Not losing Daas Torah

Being mistaken doesn’t make it not Da’as Torah. It just means that he was mistaken as to what the Da’as Torah was. Even if he wasn’t demonstrated to have been mistaken, it was still just his opinion (albeit perhaps a weighty opinion) as to what the Da’as Torah was. So being mistaken is irrelevant. It is just as much Da’as Torah after we know of the mistake as it was before we knew of the mistake, that is to say it was his opinion of what the Daas Torah was which has been shown to have been mistaken.

This thread gets relaunched by another poster every few months. The same comments appear, and there is nothing that helps to resolve the observed lack of respect that is part of the reaction to “Daas Torah”. It is not about degrading Gedolei Yisroel, nor is it about examining the historical roots of “Daas Torah”.

We have many issues in which practical problems are involved. The questions involve matters of science, human behavior, etc. We once had a Rambam who could derive all these forms of knowledge from the Torah. We lack that today. For all intents and purposes, we cannot reliably identify any individual as a purveyor of Ruach Hakodesh. The best we can hope for is an educated opinion from someone steeped in Torah knowledge. This is not so easy when it comes to matters that require a different body of knowledge. There is other information. Reb Moshe Feinstein ZT”L was asked countless questions about matters of science and medicine. He turned to scientists to gain better understanding of the subject before issuing a psak. Reb Shlomo Zalman Auerbach achieved the status as expert in Hilchos Shabbos regarding electricity. This was after hundreds of hours spent learning from electrical engineers and electricians. To rely on some Divine source of information on practical matters is erroneous. I do not deny that Gedolei Yisroel might merit forms of Divine communication. But we cannot rely on that. Today’s world is non-prophet.

I tend to disregard the opinions from rabbonim about scientific matters until I know they have developed expertise in the subject. I continue to respect them, for they possess far greater realms of Torah knowledge that I expect to reach. The questions posed to them need to reflect the expectations of what we can do with their responses.

But what is the status of the mistake itself?

If there are some statements that are provable incorrect, How are we to know which are correct and which are not correct of the rest of the things that cant be easily proved.

I just wish there was some sort of vaccine that protected you from non-daas torah.

zdad, do you go to a doctor?

ok first of all what is the mokor for this daas torah thing? Second if someone can make a mistake then he obviosly isnt desserving the title daas torah

Daas torah doesn’t mean you don’t ever make any mistakes.

just some jew:

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/daas-torah-2

Maybe somewhere in the 345 posts there is a back and forth as to the source.

Only Hashem doesn’t Make mistakes. Gedolim are gedolim, but they are human beings first. Our rabbonim can and do err. That is what is so exceptional about the Torah’s depiction of the Avos and our other Jewish leaders. Unlike other religions who deify their leaders, the Torah shows ours to be real human beings, occasional failings and all. We respect them no less for it.

“he says that it medicinal matters we hold like the scientists over Chazal”

Actually that halachic principle did not originate with Rambam; it appears in the writings of Rav Sherira Gaon, who lived centuries earlier.

If in medical matters we hold by contemporary medical experts over Chazal, kal v’chomer we hold by contemporary medical experts over contemporary rabbis based on yeridot hadorot. However, this should not be interpreted as saying that rabbis have no role to play. Here is an example: I know a frum couple whose first child was born by caesarian section and they were not sure whether they could have a second child via natural birth. (The husband is a physician but not an expert in obstetrics.) The medical evidence was not compelling one way or another (and this depends a lot on the individual woman and the type of c-section performed) and it was not clear what the answer should be. Their rabbi was able to discuss intelligently with them how the Torah views risks and benefits, and empowered them to make a decision based on Torah views in the presence of the evidence. At no time did their rabbi pretend to be a medical expert, and he did not make the decision for them.

What if someone said something against Vaccines?

even if daas torah IS real (i have yet to see a mokor) if s/o says somthing that is wrong(in anything) then you cant trust them any more unless they prove what they say and they are as good as you or me in there undersstanding ruach haokodesh on the other hand is a case by ccase thing were the tzaddik (not just any talmid chacchom) is not claming to know any thing it could just be that in that case he was not given the knowledge

Right, and the other opinion argues with the Chasam Sofer.

Daas, Rav Kook held that we do Metzitza because we trust Chazal on medical issues more than the doctors. He wrote about this, ??? ??? ???? ???? ????.

Right, and the opinion of those quoted by the S’dei Chemed argues on Rav Kook and the Binyan Tzion and Rav Moshe.

DaasYochid:

I’m not sure if you took my post as being to “disprove” you, but if you did, it wasn’t. I just figured that since you had quoted the S’dei Chemed, I would bring in a couple of other opinions.

“No, Sam, to me the issue is the vicious anti MBP movement, which seeks to stop people from practicing milah in a manner their ancestors have done for generations, and which they believe, with backing from numerous legitimate sources, to have religious significance, whether it be al pi nigleh or nistar.”

Why can’t they both be issues?

CharlieHall: I’ve seen you previously acknowledge there is no evidence of harm from MBP. How do you now account for your last above comment.

DaasYochid:

My point was that the fact that in the discussion of metzitza there is one issue (the “vicious anti-MBP movement”) doesn’t mean that another issue (the context of the pro-MBP teshuvos) is not integral to the discussion.

“the “viciously pro MBP” side is defending its rights, not trampling on others’.”

Perhaps one would argue that the viciously anti-MBP movement is defending the right of the child to not have a dangerous procedure done to him.

(the context of the pro-MBP teshuvos)

In what way is the mareh makom I brought not relevant to MBP today? There are (at least) two arguments pro MBP; one is that it gets the ?? ??????? ???????. This is indeed irrelevant and out of context if another method is equally effective.

But the sources which say that metzitzah b’peh (davka) is part of the mitzvah, either for halachic or kabbalistic reasons are wholly relevant.

The arrogance and condescension of those who think that certain groups in klal Yisroel are either incapable of determining the level and balance of risk/reward or don’t care about their children is astounding and horrifying.

DY: You wrote, “which seeks to stop people from practicing milah in a manner their ancestors have done for generations”. I was just pointing out that milah HAS changed in the past. The way we do bris milah today is not the same as when Avraham Avinu did it.

DaasYochid:

I am referring to (and I think this is what Sam meant) the context in which they were written – one has to ascertain whether they were written as a stam halachic discussion, or as a (perhaps polemical) response to a perceived threat against a religious practice. For instance, R’ Moshe’s teshuva was just simply a halachic discussion, and it was really only a tangential discussion, almost like meisiach lefi tumo. But it is possible (and to be clear I am not applying this to any source in particular) that if someone perceived a threat against the religion (or a specific practice of the religion) then they would as a counterbalance, elevate the practice to more than it really is.

I think some cant see the differnce between those who would want to ban Milah and those who want to ban MBP. There certainly is a difference. There are halachic opinions the MBP is not needed , nobody says Milah is not needed