Q&A: Keeping the General Rules of Jewish Law at the Expense of the Details
Keeping the General Rules of Jewish Law at the Expense of the Details
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I assume that in the time of the medieval authorities (Rishonim), and all the more so in the time of the Amoraim, and certainly in the time of the Tannaim, the amount of halakhic knowledge required of a halakhic decisor or rabbi was astonishingly smaller than what is required of a decisor nowadays. So in our time there is no easy struggle with the sheer quantity of knowledge involved [unless we dare to return to ruling directly from the Talmud alone].
In addition to the difficulty created by the multitude of opinions that has accumulated over the generations, there is also the difficulty created by the multitude of details that has accumulated. It is reasonable to assume that even in earlier times there were all sorts of cases that were not fully clarified in the halakhic books, and presumably they relied on the logic of ordinary learners, who knew how to compare a given case to the relevant section in the halakhic literature.
Given that, I wonder whether there is room for a mode of study that would include only the necessary general principles of Jewish law, while as for the details, each learner would judge according to his own understanding when an actual case arises. In this way we would gain something important: it would be realistic for an average scholar to encompass the parts of Torah properly. And there would be less concern about mistakes, because the principles would be clear, and even if we erred in the details, that would not count as an error in an explicit Mishnah.
Or perhaps we are doomed to study in endless confusion until the coming of our righteous Messiah.
Answer
I think that is indeed how one should study, but it is also important to get into the details, because only through them does one internalize and understand the principles. But it is true that fundamentally what matters is the modes of thinking, not what this or that source says. But this is not only because of the difficulty; it is because in truth you simply do not need it. Not every text written in Rashi script is an authoritative source, or even an important source.
Discussion on Answer
The question is what counts as an error in the details. To rule not in accordance with the Magen Avraham is not an error in the details. One should not make mistakes in Jewish law, whether in details or in principles. But one must also rule autonomously. See my article on autonomy and authority in halakhic ruling.
I mean a real mistake (if such a concept exists—see your article on “these and those are the words of the living God”). For example, where the decisor himself would agree after the fact that he made a mistake. Even so, one could argue that since our powers as human beings are limited, we should prefer mistakes in the details in order to gain fuller mastery of the principles.
[In my humble opinion, this may be one way to distinguish the method of the Chazon Ish, who preferred to invest in independent analysis of the fundamentals and therefore skipped some of the less central halakhic literature of earlier generations, thereby gaining command of almost the entire Torah, as opposed to the method of Rabbi Ovadia, of blessed memory, who preferred to take all the Torah literature before him into account, and as a result did not have enough time to encompass some important areas of Torah such as eruvin, interest, etc. Of course, this is only an example and does not pretend to analyze all the differences between the various methods of halakhic ruling.]
Support for this way of thinking might be found in the Talmud’s words (Pesachim 3): “A person should always teach his student in a concise way.” I assume that such a method could lead to error in understanding all the details of the matter, and nevertheless the Sages preferred clear basic knowledge over a great deal of knowledge that is likely to be forgotten. I found the article you mentioned, and I hope to go through it.
For some reason, when I write at a bit more length, the “Reply” tag disappears for me. How can I get around that?
In the end, one has to avoid making mistakes in Jewish law. I don’t see a difference between principles and details. I also don’t think it is possible to divide between them and deal only with principles or only with details. They are intertwined.
If you’re on a computer, press Tab until the button that disappeared appears. On mobile—I don’t know.
The reason I assume that an error in principles is more serious is based on the rule we have that there is a difference between an error in an explicit Mishnah and an error that is not in an explicit Mishnah but rather in judgment. Since the details are derived from the principles by means of judgment, it seems that errors in them are not considered errors in an explicit Mishnah.
What you are assuming here is positivism—as if the “Mishnah” contains principles and halakhic ruling derives details from them by some deductive process. But that has no basis in the facts. The Mishnah and our authoritative sources hardly deal with principles. They are built in a casuistic method, that is, around cases. The inferences are made by analogy, sometimes using principles, which are usually formed and interpreted by the learner. In short, the sharp distinctions you are making between principles and details have no factual basis. That simply isn’t how it works.
I do not dispute what was said, that the Mishnah and the Talmud deal mainly with details.
My main claim is that perhaps the time has come—mainly because there is not enough time to deal with all the details that have accumulated over the generations—to extract organized principles from those details and occupy ourselves mainly with them. True, we cannot neglect the details mentioned in the Talmud, but perhaps we can neglect the masses of details that have accumulated over the generations.
I think that one of the things Maimonides tried to do in his Mishneh Torah was to separate principles from details (though according to Rabbeinu Crescas, unsuccessfully, and there is justice to his words).
The main benefit of this method is pragmatic: to give every average Torah scholar a chance to properly master the foundations of Torah.
I’ll repeat once again that you are speaking in the air. Dealing with details is part of extracting the principles. Dealing with details does not mean studying every text that was ever written, and certainly not being bound by it. But the details cannot be detached from the principles. I think we’ve exhausted the topic.
I’m glad to hear your view, but I didn’t understand whether that is because you think an error in the details is not important, or at least less important than lack of knowledge of the principles, or because you think that through the principles there is, from the outset, no room for error in the details.