Are Rashi and the Rambam making the same point? The Rambam says to accept truth -- if it is true, regardless of the source. Hence the Rambam doesn't quote his sources so we will accept it what he concludes to be true.
One way to read the RL story and Rashi's comment is as you suggest that RL would accept the logic of what R'Elazar says but doesn't want to accept from R'Elazar. That is difficult to understand, though, because if R'Elazar is right -- why wouldn't RL accept it? The Rambam, I believe, was referring to sources who would appear much less reputable than R'Elazar.
Another way to read the story, I think, is to show that RL has greater deference for RY than for R'Elazar. Meaning, there is no proof from here that RL would not accept the Rambam's dictum and accept something from anything source as long as it is true. What the story shows, I think, is that even if RL doesn't think it is necessarily true, he will accept from RY -- given that he is his rebbe, etc. So RL could argue with the logic of R'Elazar and maintain the woman's chazaka to bring false eidim overrides the chezkas kashrus of other Jews, and think that R'Elazar is wrong, but when presented that RY agrees with R'Elazar, he would relent and yield his own opinion.
That, too, is a significant lesson, but a different one than the one you are suggesting. Thus, I don't think it is muchrach that the gemara (and/or Rashi) is against the Rambam's point.
I fail to see any disagreement.
Reish Lakish knew that he would accept it if related in the name of Rav Yochonon, therefore he felt it was wrong to hide the source. The Rambam was afraid of people dismissing what he quoted from others based on their lack of respect for those that he quoted, therefore he didn’t relate his sources.
There is not neccessarily any disagreement. The RAMBA"M is dealing with "inyonei hashkafa" in which he
researched several sources in order to arrive at the proper hashkofos.
Reish Lokish is dealing in matters of halacha in which case the exact source is absolutely required.
anon1,
What the story shows, I think, is that even if RL doesn't think it is necessarily true, he will accept from RY -- given that he is his rebbe, etc.
I hear your point. So I guess the Rambam's dictum does not work in reverse, i.e., reject non truths regardless of its source.
IFT,
Why did RL not accept R. Elazar's sevorah until he knew that it was from RY?
pisgam,
Why should it matter if it's halacha or hashkafa? It is a question of accepting a specific sevorah and it seems from Rashi that RL refused to consider the sevorah as long as he thought that R. Elazar was the source of it.
Lkwdguy,
R"L obviously felt it wasn't such a good Sevorah. Hence, hearing it from RA he simply argued on it. Once hearing it from RY he realized there was much more to it if RY said it, only then did he accept it. Imagine if someone told you a Chiddush. You might be inclined to reject it. But if quoted from the Chazon Ish (for example) you would think into it more.
As for the difference between Halacha and Hashkafa; I once saw a letter from Rav Chaim Brisker in which he writes that one can publish a Halacha Sefer anonymously since most people can judge on their own if the Severos are good. However, a Hashkafe Sefer shouldn’t be printed anonymously since one can be influenced by the ideas, and they may not be emanating from a Torah-true source.
See Rabbeinu Yonah on Avos 2:4 D'H Ahl Taamin B'atzm'choh. He says precisely the opposite of the oft quoted Rambam.
In fact, let's think about Reb Meir, the classic exemplar of the Rambam's shittah, since he learned from Elisha ben Avuya. As you know, the Gemora in Horyos 13b relates that Reb Meir attempted a coup against the Nasi, RSBG. His attempt failed, and as a punishment, he is often not quoted by name, but instead cited as 'Acheirim omrim.'
His teacher, R' Elisha ben Avuya, is also referred to as 'Acheir.' It is very clear that the choice of 'Acheirim' for Reb Meir was a reference to his association with EbA. The intent was to denigrate him by implying that his association with R' Elisha ben Avuya influenced him to some extent.
IFT,
I think you are basiclly agreeing with my post. If RL would have followed the Rambam's dictum he would not have rejected the sevorah because it came from RE as opposed to RY. You are just supplying the reason that you believe caused RL to reject it, i.e. because RY was much bigger than RE.
Following the Rambam's dictum to a "T" would require one to give the same thought to a sevorah proposed by LkwdGuy as one would give to a sevorah propsed by the Chazon Ish, no?
Barzilai,
I will b"n look at the Rabbainu Yonah tonight. Yasher Koach.
The Ohr Hachayim al haTorah states that matters of halacha can be derived at either through 1) mesorah (one's Rebbi i.e. Rav Yochanan) or
2)by having shimush in psak and proper use of the 13 middos. He further states that in all non-halachic matters any talmud [chacham] can be mechadeaish as long as he shows how he arrived at his conclusions.
Commenting by HaloScan
