Q&A: Proper Use of the Thirteen Hermeneutical Principles
Proper Use of the Thirteen Hermeneutical Principles
Question
Have a good week,
When a person uses the thirteen hermeneutical principles, or more generally a non-positivist mode of thinking for Torah study and halakhic ruling, he can derive many novel ideas from the Torah. If this is done by the Sanhedrin or even by an accepted halakhic decisor, then his words will be accepted; if it comes from a high-school student, presumably not…
Is there some parameter by which we can determine whether the things learned are correct or have validity?
Maybe we accept it only from someone who has “filled his belly with Talmud and halakhic decisors”—someone who has a “Torah mind”? (How do we know who meets that criterion?)
Maybe we accept it based on the public’s acceptance of that innovator’s rulings? (And how would we evaluate his very first innovation?)
Answer
Hello,
You are looking for criteria based on the person, and here I disagree with you. As far as I’m concerned, things are judged on their own merits, not based on the person saying them. If they seem correct to me, I accept them; if not, then not.
The question of authority is a different question. Authority such as that of the Sanhedrin gives validity to rulings by virtue of the fact that they were accepted within a certain institution, sometimes even in cases where they are not correct (though this is a complicated topic, concerning one who errs in the commandment to heed the words of the Sages, at the beginning of tractate Horayot). But nowadays this is a hypothetical question, because no one—person or institution—has authority.
Discussion on Answer
If you have no confidence in yourself, then you have to decide in whom you do have confidence and follow him. What would it help you if I told you whom I trust? In the end, the person himself has to decide—at least decide who will decide for him. As for me, I decide for myself.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems to me that in the end you too judge things based on the person; you just say that this person is me.
But why should I trust myself in using these tools? It’s pretty clear to me that if I start making verbal analogies or deciding what the labor of building is analogous to, I’ll be able to come up with a lot of nonsense.
So I suggest that maybe things can be evaluated based on public acceptance. Perhaps if the public accepts it, that’s a sign that the decisor is using the tools correctly. In the sense of, “If they are not prophets, they are the children of prophets.”
Of course I’d be happy to hear more ideas for possible tools.