חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם. דומה למיכי בוט.

Q&A: "Many of the problems and perplexities in the Talmud were because they attributed the opinion of one sage to another sage"

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

"Many of the problems and perplexities in the Talmud were because they attributed the opinion of one sage to another sage"

Question

Hello,
On the Wikipedia entry about the Hatam Sofer it says —
The Hatam Sofer opposed the method of pilpul and supported the study of the plain meaning and broad mastery, which in his view leads to truth. Thus he wrote to one of his students: "A fingernail of the medieval authorities is better; let him put aside the books of the later authorities and the deep pilpulim and investigations"[31]. He held that it is forbidden to use pilpul to issue a halakhic ruling, since the tendency toward pilpul may divert the learner from the main point.
He also criticized the method of homiletical interpretations when it contradicts the plain meaning of Scripture: "Many more far-fetched homilies are stated in the Targums and in the midrashim, but on condition that they leave the verse in its plain and true meaning and do not say that the homiletic interpretation is the plain meaning . . . for truth is beloved above all, especially in matters that affect practical Jewish law"[32]. In his will he recommends to his descendants to study and teach the children the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) with Rashi’s commentary, and the Torah with Nachmanides’ commentary — "for he is the chief of faithful belief, and through him you will become wise."
He held that one should study in order to reach halakhic conclusions, and not for the sake of studying the Talmudic give-and-take in and of itself. The Hatam Sofer adopted a philological-critical method of study similar to that of the Vilna Gaon. He had many manuscripts at his disposal, and he worked hard to determine the correct version in the Talmud and in the halakhic decisors, because in his opinion the method of pilpul developed because of corrupted textual versions[33]. In his learning he was also aided by adopting scientific methods of examining parallel sources from historical, philological, and experimental perspectives. He held that many of the problems and perplexities in the Talmud were because they attributed the opinion of one sage to another sage. He used experiments to clarify measures that appear in Jewish law, and in the laws of kashrut to clarify the anatomy of animals.
 
I did not understand the sentence: many of the problems and perplexities in the Talmud were because they attributed the opinion of one sage to another sage.
If there are such serious errors in the Talmud, how is it possible to study it at all? I really do not understand this.

Answer

To ask this question, you didn’t need to copy Wikipedia about the Hatam Sofer. In fact, it is not really connected to the Hatam Sofer at all.
As for the question itself, I didn’t understand it. Yes, corruptions did creep in, but there are ways to deal with them. We study and decipher. If anything, you could perhaps have asked: if the Hatam Sofer is right, then what is the point of studying the later authorities who reconcile the difficulties and engage in pilpul? But if you open the Hatam Sofer’s novellae instead of Wikipedia, you will see that he himself also does what all the later authorities did. The fact that someone there decided to turn him into an academic is neither his fault nor mine.

Discussion on Answer

Michi (2021-12-07)

By the way, some will answer you that what has been sanctified and what is binding is the version before us, with all its confusions, and not the words of this sage or that sage.
I once wrote an article that goes in that direction, but the dosage there is not acceptable to me today (so how can anyone study me?!). See here: https://mikyab.net/%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%9E%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9F-%D7%9E%D7%97%D7%A7%D7%A8-%D7%9C%D7%A2%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9F-%D7%94%D7%A8%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%99%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%94-%D7%A9%D7%9C-%D7%98%D7%9B%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%A7

Sh. (2021-12-08)

Could we hear what arguments made you retract what you wrote there? What did you think originally, and why now differently?

Michi (2021-12-09)

Divine providence over texts seems less plausible to me.

Y.D. (2021-12-09)

Are Rabbi Michael Abraham the first and Rabbi Michael Abraham the second counted as two halakhic decisors?

Michi (2021-12-09)

At least.

השאר תגובה

Back to top button