Q&A: Clarification versus Custom
Clarification versus Custom
Question
Rabbi, I have a problem: on the one hand, it is very important to me to clarify the source of things and understand the things I do. It helps me especially with things that are difficult for me (whether in practice or intellectually) — once I understand and clarify them, it is easier for me to observe them. On the other hand, the feeling is that my inquiry can only ever lead to stringency — my clarification never has any practical significance for leniency, or even just for changing what is currently done (even if it would not make things easier for me) — because for everything I currently practice, there is an obligation on account of the custom involved. That is, no matter how much I investigate and reach the conclusion that something I have been doing until now is foolish or baseless, I still have to practice it because that is what everyone does. And that is pretty burdensome for me — also in terms of motivation to investigate things deeply… I understand that this is mainly a question for a psychologist, because if it is forbidden, then it is forbidden. But I would be glad if the Rabbi could perhaps try to map out the areas in which we have no ability to touch things even if we think there is a mistake there [every statement in the Talmud? everything that the majority of Israel does and has accepted as obligatory custom — no matter when it arose? (legumes on Passover?), everything in the Shulchan Arukh — because it was accepted by the majority of Israel?], and in what areas there is more room in practice for the conclusions of our inquiry…?
Thank you.
Answer
It is hard for me to present a clear map here. I am finishing the editing of a trilogy whose third volume deals, among other things, with these matters.
As a rule, not everything that everyone does is automatically forbidden to change (perhaps there is a halakhic custom here, and if in your opinion this is a mistake then from your perspective perhaps the custom is not binding, because it is a custom of halakhic ruling and in your opinion one should not rule that way). Beyond that, there are very few things that literally everyone does.
If you would like to be more concrete, raise one example question and we can discuss it.
Discussion on Answer
Indeed, the practice is to recite the continuation as well (and so too with the other examples you mentioned), but this is not binding Jewish law; it is custom. However, there is a rule to preserve customs, and therefore as long as you have no positive reason to depart from them, I do not see why you should do so. If for some reason you think it is harmful or mistaken — there is room to be lenient.
I saw that many people here have asked about the authority of customs, but I would still be glad if the Rabbi would explain the source of their binding force. I understood that this is connected to the authority of the Talmud, and so the question is really about that too (since it seems that the main reason we are obligated in this is because it is brought in the Talmud). Are obligations stated in the Talmud included in “do not deviate”? (I understood that there are those who say that the Talmud has the force of a Sanhedrin — does the Rabbi agree?) And if not — is it a received acceptance by the early generations not to dispute it? What is the halakhic status of that acceptance? Does it have any formal halakhic status at all?
The authority of customs is not necessarily connected to the force of the Talmud. We accepted the Talmud upon ourselves, and it has authority like the Sanhedrin. Is there a “do not deviate” regarding this? I do not know. Perhaps public acceptance gives it actual force even with respect to “do not deviate,” but I am not sure. It may be that the basis is indeed custom, but this is a category of court customs, not a custom that starts “from below.”
In general, custom is binding by force of the verse, “Do not forsake the teaching of your mother” (see Pesachim, beginning of the chapter “A Place Where They Practiced”), and some saw in this a kind of vow.
Thank you. Regarding an example — a friend told me that he does not say the “May the Merciful One” requests at the end of Grace after Meals after the fourth blessing, because that is an addition from later sages after the Talmud, and if Maimonides recited the 4 blessings without adding requests, then one can rely on him. Seemingly he is right, but the Jewish people have adopted the practice of reciting the whole thing — is there anything to be done about that? Likewise with later additions and psalms in the prayer service, or in the blessing over the moon, etc… Thanks!