Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Determining P'sak Halacha from Gemara

Repeat after me: The gemara is not a shulchan aruch, the gemara is not a shulchan aruch, the gemara is not a shulchan aruch, the ... On the other hand, all halacha is ultimately decided by and must trace its roots to those very discussions transmitted to us by our sages through the millennia.  So how does one go from תנו רבנן to פסק הלכה?

Obviously, it ain't that easy, but there are rules that give guidelines.  I know a few, and I just saw a new really cool one in a תוספות (Brachos 34a, d'h the middle ones have no order).  Just so we are clear, I am quite aware that anyone who uses the word "cool" is not.  Moreover, anyone who uses the word cool to refer to a תוספות never was.  I'm such a rebel.

One guideline is that we generally rule like a סתם mishna; that is, an unattributed mishna.  An unattributed mishna basically represents a consensus.  Generally also a mishna beats a bareisa.  (The b'reisos are not less authoritative, but were less known.)  The opinion of a group ("the Rabbis said") will take precedence over an individual.  In a disagreement between sages, there is often a hierarchy.  Of course, the fact that we pasken like Hillel over Shamai is well known.  Less well known is that we in a machlokes between Rebbie and pretty much anyone else, we will tend to pasken like Rebbie; but not, of course, between Rebbie and the Rabbis (see previous rule).  It can be more specific also.  In a machlokes between Rav and Shmuel, we pasken like Rav if it is a matter of ritual law (kosher, tahara and tuma), but like Shmuel in monetary matters.  When Rava and Abaye argue, we go like Rava except in six instances.  And so forth.

What did תוספות say that got me so excited?  It is a machlokes R' Huna and R' Assi.  תוספות says we pasken like R' Assi for the following reasons:

  1. R' Huna is like talmid of R' Assi.  That is, we find many places where R' Huna quotes R' Assi when quoting a halacha.
  2. This particular R' Huna is a דוחק.  Not that we think his reasoning in difficult; after all, he is an Amora and even תוספות wouldn't make that call.  Rather, the gemara presents a possible refutation and R' Huna has to defend himself.  He does, but that fact that it was even an issue makes his answer a דוחק.
  3. As the discussion unfolds, another amora, R' Sheishes, gets involved by arguing with R' Huna and implicitly agreeing with R' Assi.  As usual, two against one wins.
  4. Finally, R' Assi's opinion in this case is a leniency relative to R' Huna's; since this a dispute about a rabbinic matter, we go with the leniency.
I find the rules cool and all that, but at the end of the day, I am calling my rabbi for a p'sak halacha.  After all, its my immortal soul at stake and I am nervous about even balancing my checkbook correctly.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

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 Aru...