Is there a problem with choosing to always follow the most lenient opinion in every Halachic dispute encountered? I'm talking about when the disputants are qualified poskim and the leniencies do not contradict each other.
Is this person qualified to be choosing between the opinions? If he is then I don't see the problem. It'd be an awfully big coincidence though– Double AA ♦Jan 17, 2017 at 0:48
It is said in my Yeshivahs, that if one did follow every legitimate kulah, he might not look Jewish anymore. :)– David KennerJan 17, 2017 at 0:49
1I asked this question to a person who has finished kol sifrei Shulchan Aruch biyun and confers smicha to others and he told me that technically there is no issue on doing so as long as a prominent halchaic authority holds by such a postion,but he added that this is not a mehalch and chances are there will be many contradictions,however this doesnt mean much since you dont know who I am talking about– samJan 17, 2017 at 1:16
@sam judaism.stackexchange.com/q/55086/759 which might even be a duplicate– Double AA ♦Jan 17, 2017 at 1:24
@doubleAA,totally forgot I asked that,must have asked him the next day after I asked,but still cant post my commemt above as answer,since I cant mention Rabbi– samJan 17, 2017 at 1:26
The fundamental answer to this question is no. This has been brought up before and Chazal have stated that the principles by which particular rabbonim analyze situations and obtain a psak must be maintained
When a rav analyzes a case to give a psak, he uses the principles of halacha and it then leads to the psak. Thus, as an example, the principle can lead to a "kula" in one case and a "chumra" in another even though you do not see a contradiction.
Another point is that one may not realize when a psak is brought as a kula or a chumra. For example, Rav Soloveitchik gave a psak about melacha on shabbos. He is reported to have said "I am not maikil on shabbos, I am machmir on pikuach nefesh" (paraphrase from memory).
Thus one cannot go searching among different rabbonim to find the kulah as this is not how a psak is done. One must have a rav that one can ask sh'ailos and discuss what are the particular circumstances and stay with that rav.
The main concept is that if a rav is maikil in one case and machmir in another then there will be a contradiction if you try to follow his psak in one case and not the other.
As @DoubleAA said
Psak is an art of balancing the needs and details of the situation with the traditional legal arguments and principles. Picking things willy nilly based on what's easier is not Psak.
@Yaacov Deane points to
What you are saying is true in some areas but there are many, many areas that will not be contradictory. I'm asking about those situations where it is clear or even in more complicated situations where one has verified that there is no contradictions.– Mark A.Jan 17, 2017 at 16:49
sabba the answer is still fundamentally no, and the obvious proof is no one has ever done it. Recall none us are the first to have the bright idea that being lenient is easier. If this was allowed, people would have always been doing it. Jan 17, 2017 at 17:15
But that is not why. The point isn't you have to be very careful not to contradict yourself, since some people can be careful: why didn't the Rambam go through and compose the easiest most Meikil and still internally consistent code of law instead of the Mishneh Torah? The point is that's not how to Paskin. Psak is an art of balancing the needs and details of the situation with the traditional legal arguments and principles. Picking things willy nilly based on what's easier is not Psak. It's nonsense. Jan 17, 2017 at 18:58
You aren't saying the same thing as me. You are pointing out technical difficulties and I'm pointing out fundamental difficulties. You're right that it's complicated to find the most Meikil logically-consistent set of rules. But it's possible. Why didn't the Rambam do it? He was smart enough, no? ||| "The main concept is that if a rav is maikil in one case and machmir in another then there will be a contradiction if you try to follow his psak in one case and not the other." is simply not true if you know what you're doing. That is not the main issue here but a practical implementation issue. Jan 17, 2017 at 20:49
@DoubleAA I rewrote it to try to say that by definition a posek (like the Rambam) deals with fundamental principles and follows wherever they lead, whether chumrah or kulah. I was trying to say that any other method will by definition lead to contradictions. It is both fundamental and technical. Jan 17, 2017 at 20:53