Rosh - Revision history

Unknown user: /* General Style */

2021-05-04T21:03:08Z

General Style

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:03, 4 May 2021
Line 4:		Line 4:
	# The Rosh primarily focuses on Sevarot accepted leHalacha and ignores those that are not. According to the [[Kenesset HaGedolah]], if he presents two positions without deciding, it's because he's unsure which should be accepted.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 33)</ref> Sometimes, he'll present two interpretations, because he thinks they're both true.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 43)</ref> As such, his position will be vague, so we can logically infer he follows the majority of Poskim. Additionally, his son, R' Yaakov, author of the the [[Tur]], has the credibility to tell us what his father's position was in practice.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 38)</ref>		# The Rosh primarily focuses on Sevarot accepted leHalacha and ignores those that are not. According to the [[Kenesset HaGedolah]], if he presents two positions without deciding, it's because he's unsure which should be accepted.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 33)</ref> Sometimes, he'll present two interpretations, because he thinks they're both true.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 43)</ref> As such, his position will be vague, so we can logically infer he follows the majority of Poskim. Additionally, his son, R' Yaakov, author of the the [[Tur]], has the credibility to tell us what his father's position was in practice.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 38)</ref>
	# The Rosh mainly is drawn after the [[Rif]] except perhaps by explanations of Mishnayot, in which case he often prefers the [[Rash]]'s understanding.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 28, 31). See Matnat Yado fn 62 who adds that there's a discussion regarding when the Rif is a Da'at Yachid if we should assume the Rosh still stands with him or of we should count the Rosh with those who disagree. There's also a general issue of how the Rosh originally wrote his Pesakim, as a commentary on the [[Rif]] with the direct quotes added in later (Tekafo Kohen 46, Korban Netanel (Klalim 2)) or like we have it (Shem HaGedolim HaRosh). Sdei Chemed (Klalei HaPoskim 11:2) points out how the Chatam Sofer did not have the Shem HaGedolim to be aware of this approach. See Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 510, 517) and "Contradictions" below.</ref>		# The Rosh mainly is drawn after the [[Rif]] except perhaps by explanations of Mishnayot, in which case he often prefers the [[Rash]]'s understanding.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 28, 31). See Matnat Yado fn 62 who adds that there's a discussion regarding when the Rif is a Da'at Yachid if we should assume the Rosh still stands with him or of we should count the Rosh with those who disagree. There's also a general issue of how the Rosh originally wrote his Pesakim, as a commentary on the [[Rif]] with the direct quotes added in later (Tekafo Kohen 46, Korban Netanel (Klalim 2)) or like we have it (Shem HaGedolim HaRosh). Sdei Chemed (Klalei HaPoskim 11:2) points out how the Chatam Sofer did not have the Shem HaGedolim to be aware of this approach. See Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 510, 517) and "Contradictions" below.</ref>
	# The [[Rambam]]'s understanding of Im Timtzi Lomar as Halacha is not accepted by the Rosh, who posits that even those who accept it must admit that further levels are only accepted if they are consistent with the positions of the previous ones.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 9, 10). See Beit Shmuel 137:6 and the sources ~~he cites~~ on this matter.</ref> Bach argues that Rosh will agree that when presented with four questions, two of which are Im Timtzi Lomar, that their standing out indicates the Gemara is following them.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 35)</ref>		# The [[Rambam]]'s understanding of Im Timtzi Lomar as Halacha is not accepted by the Rosh, who posits that even those who accept it must admit that further levels are only accepted if they are consistent with the positions of the previous ones.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 9, 10). See Beit Shmuel 137:6 and Pitchei Teshuva (Even HaEzer 137:8) and the sources they cite on this matter.</ref> Bach argues that Rosh will agree that when presented with four questions, two of which are Im Timtzi Lomar, that their standing out indicates the Gemara is following them.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 35)</ref>
	# An additional answer or through will be introduced with merely a "Vav," such as "וקמשמע לן" - and we ''also'' learn.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 39)</ref>		# An additional answer or through will be introduced with merely a "Vav," such as "וקמשמע לן" - and we ''also'' learn.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 39)</ref>
	# If an elucidation of the Gemara is not presented by the Rosh against [[Rashi]], we assume he agrees with [[Rashi]].<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 42)</ref>		# If an elucidation of the Gemara is not presented by the Rosh against [[Rashi]], we assume he agrees with [[Rashi]].<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 42)</ref>

Unknown user: /* General Style */ im timtzi lomar makor

2021-05-04T21:01:05Z

General Style: im timtzi lomar makor

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:01, 4 May 2021
Line 4:		Line 4:
	# The Rosh primarily focuses on Sevarot accepted leHalacha and ignores those that are not. According to the [[Kenesset HaGedolah]], if he presents two positions without deciding, it's because he's unsure which should be accepted.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 33)</ref> Sometimes, he'll present two interpretations, because he thinks they're both true.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 43)</ref> As such, his position will be vague, so we can logically infer he follows the majority of Poskim. Additionally, his son, R' Yaakov, author of the the [[Tur]], has the credibility to tell us what his father's position was in practice.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 38)</ref>		# The Rosh primarily focuses on Sevarot accepted leHalacha and ignores those that are not. According to the [[Kenesset HaGedolah]], if he presents two positions without deciding, it's because he's unsure which should be accepted.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 33)</ref> Sometimes, he'll present two interpretations, because he thinks they're both true.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 43)</ref> As such, his position will be vague, so we can logically infer he follows the majority of Poskim. Additionally, his son, R' Yaakov, author of the the [[Tur]], has the credibility to tell us what his father's position was in practice.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 38)</ref>
	# The Rosh mainly is drawn after the [[Rif]] except perhaps by explanations of Mishnayot, in which case he often prefers the [[Rash]]'s understanding.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 28, 31). See Matnat Yado fn 62 who adds that there's a discussion regarding when the Rif is a Da'at Yachid if we should assume the Rosh still stands with him or of we should count the Rosh with those who disagree. There's also a general issue of how the Rosh originally wrote his Pesakim, as a commentary on the [[Rif]] with the direct quotes added in later (Tekafo Kohen 46, Korban Netanel (Klalim 2)) or like we have it (Shem HaGedolim HaRosh). Sdei Chemed (Klalei HaPoskim 11:2) points out how the Chatam Sofer did not have the Shem HaGedolim to be aware of this approach. See Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 510, 517) and "Contradictions" below.</ref>		# The Rosh mainly is drawn after the [[Rif]] except perhaps by explanations of Mishnayot, in which case he often prefers the [[Rash]]'s understanding.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 28, 31). See Matnat Yado fn 62 who adds that there's a discussion regarding when the Rif is a Da'at Yachid if we should assume the Rosh still stands with him or of we should count the Rosh with those who disagree. There's also a general issue of how the Rosh originally wrote his Pesakim, as a commentary on the [[Rif]] with the direct quotes added in later (Tekafo Kohen 46, Korban Netanel (Klalim 2)) or like we have it (Shem HaGedolim HaRosh). Sdei Chemed (Klalei HaPoskim 11:2) points out how the Chatam Sofer did not have the Shem HaGedolim to be aware of this approach. See Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 510, 517) and "Contradictions" below.</ref>
	# The [[Rambam]]'s understanding of Im Timtzi Lomar as Halacha is not accepted by the Rosh, who posits that even those who accept it must admit that further levels are only accepted if they are consistent with the positions of the previous ones.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 9, 10)</ref> Bach argues that Rosh will agree that when presented with four questions, two of which are Im Timtzi Lomar, that their standing out indicates the Gemara is following them.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 35)</ref>		# The [[Rambam]]'s understanding of Im Timtzi Lomar as Halacha is not accepted by the Rosh, who posits that even those who accept it must admit that further levels are only accepted if they are consistent with the positions of the previous ones.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 9, 10). See Beit Shmuel 137:6 and the sources he cites on this matter.</ref> Bach argues that Rosh will agree that when presented with four questions, two of which are Im Timtzi Lomar, that their standing out indicates the Gemara is following them.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 35)</ref>
	# An additional answer or through will be introduced with merely a "Vav," such as "וקמשמע לן" - and we ''also'' learn.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 39)</ref>		# An additional answer or through will be introduced with merely a "Vav," such as "וקמשמע לן" - and we ''also'' learn.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 39)</ref>
	# If an elucidation of the Gemara is not presented by the Rosh against [[Rashi]], we assume he agrees with [[Rashi]].<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 42)</ref>		# If an elucidation of the Gemara is not presented by the Rosh against [[Rashi]], we assume he agrees with [[Rashi]].<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 42)</ref>
	# The breakup of Shu"t HaRosh into Klalim was done by later individuals, not the Rosh.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 44)</ref>		# The breakup of Shu"t HaRosh into Klalim was done by later individuals, not the Rosh.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 44)</ref>

	== Contradictions ==		== Contradictions ==
	# Just as Ein Seder LaMishnah in the days of Tannaim, meaning they didn't compile Shas in the order it now exists in, so, too, Rishonim didn't necessarily learn and write on Shas in order. It's therefore possible for an initial position to be written in a commentary to a later Masechet and the retracted corrected one to be presented in an earlier Masechet. This knowledge allows us to resolve difficulties in the Rosh and other Rishonim.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 34)</ref>		# Just as Ein Seder LaMishnah in the days of Tannaim, meaning they didn't compile Shas in the order it now exists in, so, too, Rishonim didn't necessarily learn and write on Shas in order. It's therefore possible for an initial position to be written in a commentary to a later Masechet and the retracted corrected one to be presented in an earlier Masechet. This knowledge allows us to resolve difficulties in the Rosh and other Rishonim.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 34)</ref>

Unknown user: Text replacement - "Category:Klalim" to "Category:Klalei Haposkim"

2020-08-11T14:35:45Z

Text replacement - "Category:Klalim" to "Category:Klalei Haposkim"

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:35, 11 August 2020
Line 24:		Line 24:
	=Sources=		=Sources=
	{{Reflist\|30em}}		{{Reflist\|30em}}
	[[Category:~~Klalim~~]]		[[Category:Klalei Haposkim]]

MordechaiD: /* Misc. */ kitzur teshuvot

2019-01-16T02:29:04Z

Misc.: kitzur teshuvot

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:29, 16 January 2019
Line 18:		Line 18:

	== Misc. ==		== Misc. ==
	# The Rosh's son, R' Yaakov, author of the [[Tur]] summarized his father's Pesakim in the "Kitzur Piskei HaRosh."<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Gedolim, Yud 208; Sefarim, Kuf 87)</ref>		# The Rosh's son, R' Yaakov, author of the [[Tur]] summarized his father's Pesakim in the "Kitzur Piskei HaRosh"<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Gedolim, Yud 208; Sefarim, Kuf 87)</ref> and his father's Teshuvot in "Kitzur Teshuvot HaRosh."<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Sefarim, Kuf 97) -R' Moshe de Broshlaish also condensed the Teshuvot.</ref>
	# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>		# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>
	# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>		# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>

MordechaiD: /* Misc. */

2019-01-15T04:32:48Z

Misc.

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:32, 15 January 2019
Line 18:		Line 18:

	== Misc. ==		== Misc. ==
	# The Rosh's son, R' Yaakov, author of the [[Tur]] summarized his father's Pesakim in the "Kitzur Piskei HaRosh."<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Sefarim, Kuf 87)</ref>		# The Rosh's son, R' Yaakov, author of the [[Tur]] summarized his father's Pesakim in the "Kitzur Piskei HaRosh."<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Gedolim, Yud 208; Sefarim, Kuf 87)</ref>
	# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>		# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>
	# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>		# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>

MordechaiD: /* Misc. */ kitzur

2019-01-15T04:31:52Z

Misc.: kitzur

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:31, 15 January 2019
Line 18:		Line 18:

	== Misc. ==		== Misc. ==
	# The Rosh's son, R' Yaakov, author of the [[Tur]] summarized his father's Pesakim in the "Kitzur Piskei HaRosh."		# The Rosh's son, R' Yaakov, author of the [[Tur]] summarized his father's Pesakim in the "Kitzur Piskei HaRosh."<ref>Shem HaGedolim (Sefarim, Kuf 87)</ref>
	# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>		# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>
	# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>		# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>

MordechaiD: /* Misc. */

2018-12-02T00:59:33Z

Misc.

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:59, 2 December 2018
Line 18:		Line 18:

	== Misc. ==		== Misc. ==
			# The Rosh's son, R' Yaakov, author of the [[Tur]] summarized his father's Pesakim in the "Kitzur Piskei HaRosh."
	# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>		# Uncharacteristically, the Rosh on Bava Kamma does not quote all the Gemaras and Piskei Dinim, but, rather, quotes the Gemara concisely when needed to discuss a novel idea.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 41)</ref>
	# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>		# Sometimes, the [[Hagahot Ashri]] on the Rosh is commenting on the Gemara itself, not the Rosh, and may even be disagreeing with him.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 45)</ref>

MordechaiD: /* Contradictions */

2018-11-28T03:34:46Z

Contradictions

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:34, 28 November 2018
Line 12:		Line 12:
	# Given two contradictory statements in the Piskei HaRosh, some Poskim recommend following the one that fits with the [[Rif]], but according to the [[Shach]], if one is just an instance of parroting the [[Rif]] and the other is the Rosh speaking for himself, the latter should be followed.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 15 and commentaries at length and above discussion from Tekafot Kohen. Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 410, Klalei HaRosh 29)</ref>		# Given two contradictory statements in the Piskei HaRosh, some Poskim recommend following the one that fits with the [[Rif]], but according to the [[Shach]], if one is just an instance of parroting the [[Rif]] and the other is the Rosh speaking for himself, the latter should be followed.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 15 and commentaries at length and above discussion from Tekafot Kohen. Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 410, Klalei HaRosh 29)</ref>
	# In general, if the Rosh quotes the [[Rif]] last, it means he accepts the [[Rif]]'s position.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 423)</ref>		# In general, if the Rosh quotes the [[Rif]] last, it means he accepts the [[Rif]]'s position.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 423)</ref>
	# To resolve contradictions between the Piskei HaRosh and Shu"t HaRosh, the [[Tur]]<ref>Tur Choshen Mishpat 72</ref> and his brother Rabbeinu Yehudah ben HaRosh<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 341 and Choshen Mishpat 110. In the former case, the Rosh (as related by the Tur Yoreh Deah ibid and in Shu"t HaRosh 27:1) had not yet decided against his Rebbe, the Maharam to not recite Havdala after spending Motzaei Shabbat in Aninut, even though in his Pesakim he did eventually disagree.</ref> say and the Bach<ref>Bach Yoreh Deah 334:10</ref> postulates that the Piskei HaRosh were written later, so they should be followed over the Teshuvot. The [[Beit Yosef]]<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 201 s.v. Aval Rabbeinu</ref> disagrees.<ref>See Beit Yosef Orach Chaim 12, Shu"t Beit Yosef Even HaEzer Siman 2, and Maggid Meisharim (Parashat Vayakhel, Rosh Chodesh Nissan 296) where he actually writes to follow the Pesakim and not the Teshuvot, unless it's clear that the individual Teshuvah was written later. See also Shu"T Maharanach Siman 46 and Shu"t Meishiv Davar vol. 1 Siman 24. Yalkut Mefarshim on Yad Malachi ad loc</ref> The Maharil<ref>Shu"t Maharil Siman 77</ref> argues the Teshuvot should be followed, because they were formulated in the context of Horaah.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 18). See sources cited in Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 46) and Matnat Yado ad loc at length.</ref> The Kenesset HaGedolah writes how even according to the former view, if the conflicting Teshuva is based on additional, seemingly seen afterwards, sources, then we would follow the Teshuvah.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 37)</ref> Rav Yosef Yedid HaLevi adds that these rules are only applicable when it's an explicit contradiction, if not we rather reconcile the two.<ref>Vayechi Yosef Gittin page 67 col. 3, Matnat Yado fn. 93, see Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 40) who writes similarly in the name of the Bach.</ref>		# To resolve contradictions between the Piskei HaRosh and Shu"t HaRosh, the [[Tur]]<ref>Tur Choshen Mishpat 72</ref> and his brother Rabbeinu Yehudah ben HaRosh<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 341 and Choshen Mishpat 110. In the former case, the Rosh (as related by the Tur Yoreh Deah ibid and in Shu"t HaRosh 27:1) had not yet decided against his Rebbe, the Maharam to not recite Havdala after spending Motzaei Shabbat in Aninut, even though in his Pesakim he did eventually disagree.</ref> say and the Bach<ref>Bach Yoreh Deah 334:10</ref> postulates that the Piskei HaRosh were written later, so they should be followed over the Teshuvot. The [[Beit Yosef]]<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 201 s.v. Aval Rabbeinu. See Derishah Yoreh Deah 334:9 who disputes this position</ref> disagrees.<ref>See Beit Yosef Orach Chaim 12, Shu"t Beit Yosef Even HaEzer Siman 2, and Maggid Meisharim (Parashat Vayakhel, Rosh Chodesh Nissan 296) where he actually writes to follow the Pesakim and not the Teshuvot, unless it's clear that the individual Teshuvah was written later. See also Shu"T Maharanach Siman 46 and Shu"t Meishiv Davar vol. 1 Siman 24. Yalkut Mefarshim on Yad Malachi ad loc</ref> The Maharil<ref>Shu"t Maharil Siman 77</ref> argues the Teshuvot should be followed, because they were formulated in the context of Horaah.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 18). See sources cited in Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 46) and Matnat Yado ad loc at length.</ref> The Kenesset HaGedolah writes how even according to the former view, if the conflicting Teshuva is based on additional, seemingly seen afterwards, sources, then we would follow the Teshuvah.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 37)</ref> Rav Yosef Yedid HaLevi adds that these rules are only applicable when it's an explicit contradiction, if not we rather reconcile the two.<ref>Vayechi Yosef Gittin page 67 col. 3, Matnat Yado fn. 93, see Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 40) who writes similarly in the name of the Bach.</ref>

	==Acceptance==		==Acceptance==

MordechaiD: /* Contradictions */

2018-11-28T03:31:30Z

Contradictions

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:31, 28 November 2018
Line 12:		Line 12:
	# Given two contradictory statements in the Piskei HaRosh, some Poskim recommend following the one that fits with the [[Rif]], but according to the [[Shach]], if one is just an instance of parroting the [[Rif]] and the other is the Rosh speaking for himself, the latter should be followed.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 15 and commentaries at length and above discussion from Tekafot Kohen. Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 410, Klalei HaRosh 29)</ref>		# Given two contradictory statements in the Piskei HaRosh, some Poskim recommend following the one that fits with the [[Rif]], but according to the [[Shach]], if one is just an instance of parroting the [[Rif]] and the other is the Rosh speaking for himself, the latter should be followed.<ref>See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De'ah 15 and commentaries at length and above discussion from Tekafot Kohen. Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 410, Klalei HaRosh 29)</ref>
	# In general, if the Rosh quotes the [[Rif]] last, it means he accepts the [[Rif]]'s position.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 423)</ref>		# In general, if the Rosh quotes the [[Rif]] last, it means he accepts the [[Rif]]'s position.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaTalmud 423)</ref>
	# To resolve contradictions between the Piskei HaRosh and Shu"t HaRosh, the [[Tur]]<ref>Tur Choshen Mishpat 72</ref> and his brother Rabbeinu Yehudah ben HaRosh<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 341 and Choshen Mishpat 110</ref> say and the Bach<ref>Bach Yoreh Deah 334:10</ref> postulates that the Piskei HaRosh were written later, so they should be followed over the Teshuvot. The [[Beit Yosef]]<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 201 s.v. Aval Rabbeinu ~~and Yoreh Deah 341~~</ref> disagrees.<ref>See Beit Yosef Orach Chaim 12, Shu"t Beit Yosef Even HaEzer Siman 2, and Maggid Meisharim (Parashat Vayakhel, Rosh Chodesh Nissan 296) where he actually writes to follow the Pesakim and not the Teshuvot, unless it's clear that the individual Teshuvah was written later. See also Shu"T Maharanach Siman 46 and Shu"t Meishiv Davar vol. 1 Siman 24. Yalkut Mefarshim on Yad Malachi ad loc</ref> The Maharil<ref>Shu"t Maharil Siman 77</ref> argues the Teshuvot should be followed, because they were formulated in the context of Horaah.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 18). See sources cited in Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 46) and Matnat Yado ad loc at length.</ref> The Kenesset HaGedolah writes how even according to the former view, if the conflicting Teshuva is based on additional, seemingly seen afterwards, sources, then we would follow the Teshuvah.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 37)</ref> Rav Yosef Yedid HaLevi adds that these rules are only applicable when it's an explicit contradiction, if not we rather reconcile the two.<ref>Vayechi Yosef Gittin page 67 col. 3, Matnat Yado fn. 93, see Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 40) who writes similarly in the name of the Bach.</ref>		# To resolve contradictions between the Piskei HaRosh and Shu"t HaRosh, the [[Tur]]<ref>Tur Choshen Mishpat 72</ref> and his brother Rabbeinu Yehudah ben HaRosh<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 341 and Choshen Mishpat 110. In the former case, the Rosh (as related by the Tur Yoreh Deah ibid and in Shu"t HaRosh 27:1) had not yet decided against his Rebbe, the Maharam to not recite Havdala after spending Motzaei Shabbat in Aninut, even though in his Pesakim he did eventually disagree.</ref> say and the Bach<ref>Bach Yoreh Deah 334:10</ref> postulates that the Piskei HaRosh were written later, so they should be followed over the Teshuvot. The [[Beit Yosef]]<ref>Beit Yosef Yoreh Deah 201 s.v. Aval Rabbeinu</ref> disagrees.<ref>See Beit Yosef Orach Chaim 12, Shu"t Beit Yosef Even HaEzer Siman 2, and Maggid Meisharim (Parashat Vayakhel, Rosh Chodesh Nissan 296) where he actually writes to follow the Pesakim and not the Teshuvot, unless it's clear that the individual Teshuvah was written later. See also Shu"T Maharanach Siman 46 and Shu"t Meishiv Davar vol. 1 Siman 24. Yalkut Mefarshim on Yad Malachi ad loc</ref> The Maharil<ref>Shu"t Maharil Siman 77</ref> argues the Teshuvot should be followed, because they were formulated in the context of Horaah.<ref>Korban Netanel (Klalim 18). See sources cited in Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 46) and Matnat Yado ad loc at length.</ref> The Kenesset HaGedolah writes how even according to the former view, if the conflicting Teshuva is based on additional, seemingly seen afterwards, sources, then we would follow the Teshuvah.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 37)</ref> Rav Yosef Yedid HaLevi adds that these rules are only applicable when it's an explicit contradiction, if not we rather reconcile the two.<ref>Vayechi Yosef Gittin page 67 col. 3, Matnat Yado fn. 93, see Yad Malachi (Klalei Rosh 40) who writes similarly in the name of the Bach.</ref>

	==Acceptance==		==Acceptance==

MordechaiD: /* Acceptance */

2018-06-27T11:56:24Z

Acceptance

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:56, 27 June 2018
Line 15:		Line 15:

	==Acceptance==		==Acceptance==
	# Many testify to the grand acceptance of the Rosh throughout Spain, which the Kenesset HaGedolah argues is true even over the [[Rambam]] and [[Riaz]]. Meanwhile, the Radbaz recommends to at least follow the Rosh whenever the [[Rambam]] is unclear. He adds that the Halacha follows the [[~~Rosh~~]] ~~against the Rashba~~, as the former came later.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 36)</ref>		# Many testify to the grand acceptance of the Rosh throughout Spain, which the Kenesset HaGedolah argues is true even over the [[Rambam]] and [[Riaz]]. Meanwhile, the Radbaz recommends to at least follow the Rosh whenever the [[Rambam]] is unclear. He adds that the Halacha follows the Rosh against the [[Rashba]], as the former came later.<ref>Yad Malachi (Klalei HaRosh 36), Shem HaGedolim (Gedolim, Aleph 236)</ref>

	== Misc. ==		== Misc. ==