YWN Coffee Room » Bais Medrash

Aruch Hashulchan

(92 posts)
  • Started 9 months ago by rationalfrummie
  • Latest reply from mdd

Tags:

No tags yet.

  1. According to the esteemed talmidei chachamim of the CR, what is the halachic status of the Aruch Hashulchan? Why was the Mishnah Berurah picked to be the sefer followed l'halacha? Is it still okay for one to follow what the Aruch says?

    Also, usually the MB is pretty machmir and does not like to pick sides in machlokos rishonim. I'm learning Aruch Hashulchan in orach chaim and I see that he does this ALL THE TIME!

    Just recently, I learned an aruch (in O.C. 176:1 for those interested) where he claims that the Rema is wrong, and that because there is a safek in the Bavli, we follow the Yerushalmi (he loves the yerushalmi for some reason)!!!!!!!!!! Voz iz dos?

    Posted 9 months ago #
  2. truthsharer
    Blocked

    Until very recently, the AH was the ultimate.
    One of the reasons why the MB took over was due to the ease of reading the MB over the AH.
    In Europe, the AH was used as the guide and indeed R' Moshe says to use the AH.
    One of the reasons is that the AH was written later and includes some MB comments, also the AH was a posek while the MB is at times more theoretical.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  3. THE MB HAS GENERALLY BEEN USED AS THE DEFAULT "GO TO" AS FINAL PSAK ALMOST SINCE IT WAS PUBLISHED.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  4. HaLeiVi
    Plays the aeolian harp by air

    The Chafetz Chaim didn't always personally follow his own ruling, since he had a Messora. Don't just pick a Shita. Discuss these issues with your Rov.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  5. charliehall
    Member

    "the AH was a posek while the MB is at times more theoretical."

    The difference is like the difference between Rav Moshe and Rav Soloveitchik. R'Epstein and R'Moshe were poseks; The Chafetz Chaim and The Rav were rosh yeshivas. Rav Henkin z'tz'l also held that we should prefer the Aruch HaShulchan.

    "he claims that the Rema is wrong"

    The Aruch HaShulchan is far from unique in saying that the Rema should not be followed; for example the Vilna Gaon rules contrary to the Rema on a regular basis.

    "he loves the yerushalmi for some reason"

    Not clear what the problem with the Yerushalmi is, or why we would not follow it, especially when the psak of the Bavli is unclear. But we clearly do not do regularly follow the Yerushalmi.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  6. Toi
    beware the cleats

    CM- thats yeshivishly inaccurate. if you ask any RY over 50, they will tell you that the AH or the chayei adam can be relied on to use as a final psak. it isnt even kluhr the MB meant to decide every case he brings down. youre simply wrong.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  7. rebdoniel
    Modern/Open Orthodox

    The MB's approach is more textually-grounded; the AhS is more inclined to allow leniency on the basis of human need or what is observed socially (ie. he offers more limudei zechut, typically). AhS allowing people to feed birds on Shabbat Beshalach, or allowing hashma'at kol on shabbat, etc. are examples of this.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  8. Sam2
    The Even-Keeled and Erudite Shmuely Wollenberger from Las Vegas

    The Aruch HaShulchan was generally followed in the Frum world until World War II. For some reason, the post-Holocaust age turned towards the Mishnah B'rurah. I have heard several theories as to how that came to be, but it is pretty clear that the war was the start of the turning point. Find a Rav. But if you can't have a Rav (or you don't have a Rav accessible for every Shailah), then there should be nothing wrong with following the Aruch Hashulchan, so long as you always follow him no matter what the case.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  9. rebdoniel
    Modern/Open Orthodox

    I'd say that the acceptance of the MB over AhS is one example proving Prof. Hayyim Soloveitchik's "Rupture and Reconstruction" theory correct.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  10. yitayningwut
    I have no idea wut this screen name means. Do YOU know what this screen name means?

    I've never heard the Aruch Hashulchan referred to as the Aruch.

    Disagreeing with a Rema is not the Aruch Hashulchan's chiddush.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  11. pixelate
    Member

    The Aruch Hashulchan paskens that you can turn on a light on Yom Tov. Nobody agrees to that.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  12. Sam2
    The Even-Keeled and Erudite Shmuely Wollenberger from Las Vegas

    pixelate: I'll take your word that he says that (I'm not aware of it offhand), but things like that should be obvious that you can't hold by nowadays. Many of his contemporaries said the same. They just didn't know how electricity worked. He also says that it's healthy to smoke and recommends doing it. Once again, many of his contemporaries agreed because they didn't know it was bad for you.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  13. Avi K
    Member

    Pixelate, that is an exaggrration. While that is not the normative haalcha there are a few (mainly Sephardic) poskim who agree. Rav Ovadia says not to make an issue of it if one sees a community where it is done. In any case, when I asked a rav the question on the virtual floor he told me "min haShamayim". However, there are poskim who rely on the AS. It's a matter of mesoret.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  14. pixelate
    Member

    I think Sam2 has the right idea. Based on the AH's understanding of electricity, it is nothing more than extending Aish; the electrical current. The Chazon Ish,(a great and hidden scientist in his own right) vehemently disagreed, and rightly forbade flipping a light switch because of the Issur of Boneh, since you are creating a new circuit.

    I have never heard that Rav Ovadia said Ein Limchos with regard to this. If the AH would have fully understood electricity, there is no question he would have agreed.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  15. reb doniel, thank you for directly answering the question and I like your theory that it's an example of the surge in didactic learning in the frum velt, especially after the war.

    Sam2: What are some of those theories? Would you agree with RD?

    Some questions remain. Why does the Aruch Hashulchan rely on the Yerushalmi when for centuries the Bavli has been the classic primary halachic text?

    Also, many a time the Mishnah Berurah will refrain from issuing a psak on a shailah and instead just say it's good to be machmir. He is very uncomfortable with picking shitahs among the rishonim. On the other hand, the Aruch Hashulchan does that regularly.

    To sum up, which sefer should be followed, and why?

    Posted 9 months ago #
  16. rabbiofberlin
    Member

    pixelate and others: in the early days of electricity, there were a number of very big Poskim who allowed it to be used on Yom tov. The "Maharsham' (the gaon of Brezhan,Rav Schwadron) held that way. I am of the impression thatR'Chaim Ozer grodzinsky was of the same view, although i am not sure about him.In any case, even if you accept some of the reasons for electricity (mav-ir, boneh, mevashel), it is only on shabbos that it is ossur- there may be many hetterim for yom tov, because of "ho'il".
    BTW- In Poland, galicia, Hungary and the like, the "Mogen Avrohom" was (still is) the psssok upon one relies. In Russia, it was the shulchan aruch Horav. The mishneh berurah-and the aruch hashulchan-were of lithuanian origin and were not well know elsewhere.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  17. Sam2
    The Even-Keeled and Erudite Shmuely Wollenberger from Las Vegas

    pixelate: No. That is not true at all. There are many Poskim nowadays who strongly disagree with the Chazon Ish (many hold that R' Shlomo Zalman properly refuted him) and they would not hold of this. Because there is some problem with turning on electricity based on what we know nowadays. It's a big Machlokes exactly what, but even if you don't hold of Boneh then it's still Assur to turn a light on on Yom Tov. R' Shlomo Zalman and his Talmidim don't hold that it's Muttar. By your logic they should.

    Also, the Chazon Ish did not hold that the Boneh was because you created a new circuit. That is a massively widespread misunderstanding of the Chazon Ish. See the Tzitz Eliezer who goes out of his way to point this out numerous times, basically in any T'shuvah discussing electricity on Shabbos.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  18. Sam2
    The Even-Keeled and Erudite Shmuely Wollenberger from Las Vegas

    rf: You're asking us to put our heads between these mountains? The Aruch Hashulchan's style speaks to some people more. The M"B's to others. Neither is inherently better or worse.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  19. rebdoniel
    Modern/Open Orthodox

    It is interesting to me that thematically, the Yerushalmi is far less textual or objective than the Bavli, for starters. Yerushalmi many times is concerned with observing people's conduct and codifies observations of what people are noheg to do. Tosafot very often reads Ashkenazic minhagim and more Yerushalmi-based practices into the canon, and AhS, like Tosafot (and even the Ra'avad), is often concerned with paskening in a less textual manner. AhS is concerned with what people are noheg to do (see his limmudei zechut on women's hair covering, hashma'at kol on shabbat, bedikat tolaim, cantors using tuning forks on Shabbat- which the MB was against, eruvin, etc.) MB seems to be closer to the principles inherent in the Rambam's approach, IMHO.

    AhS is very much lekula in his psakim, and the very fact that he was a communal rav and not a rosh yeshiva is probably a testament to this fact; AhS is more concerned with popular practice than a more academic style, and he has fealty to established custom, even when it is in conflict with theoretical halakha. The Gra was very opposed to this type of approach, hence the fact that the MB is very much reliant on the more Talmudically-based Gra in many areas. If my theory or observation is faulty, I'd accept other views.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  20. pixelate
    Member

    Sam2 See the Tzitz Eliezer who goes out of his way...
    OK, will see.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  21. yitayningwut
    I have no idea wut this screen name means. Do YOU know what this screen name means?

    If you do not have the requisite knowledge to answer a question for yourself then follow whoever you are more comfortable with, but be consistent.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  22. mdd
    Member

    Rebdoniel, the A.H. never offered a limud zechus on women not covering their hair. Seconly, it is wrong to say about a Gemorah that it's "less objective". I can explain your statement in an non-offensive way, but still you have to be careful about what you say.
    ROB, a historical-geographical correction. When we speak about (the Jewish) Russia, Lita is the northern half of it with the Ukraine(minus eastern Galicia) being the second.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  23. Sam2
    The Even-Keeled and Erudite Shmuely Wollenberger from Las Vegas

    Yitay: That reminds me of something that I once said. You can pick one Posek out of the 3 major ones from the previous era (M"B, AH"SH, and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch) as long as you're consistent. And if you learn the entirety of all 3 of them to search for who's the most Meikel, that's fine. Because by the time you're done you probably know enough to Pasken for yourself anyway.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  24. mdd
    Member

    Sam2, it is wrong to search for the most meikal shittah unless it's shas ha'dchak.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  25. rebdoniel
    Modern/Open Orthodox

    If you re-read my comments, than you'd see that I said that DEVIATING from a Talmudic standard results in a less textually-grounded approach and one more rooted in social need.

    If you say that the keriat shema can be said around a married woman with uncovered hair, than that sounds a lot like saying that in this day and age, based on social reality, a married woman's hair is not considered ervah. If that's not a limmud zechut, what is?

    Posted 9 months ago #
  26. mdd
    Member

    Rebdoniel, he clearly writes that women must cover their hair. It's de'Oraisa. As far as the issue of men's hirhurim when saying Shma he is lenient about the hair of a married woman in his time and place. And it would not apply to other body parts btw.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  27. apushatayid
    Member

    Just follow your Rav. I think both the Aruch Hashulchan and Mishna Berura would agree on that.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  28. Ðash®
    Member

    Why was the Mishnah Berurah picked to be the sefer followed l'halacha?

    I think it is because our generation perceives Roshei Yeshivah as being greater than Poskim.

    © Ю

    Posted 9 months ago #
  29. Sam2
    The Even-Keeled and Erudite Shmuely Wollenberger from Las Vegas

    mdd: You missed my point. If "searching for Kulos" means learning the entirety of these 3 Seforim, then by the time you're done searching you'll know enough when to be Meikel and when to be Machmir.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  30. rabbiofberlin
    Member

    Dash@- Actually, Roshei yshiva are not Poskim at all. The vast majority of shaalos and treshvos are answred by rabbonim, not Roshei Yeshiva. They are too sheltered from reality.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  31. musser zoger
    Member

    Mishna berurah is easier to learn and it is accompanied by the SA.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  32. apushatayid
    Member

    I think a major reason is because one need not "learn" the mishna berura, just read it and see the psak. The arush hashulchan on the other hand is really a summary of the sugya.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  33. Chacham
    not Joseph

    My father asked Rav Shlomo Zalman why the oilam uses Mishna berura over aruch hashulchan and he answered because the chafetz chaim put more ameilus into making the mishna berura (like chazering everything 35 times) But my father is unclear if he meant therefore the psak of the MB is more authoritative or min hashamayim it was more niskabel by the velt because of the yegiah.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  34. mdd
    Member

    Sam2, I think learning only those 3 is not enough to know how to pasken.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  35. charliehall
    Member

    "he clearly writes that women must cover their hair. It's de'Oraisa."

    Machloket poskim whether it is d'oraita or d'rabbanan, and there are a few opinions out there among acharonim that say that it is minhag. (Not the MB or A"H.)

    Posted 9 months ago #
  36. rabbiofberlin

    -"Actually, Roshei yshiva are not Poskim at all. The vast majority of shaalos and treshvos are answred by rabbonim, not Roshei Yeshiva. They are too sheltered"

    Of course R M Feinstein, R Yaakov Kamenetzky, R Shloima Zalman Auerbach were all Roshei Yeshiva, I am glad you think they were not poskim.

    Perhaps you are speaking about your circles, so your point of reference would be R J B Soloveitchik or MD Tendler.

    Posted 9 months ago #
  37. mdd
    Member

    Charliehall,Gemora in Kesuvos 72A says it is. Who holds it's de'rabbonon or a minhag? One always can find a shitta which holds of some far--off kula or chumra that we don't psken like.

    Posted 8 months ago #
  38. About Time
    Member

    'I'd say that the acceptance of the MB over AhS is one example proving Prof. Hayyim Soloveitchik's "Rupture and Reconstruction" theory correct.'

    "Rupture and Reconstruction" which may have had just a bit of use when published in '94,is very dated and a laugher that still it is quoted by modox.
    Besides, his contradictory statements and his conclusions based on ignorance...but go ahead

    Posted 8 months ago #
  39. About Time
    Member

    "R'Chaim Ozer grodzinsky was of the same view,"

    hmm...R'Chaim Ozer Grodezensky specifically made havdalah on an incandescent bulb ,lest anyone come and say he allowed it's use..

    'I think a major reason is because one need not "learn" the mishna berura, just read it and see the psak. The arush hashulchan on the other hand is really a summary of the sugya.'

    plus one could rather easily misunderstand unless contemplated

    Posted 8 months ago #
  40. rabbiofberlin
    Member

    About Time : You are drinking too much. I have no clue where you find the things you write about me (on this and other threads) and clearly you never learned the "chofezt chaim" . Check it out,it is a good sefer!
    And- btw- I clearly said that "I think" that it was R"Chaim Ozer who also held that electricity is muttor on yomtov,so you are barking up the wrong tree.It is also not a contradiction to use it for havdalah (I will have to trust you on that-unfortunately)
    I also suggest you read the posts carefully- I mentioned "YOM TOV", not shabbos, and I clearly gave the reason why. So, before you accuse me of being an "am hooretz", learn the sugyas. Remember, "Kol hapossel, bemumo possel"

    Posted 8 months ago #
  41. truthsharer
    Blocked

    nishtdayngesheft, it's funny how you try to insult the MO but you end up insulting yourself. One of the reasons given for using the AH over the MB is indeed because the AH was on the ground paskening.
    It has been said that one of the reasons why there is a slide to the right is because we are now using Roshey Yeshiva and not Rabbonim to pasken shailos. It's not very good to pasken based on theoretics.

    Posted 8 months ago #
  42. rabbiofberlin
    Member

    nishddayngesheft: You fall prey to the same illusion that so many of your generation fall to. Life and Shaalos and teshuvos did NOT start with the last twenty years. For your information,it has a long history , going back almost two thousand years.I wrote "the vast majority of Poskim"- I did not say all. If you take a look at the Poskim of previous generations, you will see that the vast majority (maybe all), were Rabbonim of towns, not Poskim.
    Even the Poskim that you mention (R"Moshe, R'Yaakov) were Rabbonim of towns way before they became Roshei yeshiva. Even "leshitoshcho", I can quote a long list of present day Poskim and they were all Rabbonim of towns, not Roshei Yeshiva (Rav Ovadia Yossef shelita, the "minchas Yitzchok", Rav Wosner shelita, Rab Zvi pessach frank and many ,many others)

    Posted 8 months ago #
  43. Chacham
    not Joseph

    rob- reb chaim ozer writes bfeirush it is assur on tom tov- see http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=8861&st=&pgnum=6

    Posted 8 months ago #
  44. Sam2
    The Even-Keeled and Erudite Shmuely Wollenberger from Las Vegas

    About Time: R' Chaim Ozer made Havdalah on the bulb to show that he held that a burning filament was a real fire, not just to show that you couldn't use it on Shabbos.

    Posted 8 months ago #
  45. ROB,

    I am quite aware that they were Rabbonim also. However they defined themselves primarily as RY. And your comment, which I quoted earlier, effectively said the two are mutually exclusive.

    And please do not make any suppositions about me, because apparently you live in a fantasy world of your own.

    Posted 8 months ago #
  46. mdd
    Member

    ROB and Truthsharer, it is a false and dangerous precept that there could be a legitimate difference between theory and life in Halochah. What you probably heard about is that some Poskim would try more to justify questionable practices than some other Poskim. But it is not so good as you imply as sometimes the justifications could be good ones while at other times -- not so. So one can end up with a questionable practice with not-really-valid post factum justifications.

    Posted 8 months ago #
  47. rabbiofberlin
    Member

    nishtdayngeshfet: You quote the two geonim (R"Moshe and R'Yaakov) who may have considered themselves Roshei Yeshiva -and I am not even sure if they did. (I am not even sure if you can consider R"yyakov zz'l a Possek). You are right that I wrote a definite statement,that "Roshei yeshiva are not Poskim". Allow me to amend that to- the vast majority of actual shaalos uteshuvos are from Rabbonim of kehillos. I mentioned some of them, I can mention many more, while you will have difficulty finding many illustrious Roshei Yeshiva that were Poskim.
    I am not sure what fantasy world I live in. I back up what I say.

    Posted 8 months ago #
  48. anIsraeliYid
    Member

    What I was told is that in pre-war Europe and the US, the AH was considered to be the authoritative Posek. Rav Aharon Kotler ZT"L, though, favored the MB - which is why it gained a following in the "Yeshiva Velt" after the war. As a result, the MB has now come to be viewed in the US as more authoritative than the AH.

    I heard this from an old Talmid of R' Dovid Leibowitz, who grew up in the US and saw this change happen.

    an Israeli Yid

    Posted 8 months ago #
  49. Toi
    beware the cleats

    nisht- im not arguing on your position, but how Edited do you know how they primarily defined themselves? ver hut eich gizugt?

    Posted 8 months ago #
  50. rabbiofberlin
    Member

    chacham: I thank you for finding this letter. I did no say categorically that R"Chaim Ozer was one of the makilim. I only had a thought about it. I do know that the Maharsham (the gaon of Brezahn, Rav Shwadron) who was considered THE Possek in Galicia, POland and Rumania allowed it on yomtov.
    My question on R'Chaim Ozer zz'l ,if it is "mavir" why is it ossur on yomtov? You are allowed to make a fire on yomtov, and ,at the minimum, you can use "ho'il".
    You should also know that R"Shlomo Zalman (to whom this letter is addressed) thought thst using a microphone (on shabbos mind you!)is only miderabbbonon (check Rav Ovadia Yossef's shelita, teshuvos)
    Thank you for providing the letter (an assist to hebrew books!)

    Posted 8 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.