Shulchan Aruch: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Sephardim: safek
m (Text replacement - "Sepharadi" to "Sephardi") |
(→Sephardim: safek) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
#The [[Chida]] writes how Maran had the Neshama of R' Yehudah Bar Ilay, who was "Rosh HaMedabrim beChol Makom"<ref>Shabbat 33b</ref>. His ruling were accepted throughout Eretz Yisrael, Turkey, Syria, Iran, etc, but not with respect to monetary matters. According to him, one who follows the stringencies of the Rama in Eretz Yisrael need not be rebuked, but one who follows the leniencies should be. The Panim Meirot says that an Ashkenazi who keeps the leniencies of the Shulchan Aruch needs Teshuvah, and the Chida says a Yerei Hashem should keep the stringencies of both.<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Sefarim, Tet 11)</ref> | #The [[Chida]] writes how Maran had the Neshama of R' Yehudah Bar Ilay, who was "Rosh HaMedabrim beChol Makom"<ref>Shabbat 33b</ref>. His ruling were accepted throughout Eretz Yisrael, Turkey, Syria, Iran, etc, but not with respect to monetary matters. According to him, one who follows the stringencies of the Rama in Eretz Yisrael need not be rebuked, but one who follows the leniencies should be. The Panim Meirot says that an Ashkenazi who keeps the leniencies of the Shulchan Aruch needs Teshuvah, and the Chida says a Yerei Hashem should keep the stringencies of both.<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Sefarim, Tet 11)</ref> | ||
#The Acharonim debate whether one can employ a [[Safek Sefekah]] leHalacha when both other sides are against Maran. Rav Ovadia is lenient,<ref>Yabia Omer vol. 9 Yoreh Deah 6:4, because we accepted Maran BeTorat Safek, not Vaday</ref> but Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul is not.<ref>Shu"t Ohr LeTzion volume 2 page 12</ref> | #The Acharonim debate whether one can employ a [[Safek Sefekah]] leHalacha when both other sides are against Maran. Rav Ovadia is lenient,<ref>Yabia Omer vol. 9 Yoreh Deah 6:4, because we accepted Maran BeTorat Safek, not Vaday</ref> but Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul is not.<ref>Shu"t Ohr LeTzion volume 2 page 12</ref> | ||
# The [[Chida]] argues that quite often the greatest of the Acharonim demonstrate that they only accepted the rulings of the [[Rambam]] and Shulchan Aruch where their positions are clear. If there is any doubt about their positions on a matter, we do not accept their rulings.<ref>Shu"t Chaim She'al vol. 2 Siman 21 s.v. Vechazeh. See Magen Avot (Orach Chaim 263:5).</ref> | |||
==Chronology of Writings== | ==Chronology of Writings== | ||
| Line 109: | Line 110: | ||
#If Maran stipulates that something is only permissible given a certain parameter yet he himself elsewhere writes that that parameter isn't necessary, his intention here is just to say that with this additional factor everyone is lenient.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 8)</ref> | #If Maran stipulates that something is only permissible given a certain parameter yet he himself elsewhere writes that that parameter isn't necessary, his intention here is just to say that with this additional factor everyone is lenient.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 8)</ref> | ||
#When Maran writes "דברי פלוני נראין," he concurs to rule stringently but not for that Posek's reasoning. Additionally, "ויש לאסור כסברא פלוני" means he rules that way and agrees with the reasoning, too.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 9)</ref> | #When Maran writes "דברי פלוני נראין," he concurs to rule stringently but not for that Posek's reasoning. Additionally, "ויש לאסור כסברא פלוני" means he rules that way and agrees with the reasoning, too.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 9)</ref> | ||
#Maran always records the ruling in the original articulation of the Posek it comes from, even if there is some difficulty in his language that may even have practical ramifications. Essentially, he leaves room to inject whatever explanation is given for that Posek's words to the ruling in Shulchan Aruch, as well.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 11)</ref> | #Maran always records the ruling in the original articulation of the Posek it comes from, even if there is some difficulty in his language that may even have practical ramifications. Essentially, he leaves room to inject whatever explanation is given for that Posek's words to the ruling in Shulchan Aruch, as well.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 11). See Taharat HaBayit vol. 2 pg. 252 fn. s.v. ועינא for more references.</ref> | ||
====Stam veYesh (סתם ויש)==== | ====Stam veYesh (סתם ויש)==== | ||
| Line 191: | Line 192: | ||
#The Kenesset HaGedolah writes that Shulchan Aruch follows the Stam unequivocally and unabashedly and only presents the Yesh to give Kavod to the Rishon who maintains that position, unless indicated otherwise.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shaar HaPoskim 17)</ref> The Ginat Veradim says it's a dispensation to allow later Chachamim who invest themselves in the Halacha and come to the conclusion of the Yesh Omrim to follow it. Many Acharonim accept this Klal, including the Rama miFano, Bach, Shach, Pri Chadash, Beit David, Elyah Rabbah, Chelkat Mechokek, and Yad Malachi.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 17). See Sdei Chemed Klalei HaPoskim 13:8, Minchat Yitzchak 10:8.</ref> | #The Kenesset HaGedolah writes that Shulchan Aruch follows the Stam unequivocally and unabashedly and only presents the Yesh to give Kavod to the Rishon who maintains that position, unless indicated otherwise.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shaar HaPoskim 17)</ref> The Ginat Veradim says it's a dispensation to allow later Chachamim who invest themselves in the Halacha and come to the conclusion of the Yesh Omrim to follow it. Many Acharonim accept this Klal, including the Rama miFano, Bach, Shach, Pri Chadash, Beit David, Elyah Rabbah, Chelkat Mechokek, and Yad Malachi.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shulchan Aruch 17). See Sdei Chemed Klalei HaPoskim 13:8, Minchat Yitzchak 10:8.</ref> | ||
#A Stam VeYesh that is reversed elsewhere, meaning the Stam here is the Yesh there and the Yesh here is the Stam there, leaves us uncertain how to proceed.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shaar HaPoskim 18)</ref> | #A Stam VeYesh that is reversed elsewhere, meaning the Stam here is the Yesh there and the Yesh here is the Stam there, leaves us uncertain how to proceed.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Shaar HaPoskim 18)</ref> | ||
# The Beit David proposed that whenever the Stam merely states a basic Halacha and the Yesh modifies it by introducing a new parameter (i.e. it mentions a detail that was not explicitly addressed in the Stam), the Halacha follows the Yesh. In this case, he argues, the Yesh is not opposing the stam but, rather, is adding on a layer of detail. A number of Poskim debate whether the Beit David's rule is correct or not.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 588:2 and 590:8, Pri Chadash to the former, Beit David Orach Chaim 409 and 441, Taharat HaBayit vol. 1 8:4 and footnotes ad loc, Keter David footnotes on Beit David Orach Chaim 409 printed in the Machon HaKeter edition of Beit David, and Birkat Yehuda vol. 5 siman 1 pp. 261</Ref> | |||
====Yesh veYesh (יש ויש)==== | ====Yesh veYesh (יש ויש)==== | ||
| Line 248: | Line 250: | ||
==Sources== | ==Sources== | ||
{{Reflist|30em}} | {{Reflist|30em}} | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:Rules for Determining Halacha]] | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
