Q&A: Halakhic Ruling
Halakhic Ruling
Question
Hello Michi,
Can I disagree with the halakhic decisors in understanding Jewish law?
That is, if I understand the Talmud differently from the way the Shulchan Arukh rules, am I still bound by its ruling?
And similarly regarding the Sages: if I understand the Mishnah differently, can I disagree with them?
In short, whom am I supposed to accept as Torah from Heaven? (Other than the Hebrew Bible itself.) Halakhic decisors? Later authorities? Medieval authorities? The Sages?
Answer
In my understanding, only the Sanhedrin has formal authority (because of “do not deviate”), or the Talmud has authority because we accepted it upon ourselves. Anything beyond that has no formal authority, only substantive authority; that is, it is advisable to listen to someone who is a Torah scholar so as not to make mistakes, but there is no obligation to do so.
At the same time, there is an obligation of autonomous halakhic ruling if you are capable of it—that is, if you are knowledgeable and skilled in issuing halakhic rulings.
The question of what among all this counts as Torah from Heaven is not connected to the question of whose voice one should heed. Nothing is from Heaven except the Written Torah. But everything is considered from Heaven in the principled sense (as if given from Heaven). That is just a definitional question, since this is not a historical question (what was actually given at Sinai) but a normative one (what is actually binding).
I elaborated on this in the third book of my trilogy.
Discussion on Answer
What is binding about accepting things at Mount Sinai? One can disagree about anything.
Even with an authoritative body that made a mistake, there are rules and it is possible to disagree with it (see the beginning of tractate Horayot regarding someone who errs in the commandment to heed the words of the Sages).
Thank you for the answer, and following from that:
When I rule in accordance with the Talmud even though this goes against my own view (because in my opinion they are mistaken in their interpretation of the Mishnah), and I set aside my opinion because of “do not deviate”—on whom does the punishment for the transgression fall? (According to my view, an act of prohibition is being committed here.)
There is no punishment for the transgression, because it is not in Heaven. Jewish law is whatever is determined by the religious court.
I seem to remember that you addressed this in one of your columns, where you quoted a rabbi who told you that you had to listen to Rabbi Shach (I don’t remember on what issue), but in a case where it’s a mistake, the obligation is still on you.
Meaning, you are obligated by “do not deviate,” and therefore you set aside your own view in favor of his—but if it turns out that you were right and he was wrong, they would hold you liable for the price and the punishment.
He didn’t say I was obligated, only that it was advisable for me to do so (because he was likely right). The question there was not a halakhic one, and Rabbi Shach is not the Sanhedrin.
What does it mean that the Talmud is binding because we accepted it upon ourselves?
Why should what my ancestors accepted obligate me if my understanding is that they were mistaken in the words of the Mishnah?
Acceptance can obligate things that are written ambiguously, but when it comes to something that depends on understanding, and in my view that understanding is a mistake, what obligates me?