Questions following your comments about two weeks ago

שו”ת › Category: Halacha › Questions following your comments about two weeks ago

asked 6 years ago

Question following your lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SVdPzsI9Cw&t=127s
It would sound like you are disparaging the credibility of a sermon by the Sages that disqualifies a woman from testifying (“questionable interpretation”), on the other hand, you see it as a binding halakhic source. This seems dissonant to me. I would be happy for you to explain to me your attitude towards incomprehensible sermons found in the Sages such as this one. How do you relate to the lack of interpretive logic or the lack of necessity or urgency in them, and yet still treat them as something serious and binding.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 6 years ago

I didn’t listen to the lecture again, but I don’t think you understood correctly. What I’m saying is that the sermons sometimes came to establish an explanation (like a sermon that relies on the explanation, but relies on the explanation and not on tradition) and with the change in the explanation, the halakha that is learned from them will also change. I demonstrated this with the sermon that disqualifies women from testifying because it really seems problematic and not based on the text. Beyond that, the authority of the sages is not based on their being more right, but on the fact that we have accepted them as our own. Therefore, even if I do not accept the sermon, I must accept its halachic conclusion. The authority of the Knesset is also not based on its necessarily being right, and there is an obligation to uphold its decisions even where I do not agree with them.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

אסף replied 6 years ago

If many of Chazal's sermons don't align with honest interpretation or don't seem to you to be based on the text, why do you see the need to accept them as your own? It's not one or two sermons, it's a lot.. How is it intellectually honest to accept a lot of laws that are built on almost nothing?

מיכי Staff replied 6 years ago

First, there is not much. Second, even if there is a lot - most of it must be attributed to the loss of skill of the sermons (I do not understand how they preached). Third, even if I am convinced that the sermon does not really have anything in it - this does not mean that the bottom line is wrong. After all, I explained that in these cases the sermons come to rely on reason (for example, even if you do not accept the sermon from the book of the Law that includes the fear of the twelfth, it is still possible that the fear of the twelfth is a correct law. In the case of women, the result is not reasonable for our time, and therefore it is significant that the sermon is questionable, and there too there is authority for the Talmud unless I come to the conclusion that it was not talking about women of our time). Fourth, even if everything is questionable - this is the law. The validity of Knesset laws is not conditional on my consent. There is a "do not deviate".

hitecharena replied 6 years ago

The first three things you said put my mind at ease.
Regarding your fourth statement – I still don't understand how if the laws are questionable I would accept them. Isn't that disrespecting the position of the sages and the resulting disobedience to the sages? Why would I accept a questionable set of laws?
I will ask you positively – What is the basis that causes the people to accept the laws of the sages?

מיכי Staff replied 6 years ago

It seems to me that what they received as their authority is not the sages but the Talmud. We are not talking about people but about a text or textual corpus. In my opinion, the reason for this is technical: without it, when the people of Israel were scattered throughout the world, there would be nothing left of us. They had to establish a framework within which the halakhic discourse would take place throughout the world. I have written about this several times. See the end of this thread for a short explanation:
https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%91%D7%A2%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%99%D7%9F-%D7%94%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%97%D7%A9%D7%91%D7%94-%D7%A7%D7%96%D7%95%D7%90%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%99%D7%AA