X hits on this document

Word document






61 / 157

2, 2(6), pp. 87-95 (Tevet 1990), at p. 93 (see below Addendum part 6); R. Isaac Herzog, Resp. Heikhal Yitshak, E.H., I, sec. 10, no. 15—reprinted in Pesakim uKhtavim VI, She’eilot uTshuvot beDinei Even haEzer, sec 14, no. 10; R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Reshimot Shiurim, R. Zvi Joseph Reichman, ed. (New York, 5749), Sukka 31b, p. 144, no. 8, s.v.beIsur” and Reshimot Shiurim, R. Zvi Joseph Reichman, ed. (New York, 5753), Nedarim, p. 182, no. 5, s.v.veHinei aleinu;” and R. Yehuda Herzl Henkin, Resp. Benei Vanim, I, sec. 37, no. 12. See also R. Eliezer ben-Porat, “beInyan bal Tosif,” Moriah, 24:7-9 (283-285; Sivan 5762) pp. 106-112. Most commentators who discuss Rambam’s view seem to disagree, however. For example, Hinukh, Commandment 454 (465 in the Chavel edition), cites Maimonides’ ruling as referring to any teacher or decisor of Jewish law (“more”), not just the court. [R. Yehuda Herzl Henkin (personal communication, June 5, 1997) has suggested that the above decision of Hinukh may be connected with his subsequent ruling (Commandment 496) that the biblical obligation to heed rabbinic edicts (lo tasur) applies to rulings of the great scholars of any generation, not just those of the Sanhedrin; see Resp. Benei Vanim, II, sec. 23, no 5, pp. 90-91.] Similarly, R. Elijah Zev Rosenberg, Kiryat Sefer, Mamrim, Chapter 2, Azhara 345, paraphrases Maimonides ruling using the singular (while the plural is used in the previous paragraph, which deals with the Sanhedrin). The singular formulation is also used by R. Elijah Mizrahi, gloss to Semag, Hilkhot Megilla (at beginning). Other scholars agree with this latter understanding of Maimonides; see: R. Jacob Ibn Forno, cited in Birkei Yosef, O.H. sec. 243 at end; R. David Pardo, Hasdei David, Tosefet Kedusha, Tesefta, Korbanot 8, s.v. vaYomer David;” Birkei Yosef, O.H. sec. 589, no. 2, s.v. ve-haSemag”; R. Zevi Hirsch Chajes, Darkei Hora’a, sec. 6, first footnote, and in greater detail in Torat haNevi’im, Ma’amar Bal Tosif, p. 85 (“le-khol beit din u-beit din, ve-khein le-khol hakham u-more hora’a bi-zemano”); R. Chaim Soloveitchik of Brisk, cited in Nefesh haRav, p. 177; R. Joseph Babad, Minhat Hinukh, 454, end of no. 1; Pri Megadim, O.H., Petiha Kollelet, Part I, end of sec. 35; R. Jacob Ettlinger, Bikkurei Yaakov, sec. 658, no. 1; R. Chayim Hirschensohn. Resp. Malki baKodesh, II, sec. 4, p. 13; R. Joseph Elijah Henkin, Teshuvot Ivra, sec. 52, no. 3 (in Kitvei haGri Henkin, II); R. Joshua Menahem Mendel Ehrenberg; Resp. Devar Yehoshua, I, sec. 19, no. 6; Resp. Iggerot Moshe, O.H., IV, sec. 49, s.v. “veHinei”; Resp. Rivevot Efrayyim, VIII, sec 403, no. 58; R. Simha Ben Tsiyyon Rabinowitz, Piskei Teshuvot, V, O.H., sec. 489, no. 10, p. 289; R. Isaac Jacob Rabinowitz, in his introduction to R. D.Y. Zvi Rabinowitz, Iyyunei Halakhot, Hakdama uVerakha, sec. 3, no. 14; and R. David Cohen, conversation with Aryeh A. Frimer and Dov I. Frimer, March 20, 1995. Interestingly, R.

Document info
Document views406
Page views407
Page last viewedThu Dec 08 00:15:29 UTC 2016