Similarly, if he must permit something mediante an emergency, he must clarify his reason for that particular case

Similarly, if he must permit something mediante an emergency, he must clarify his reason for that particular case

Just as per rabbi may not permit that which is forbidden, so must he be careful not onesto forbid that which is permitted. Therefore, if a 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 puro establish an erroneous precedent.

Nevertheless, it is forbidden for verso city onesto split into two congregations primarily because of a dispute over law or practice

Per rabbi should be careful not puro 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 preciso erroneous conclusions. It is for this reason that there are cases which are permitted only in the case of per scholar, and which may not be taught to the ignorant.

When a rabbi renders per decision mediante per case sopra which there are niente affatto clear precedents, he must strive sicuro bring as many proofs as possible…

When a rabbi renders per decision con verso question of law, the Torah recognizes it as binding. Therefore, when a rabbi decides on per case and forbids something, it becomes intrinsically forbidden.

Since the initial decision renders the subject of per case intrinsically forbidden, it cannot be permitted even by verso greater sage or by per majority rule.

An erroneous decision cannot render verso case intrinsically forbidden. Therefore, if a second rabbi is able puro esibizione 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 preciso determine that common practice traditionally opposes the initial ong authorities, he may convince the first rabbi to retract his decision and permit the case con question. Individual logic and judgment, however, are not considered sufficient reason for verso rabbi onesto reverse even his own decision…

Per order puro prevent controversy, one should not present a case before a 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 sicuro be erroneous

Although the Torah demands a indivis degree of uniformity in practice, it does recognize geographical differences. Therefore, different communities may follow varying opinions in minor questions of Torah law.

However, where there is in nessun caso geographical or similar justification for varied practices, such differences are liable onesto be associated with ideological divergences and are forbidden. Within a scapolo community, the Torah requires per high degree of uniformity con religious practice. Con niente affatto case should it be made esatto 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 preciso mutilate one’s body, so is it prohibited preciso mutilate the body of Judaism by dividing it into factions. Preciso do so is to disaffirm the universal fatherhood of God and the unity of His Torah.

It is therefore forbidden for members of verso single congregation puro form factions, each following verso different practice or opinion. It is likewise forbidden for verso scapolo rabbinical trapu preciso issue a split decision.

However, where verso city has more than one congregation, or more than one rabbinical court, the following of each one is counted as a separate community, and each one may follow different practices.