Just as a rabbi may not permit that which is forbidden, so must he be careful not esatto forbid that which is permitted. Therefore, if verso rabbi must forbid something merely because of a question of law, because of per custom, or because of special circumstances, he must state his reason so as not sicuro establish an erroneous precedent.
Nevertheless, it is forbidden for per city onesto split into two congregations primarily because of verso dispute over law or practice
Verso rabbi should be careful not preciso render an unusual or anomalous decision, unless he carefully explains the reasons for it. Therefore, any uncommon decision that depends on subtle or esoteric reasoning should not be publicized, lest it lead onesto erroneous conclusions. It is for this reason that there are cases which are permitted only per the case of per scholar, and which may not be taught puro the ignorant.
When verso rabbi renders a decision in verso case mediante which there are no clear precedents, he must strive esatto bring as many proofs as possible…
When a rabbi renders a decision per verso question of law, the Torah recognizes it as binding. Therefore, when a rabbi decides on verso case and forbids something, it becomes intrinsically forbidden.
Since the initial decision renders the subject of verso case intrinsically forbidden, it cannot be permitted even by verso greater sage or by a majority rule.
An erroneous decision cannot render verso case intrinsically forbidden. Therefore, if verso second rabbi is able esatto spettacolo that the original decision is refuted by generally accepted authorities or codes, he may reverse the original decision.
Similarly, a decision that is retracted with good reason does not render a case intrinsically forbidden. Therefore, if per second rabbi is able onesto determine that common practice traditionally opposes the initial ong authorities, he may convince the first rabbi preciso retract his decision and permit the case in question. Individual logic and judgment, however, are not considered sufficient reason for per rabbi https://datingranking.net/it/older-women-dating-review/ preciso reverse even his own decision…
Mediante order to prevent controversy, one should not present a case before verso rabbi without informing him of any previous decisions associated with that particular case.
One rabbi can overturn the decision of another only if he can prove the initial decision puro be erroneous
Although the Torah demands a indivis degree of uniformity per practice, it does recognize geographical differences. Therefore, different communities may follow varying opinions con minor questions of Torah law.
However, where there is giammai geographical or similar justification for varied practices, such differences are liable to be associated with ideological divergences and are forbidden. Within per scapolo community, the Torah requires a high degree of uniformity con religious practice. Durante niente affatto case should it be made sicuro appear that there is more than one Torah.
It is written, «You are children of God your Lord; you must not mutilate yourselves (lo tit-godedu)» (Deut. 14:1). Just as it is forbidden puro mutilate one’s body, so is it prohibited sicuro mutilate the body of Judaism by dividing it into factions. To do so is sicuro disaffirm the universal fatherhood of God and the unity of His Torah.
It is therefore forbidden for members of per scapolo congregation sicuro form factions, each following verso different practice or opinion. It is likewise forbidden for per celibe rabbinical capable esatto issue per split decision.
However, where verso city has more than one congregation, or more than one rabbinical athletique, the following of each one is counted as verso separate community, and each one may follow different practices.