Do Rabbis get punished in Heaven for wrong interpretations or claims?A holistic explanation of King David's use of AvishagWhy do we Daven for יראת שמים / fear of Heaven?Why was Yaakov punished for not honoring his parents?How do I get myself to yearn for moshiach if I'm comfortable in the diaspora?Why do we get “so did they do” for the commandment of expelling tamei people in Parashat Naso?Why were the Jews punished for 40 years if the spies were the ones who were there for 40 days?How does “everything is from heaven aside from fear of heaven” apply when others are doing the wrong action?From where/Why do you get more reward for doing a obligated mitzvah than a non obligated mitzvah?Why Did Yosef Get Punished For His Hishtadlut While Yaakov Didn't?Does a Ben Noach, who keeps the seven mitzvot but has bad hashkafah, get punished by Hashem?
How could an engineer advance human civilization by time traveling to the past?
The 50,000 row query limit is not actually a "per APEX call" as widely believed
dos2unix is unable to convert typescript file to unix format
What is the meaning of "you has the wind of me"?
Found more old paper shares from broken up companies
Why are angular mometum and angular velocity not necessarily parallel, but linear momentum and linear velocity are always parallel?
How can Kazakhstan perform MITM attacks on all HTTPS traffic?
Why does the salt in the oceans not sink to the bottom?
Why is a dedicated QA team member necessary?
What is an Eternal Word™?
How can I tell if there was a power cut when I was out?
Why is chess failing to attract big name sponsors?
How to repair basic cable/wire issue for household appliances
How important is a good quality camera for good photography?
How may I shorten this shell script?
Why did computer video outputs go from digital to analog, then back to digital?
Other than a swing wing, what types of variable geometry have flown?
Who controls a summoned steed’s familiar?
Is it OK to accept a job opportunity while planning on not taking it?
Is an easily guessed plot twist a good plot twist?
401k investment after being fired. Do I own it?
Film where a boy turns into a princess
Monty Hall Problem with a Fallible Monty
Impact of throwing away fruit waste on a peak > 3200 m above a glacier
Do Rabbis get punished in Heaven for wrong interpretations or claims?
A holistic explanation of King David's use of AvishagWhy do we Daven for יראת שמים / fear of Heaven?Why was Yaakov punished for not honoring his parents?How do I get myself to yearn for moshiach if I'm comfortable in the diaspora?Why do we get “so did they do” for the commandment of expelling tamei people in Parashat Naso?Why were the Jews punished for 40 years if the spies were the ones who were there for 40 days?How does “everything is from heaven aside from fear of heaven” apply when others are doing the wrong action?From where/Why do you get more reward for doing a obligated mitzvah than a non obligated mitzvah?Why Did Yosef Get Punished For His Hishtadlut While Yaakov Didn't?Does a Ben Noach, who keeps the seven mitzvot but has bad hashkafah, get punished by Hashem?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I had a Zchus of serving a great Rabbi Z"l here in Jerusalem who wrote lots of books on Torah as well as on Halacha and Shu"t. I helped him publishing his books for a decade and for his last years I was driving him to various medical procedures out of town and we had a lot of time to talk.
He revealed to me that he was afraid of Yom Hadin, that some of his interpretations or Shu"tim might be wrong (in the eyes of Hashem I suppose). He also added that this fear was constantly guarding him in his writings.
We know that many passages in Horayos or Makos deal with wrong [court or Halachic] judgments. So I would really like to focus on Torah interpretations or non-Halachic statements. For example, interpreting Maase Bereishit, Torah characters intentions, anatomical or scientific facts, etc.
Does such a concept exist - that G-d punishes Rabbis for wrong interpretations or claims?
parshanut-torah-comment hashkafah-philosophy
|
show 4 more comments
I had a Zchus of serving a great Rabbi Z"l here in Jerusalem who wrote lots of books on Torah as well as on Halacha and Shu"t. I helped him publishing his books for a decade and for his last years I was driving him to various medical procedures out of town and we had a lot of time to talk.
He revealed to me that he was afraid of Yom Hadin, that some of his interpretations or Shu"tim might be wrong (in the eyes of Hashem I suppose). He also added that this fear was constantly guarding him in his writings.
We know that many passages in Horayos or Makos deal with wrong [court or Halachic] judgments. So I would really like to focus on Torah interpretations or non-Halachic statements. For example, interpreting Maase Bereishit, Torah characters intentions, anatomical or scientific facts, etc.
Does such a concept exist - that G-d punishes Rabbis for wrong interpretations or claims?
parshanut-torah-comment hashkafah-philosophy
judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/96618/…
– Alex
6 hours ago
@Alex...a fascinating question you've linked to there, but I don't see how it bears on the case at hand. Am I being obtuse or did you perhaps intend to link elsewhere?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
@JoshK The link is to Al’s comment on my answer, particularly the last sentence which may have been the catalyst for this question.
– Alex
3 hours ago
Now I get it. You may very well be right, @Alex. In my mind the scope of such "wrong interpretations" was limited to psak but this makes much more sense. Kol tov
– Josh K
3 hours ago
1
Isn’t it counterintuitive to append ‘Z”l’ to a person you’re keeping anonymous?
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
I had a Zchus of serving a great Rabbi Z"l here in Jerusalem who wrote lots of books on Torah as well as on Halacha and Shu"t. I helped him publishing his books for a decade and for his last years I was driving him to various medical procedures out of town and we had a lot of time to talk.
He revealed to me that he was afraid of Yom Hadin, that some of his interpretations or Shu"tim might be wrong (in the eyes of Hashem I suppose). He also added that this fear was constantly guarding him in his writings.
We know that many passages in Horayos or Makos deal with wrong [court or Halachic] judgments. So I would really like to focus on Torah interpretations or non-Halachic statements. For example, interpreting Maase Bereishit, Torah characters intentions, anatomical or scientific facts, etc.
Does such a concept exist - that G-d punishes Rabbis for wrong interpretations or claims?
parshanut-torah-comment hashkafah-philosophy
I had a Zchus of serving a great Rabbi Z"l here in Jerusalem who wrote lots of books on Torah as well as on Halacha and Shu"t. I helped him publishing his books for a decade and for his last years I was driving him to various medical procedures out of town and we had a lot of time to talk.
He revealed to me that he was afraid of Yom Hadin, that some of his interpretations or Shu"tim might be wrong (in the eyes of Hashem I suppose). He also added that this fear was constantly guarding him in his writings.
We know that many passages in Horayos or Makos deal with wrong [court or Halachic] judgments. So I would really like to focus on Torah interpretations or non-Halachic statements. For example, interpreting Maase Bereishit, Torah characters intentions, anatomical or scientific facts, etc.
Does such a concept exist - that G-d punishes Rabbis for wrong interpretations or claims?
parshanut-torah-comment hashkafah-philosophy
parshanut-torah-comment hashkafah-philosophy
edited 6 mins ago
Al Berko
asked 10 hours ago
Al BerkoAl Berko
8,3222 gold badges6 silver badges32 bronze badges
8,3222 gold badges6 silver badges32 bronze badges
judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/96618/…
– Alex
6 hours ago
@Alex...a fascinating question you've linked to there, but I don't see how it bears on the case at hand. Am I being obtuse or did you perhaps intend to link elsewhere?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
@JoshK The link is to Al’s comment on my answer, particularly the last sentence which may have been the catalyst for this question.
– Alex
3 hours ago
Now I get it. You may very well be right, @Alex. In my mind the scope of such "wrong interpretations" was limited to psak but this makes much more sense. Kol tov
– Josh K
3 hours ago
1
Isn’t it counterintuitive to append ‘Z”l’ to a person you’re keeping anonymous?
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/96618/…
– Alex
6 hours ago
@Alex...a fascinating question you've linked to there, but I don't see how it bears on the case at hand. Am I being obtuse or did you perhaps intend to link elsewhere?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
@JoshK The link is to Al’s comment on my answer, particularly the last sentence which may have been the catalyst for this question.
– Alex
3 hours ago
Now I get it. You may very well be right, @Alex. In my mind the scope of such "wrong interpretations" was limited to psak but this makes much more sense. Kol tov
– Josh K
3 hours ago
1
Isn’t it counterintuitive to append ‘Z”l’ to a person you’re keeping anonymous?
– Oliver
2 hours ago
judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/96618/…
– Alex
6 hours ago
judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/96618/…
– Alex
6 hours ago
@Alex...a fascinating question you've linked to there, but I don't see how it bears on the case at hand. Am I being obtuse or did you perhaps intend to link elsewhere?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
@Alex...a fascinating question you've linked to there, but I don't see how it bears on the case at hand. Am I being obtuse or did you perhaps intend to link elsewhere?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
@JoshK The link is to Al’s comment on my answer, particularly the last sentence which may have been the catalyst for this question.
– Alex
3 hours ago
@JoshK The link is to Al’s comment on my answer, particularly the last sentence which may have been the catalyst for this question.
– Alex
3 hours ago
Now I get it. You may very well be right, @Alex. In my mind the scope of such "wrong interpretations" was limited to psak but this makes much more sense. Kol tov
– Josh K
3 hours ago
Now I get it. You may very well be right, @Alex. In my mind the scope of such "wrong interpretations" was limited to psak but this makes much more sense. Kol tov
– Josh K
3 hours ago
1
1
Isn’t it counterintuitive to append ‘Z”l’ to a person you’re keeping anonymous?
– Oliver
2 hours ago
Isn’t it counterintuitive to append ‘Z”l’ to a person you’re keeping anonymous?
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
Kiddushin 57a
כדתניא שמעון העמסוני ואמרי לה נחמיה העמסוני היה דורש כל אתין שבתורה כיון שהגיע לאת ה' אלהיך תירא פירש אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי כל אתין שדרשת מה תהא עליהם אמר להם כשם שקבלתי שכר על הדרישה כך קבלתי על הפרישה עד שבא רבי עקיבא ולימד את ה' אלהיך תירא לרבות תלמידי חכמים
As it was taught: Simeon the Imsonite — others state, Nehemiah the
Imsonite, — interpreted every eth in the Torah, but as soon as he came to, thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, he refrained. Said his disciples to him, ‘Master, what is to happen with all the ethin
which you have interpreted?’ ‘Just as I received reward for interpreting [them],’ he replied: ‘so do I
receive reward for retracting.’ Subsequently R. Akiba came and taught: Thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, that is to include scholars.
(Soncino translation)
Here the tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations. Yet not only does he not think he's going to get punished for them, he thinks he gets rewarded for them!
On the other hand, we might also derive from this case that there are some exceptions. Rashi explains why the tanna refrained from expounding the "eth" in the verse about fearing the Lord:
שירא לרבות שום דבר להשוותו למורא המקום
For he was afraid to include anything to equate it with fear of the Omnipresent.
It sounds like the tanna was afraid of giving an incorrect interpretation, but not because it was incorrect per se; rather because it would be incorrect in a way which dishonors God. Thus, there may be a distinction between incorrect interpretations that have negative ramifications, and incorrect interpretations that are merely incorrect.
This might also be supported by another Talmudic passage:
Shabbat 96b
ת"ר מקושש זה צלפחד וכן הוא אומר ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר וימצאו איש וגו' ולהלן הוא אומר אבינו מת במדבר מה להלן צלפחד אף כאן צלפחד דברי ר' עקיבא אמר לו ר' יהודה בן בתירא עקיבא בין כך ובין כך אתה עתיד ליתן את הדין אם כדבריך התורה כיסתו ואתה מגלה אותו ואם לאו אתה מוציא לעז על אותו צדיק
Our Rabbis taught: The gatherer was Zelophehad. And thus it is said, and while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man [gathering sticks, etc.]; whilst elsewhere it is said, our father died in the wilderness; just as there Zelophehad [is meant], so here too Zelophehad [is meant]: this is R. Akiba's view. Said R. Judah b. Bathyra to him, 'Akiba! in either case you will have to give an account [for your statement]: if you are right, the Torah shielded him, while you reveal him; and if not, you cast a stigma upon a righteous man.'
(Soncino translation)
Here it sounds like the objection to R. Akiva's interpretation is not merely that it is incorrect, but that it is incorrect in a way which slanders a righteous individual. This might indicate that if an interpretation is incorrect in an innocuous way then the interpreting rabbi will not face any repercussions for the rogue interpretation.
When it comes to mistakes in actual halacha, it would seem that there might be more to worry about. For instance, the Talmud strongly cautions people against being involved in matters of marriage and divorce:
Kiddushin 13a
דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהן אמר ר' אסי אמר רבי יוחנן וקשין לעולם יותר מדור המבול
Again they sat and related: In reference to Rab Judah's statement
in Rab's name, [that] one who does not know the peculiar nature of divorce and betrothal should
have no business with them, R. Assi said in R. Johanan's name: And they are more harmful to the
world than the generation of the flood,
(Soncino translation)
In a Mishnah in Berachot (28b) we are told how R. Nechunia would pray that he would not make a mistake in his halachic rulings:
ר' נחוניא בן הקנה היה מתפלל בכניסתו לבית המדרש וביציאתו תפלה קצרה אמרו לו מה מקום לתפלה זו אמר להם בכניסתי אני מתפלל שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי וביציאתי אני נותן הודאה על חלקי
R. NEHUNIA B. HA-KANEH USED TO SAY A PRAYER AS HE ENTERED THE BETH HA-MIDRASH AND AS HE LEFT IT — A SHORT PRAYER. THEY SAID TO HIM: WHAT SORT OF PRAYER IS THIS? HE REPLIED: WHEN I ENTER I PRAY THAT NO OFFENCE SHOULD OCCUR THROUGH ME,3 AND WHEN I LEAVE I EXPRESS THANKS FOR MY LOT.
(Soncino translation, capitals in original)
The Talmud there cites a Beraita elaborating about what this prayer actually is:
ת"ר בכניסתו מהו אומר יהי רצון מלפניך ה' אלהי שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי ולא אכשל בדבר הלכה וישמחו בי חברי ולא אומר על טמא טהור ולא על טהור טמא ולא יכשלו חברי בדבר הלכה ואשמח בהם
Our Rabbis taught: On entering what does a man say? 'May it be Thy will, O Lord my God, that no offence may occur through me, and that I may not err in a matter of halachah and that my colleagues may rejoice in me and that I may not call unclean clean or clean unclean, and that my colleagues may not err in a matter of halachah and that I may rejoice in them'.
(Soncino translation)
Elsewhere in the Talmud, judges are warned to imagine the danger they are in by possibly ruling incorrectly:
Sanhedrin 7a
ואמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן לעולם יראה דיין עצמו כאילו חרב מונחת לו בין ירכותיו וגיהנם פתוחה לו מתחתיו שנאמר שנאמר הנה מטתו שלשלמה ששים גבורים סביב לה מגבורי ישראל כולם אחוזי חרב מלומדי מלחמה איש חרבו על יריכו מפחד בלילות מפחדה של גיהנם שדומה ללילה
R. Samuel b. Nahmani further said, reporting R. Jonathan: A judge should always think of himself as if he had a sword hanging over his head and Gehenna gaping under him, for it is written, Behold, it is the litter of Solomon [symbolically the Shechinah], and round about it three score of the mighty men of Israel [symbolising the scholars]; they all handle the sword and are expert in war [in debates] and every man has his sword upon his flank because of the dread in the night. [the dread of Gehenna, which is likened unto night].
(Soncino translation)
The implication here seems to be that if the judge rules incorrectly, he will be subjected to "the sword" and "Gehenna".
WoW! Very creative thinking! +5. I'd like to discuss the points one by one. 1. "tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations" How do you infer it from the text which merely says he refrained b/c he was afraid of fiddling with G-d's name. He seemingly claimed he will be rewarded both for the interpretations and his retreat.
– Al Berko
27 mins ago
add a comment |
Avot 4:13
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי זָהִיר בַּתַּלְמוּד, שֶׁשִּׁגְגַת תַּלְמוּד עוֹלָה זָדוֹן.
Rabbi Judah said: be careful in study, for an error in study counts as deliberate sin.
Bartenura ad loc:
אִם תִּטְעֶה בְּהוֹרָאָה מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁלֹּא דִּקְדַּקְתָּ בְּתַלְמוּדְךָ וְתָבֹא לְהַתִּיר אֶת הָאָסוּר, הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַעֲלֶה עַל יָדְךָ כְּאִלּוּ עָשִׂיתָ מֵזִיד:
If you err in a legal decision from your not being exact in your study, and you come to permit the forbidden; the Holy One, blessed be He, considers it for you as if you had done it intentionally.
I'm not sure if every wrong Halacha fall under this category
– kouty
8 hours ago
How about those following the erring rabbi's rulings?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
1
Teachings like this encourage rabbis to forbid everything without much thinking if there is even a shadow of a doubt. I know many rabbis do that anyway. Why stick your neck out?
– Maurice Mizrahi
3 hours ago
@MauriceMizrahi Indeed, the Gemara in several places says that it means a lot more when a Rabbi is lenient than when he’s stringent (כח דהתירא עדיף), as if he’s stringent it doesn’t necessarily mean he believes in his opinion but rather isn’t sure enough to be lenient (ex. Beitzah 2b with Rashi).
– DonielF
3 hours ago
The Mishnah is speaking toward negligibility when drawing a conclusion in a Torah matter. The question, presumably, is when a rabbi did his “due diligence” before reaching his [halachic] conclusion.
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
No, I do not think Hashem will punish your rabbi simply because he made a few mistakes there and then. Of course it is imperative to proofread and correct any sources you may have misused, but to come and say that person is in hell is absurd. Only G-d knows who is guilty. Anyway Jews don’t believe in hell. For us, hell is more of a period of self reflection for 12 mouths max.
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Kiddushin 57a
כדתניא שמעון העמסוני ואמרי לה נחמיה העמסוני היה דורש כל אתין שבתורה כיון שהגיע לאת ה' אלהיך תירא פירש אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי כל אתין שדרשת מה תהא עליהם אמר להם כשם שקבלתי שכר על הדרישה כך קבלתי על הפרישה עד שבא רבי עקיבא ולימד את ה' אלהיך תירא לרבות תלמידי חכמים
As it was taught: Simeon the Imsonite — others state, Nehemiah the
Imsonite, — interpreted every eth in the Torah, but as soon as he came to, thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, he refrained. Said his disciples to him, ‘Master, what is to happen with all the ethin
which you have interpreted?’ ‘Just as I received reward for interpreting [them],’ he replied: ‘so do I
receive reward for retracting.’ Subsequently R. Akiba came and taught: Thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, that is to include scholars.
(Soncino translation)
Here the tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations. Yet not only does he not think he's going to get punished for them, he thinks he gets rewarded for them!
On the other hand, we might also derive from this case that there are some exceptions. Rashi explains why the tanna refrained from expounding the "eth" in the verse about fearing the Lord:
שירא לרבות שום דבר להשוותו למורא המקום
For he was afraid to include anything to equate it with fear of the Omnipresent.
It sounds like the tanna was afraid of giving an incorrect interpretation, but not because it was incorrect per se; rather because it would be incorrect in a way which dishonors God. Thus, there may be a distinction between incorrect interpretations that have negative ramifications, and incorrect interpretations that are merely incorrect.
This might also be supported by another Talmudic passage:
Shabbat 96b
ת"ר מקושש זה צלפחד וכן הוא אומר ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר וימצאו איש וגו' ולהלן הוא אומר אבינו מת במדבר מה להלן צלפחד אף כאן צלפחד דברי ר' עקיבא אמר לו ר' יהודה בן בתירא עקיבא בין כך ובין כך אתה עתיד ליתן את הדין אם כדבריך התורה כיסתו ואתה מגלה אותו ואם לאו אתה מוציא לעז על אותו צדיק
Our Rabbis taught: The gatherer was Zelophehad. And thus it is said, and while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man [gathering sticks, etc.]; whilst elsewhere it is said, our father died in the wilderness; just as there Zelophehad [is meant], so here too Zelophehad [is meant]: this is R. Akiba's view. Said R. Judah b. Bathyra to him, 'Akiba! in either case you will have to give an account [for your statement]: if you are right, the Torah shielded him, while you reveal him; and if not, you cast a stigma upon a righteous man.'
(Soncino translation)
Here it sounds like the objection to R. Akiva's interpretation is not merely that it is incorrect, but that it is incorrect in a way which slanders a righteous individual. This might indicate that if an interpretation is incorrect in an innocuous way then the interpreting rabbi will not face any repercussions for the rogue interpretation.
When it comes to mistakes in actual halacha, it would seem that there might be more to worry about. For instance, the Talmud strongly cautions people against being involved in matters of marriage and divorce:
Kiddushin 13a
דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהן אמר ר' אסי אמר רבי יוחנן וקשין לעולם יותר מדור המבול
Again they sat and related: In reference to Rab Judah's statement
in Rab's name, [that] one who does not know the peculiar nature of divorce and betrothal should
have no business with them, R. Assi said in R. Johanan's name: And they are more harmful to the
world than the generation of the flood,
(Soncino translation)
In a Mishnah in Berachot (28b) we are told how R. Nechunia would pray that he would not make a mistake in his halachic rulings:
ר' נחוניא בן הקנה היה מתפלל בכניסתו לבית המדרש וביציאתו תפלה קצרה אמרו לו מה מקום לתפלה זו אמר להם בכניסתי אני מתפלל שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי וביציאתי אני נותן הודאה על חלקי
R. NEHUNIA B. HA-KANEH USED TO SAY A PRAYER AS HE ENTERED THE BETH HA-MIDRASH AND AS HE LEFT IT — A SHORT PRAYER. THEY SAID TO HIM: WHAT SORT OF PRAYER IS THIS? HE REPLIED: WHEN I ENTER I PRAY THAT NO OFFENCE SHOULD OCCUR THROUGH ME,3 AND WHEN I LEAVE I EXPRESS THANKS FOR MY LOT.
(Soncino translation, capitals in original)
The Talmud there cites a Beraita elaborating about what this prayer actually is:
ת"ר בכניסתו מהו אומר יהי רצון מלפניך ה' אלהי שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי ולא אכשל בדבר הלכה וישמחו בי חברי ולא אומר על טמא טהור ולא על טהור טמא ולא יכשלו חברי בדבר הלכה ואשמח בהם
Our Rabbis taught: On entering what does a man say? 'May it be Thy will, O Lord my God, that no offence may occur through me, and that I may not err in a matter of halachah and that my colleagues may rejoice in me and that I may not call unclean clean or clean unclean, and that my colleagues may not err in a matter of halachah and that I may rejoice in them'.
(Soncino translation)
Elsewhere in the Talmud, judges are warned to imagine the danger they are in by possibly ruling incorrectly:
Sanhedrin 7a
ואמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן לעולם יראה דיין עצמו כאילו חרב מונחת לו בין ירכותיו וגיהנם פתוחה לו מתחתיו שנאמר שנאמר הנה מטתו שלשלמה ששים גבורים סביב לה מגבורי ישראל כולם אחוזי חרב מלומדי מלחמה איש חרבו על יריכו מפחד בלילות מפחדה של גיהנם שדומה ללילה
R. Samuel b. Nahmani further said, reporting R. Jonathan: A judge should always think of himself as if he had a sword hanging over his head and Gehenna gaping under him, for it is written, Behold, it is the litter of Solomon [symbolically the Shechinah], and round about it three score of the mighty men of Israel [symbolising the scholars]; they all handle the sword and are expert in war [in debates] and every man has his sword upon his flank because of the dread in the night. [the dread of Gehenna, which is likened unto night].
(Soncino translation)
The implication here seems to be that if the judge rules incorrectly, he will be subjected to "the sword" and "Gehenna".
WoW! Very creative thinking! +5. I'd like to discuss the points one by one. 1. "tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations" How do you infer it from the text which merely says he refrained b/c he was afraid of fiddling with G-d's name. He seemingly claimed he will be rewarded both for the interpretations and his retreat.
– Al Berko
27 mins ago
add a comment |
Kiddushin 57a
כדתניא שמעון העמסוני ואמרי לה נחמיה העמסוני היה דורש כל אתין שבתורה כיון שהגיע לאת ה' אלהיך תירא פירש אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי כל אתין שדרשת מה תהא עליהם אמר להם כשם שקבלתי שכר על הדרישה כך קבלתי על הפרישה עד שבא רבי עקיבא ולימד את ה' אלהיך תירא לרבות תלמידי חכמים
As it was taught: Simeon the Imsonite — others state, Nehemiah the
Imsonite, — interpreted every eth in the Torah, but as soon as he came to, thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, he refrained. Said his disciples to him, ‘Master, what is to happen with all the ethin
which you have interpreted?’ ‘Just as I received reward for interpreting [them],’ he replied: ‘so do I
receive reward for retracting.’ Subsequently R. Akiba came and taught: Thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, that is to include scholars.
(Soncino translation)
Here the tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations. Yet not only does he not think he's going to get punished for them, he thinks he gets rewarded for them!
On the other hand, we might also derive from this case that there are some exceptions. Rashi explains why the tanna refrained from expounding the "eth" in the verse about fearing the Lord:
שירא לרבות שום דבר להשוותו למורא המקום
For he was afraid to include anything to equate it with fear of the Omnipresent.
It sounds like the tanna was afraid of giving an incorrect interpretation, but not because it was incorrect per se; rather because it would be incorrect in a way which dishonors God. Thus, there may be a distinction between incorrect interpretations that have negative ramifications, and incorrect interpretations that are merely incorrect.
This might also be supported by another Talmudic passage:
Shabbat 96b
ת"ר מקושש זה צלפחד וכן הוא אומר ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר וימצאו איש וגו' ולהלן הוא אומר אבינו מת במדבר מה להלן צלפחד אף כאן צלפחד דברי ר' עקיבא אמר לו ר' יהודה בן בתירא עקיבא בין כך ובין כך אתה עתיד ליתן את הדין אם כדבריך התורה כיסתו ואתה מגלה אותו ואם לאו אתה מוציא לעז על אותו צדיק
Our Rabbis taught: The gatherer was Zelophehad. And thus it is said, and while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man [gathering sticks, etc.]; whilst elsewhere it is said, our father died in the wilderness; just as there Zelophehad [is meant], so here too Zelophehad [is meant]: this is R. Akiba's view. Said R. Judah b. Bathyra to him, 'Akiba! in either case you will have to give an account [for your statement]: if you are right, the Torah shielded him, while you reveal him; and if not, you cast a stigma upon a righteous man.'
(Soncino translation)
Here it sounds like the objection to R. Akiva's interpretation is not merely that it is incorrect, but that it is incorrect in a way which slanders a righteous individual. This might indicate that if an interpretation is incorrect in an innocuous way then the interpreting rabbi will not face any repercussions for the rogue interpretation.
When it comes to mistakes in actual halacha, it would seem that there might be more to worry about. For instance, the Talmud strongly cautions people against being involved in matters of marriage and divorce:
Kiddushin 13a
דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהן אמר ר' אסי אמר רבי יוחנן וקשין לעולם יותר מדור המבול
Again they sat and related: In reference to Rab Judah's statement
in Rab's name, [that] one who does not know the peculiar nature of divorce and betrothal should
have no business with them, R. Assi said in R. Johanan's name: And they are more harmful to the
world than the generation of the flood,
(Soncino translation)
In a Mishnah in Berachot (28b) we are told how R. Nechunia would pray that he would not make a mistake in his halachic rulings:
ר' נחוניא בן הקנה היה מתפלל בכניסתו לבית המדרש וביציאתו תפלה קצרה אמרו לו מה מקום לתפלה זו אמר להם בכניסתי אני מתפלל שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי וביציאתי אני נותן הודאה על חלקי
R. NEHUNIA B. HA-KANEH USED TO SAY A PRAYER AS HE ENTERED THE BETH HA-MIDRASH AND AS HE LEFT IT — A SHORT PRAYER. THEY SAID TO HIM: WHAT SORT OF PRAYER IS THIS? HE REPLIED: WHEN I ENTER I PRAY THAT NO OFFENCE SHOULD OCCUR THROUGH ME,3 AND WHEN I LEAVE I EXPRESS THANKS FOR MY LOT.
(Soncino translation, capitals in original)
The Talmud there cites a Beraita elaborating about what this prayer actually is:
ת"ר בכניסתו מהו אומר יהי רצון מלפניך ה' אלהי שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי ולא אכשל בדבר הלכה וישמחו בי חברי ולא אומר על טמא טהור ולא על טהור טמא ולא יכשלו חברי בדבר הלכה ואשמח בהם
Our Rabbis taught: On entering what does a man say? 'May it be Thy will, O Lord my God, that no offence may occur through me, and that I may not err in a matter of halachah and that my colleagues may rejoice in me and that I may not call unclean clean or clean unclean, and that my colleagues may not err in a matter of halachah and that I may rejoice in them'.
(Soncino translation)
Elsewhere in the Talmud, judges are warned to imagine the danger they are in by possibly ruling incorrectly:
Sanhedrin 7a
ואמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן לעולם יראה דיין עצמו כאילו חרב מונחת לו בין ירכותיו וגיהנם פתוחה לו מתחתיו שנאמר שנאמר הנה מטתו שלשלמה ששים גבורים סביב לה מגבורי ישראל כולם אחוזי חרב מלומדי מלחמה איש חרבו על יריכו מפחד בלילות מפחדה של גיהנם שדומה ללילה
R. Samuel b. Nahmani further said, reporting R. Jonathan: A judge should always think of himself as if he had a sword hanging over his head and Gehenna gaping under him, for it is written, Behold, it is the litter of Solomon [symbolically the Shechinah], and round about it three score of the mighty men of Israel [symbolising the scholars]; they all handle the sword and are expert in war [in debates] and every man has his sword upon his flank because of the dread in the night. [the dread of Gehenna, which is likened unto night].
(Soncino translation)
The implication here seems to be that if the judge rules incorrectly, he will be subjected to "the sword" and "Gehenna".
WoW! Very creative thinking! +5. I'd like to discuss the points one by one. 1. "tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations" How do you infer it from the text which merely says he refrained b/c he was afraid of fiddling with G-d's name. He seemingly claimed he will be rewarded both for the interpretations and his retreat.
– Al Berko
27 mins ago
add a comment |
Kiddushin 57a
כדתניא שמעון העמסוני ואמרי לה נחמיה העמסוני היה דורש כל אתין שבתורה כיון שהגיע לאת ה' אלהיך תירא פירש אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי כל אתין שדרשת מה תהא עליהם אמר להם כשם שקבלתי שכר על הדרישה כך קבלתי על הפרישה עד שבא רבי עקיבא ולימד את ה' אלהיך תירא לרבות תלמידי חכמים
As it was taught: Simeon the Imsonite — others state, Nehemiah the
Imsonite, — interpreted every eth in the Torah, but as soon as he came to, thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, he refrained. Said his disciples to him, ‘Master, what is to happen with all the ethin
which you have interpreted?’ ‘Just as I received reward for interpreting [them],’ he replied: ‘so do I
receive reward for retracting.’ Subsequently R. Akiba came and taught: Thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, that is to include scholars.
(Soncino translation)
Here the tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations. Yet not only does he not think he's going to get punished for them, he thinks he gets rewarded for them!
On the other hand, we might also derive from this case that there are some exceptions. Rashi explains why the tanna refrained from expounding the "eth" in the verse about fearing the Lord:
שירא לרבות שום דבר להשוותו למורא המקום
For he was afraid to include anything to equate it with fear of the Omnipresent.
It sounds like the tanna was afraid of giving an incorrect interpretation, but not because it was incorrect per se; rather because it would be incorrect in a way which dishonors God. Thus, there may be a distinction between incorrect interpretations that have negative ramifications, and incorrect interpretations that are merely incorrect.
This might also be supported by another Talmudic passage:
Shabbat 96b
ת"ר מקושש זה צלפחד וכן הוא אומר ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר וימצאו איש וגו' ולהלן הוא אומר אבינו מת במדבר מה להלן צלפחד אף כאן צלפחד דברי ר' עקיבא אמר לו ר' יהודה בן בתירא עקיבא בין כך ובין כך אתה עתיד ליתן את הדין אם כדבריך התורה כיסתו ואתה מגלה אותו ואם לאו אתה מוציא לעז על אותו צדיק
Our Rabbis taught: The gatherer was Zelophehad. And thus it is said, and while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man [gathering sticks, etc.]; whilst elsewhere it is said, our father died in the wilderness; just as there Zelophehad [is meant], so here too Zelophehad [is meant]: this is R. Akiba's view. Said R. Judah b. Bathyra to him, 'Akiba! in either case you will have to give an account [for your statement]: if you are right, the Torah shielded him, while you reveal him; and if not, you cast a stigma upon a righteous man.'
(Soncino translation)
Here it sounds like the objection to R. Akiva's interpretation is not merely that it is incorrect, but that it is incorrect in a way which slanders a righteous individual. This might indicate that if an interpretation is incorrect in an innocuous way then the interpreting rabbi will not face any repercussions for the rogue interpretation.
When it comes to mistakes in actual halacha, it would seem that there might be more to worry about. For instance, the Talmud strongly cautions people against being involved in matters of marriage and divorce:
Kiddushin 13a
דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהן אמר ר' אסי אמר רבי יוחנן וקשין לעולם יותר מדור המבול
Again they sat and related: In reference to Rab Judah's statement
in Rab's name, [that] one who does not know the peculiar nature of divorce and betrothal should
have no business with them, R. Assi said in R. Johanan's name: And they are more harmful to the
world than the generation of the flood,
(Soncino translation)
In a Mishnah in Berachot (28b) we are told how R. Nechunia would pray that he would not make a mistake in his halachic rulings:
ר' נחוניא בן הקנה היה מתפלל בכניסתו לבית המדרש וביציאתו תפלה קצרה אמרו לו מה מקום לתפלה זו אמר להם בכניסתי אני מתפלל שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי וביציאתי אני נותן הודאה על חלקי
R. NEHUNIA B. HA-KANEH USED TO SAY A PRAYER AS HE ENTERED THE BETH HA-MIDRASH AND AS HE LEFT IT — A SHORT PRAYER. THEY SAID TO HIM: WHAT SORT OF PRAYER IS THIS? HE REPLIED: WHEN I ENTER I PRAY THAT NO OFFENCE SHOULD OCCUR THROUGH ME,3 AND WHEN I LEAVE I EXPRESS THANKS FOR MY LOT.
(Soncino translation, capitals in original)
The Talmud there cites a Beraita elaborating about what this prayer actually is:
ת"ר בכניסתו מהו אומר יהי רצון מלפניך ה' אלהי שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי ולא אכשל בדבר הלכה וישמחו בי חברי ולא אומר על טמא טהור ולא על טהור טמא ולא יכשלו חברי בדבר הלכה ואשמח בהם
Our Rabbis taught: On entering what does a man say? 'May it be Thy will, O Lord my God, that no offence may occur through me, and that I may not err in a matter of halachah and that my colleagues may rejoice in me and that I may not call unclean clean or clean unclean, and that my colleagues may not err in a matter of halachah and that I may rejoice in them'.
(Soncino translation)
Elsewhere in the Talmud, judges are warned to imagine the danger they are in by possibly ruling incorrectly:
Sanhedrin 7a
ואמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן לעולם יראה דיין עצמו כאילו חרב מונחת לו בין ירכותיו וגיהנם פתוחה לו מתחתיו שנאמר שנאמר הנה מטתו שלשלמה ששים גבורים סביב לה מגבורי ישראל כולם אחוזי חרב מלומדי מלחמה איש חרבו על יריכו מפחד בלילות מפחדה של גיהנם שדומה ללילה
R. Samuel b. Nahmani further said, reporting R. Jonathan: A judge should always think of himself as if he had a sword hanging over his head and Gehenna gaping under him, for it is written, Behold, it is the litter of Solomon [symbolically the Shechinah], and round about it three score of the mighty men of Israel [symbolising the scholars]; they all handle the sword and are expert in war [in debates] and every man has his sword upon his flank because of the dread in the night. [the dread of Gehenna, which is likened unto night].
(Soncino translation)
The implication here seems to be that if the judge rules incorrectly, he will be subjected to "the sword" and "Gehenna".
Kiddushin 57a
כדתניא שמעון העמסוני ואמרי לה נחמיה העמסוני היה דורש כל אתין שבתורה כיון שהגיע לאת ה' אלהיך תירא פירש אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי כל אתין שדרשת מה תהא עליהם אמר להם כשם שקבלתי שכר על הדרישה כך קבלתי על הפרישה עד שבא רבי עקיבא ולימד את ה' אלהיך תירא לרבות תלמידי חכמים
As it was taught: Simeon the Imsonite — others state, Nehemiah the
Imsonite, — interpreted every eth in the Torah, but as soon as he came to, thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, he refrained. Said his disciples to him, ‘Master, what is to happen with all the ethin
which you have interpreted?’ ‘Just as I received reward for interpreting [them],’ he replied: ‘so do I
receive reward for retracting.’ Subsequently R. Akiba came and taught: Thou shalt fear [eth] the
Lord thy God, that is to include scholars.
(Soncino translation)
Here the tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations. Yet not only does he not think he's going to get punished for them, he thinks he gets rewarded for them!
On the other hand, we might also derive from this case that there are some exceptions. Rashi explains why the tanna refrained from expounding the "eth" in the verse about fearing the Lord:
שירא לרבות שום דבר להשוותו למורא המקום
For he was afraid to include anything to equate it with fear of the Omnipresent.
It sounds like the tanna was afraid of giving an incorrect interpretation, but not because it was incorrect per se; rather because it would be incorrect in a way which dishonors God. Thus, there may be a distinction between incorrect interpretations that have negative ramifications, and incorrect interpretations that are merely incorrect.
This might also be supported by another Talmudic passage:
Shabbat 96b
ת"ר מקושש זה צלפחד וכן הוא אומר ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר וימצאו איש וגו' ולהלן הוא אומר אבינו מת במדבר מה להלן צלפחד אף כאן צלפחד דברי ר' עקיבא אמר לו ר' יהודה בן בתירא עקיבא בין כך ובין כך אתה עתיד ליתן את הדין אם כדבריך התורה כיסתו ואתה מגלה אותו ואם לאו אתה מוציא לעז על אותו צדיק
Our Rabbis taught: The gatherer was Zelophehad. And thus it is said, and while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man [gathering sticks, etc.]; whilst elsewhere it is said, our father died in the wilderness; just as there Zelophehad [is meant], so here too Zelophehad [is meant]: this is R. Akiba's view. Said R. Judah b. Bathyra to him, 'Akiba! in either case you will have to give an account [for your statement]: if you are right, the Torah shielded him, while you reveal him; and if not, you cast a stigma upon a righteous man.'
(Soncino translation)
Here it sounds like the objection to R. Akiva's interpretation is not merely that it is incorrect, but that it is incorrect in a way which slanders a righteous individual. This might indicate that if an interpretation is incorrect in an innocuous way then the interpreting rabbi will not face any repercussions for the rogue interpretation.
When it comes to mistakes in actual halacha, it would seem that there might be more to worry about. For instance, the Talmud strongly cautions people against being involved in matters of marriage and divorce:
Kiddushin 13a
דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקדושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהן אמר ר' אסי אמר רבי יוחנן וקשין לעולם יותר מדור המבול
Again they sat and related: In reference to Rab Judah's statement
in Rab's name, [that] one who does not know the peculiar nature of divorce and betrothal should
have no business with them, R. Assi said in R. Johanan's name: And they are more harmful to the
world than the generation of the flood,
(Soncino translation)
In a Mishnah in Berachot (28b) we are told how R. Nechunia would pray that he would not make a mistake in his halachic rulings:
ר' נחוניא בן הקנה היה מתפלל בכניסתו לבית המדרש וביציאתו תפלה קצרה אמרו לו מה מקום לתפלה זו אמר להם בכניסתי אני מתפלל שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי וביציאתי אני נותן הודאה על חלקי
R. NEHUNIA B. HA-KANEH USED TO SAY A PRAYER AS HE ENTERED THE BETH HA-MIDRASH AND AS HE LEFT IT — A SHORT PRAYER. THEY SAID TO HIM: WHAT SORT OF PRAYER IS THIS? HE REPLIED: WHEN I ENTER I PRAY THAT NO OFFENCE SHOULD OCCUR THROUGH ME,3 AND WHEN I LEAVE I EXPRESS THANKS FOR MY LOT.
(Soncino translation, capitals in original)
The Talmud there cites a Beraita elaborating about what this prayer actually is:
ת"ר בכניסתו מהו אומר יהי רצון מלפניך ה' אלהי שלא יארע דבר תקלה על ידי ולא אכשל בדבר הלכה וישמחו בי חברי ולא אומר על טמא טהור ולא על טהור טמא ולא יכשלו חברי בדבר הלכה ואשמח בהם
Our Rabbis taught: On entering what does a man say? 'May it be Thy will, O Lord my God, that no offence may occur through me, and that I may not err in a matter of halachah and that my colleagues may rejoice in me and that I may not call unclean clean or clean unclean, and that my colleagues may not err in a matter of halachah and that I may rejoice in them'.
(Soncino translation)
Elsewhere in the Talmud, judges are warned to imagine the danger they are in by possibly ruling incorrectly:
Sanhedrin 7a
ואמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן לעולם יראה דיין עצמו כאילו חרב מונחת לו בין ירכותיו וגיהנם פתוחה לו מתחתיו שנאמר שנאמר הנה מטתו שלשלמה ששים גבורים סביב לה מגבורי ישראל כולם אחוזי חרב מלומדי מלחמה איש חרבו על יריכו מפחד בלילות מפחדה של גיהנם שדומה ללילה
R. Samuel b. Nahmani further said, reporting R. Jonathan: A judge should always think of himself as if he had a sword hanging over his head and Gehenna gaping under him, for it is written, Behold, it is the litter of Solomon [symbolically the Shechinah], and round about it three score of the mighty men of Israel [symbolising the scholars]; they all handle the sword and are expert in war [in debates] and every man has his sword upon his flank because of the dread in the night. [the dread of Gehenna, which is likened unto night].
(Soncino translation)
The implication here seems to be that if the judge rules incorrectly, he will be subjected to "the sword" and "Gehenna".
edited 3 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
AlexAlex
28.1k2 gold badges70 silver badges150 bronze badges
28.1k2 gold badges70 silver badges150 bronze badges
WoW! Very creative thinking! +5. I'd like to discuss the points one by one. 1. "tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations" How do you infer it from the text which merely says he refrained b/c he was afraid of fiddling with G-d's name. He seemingly claimed he will be rewarded both for the interpretations and his retreat.
– Al Berko
27 mins ago
add a comment |
WoW! Very creative thinking! +5. I'd like to discuss the points one by one. 1. "tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations" How do you infer it from the text which merely says he refrained b/c he was afraid of fiddling with G-d's name. He seemingly claimed he will be rewarded both for the interpretations and his retreat.
– Al Berko
27 mins ago
WoW! Very creative thinking! +5. I'd like to discuss the points one by one. 1. "tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations" How do you infer it from the text which merely says he refrained b/c he was afraid of fiddling with G-d's name. He seemingly claimed he will be rewarded both for the interpretations and his retreat.
– Al Berko
27 mins ago
WoW! Very creative thinking! +5. I'd like to discuss the points one by one. 1. "tanna acknowledges that he had made thousands of incorrect interpretations" How do you infer it from the text which merely says he refrained b/c he was afraid of fiddling with G-d's name. He seemingly claimed he will be rewarded both for the interpretations and his retreat.
– Al Berko
27 mins ago
add a comment |
Avot 4:13
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי זָהִיר בַּתַּלְמוּד, שֶׁשִּׁגְגַת תַּלְמוּד עוֹלָה זָדוֹן.
Rabbi Judah said: be careful in study, for an error in study counts as deliberate sin.
Bartenura ad loc:
אִם תִּטְעֶה בְּהוֹרָאָה מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁלֹּא דִּקְדַּקְתָּ בְּתַלְמוּדְךָ וְתָבֹא לְהַתִּיר אֶת הָאָסוּר, הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַעֲלֶה עַל יָדְךָ כְּאִלּוּ עָשִׂיתָ מֵזִיד:
If you err in a legal decision from your not being exact in your study, and you come to permit the forbidden; the Holy One, blessed be He, considers it for you as if you had done it intentionally.
I'm not sure if every wrong Halacha fall under this category
– kouty
8 hours ago
How about those following the erring rabbi's rulings?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
1
Teachings like this encourage rabbis to forbid everything without much thinking if there is even a shadow of a doubt. I know many rabbis do that anyway. Why stick your neck out?
– Maurice Mizrahi
3 hours ago
@MauriceMizrahi Indeed, the Gemara in several places says that it means a lot more when a Rabbi is lenient than when he’s stringent (כח דהתירא עדיף), as if he’s stringent it doesn’t necessarily mean he believes in his opinion but rather isn’t sure enough to be lenient (ex. Beitzah 2b with Rashi).
– DonielF
3 hours ago
The Mishnah is speaking toward negligibility when drawing a conclusion in a Torah matter. The question, presumably, is when a rabbi did his “due diligence” before reaching his [halachic] conclusion.
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Avot 4:13
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי זָהִיר בַּתַּלְמוּד, שֶׁשִּׁגְגַת תַּלְמוּד עוֹלָה זָדוֹן.
Rabbi Judah said: be careful in study, for an error in study counts as deliberate sin.
Bartenura ad loc:
אִם תִּטְעֶה בְּהוֹרָאָה מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁלֹּא דִּקְדַּקְתָּ בְּתַלְמוּדְךָ וְתָבֹא לְהַתִּיר אֶת הָאָסוּר, הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַעֲלֶה עַל יָדְךָ כְּאִלּוּ עָשִׂיתָ מֵזִיד:
If you err in a legal decision from your not being exact in your study, and you come to permit the forbidden; the Holy One, blessed be He, considers it for you as if you had done it intentionally.
I'm not sure if every wrong Halacha fall under this category
– kouty
8 hours ago
How about those following the erring rabbi's rulings?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
1
Teachings like this encourage rabbis to forbid everything without much thinking if there is even a shadow of a doubt. I know many rabbis do that anyway. Why stick your neck out?
– Maurice Mizrahi
3 hours ago
@MauriceMizrahi Indeed, the Gemara in several places says that it means a lot more when a Rabbi is lenient than when he’s stringent (כח דהתירא עדיף), as if he’s stringent it doesn’t necessarily mean he believes in his opinion but rather isn’t sure enough to be lenient (ex. Beitzah 2b with Rashi).
– DonielF
3 hours ago
The Mishnah is speaking toward negligibility when drawing a conclusion in a Torah matter. The question, presumably, is when a rabbi did his “due diligence” before reaching his [halachic] conclusion.
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Avot 4:13
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי זָהִיר בַּתַּלְמוּד, שֶׁשִּׁגְגַת תַּלְמוּד עוֹלָה זָדוֹן.
Rabbi Judah said: be careful in study, for an error in study counts as deliberate sin.
Bartenura ad loc:
אִם תִּטְעֶה בְּהוֹרָאָה מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁלֹּא דִּקְדַּקְתָּ בְּתַלְמוּדְךָ וְתָבֹא לְהַתִּיר אֶת הָאָסוּר, הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַעֲלֶה עַל יָדְךָ כְּאִלּוּ עָשִׂיתָ מֵזִיד:
If you err in a legal decision from your not being exact in your study, and you come to permit the forbidden; the Holy One, blessed be He, considers it for you as if you had done it intentionally.
Avot 4:13
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי זָהִיר בַּתַּלְמוּד, שֶׁשִּׁגְגַת תַּלְמוּד עוֹלָה זָדוֹן.
Rabbi Judah said: be careful in study, for an error in study counts as deliberate sin.
Bartenura ad loc:
אִם תִּטְעֶה בְּהוֹרָאָה מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁלֹּא דִּקְדַּקְתָּ בְּתַלְמוּדְךָ וְתָבֹא לְהַתִּיר אֶת הָאָסוּר, הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַעֲלֶה עַל יָדְךָ כְּאִלּוּ עָשִׂיתָ מֵזִיד:
If you err in a legal decision from your not being exact in your study, and you come to permit the forbidden; the Holy One, blessed be He, considers it for you as if you had done it intentionally.
answered 9 hours ago
Joel KJoel K
18k2 gold badges30 silver badges104 bronze badges
18k2 gold badges30 silver badges104 bronze badges
I'm not sure if every wrong Halacha fall under this category
– kouty
8 hours ago
How about those following the erring rabbi's rulings?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
1
Teachings like this encourage rabbis to forbid everything without much thinking if there is even a shadow of a doubt. I know many rabbis do that anyway. Why stick your neck out?
– Maurice Mizrahi
3 hours ago
@MauriceMizrahi Indeed, the Gemara in several places says that it means a lot more when a Rabbi is lenient than when he’s stringent (כח דהתירא עדיף), as if he’s stringent it doesn’t necessarily mean he believes in his opinion but rather isn’t sure enough to be lenient (ex. Beitzah 2b with Rashi).
– DonielF
3 hours ago
The Mishnah is speaking toward negligibility when drawing a conclusion in a Torah matter. The question, presumably, is when a rabbi did his “due diligence” before reaching his [halachic] conclusion.
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
I'm not sure if every wrong Halacha fall under this category
– kouty
8 hours ago
How about those following the erring rabbi's rulings?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
1
Teachings like this encourage rabbis to forbid everything without much thinking if there is even a shadow of a doubt. I know many rabbis do that anyway. Why stick your neck out?
– Maurice Mizrahi
3 hours ago
@MauriceMizrahi Indeed, the Gemara in several places says that it means a lot more when a Rabbi is lenient than when he’s stringent (כח דהתירא עדיף), as if he’s stringent it doesn’t necessarily mean he believes in his opinion but rather isn’t sure enough to be lenient (ex. Beitzah 2b with Rashi).
– DonielF
3 hours ago
The Mishnah is speaking toward negligibility when drawing a conclusion in a Torah matter. The question, presumably, is when a rabbi did his “due diligence” before reaching his [halachic] conclusion.
– Oliver
2 hours ago
I'm not sure if every wrong Halacha fall under this category
– kouty
8 hours ago
I'm not sure if every wrong Halacha fall under this category
– kouty
8 hours ago
How about those following the erring rabbi's rulings?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
How about those following the erring rabbi's rulings?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
1
1
Teachings like this encourage rabbis to forbid everything without much thinking if there is even a shadow of a doubt. I know many rabbis do that anyway. Why stick your neck out?
– Maurice Mizrahi
3 hours ago
Teachings like this encourage rabbis to forbid everything without much thinking if there is even a shadow of a doubt. I know many rabbis do that anyway. Why stick your neck out?
– Maurice Mizrahi
3 hours ago
@MauriceMizrahi Indeed, the Gemara in several places says that it means a lot more when a Rabbi is lenient than when he’s stringent (כח דהתירא עדיף), as if he’s stringent it doesn’t necessarily mean he believes in his opinion but rather isn’t sure enough to be lenient (ex. Beitzah 2b with Rashi).
– DonielF
3 hours ago
@MauriceMizrahi Indeed, the Gemara in several places says that it means a lot more when a Rabbi is lenient than when he’s stringent (כח דהתירא עדיף), as if he’s stringent it doesn’t necessarily mean he believes in his opinion but rather isn’t sure enough to be lenient (ex. Beitzah 2b with Rashi).
– DonielF
3 hours ago
The Mishnah is speaking toward negligibility when drawing a conclusion in a Torah matter. The question, presumably, is when a rabbi did his “due diligence” before reaching his [halachic] conclusion.
– Oliver
2 hours ago
The Mishnah is speaking toward negligibility when drawing a conclusion in a Torah matter. The question, presumably, is when a rabbi did his “due diligence” before reaching his [halachic] conclusion.
– Oliver
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
No, I do not think Hashem will punish your rabbi simply because he made a few mistakes there and then. Of course it is imperative to proofread and correct any sources you may have misused, but to come and say that person is in hell is absurd. Only G-d knows who is guilty. Anyway Jews don’t believe in hell. For us, hell is more of a period of self reflection for 12 mouths max.
add a comment |
No, I do not think Hashem will punish your rabbi simply because he made a few mistakes there and then. Of course it is imperative to proofread and correct any sources you may have misused, but to come and say that person is in hell is absurd. Only G-d knows who is guilty. Anyway Jews don’t believe in hell. For us, hell is more of a period of self reflection for 12 mouths max.
add a comment |
No, I do not think Hashem will punish your rabbi simply because he made a few mistakes there and then. Of course it is imperative to proofread and correct any sources you may have misused, but to come and say that person is in hell is absurd. Only G-d knows who is guilty. Anyway Jews don’t believe in hell. For us, hell is more of a period of self reflection for 12 mouths max.
No, I do not think Hashem will punish your rabbi simply because he made a few mistakes there and then. Of course it is imperative to proofread and correct any sources you may have misused, but to come and say that person is in hell is absurd. Only G-d knows who is guilty. Anyway Jews don’t believe in hell. For us, hell is more of a period of self reflection for 12 mouths max.
answered 9 hours ago
Turk HillTurk Hill
3151 silver badge11 bronze badges
3151 silver badge11 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/96618/…
– Alex
6 hours ago
@Alex...a fascinating question you've linked to there, but I don't see how it bears on the case at hand. Am I being obtuse or did you perhaps intend to link elsewhere?
– Josh K
4 hours ago
@JoshK The link is to Al’s comment on my answer, particularly the last sentence which may have been the catalyst for this question.
– Alex
3 hours ago
Now I get it. You may very well be right, @Alex. In my mind the scope of such "wrong interpretations" was limited to psak but this makes much more sense. Kol tov
– Josh K
3 hours ago
1
Isn’t it counterintuitive to append ‘Z”l’ to a person you’re keeping anonymous?
– Oliver
2 hours ago