Q&A: The Validity of Torah Scrolls Nowadays
The Validity of Torah Scrolls Nowadays
Question
Hello honorable Rabbi, recently I became aware of the issue of the validity of Torah scrolls nowadays. In brief: according to most of the Geonim and those who continued their tradition, such as the Rif and Maimonides, the Torah scrolls of our day are invalid, both because of the way the parchment is processed — with lime rather than gall-nuts — and because the writing is done on what is, by definition, the wrong side: on dukhsustus instead of klaf…. And this is contrary to what was ruled in the Shulchan Arukh.
After learning as much as I could and hearing the common answers (such as local custom, the doubt surrounding a responsum of Maimonides regarding permission to recite a blessing over an invalid scroll, etc.), I came to the conclusion that I cannot find grounds to recite a blessing over most Torah scrolls nowadays, for fear of a blessing in vain — except for Torah scrolls, most of which are found among the Yemenite community, which are properly processed and made of gevil or written on klaf.
Is it nevertheless the case that my eyes have been blinded and I am simply being overly stringent?
Thank you
Answer
I am not well versed in this topic, but I don’t think that the fact that Maimonides and the Rif, or the Shulchan Arukh, ruled one way necessarily means that those who do not follow them thereby invalidate the scrolls. So in this case, they did not rule in accordance with them. What is the problem with that? Where is it written that one must rule in accordance with them? Just as people adopted the practice of ruling like them, they can also adopt the practice of not doing so. The same mouth that forbade is the mouth that permitted.
Discussion on Answer
I answered, and I’ll answer again: the period has no significance. The Talmud has authority, and the Sanhedrin had authority. After the Talmud, no one has formal authority (see at length in the Rosh on Sanhedrin, chapter 4, no. 6; the main points are brought in Choshen Mishpat, no. 25). Therefore, even if today people practice not in accordance with Maimonides, or the Shulchan Arukh, or the Rif, there is nothing to that. That is simply the way the world of halakhic practice works.
Maybe this is a more general question that applies to other halakhic cases as well: what does one do when studying Jewish law and, using the tools available to us, one reaches the conclusion that a substantial change occurred because of generational gaps, printing errors, and the transmission of knowledge — and not because of a dispute among halakhic decisors from the same period?