X hits on this document

Word document






65 / 157

secs. 364 and 371; Gloss of Rabbi Solomon Mordechai on R. Nahman Kahana, Orhot Hayyim, O.H., end of sec. 156, s.v. beMagen Avraham.” Both R. Jacob Israel Kanievsky and R. Joseph Shalom Elyashiv, indicate that one cannot lie when telling children stories about the gedolim; see: R. Jacob Israel Kanievsky, cited in R. Abraham haLevi Horowitz, Orhot Rabbenu, p. 252, no. 12; R. Joseph Shalom Elyashiv, Kovets Teshuvot, III, O.H., sec. 28. However, fictional or exaggerated stories about unnamed or fictional characters are permitted for educational or other positive purposes; see: R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited by R. Nahum Stepansky, veAleihu Lo Yibol, II, Hadrakha beInyanei Talmud Torah veHinukh, sec. 10, p. 42.

We turn now to the particular issue raised in the text at note 228, namely, does misrepresenting halakha and/or giving an erroneous reason or source for a prohibition involve violation of the prohibition against lying? This question came into prominence as a result of the famous Pesak Din promulgated by a conference of rabbis who met in Michalowce Hungary in 1865. This Pesak Din, initially signed by twenty-five leading rabbinic figures and subsequently by many more, ruled that nine practices (including, inter alia, synagogue choirs, sermons in the vernacular, synagogues weddings, absence of a central bima, canonical robes for the Hazan) were halakhically forbidden. Rabbis Moses Schick and Esriel Hildesheimer and many of their colleagues refused to sign. The fundamental claim of Rabbis Schick and Hildesheimer was that, contrary to the impression given by the Pesak Din, the only grounds for some of the edicts were public policy (mi-gdar milta) - not halakhic - considerations. The term “Pesak Din” (legal ruling) was in fact a conscious misnomer, an attempt to hide the truth, and, hence, a flagrant deviation from Jewish law with which they could take no part. As noted above (Addendum part 5), R. Schick also argued that, since the Pesak Din was promulgated by a Jewish court, it violated bal tosif. See: R. Moses Schick in Likutei Teshuvot Hatam Sofer, R. Israel Stern, ed. (London, 1965), sec. 82, pp. 73-75; Meir Hildesheimer, “She’eilot u-Teshuvot Maharam Schick,” Tsefunot, 2:2(6) (Tevet 5750), pp. 87-95, at p. 93; Yona Emanuel, “Me’a Shana lePetirat haRav Azriel Hildesheimer Zatsal,” haMa’ayn, XXXIX, 4 (Tammuz 5759), pp. 1-7, “Al Kinus haRabbanim be-Mikhalovitch” pp. 2-4; Michael K. Silber, “The Emergence of Ultra-Orthodoxy: The Invention of a Tradition,” In The Uses of Tradition, Jack Wertheimer, ed. (New York, Jewish Theological Seminary, 1992), p. 23-84; Mordechai Eliav, “Mekomo shel Rav Azriel Hildesheimer be-Ma’avak al Demutah shel Yahadutr Hungariah,” Zion 27 (1962), 59-86; Nethanel Katzburg, “Pesak Din shel Michalovitch 5726,” in Perakim be-Toldot ha-Hevrah ha-Yehudit be-Yemei ha-Beinayim

Document info
Document views475
Page views476
Page last viewedTue Jan 17 02:10:00 UTC 2017