>Pitchei Teshuva Yoreh Deah 242. Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 1) and Matnat Yado ad loc.</ref>
===== Audience =====
# The Kenesset HaGedolah postulates all rulings in the Beit Yosef are intended for all Jewish communities, while those in Shulchan Aruch are only intended for Eretz Yisrael. This would even be plausible to say between two contradictory statements in Shulchan Aruch itself.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 3)</ref>
==== Authorship ====
# A number of Acharonim, including the Maharikash, R' Shmuel Abuhab, and even Rav Chaim Vital claim or heard that Shulchan Aruch was written at the end of Rav Yosef part Karo's life, which accounts for contradictions and inaccuracies that crept in. They claim either he wrote it himself and was weak and old, or students wrote it for him or on their own. The printing dates suffice to trounce this claim. The Maharitatz writes that the Shulchan Aruch was written for laymen and Amei HaAretz, which caused the Yad Malachi to call attention to the introduction to Shulchan Aruch where Maran writes exactly not so and to the  testimonies of the Ginat Veradim and Kenesset HaGedolah to the grand acceptance of Shulchan Aruch. Some argue the proof from the Hakdama is invalid, as it could be referring to one who uses both Shulchan Aruch and Beit Yosef. The Maamar Mordechai 38:4 defends the Maharitatz as being taken out of context.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 2), Matnat Yado ad loc</ref>
=== Works Not Available to Rav Yosef Karo ===
=== Works Not Available to Rav Yosef Karo ===
# The Ra'ah's Bedek HaBayit was not available to Maran.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTur 15)</ref>
# The Ra'ah's Bedek HaBayit was not available to Maran.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTur 15)</ref>