Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Two Learn Better Than One and Engender Objectivity

Confluence is both a cool word and and interesting concept.  I particularly like it when HaShem arranges a practicum for me to get a better understanding of what I am learning.

I have been listening to shiurim on Sanhedrin from the Business Halacha Institute during my commute.  These shiurim cover interesting halacha that comes out of the daf; the format is either a story or simple halacha that relates to the daf.  I like them because I find I can't pay attention to the road and listen to a complex shiur at the same time.  Last night I heard an interesting halacha about how a beis din operates.

Of course, a beis din needs to have an odd number of members in order to arrive at a decision by majority vote.  The minimum for that is three, and that is the general procedure nowadays.  Suppose one dayan can't come to a conclusion... he is left saying, "I just don't know."  In that case, a new dayan is chosen to join.  The expression used by the gemara is that a dayan who can't make up his mind is essentially not even there.  Simple enough.

Suppose, though, that two dayanim reach the same conclusion.  In that, you might think that we just go with it.  After all, no matter what the new dayan says, we will still have (at least) two to one.  Nonetheless, the halacha still dictates that a new dayan be chosen to join the beis din before a decision can be rendered.  Why?  R' Chaim Kanievsky has an explanation based on a deeper understanding of what it means that to say that the indecisive dayan is as if he is not present at all.

Here comes the confluence.  I have been have a discussion with a friend about wearing a blue thread among one's ציצית.  Much of the discussion has revolved around the Rema (9:5) who says our custom is wear only white ציצית.  The Rema -- as my friend uncovered and shared with me -- is based on a T'rumas haDeshen who finishes with a slight twist: The custom of Ashkanazim it to wear white ציצית... even though there is no objection to colored at all.  Had I been learning that myself, I would have blown through it as just an alternate wording.  In our discussion, though, I realized that this T'rumas haDeshen could be understood in two ways.
  1. Ashkanazim have accepted this stringency, even though there is no objection to colored at all.
  2. Even though Ashkanazim have accepted this stringency, there is no objection to colored at all.
Both of us were delighted to see there were two quite different ways to read this that were equally valid. I say "delighted" because before our discussion, I only read it according to (1) and he only read it according to (2).

That, explains R' Chaim Kanievsky is why two yes and one no is a no, while two yes and one "I don't know" is a hung court.  The yes's and no's will force each side to understand the arguments on both sides with more clarity.  An "I don't know" doesn't have that effect; it's as if he isn't even involved.

One more confluence in this practicum: It comes on the heels of my TftD about hidden subjectivity.  Both my friend and I were trying our best to be completely objective and come to a conclusion by a dry analysis of the bare facts.  The truth is, though, that I am predisposed to thinking we should only wear white ציצית and he is predisposed to thinking that adding blue would be nice.  Learning and discussing with a respected colleague brings only greater clarity and understanding.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Love in the Time of Corona Virus/Anxiously Awaiting the Mashiach

Two scenarios: Scenario I: A young boy awakened in the middle of the night, placed in the back of vehicle, told not to make any noise, and the vehicle speeds off down the highway. Scenario II: Young boy playing in park goes to see firetruck, turns around to see scary man in angry pursuit, poised to attack. I experienced and lived through both of those scenarios. Terrifying, no? Actually, no; and my picture was never on a milk carton. Here's the context: Scenario I: We addressed both set of our grandparents as "grandma" and "grandpa". How did we distinguish? One set lived less than a half hour's drive; those were there "close grandma and grandpa". The other set lived five hour drive away; they were the "way far away grandma and grandpa". To make the trip the most pleasant for all of us, Dad would wake up my brother and I at 4:00AM, we'd groggily -- but with excitement! -- wander out and down to the garage where we'd crawl

Thought for the Day: David HaMelech's Five Stages of Finding HaShem In the World

Many of us "sing" (once you have heard what I call carrying a tune, you'll question how I can, in good conscience, use that verb, even with the quotation marks) Eishes Chayil before the Friday night Shabbos meal.  We feel like we are singing the praises of our wives.  In fact, I have also been to chasunas where the chasson proudly (sometimes even tearfully) sings Eishes Chayil to his new eishes chayil.  Beautiful.  Also wrong.  (The sentiments, of course, are not wrong; just a misunderstanding of the intent of the author of these exalted words.) Chazal (TB Brachos, 10a) tell us that when Sholmo HaMelech wrote the words "She opens her mouth Mwith wisdom; the torah of kindness is on her tongue", that he was referring to his father, Dovid HaMelech, who (I am continuing to quote Chazal here) lived in five worlds and sang a song of praise [to each].  It seems to me that "world" here means a perception of reality.  Four times Dovid had to readjust his perc

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aruch HaRav that referred to the noise of תקתוק