Timeline for "אלו ואלו דברי א' חיים" vs "נעשית תורה כשתי תורות" with examples
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 28, 2018 at 11:10 | comment | added | user18155 | שתי תורות applies when it is applied in each particular context. | |
| Oct 28, 2018 at 11:09 | comment | added | user18155 | Nothing is black and white, there are often many shades of gray, and an opinion presented often is only relevant in a particular circumstance. | |
| Oct 28, 2018 at 11:08 | comment | added | user18155 | Halacha is not a matter of 'luck' or 'fashion' as you say, it is perfectly logical and reasonable. Perhpas not your logic or your reasoning. But that doesn't impact on the fact that it is logical or reasonable. Since you can't predict it doesn't invalidate the process or the premise. Resolution of a problem is a specific scenario and doesn't apply to every instance. If you don't apply Eilu 'Eilu in every dispute, that means that one opinion is not relevant, given particular criteria. | |
| Oct 28, 2018 at 10:28 | comment | added | Al Berko | 3. How do you treat the other statement about שתי תורות? | |
| Oct 28, 2018 at 10:27 | comment | added | Al Berko | 2. Halacha is a matter of luck and fashion if I may, not reason and logic. See my Qs about B"H and B"S. As you can see there's no way of predicting Halachah and sometimes it's not resolved for hundreds of years. So the fact that a certain Halachah was accepted teaches nothing about the truthfulness of any argument. | |
| Oct 28, 2018 at 10:26 | comment | added | Al Berko | 1. Interestingly, if you don't apply EV"E approach to every dispute you end up claiming that one is wrong, simply wrong, and that's insulting toward a Rabbi. That's why I tend to accept the second approach applying EVE to every dispute. | |
| Oct 27, 2018 at 21:35 | history | answered | user18155 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |