[int]

Ok, so let's assume halacha changes, whatever this means/implies.

Are there any parameters though? Are all halachos subject to change? We've already seen examples of issurim d'oraysa (photographs) that changed. So then perhaps even halachos such as "You can't flip a light switch on Shabbos" or even "You can't light a fire on Shabbos" or "You can't eat pork" can also change? If not, then where and how do we draw the boundary?

[Pure Myrrh]

int, on Feb 14 2006, 01:55 PM, said:

Ok, so let's assume halacha changes, whatever this means/implies.

Are there any parameters though? Are all halachos subject to change? We've already seen examples of issurim d'oraysa (photographs) that changed. So then perhaps even halachos such as "You can't flip a light switch on Shabbos" or even "You can't light a fire on Shabbos" or "You can't eat pork" can also change? If not, then where and how do we draw the boundary?

I'm not melech and I do not speak for him, but allow me to give an analogy.

The Torah is like a GPS navigation system in a car. We must always listen to the GPS in order to best arrive at our destination. However, the directions between any given two points may change due to road construction/destruction, traffic conditions, weather, etc. The GPS has not changed at all even though the directions are different. So too the Torah does not change even though the actions that we take to observe it properly may change due to "road conditions".

[Elana]

interesting analogy

[int]

Mordechai, on Feb 14 2006, 02:01 PM, said:

I'm not melech and I do not speak for him, but allow me to give an analogy.

The Torah is like a GPS navigation system in a car. We must always listen to the GPS in order to best arrive at our destination. However, the directions between any given two points may change due to road construction/destruction, traffic conditions, weather, etc. The GPS has not changed at all even though the directions are different. So too the Torah does not change even though the actions that we take to observe it properly may change due to "road conditions".

That's a nice analogy, but it doesn't answer my question. Are basic halachos of Shabbos, kashrus, arayos, etc. also subject to change?

[artscroll]

int, on Feb 14 2006, 01:55 PM, said:

Ok, so let's assume halacha changes, whatever this means/implies.

Are there any parameters though? Are all halachos subject to change? We've already seen examples of issurim d'oraysa (photographs) that changed. So then perhaps even halachos such as "You can't flip a light switch on Shabbos" or even "You can't light a fire on Shabbos" or "You can't eat pork" can also change? If not, then where and how do we draw the boundary?

I'm not Melech, but the common denominator with nearly all the evolution in halakha is that it was either unconscious or seemed so.

The example about photographs is questionable, because it is questionable if it violates the de-orayta even in theory. We know for certain that by tannaitic times that prohibition was not understood according to the simple reading. I even have a photo of the lintel of the Beit Midrash of a tanna, R. Eleazar Ha-kappar, which shows an image of a bird.

[Pure Myrrh]

int, on Feb 14 2006, 02:04 PM, said:

That's a nice analogy, but it doesn't answer my question. Are basic halachos of Shabbos, kashrus, arayos, etc. also subject to change?

What does "halacha" mean? Halacha consists of both rules and applications. Rules tend to be static whereas applications can easily change based on changes in the world we live in.

[DQ]

Mordechai, on Feb 14 2006, 02:01 PM, said:

I'm not melech and I do not speak for him, but allow me to give an analogy.

The Torah is like a GPS navigation system in a car. We must always listen to the GPS in order to best arrive at our destination. However, the directions between any given two points may change due to road construction/destruction, traffic conditions, weather, etc. The GPS has not changed at all even though the directions are different. So too the Torah does not change even though the actions that we take to observe it properly may change due to "road conditions".

But you got to have a map (chazal, precedent) and know what you're doing, otherwise you might fall off a cliff.

[Pure Myrrh]

DeepQuest, on Feb 14 2006, 02:09 PM, said:

But you got to have a map (chazal, precedent) and know what you're doing, otherwise you might fall off a cliff.

Actually, the whole point of GPS is that you do not need a map. The GPS is your map.

[Melech]

artscroll, on Feb 14 2006, 02:05 PM, said:

I'm not Melech, but the common denominator with nearly all the evolution in halakha is that it was either unconscious or seemed so.

The example about photographs is questionable, because it is questionable if it violates the de-orayta even in theory. We know for certain that by tannaitic times that prohibition was not understood according to the simple reading. I even have a photo of the lintel of the Beit Midrash of a tanna, R. Eleazar Ha-kappar, which shows an image of a bird.

A bird, not a human. I was very specific about humans and celestial images specifically.

[int]

Mordechai, on Feb 14 2006, 02:09 PM, said:

What does "halacha" mean? Halacha consists of both rules and applications. Rules tend to be static whereas applications can easily change based on changes in the world we live in.

Well, let's stick with my example and see how this plays out:

Would you call the statement "One can't light a fire on Shabbos" to be a rule or an application?

Suppose it's an application of a rule (where the rule might be 'certain types of work done in the mishkan are forbidden on Shabbos'). Since it's an application, according to you it can 'easily change based on changes in the world we live in'. Do you agree?

[Melech]

int, on Feb 14 2006, 01:55 PM, said:

Ok, so let's assume halacha changes, whatever this means/implies.

Are there any parameters though? Are all halachos subject to change? We've already seen examples of issurim d'oraysa (photographs) that changed. So then perhaps even halachos such as "You can't flip a light switch on Shabbos" or even "You can't light a fire on Shabbos" or "You can't eat pork" can also change? If not, then where and how do we draw the boundary?

There is no halachah subject to change whether d'orayta or de-rabbanan. I'm claiming that it happens regardless for a variety of reasons. Minhag oker halachah. Chazal said it, not me.

[artscroll]

melech, on Feb 14 2006, 02:14 PM, said:

A bird, not a human. I was very specific about humans and celestial images specifically.

I didn't misquote you. I was talking about the plain sense of Ex. 20:3.

Although this isn't the Bei Midrasha shel Ribbi Eleazar Ha-kappar, the Talmudic-era synagogues depict faces, constellations, angels and possibly even gods. Not a halakhic raya, but something to note in this context. If we can define the 2nd devar however we like then we can also have chumash coloring books for parshat vayeishev with a full moon and stars.

[Melech]

artscroll, on Feb 14 2006, 02:19 PM, said:

I didn't misquote you. I was talking about the plain sense of Ex. 20:3.

Although this isn't the Bei Midrasha shel Ribbi Eleazar Ha-kappar, the Talmudic-era synagogues depict faces, constellations, angels and possibly even gods. Not a halakhic raya, but something to note in this context. If we can define the 2nd devar however we like then we can also have chumash coloring books for parshat vayeishev with a full moon and stars.

And the cover page of the Levush has pictures of a naked woman. Big deal.

[Pure Myrrh]

int, on Feb 14 2006, 02:16 PM, said:

Well, let's stick with my example and see how this plays out:

Would you call the statement "One can't light a fire on Shabbos" to be a rule or an application?

Suppose it's an application of a rule (where the rule might be 'certain types of work done in the mishkan are forbidden on Shabbos'). Since it's an application, according to you it can 'easily change based on changes in the world we live in'. Do you agree?

Well your example is both a rule and an application. However, "One cannot drive a car on Shabbos" is an application that could, in theory, change, if the driving of a car did not involve any melacha.

[DQ]

melech, on Feb 14 2006, 02:19 PM, said:

There is no halachah subject to change whether d'orayta or de-rabbanan. I'm claiming that it happens regardless for a variety of reasons. Minhag oker halachah. Chazal said it, not me.

Examples please

[artscroll]

melech, on Feb 14 2006, 02:21 PM, said:

And the cover page of the Levush has pictures of a naked woman. Big deal.

No big deal. I'm just saying "he common denominator with nearly all the evolution in halakha is that it was either unconscious or seemed so" and that the "example about photographs is questionable, because it is questionable if it violates the de-orayta even in theory." If you didn't like my picture of R. Eleazar's lintel, I mentioned synagogue mosaics and coloring books.

DeepQuest, on Feb 14 2006, 02:22 PM, said:

Examples please

Drinking stam yenam.

[DQ]

melech, on Feb 14 2006, 02:21 PM, said:

And the cover page of the Levush has pictures of a naked woman. Big deal.

Many seforim where printed by goyim.

The levush would never have allowed such a picture to be the cover art for his sefer.

[int]

melech, on Feb 14 2006, 02:19 PM, said:

There is no halachah subject to change whether d'orayta or de-rabbanan. I'm claiming that it happens regardless for a variety of reasons. Minhag oker halachah. Chazal said it, not me.

Two points:

1. If I rephrased my question from "subject to change" to "changes", how would you answer? Can something as basic as core hilchos Shabbos also just happen to change?

2. There is an implicit assumption that you're not stating - when the halacha just 'happens' to change, even though it wasn't subject to, it is still nonetheless accepted as binding halacha. E.g. we don't see gedolim and poskim in our days all of a sudden start screaming "Oh no, we have an issur d'oraysa not to make photographs, but yet we're taking pictures all the time! We are all sinners and need to repent!". No, rather the change itself is accepted as halacha. This implicit acceptance and approval means that it was subject to change in the first place (by definition of 'subject to'...i.e. that it's OK if it changes).

[DQ]

artscroll, on Feb 14 2006, 02:23 PM, said:

Drinking stam yenam.

Explain

[artscroll]

DeepQuest, on Feb 14 2006, 02:26 PM, said:

Many seforim where printed by goyim.

The levush would never have allowed such a picture to be the cover art of his sefer.

Title page, not cover:

http://seforim.blogs...es-updated.html

Why didn't he tear each page out before selling them? After all, he had them printed.