I am rereading the thread, because I was responding to the “narrow” (?) point of what the halacha actually is, and I noticed a couple of posts from PAA to which I will respond first.
All I am doing is providing women who want to wear Tefillin a way in which to work out the sugya so that all potential reasons why a woman shouldn’t wear Tefillin are circumvented.
to which I responded,
Except that that’s not how halacha is supposed to work.
to which Patur Aval Assur responded:
“Except that that’s not how halacha is supposed to work.”
Correct if you adopt a codifier’s methodology of halacha. But if you adopt a Lurian methodology then this is exactly how halacha is supposed to work – you learn through the Gemara and come up with the best pshat and take the early authorities into account but by no means be bound by them. In fact if not for the special respect that is being accorded to the Rema, you will find that his view is a minority view.
Who says this is the best pshat?* Rabbi Harcsztark was not claiming his pshat was the best pshat, just the most convenient for him. So he reworked the halacha to fit his (possibly well-intentioned) whims. You’d doing the same with halachic methodology; although I’m honestly not familiar with what you call “the Lurian method”, it’s not how we pasken today, and one cannot recycle it at will.
*(As I think I previously explained, R’ Chaim wasn’t either claiming his pshat to be the best one; it was only a pshat in one mehalech, lo silbash, not in guf naki.)
Once again though, I am not advocating women’s Tefillin.
Nolens volens (that’s a term I just learned), you are.