Q&A: Kashrut and Halakhic Ruling
Kashrut and Halakhic Ruling
Question
Hello Rabbi. I have 2 questions.
A. Is kashrut in the noumenon or in the phenomenon? A practical difference would be with spiritual dulling of the heart and other mystic ideas. The Rabbi dealt with this topic, but I don’t remember whether there was a clear conclusion.
B. According to the Rabbi’s approach, that every competent person should reach halakhic conclusions on his own and not rely only on his predecessors in some mathematical way or another, whether and how can a person know that he has become competent? Is it a kind of “when you grow up you’ll understand” or “when you get there you’ll know,” or is it possible to give definitions? After all, we’re talking about things that can lead to halakhic and practical mistakes.
Thank you very much.
Answer
The Kantian formulation doesn’t seem precise to me here. But as for your question: in my opinion there is no real basis for such mystical assertions. The Sages did indeed derive this from the verse “and you shall be defiled by them,” but I’m not sure that this exposition is correct. Their halakhic determinations are binding, but it does not necessarily follow that they are factually correct.
As for the second question, a person himself can sense whether he is competent. I once gave a criterion for this: if you return to some topic after a few years and usually arrive at the same results, then you are competent. That means that you yourself have become crystallized.
The concern about mistakes always exists, even if you rely on other competent people, no matter how great they may be. My claim is that autonomy has value, and it outweighs the concern for error (when you are competent).
Discussion on Answer
That’s the same question. If spiritual dulling of the heart doesn’t exist, then if you ate it permissibly, why would you have spiritual dulling of the heart? You have committed no transgression and incur no punishment. So what is left? If there is such spiritual dulling of the heart, then there is room to ask what happens in a case of inadvertence or coercion.
I discussed this in my opinion piece on citric acid on Passover: 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%94%D7%A0%D7%96%D7%A7-%D7%91%D7%90%D7%9B%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%AA-%D7%97%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%A6%D7%AA-%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F-%D7%91%D7%A4%D7%A1%D7%97-%D7%91%D7%9C%D7%99-%D7%99%D7%93%D7%99%D7%A2%D7%94/
Thank you to the Rabbi for the answer.
On the first question, maybe I meant something a bit different (maybe the term really doesn’t fit well) — for example, when there is a prohibition on pork, is the prohibition on the pork itself regardless of the circumstances in which you ate it, so that even if you were forced or did it unintentionally it is the same as if you did it deliberately? (Obviously you wouldn’t be punished to the same degree, but it would make a difference for spiritual dulling of the heart and the like.) Or is pork, in and of itself, a lovely animal no different from the other kosher animals and it does not cause spiritual dulling of the heart (except maybe clogged arteries), and only the Torah’s or the Sages’ prohibition is what causes that dulling?
I’m also not sure whether this spiritual dulling of the heart is really a thing, but it’s still interesting as a question.
I remember the Rabbi dealt with this, and I’m not sure whether it remained open or whether there was a conclusion.