谁将承担自己反驳Shulḥan ' Arukh?哀悼自杀:哈拉希当局主导哈拉希变迁过程的个案研究

IF 0.7 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY
Eliezer Sariel, Aviram Sariel
{"title":"谁将承担自己反驳Shulḥan ' Arukh?哀悼自杀:哈拉希当局主导哈拉希变迁过程的个案研究","authors":"Eliezer Sariel, Aviram Sariel","doi":"10.1353/ajs.2023.a911528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: This article presents a case study of a halakhic innovation led by Orthodox authorities: in a watershed ruling on mourning a suicide, the Ḥatam Sofer allowed families of suicides to mourn. The exemplar par excellence of Orthodoxy and coiner of its supposed motto “the novel is prohibited by the Torah,” Sofer headed a ruling both novel and permissive. Further, the bulk of his responsum is explicitly dedicated to confronting the Shulḥan ‘arukh . In our opinion, Sofer contended with a substantial challenge to the halakhic system presented by Saul Berlin in his controversial book, Besamim Rosh . We trace commonalities between Berlin and Sofer and note their differences. Consequently, we demonstrate how historical analysis must include rabbinic polemics and study their efforts to preserve the accountability and rationality of the Halakhah.","PeriodicalId":54106,"journal":{"name":"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies","volume":"21 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who Will Take upon Himself to Contradict the Shulḥan ‘Arukh? Mourning Suicide as a Case Study of Halakhic Authorities Leading the Process of Halakhic Change\",\"authors\":\"Eliezer Sariel, Aviram Sariel\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/ajs.2023.a911528\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: This article presents a case study of a halakhic innovation led by Orthodox authorities: in a watershed ruling on mourning a suicide, the Ḥatam Sofer allowed families of suicides to mourn. The exemplar par excellence of Orthodoxy and coiner of its supposed motto “the novel is prohibited by the Torah,” Sofer headed a ruling both novel and permissive. Further, the bulk of his responsum is explicitly dedicated to confronting the Shulḥan ‘arukh . In our opinion, Sofer contended with a substantial challenge to the halakhic system presented by Saul Berlin in his controversial book, Besamim Rosh . We trace commonalities between Berlin and Sofer and note their differences. Consequently, we demonstrate how historical analysis must include rabbinic polemics and study their efforts to preserve the accountability and rationality of the Halakhah.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54106,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies\",\"volume\":\"21 7\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/ajs.2023.a911528\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ajs.2023.a911528","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本文介绍了一个由东正教当局领导的伊斯兰教创新的案例研究:在一个关于哀悼自杀的分水岭裁决中,Ḥatam Sofer允许自杀者的家庭哀悼。Sofer是正统派的典范,也是其所谓的座右铭“Torah禁止小说”的创造者,他领导了一项既新颖又宽容的裁决。此外,他的大部分回复都明确地致力于对抗Shulḥan ' arukh。在我们看来,Sofer在他的有争议的书《Besamim Rosh》中对halakhic体系提出了实质性的挑战。我们追溯了柏林和索弗之间的共同点,并指出了它们的不同之处。因此,我们展示了历史分析如何必须包括拉比的争论,并研究他们为维护哈拉卡的责任和合理性所做的努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Who Will Take upon Himself to Contradict the Shulḥan ‘Arukh? Mourning Suicide as a Case Study of Halakhic Authorities Leading the Process of Halakhic Change
Abstract: This article presents a case study of a halakhic innovation led by Orthodox authorities: in a watershed ruling on mourning a suicide, the Ḥatam Sofer allowed families of suicides to mourn. The exemplar par excellence of Orthodoxy and coiner of its supposed motto “the novel is prohibited by the Torah,” Sofer headed a ruling both novel and permissive. Further, the bulk of his responsum is explicitly dedicated to confronting the Shulḥan ‘arukh . In our opinion, Sofer contended with a substantial challenge to the halakhic system presented by Saul Berlin in his controversial book, Besamim Rosh . We trace commonalities between Berlin and Sofer and note their differences. Consequently, we demonstrate how historical analysis must include rabbinic polemics and study their efforts to preserve the accountability and rationality of the Halakhah.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信