Rabbi Eliezer Papo is best known for his inspirational and friendly sermon-like “Pele Yoetz“.
In the entry entitled “Asufa”, (or “Halachic Compendiums”) he says something puzzling. After initial elaboration on the great need and benefit derived from these works, he subsequently qualifies his praise by adding the following –
אמנם הבעלי אסופות שמאספים קצורי דינים צריכים ליזהר הרבה שלא יכנסו למלאכה זו אא”כ יכולים לעשות אותה על מתכונתה כי היכי דלא תפוק מינה חורבה דהיינו שיהא להם ספרים הרבה מהראשונים ואחרונים ותשלוט עיניהם בכולם בעיון יפה יפה ולא יסמכו על הכלל העולה כי יש פתח טועה ולא יטעו לרשום היפך ממה שכתוב בספר כאשר נמצא לפעמים באלו הקיצורים.
ולכן אמרו שאין ראוי לסמוך על הקיצורים להקל או להוציא ממון מיד המוחזק עד שילמד חיפוש מחיפוש ועד שיראה הדין בשורשו ושמעתי אומרים שאף על פי שהרב מעם לועז עשה מלאכה גדולה וזכה וזיכה את הרבים לא היה רוח חכמים שבדורו נוחה הימנו על שכתב הלכות פסוקות ורבים מעמי הארץ שאין יודעים לקרות אלא ספרו ומקבלים דבריו כנתינתם מסיני ואין חוזרים לשאול פי חכם וסומכין עליו בין להקל בין להחמיר ופעמים המצא ימצא איזה דין שנתחדשו בעת ספרים שחולקים על דבריו ומחמירים וכן ראוי להחמיר.
ולכן יש להזהיר ללועזים שלא יסמכו על ספרי הלועזים להקל באין שאלת חכם. ודיין להם שספרי הלועזים יעוררום ליכנס לבית הספק כרי לשאול לחכם (יש את לבבי לכתוב ספר אסיפת דינים בקיצור אך לא אכתוב אלא מה הוא אסור ולא אזכיר את המותר למען לא תצא תקלה כזו). כו’
Translation by Rabbi Eli J. Mansour:
However, the authors of halachic compendiums, who gather concise and shortened laws together, must be very careful not to engage in this work unless they are able to do it properly, lest some tragic error result thereby. I mean to say that they have many works of the medieval and later scholars, and their eyes will master all of them through rigorous analysis. Nonetheless, they must not rely on the general principle they derive from them as there is room for a mistake, and they might err by recording the exact opposite of what is written in those books, as is sometimes found in compendiums of this type.
Therefore, the contemporary sages said that it is not proper to rely on the concise halachic compendiums for leniencies or to extract money until one has thoroughly studied the topic and sees the actual source of the law. I have heard those who say that even though the author of “Mayam Loez” did a giant service and brought a great deal of merit to the masses, the “spirit” of the sages of his generation were not pleased that he wrote definitive halachot. Many common people, who can only read his book, accept his word as if it came from Sinai, and therefore do not consult a rabbinic authority. They rely on his decision, whether he is lenient or stringent. Nevertheless, sometimes there are laws in which later authorities have disagreed with his ruling and are more stringent. In these cases, it is correct to be more stringent.
Therefore, one should admonish speakers of foreign languages that they should not rely on the works written in their native tongue, without first consulting a rabbinic authority. It is sufficient that these works make them aware of questions in order that they should go to ask a sage. (I have a dream to write a work of concise halachot. However, I will only write that which is forbidden, and I will not mention that which is permitted, in order to avoid this kind of a mistake.)
What do you think of the concept? Do any of our readers know if such a book was ever published by Rabbi Papo (or anyone else, for that matter)? Perhaps Rabbi Papo regretted the idea; the concept is not exactly “Politically Correct”‘… Does anyone else wish to take on the mission?
Rabbi Papo actually did publish a kind of abbreviated Shulchan Aruch called “Chessed La’alafim”. As far as I can gather, he lists all the laws, bound as he is to the subject matter of the book he proposes to abridge.
On a personal note, this piece fascinates me because I once considered writing a book with the opposite goal; to list laws which are surprisingly lenient…
Have something to say? Write to Avraham Rivkas: CommentTorah@gmail.com