Private Pesak and Paskening from Narrative
There are two interesting articles in Yediot Ahronot. The first article is about a responsum (here) by R. Yuval Cherlow in which he calls on rabbis to narrow the gap between more lenient decisions that they give in private and individually to people and those which they publish. R. Cherlow is a very prolific author of responsa and books on Jewish thought. While I would agree with his criticism of others, I would also offer some criticism of my own about his own responsum. He is to be applauded for answering questions which many rabbis would either shy away from or only answer in private, but one thing which I find lacking in many of his responsa is sources on which he bases his answer. All too often he gives an answer without showing why his opinion is authentically grounded in sources. Many of the questions that he answers are often related to theological or pastoral matters and in these cases I can understand why he doesn’t feel a need to quote sources. Also see this interesting admission by him that he is ignorant about the historical development of a certain custom. I think that there is an important need for poskim to produce accessible responsa and a fine example are those of R. Hayyim David HaLevi. It could also be the nature of the teacher/student relationship in the hesder world which I am not familiar with, or the type of rabbinic authority with R. Cherlow wants to project. Whatever the reason may be, his work is important and he will hopefully continue to produce more Torah. The second article is a response by Ruchamah Weiss to an article by R. Shemuel Eliyahu about whether it is permissible to bomb a location which terrorists are using even though it is known that women and children are present. R. Eliyahu finds support for permitting this in the biblical story about Samson and the Philistines (Judges 16:25-30). Ruchamah Weiss (here) has a number of criticisms with regard to R. Eliyahu’s opinion, one of them is that he seems to be deciding halakhah on the basis of biblical narrative, something that Weiss was perplexed at. Many people have addressed the role that biblical narrative plays in halakhic development. On this question in general see my friend Jane Kanarek’s dissertation Let the story remain with us : Biblical narrative and the formation of rabbinic law. The place of biblical narrative in legal discussion has also been discussed by many in relation to suicide in general and the behavior of many Jews during the Crusades specifically. There is a very large among of literature on the subject, for one of the more recent articles see Ephraim Kanarfogel, “Halakha and Metziut (Realia) in Medieval Ashkenaz : Surveying the Parameters and Defining the Limits.” Jewish Law Annual 14 (2003): 193-224. On the question of Jewish wartime ethics also see this responsum by R. Shelomo Aviner and this article by R. David Golinkin.
January 20th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
R’ Yitzchok Zilberstein does it all the time. I don’t know if you can see that in any of his Seforim but he does it all the time in his shiurim
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:21 am
i think r. halevi’s “teshuvot” were originally give on his radio show? i like him because (among other reasons) he is very easy to understand. i’ve posted a whole bunch of them on my blog.
r. aviner also published 2 vols of acecsible teshuvot (עם כלביא), but i don’t think he himself holds from them anymore?
January 22nd, 2009 at 5:46 am
R. Halevi’s teshuvot found in Aseh Lecha Rav were often originally from his radio program, but he included some which weren’t from there. He also has a few volumes of responsa called “Mayim Hayyim” which were published a few years before his death. Rav Aviner also has a larger multi-volume collection of responsa whose name I forgot. His teshuvot are also very accessible. Rav Ovadiah Yehaveh Da’at are also based on a radio program.