I was told that a while back a Sefer came out that went through a couple of the teshuvot in Igros Moshe and refuted some of the answers given. Due to some harsh remarks the author made in the introduction the Sefer was put into chayrem (nobody sold it). Im curious as to what the name of the Sefer was. Although the author was out of line for his comments in the introduction, from what I hear the Sefer itself was incredibly thought out. Anyone know the sefers name?

  • See here for Rav Aviner's view of the sefer (including a relevant incident involving the author and the Steipler and a quote from a leading talmid of R. Moshe): kipa.co.il/jew/54019.html – Joseph Nov 17 '16 at 8:41
  • The sefer can be downloaded here: israel613.com/books/MEANE_IGROT-H.pdf Some of the critique aligns with the views of other poskim (e.g. on Chalav Yisrael, the time of Chatzos, nylon tzitzis etc), and the other parts tend to be less convincing, in my opinion. – Joseph Nov 17 '16 at 8:42

The work in question is the Ma'aneh L'igrot מענה לאגרות of R. Yom Tov Schwartz.

  • 1
    The work was relegated to obscurity for good reason. The cover page reads: והוכחתי שהמחבר הזה הכשיל את הרבים באופן מחריד בהתרת הרבה איסורים חמורים וטעה בכל הוראותיו או בדבר משנה או בשקול הדעת וסברא the rest of the work is no more respectfull... – mevaqesh Nov 17 '16 at 6:31
  • What's wrong with what he wrote on the cover page? Isn't that the derech ha'Torah - to fight for the truth of the Torah without regard for what might have already been said? And maybe there were instances where Rav Schwarz was right? – Mark A. Nov 17 '16 at 13:27
  • 2
    "The strange book published by Rabbi Yom Tov Halevi Schwartz, Ma’aneh Le’igerot. (New York, 1973) Schwartz’s stated aim in this book is to demolish Feinstein’s standing as a posek, seeking, on the whole quite unsuccessfully, to show that Feinstein is often in error in his halakhic decisions. To the unbiased reader Schwartz cannot hold a candle to Feinstein in halakhic expertise and talmudic learning." – Joseph Nov 17 '16 at 15:52
  • 2
    "This book is a curiosity, too, because Schwartz had resort to the same publisher as the one who published Feinstein’s works and the work at a superficial glance, looks like an additional Feinstein volume since exactly the same format, type and binding is used for both. See the biography of Feinstein, op.cit. p. 192 that the embarrassed publisher consulted Feinstein before publishing the Schwartz book but Feinstein told him to go ahead since his living depended on it." – Joseph Nov 17 '16 at 15:52
  • 2
    @MarkA. You are welcome to your opinion. Personally I do not think that this is at all normal ritha d'orayta, and it is difficult for me to imagine that anyone who has actually perused the work, and views it in the context of halakhic literature from the period, would find it consistent with the norm. Indeed, this sentiment was and is shared by numerous talmidei hakhamim of diverse backgrounds, and was the reason for the reaction to the book, which prompted this question. I can only conjecture what drives you to repeatedly defend this vile piece of hate literature. – mevaqesh Nov 18 '16 at 5:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .