What does that mean?
Rabbi, on the one hand, we saw that Shabbat Noru of Akhnai does not bring supernatural evidence and does not oversee a Bat Kol, and the halakha is determined according to assumptions and arguments. But in the dispute between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai, Bat Kol again came out and declared that the halakha was according to Beit Hillel. But we said that one does not oversee a Bat Kol except on the merits of the matter.
What is the settlement? Is there a contradiction at all?
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
0 Answers
I have explained this several times here on the site. The dispute between B.S. and B.E. could not be resolved according to the rules of halakhah, because they argued whether to follow the majority of wisdom (and then the halakhah of B.S.) or the majority of people (and then the halakhah of B.E.). The rule is not in the sky, it is said when you have a way to decide according to the rules of halakhah. When you don’t – that is precisely why Bat Kol comes out.
By the way, this is my explanation. Thos. in Eruvin (13 or 6. I don’t remember) complicates this and gives three answers of his own.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
