Can later scholars make an issue of something that earlier scholars were not concerned about?

Question

I know that this is a potentially broad subject but there seems to be a phenomenon where later generations of scholars (i.e. after the close of the Gemara; the Amoraim) come up with new halakhoth or restrictions based on either questions or safeqoth that were never considered or taken into account before.

For instance, the berakhah of shelo ^asani goy was said by all Jews - native-born and convert alike - until some scholars among the Rishonim began to be medayeq on the literal wording of the berakhah and decided that converts should not say it - and even began inventing alternate berakhoth! These forms of the blessing had never been heard of before, or even seen as necessary, by any scholar of any previous generation; not the Tannaim, not the Amoraim, not the Geonim.

This type of thing arises in numerous instances and no one seems to ask in response why, if the halakhah was 'good enough' for the earlier scholars/authorities, it needs to be changed or altered.

My question is: Is this type of innovation warranted, necessary, or even possible? Shouldn't the halakhah remain unless changed by either reality or an authorized beth din [ha-gadhol]?

Answer 1

The basic principle of later authorities introducing new ideas and addressing them even though earlier authorities had obviously left things as is, is addressed in Chulin 6b-7a.

Chizkiyahu destroyed the copper snake from Moshe Rabbeinu due to avoda zara issues. The gemara asks is it possible Assa and Yehoshaphat didn't destroy it? But they destroyed all the avoda zara? The gemara answers that they let room for Chizkiyahu to become great. Rabi Yehuda HaNasi used this story to give credence to his decision to accept the testimony of a certain talmid chacham and obviate Beis Shaan from the laws of Maaser, something which no-one was willing to do until then. Notice two points, that Chizkiyahu was being machmir and Rebi was being Meikel. A second point is that Chizkiyahu made a self reliant decision contrary to previous acts, whereas Rebi was accepting testimony contrary to previous practice. But Rabi Yehuda and the Gemara had no issue comparing them and neither should we.

The gemara goes on to prove from here that if a Talmid Chacham says a halacha one should not dismiss his words. The gemara has three versions of how not to react to him. Don't say he didn't actually hear this, or don't say his words are ridiculous and don't say his haughty nature caused him to not listen to his teacher properly.

There is always room to invent. Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik thought it was ridiculous to think Halakha was a stagnant set of ancient laws. It is a growing, moving, body of work.