Editing Halakha (section)

== Sources and process ==
<div class="floatright toccolours" style="width:400px; width:calc(200px + 15vw); max-width:100%; box-sizing:border-box">
<div style="font-weight:bold;text-align:center">Eras of Jewish law</div>
* [[Chazal]] ({{abbr|lit.|literally}} "Our Sages, may their memory be blessed"): all Jewish sages of the [[Mishna]], [[Tosefta]] and [[Talmud]] eras ({{circa|250 BCE|625 CE}}).
** The ''[[Zugot]]'' ("pairs"), both the 200-year period ({{Circa|170 BCE}} – 30&nbsp;CE, "Era of the Pairs") during the [[Second Temple period]] in which the spiritual leadership was in the hands of five successions of "pairs" of religious teachers, and to each of these pairs themselves.
** The ''[[Tannaim]]'' ("repeaters") were rabbis living primarily in [[Eretz Yisrael]] who codified the [[Oral Torah]] in the form of the Mishnah; 0–200&nbsp;CE.
** The ''[[Amoraim]]'' ("sayers") lived in both Eretz Yisrael and [[Babylonia]]. Their teachings and discussions were compiled into the two versions of the [[Gemara]]; 200–500.
** The ''[[Savoraim]]'' ("[[Inductive reasoning|reasoners]]") lived primarily in [[Sassanid]] Babylonia due to the suppression of Judaism in the [[Eastern Roman Empire]] under [[Theodosius II]]; 500–650.
* The ''[[Geonim]]'' ("greats" or "geniuses") presided over the two major Babylonian Academies of [[Sura Academy|Sura]] and [[Pumbedita]]; 650–1038.
* The ''[[Rishonim]]'' ("firsts") are the rabbis of the [[late medieval]] period ({{Circa|1038}}–1563), preceding the ''[[Shulchan Aruch]]''.
* The ''[[Acharonim]]'' ("lasts") are the rabbis from {{Circa|1500}} to the present.
</div>
{{See also|Rabbinic literature}}
The development of ''halakha'' in the period before the [[Maccabees]], which has been described as the formative period in the history of its development, is shrouded in obscurity. Historian [[Yitzhak Baer]] argued that there was little pure academic legal activity at this period and that many of the laws originating at this time were produced by a means of neighbourly good conduct rules in a similar way as carried out by Greeks in the age of [[Solon]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Baer |first1=I. F. |author-link1=Yitzhak Baer |title=The Historical Foundations of the Halacha |journal=[[Zion (journal)|Zion]] |date=1952 |volume=17 |pages=1–55 |publisher=Historical Society of Israel |language=he}}</ref> For example, the first chapter of ''[[Bava Kamma]]'', contains a formulation of the law of [[tort]]s worded in the first person.<ref name="EncJudaica" />{{rp|256}}

The boundaries of Jewish law are determined through the Halakhic process, a religious-ethical system of legal reasoning. Rabbis generally base their opinions on the primary sources of ''halakha'' as well as on precedent set by previous rabbinic opinions. The major sources and genre of ''halakha'' consulted include:
* The foundational Talmudic literature (especially the [[Mishna]] and the [[Talmud|Babylonian Talmud]]) with commentaries;
** [[Talmudic hermeneutics]]: the science which defines the rules and methods for the investigation and exact determination of the meaning of the Scriptures; also includes the rules from which the Halakhot are derived and which were established by the written law. These may be seen as the rules from which early Jewish law is derived.
** ''[[Gemara]]'' – the Talmudic process of elucidating the ''halakha''
* The post-Talmudic codificatory literature, such as Maimonides's [[Mishneh Torah]] and the ''[[Shulchan Aruch]]'' with its commentaries (see [[#Codes of Jewish law]] below);
* Regulations and other "legislative" enactments promulgated by rabbis and communal bodies:
** ''[[Gezeirah]]'' ("declaration"): "preventative legislation" of the rabbis, intended to prevent violations of the [[mitzva|commandments]]
** ''[[Takkanah]]'' ("repair" or "regulation"): "positive legislation", practices instituted by the rabbis not based (directly) on the [[mitzva|commandments]]
* ''[[Minhag]]'': Customs, community practices, and customary law, as well as the exemplary deeds of prominent (or local) rabbis;
* The ''she'eloth u-teshuvoth'' ([[responsa]], "questions and answers") literature.
* ''[[Dina d'malkhuta dina|Dina d'malchuta dina]]'' ("the law of the king is law"): an additional aspect of ''halakha'', being the principle recognizing non-Jewish laws and non-Jewish legal jurisdiction as binding on Jewish citizens, provided that they are not contrary to a law in Judaism. This principle applies primarily in areas of commercial, civil and criminal law.

In antiquity, the ''[[Sanhedrin]]'' functioned essentially as the Supreme Court and legislature (in the US judicial system) for Judaism, and had the power to administer binding law, including both received law and its own rabbinic decrees, on all Jews—rulings of the Sanhedrin became ''halakha''; see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism|Oral law]]. That court ceased to function in its full mode in 40&nbsp;CE. Today, the authoritative application of Jewish law is left to the local rabbi, and the local rabbinical courts, with only local applicability. In branches of Judaism that follow ''halakha'', lay individuals make numerous ad-hoc decisions but are regarded as not having authority to decide certain issues definitively.

Since the days of the Sanhedrin, however, no body or authority has been generally regarded as having the authority to create universally recognized precedents. As a result, ''halakha'' has developed in a somewhat different fashion from Anglo-American legal systems with a Supreme Court able to provide universally accepted precedents. Generally, Halakhic arguments are effectively, yet unofficially, peer-reviewed. When a rabbinic ''[[posek]]'' ("he who makes a statement", "decisor") proposes an additional interpretation of a law, that interpretation may be considered binding for the posek's questioner or immediate community. Depending on the stature of the posek and the quality of the decision, an interpretation may also be gradually accepted by other rabbis and members of other Jewish communities.

Under this system there is a tension between the relevance of earlier and later authorities in constraining Halakhic interpretation and innovation. On the one hand, there is a principle in ''halakha'' not to overrule a specific law from an earlier era, after it is accepted by the community as a law or [[vow]],<ref>[[Moshe Isserles|Rema]] [[Choshen Mishpat]] Chapter 25</ref> unless supported by another, relevant earlier precedent; see list below. On the other hand, another principle recognizes the responsibility and authority of later authorities, and especially the ''posek'' handling a then-current question. In addition, the ''halakha'' embodies a wide range of principles that permit judicial discretion and deviation (Ben-Menahem).

Notwithstanding the potential for innovation, rabbis and Jewish communities differ greatly on how they make changes in ''halakha''. Notably, ''[[poskim]]'' frequently extend the application of a law to new situations, but do not consider such applications as constituting a "change" in ''halakha''. For example, many [[Orthodox Judaism|Orthodox]] rulings concerning electricity are derived from rulings concerning fire, as closing an electrical circuit may cause a spark. In contrast, Conservative ''poskim'' consider that switching on electrical equipment is physically and chemically more like turning on a water tap (which is permissible by ''halakha'') than lighting a fire (which is not permissible), and therefore permitted on Shabbat. The reformative [[Judaism]] in some cases explicitly interprets ''halakha'' to take into account its view of contemporary society. For instance, most Conservative rabbis extend the application of certain Jewish obligations and permissible activities to women (see [[Halakha#Conservative Judaism|below]]).

Within certain Jewish communities, formal organized bodies do exist. Within [[Modern Orthodox Judaism]], there is no one committee or leader, but Modern US-based Orthodox rabbis generally agree with the views set by consensus by the leaders of the [[Rabbinical Council of America]]. Within [[Conservative Judaism]], the [[Rabbinical Assembly]] has an official [[Committee on Jewish Law and Standards]].<ref>[https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/jewish-law/committee-jewish-law-and-standards "Committee on Jewish Law and Standards."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190509091310/https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/jewish-law/committee-jewish-law-and-standards |date=2019-05-09 }} ''The Rabbinical Assembly''. 9 April 2019.</ref>

Note that ''takkanot'' (plural of ''[[takkanah]]'') in general do not affect or restrict observance of Torah ''mitzvot''. (Sometimes ''takkanah'' refers to either ''gezeirot'' or ''takkanot''.) However, the Talmud states that in exceptional cases, the Sages had the authority to "uproot matters from the Torah". In Talmudic and classical Halakhic literature, this authority refers to the authority to prohibit some things that would otherwise be Biblically sanctioned (''shev v'al ta'aseh'', "thou shall stay seated and not do"). Rabbis may rule that a specific mitzvah from the Torah should not be performed, e. g., blowing the ''[[shofar]]'' on Shabbat, or taking the ''[[Four Species|lulav and etrog]]'' on Shabbat. These examples of takkanot which may be executed out of caution lest some might otherwise carry the mentioned items between home and the synagogue, thus inadvertently violating a Sabbath ''[[Activities prohibited on Shabbat|melakha]]''. Another rare and limited form of takkanah involved overriding Torah prohibitions. In some cases, the Sages allowed the temporary violation of a prohibition in order to maintain the Jewish system as a whole. This was part of the basis for [[Esther]]'s relationship with [[Ahasuerus]] (Xeres). For general usage of takkanaot in Jewish history see the article [[Takkanah]]. For examples of this being used in Conservative Judaism, see [[Conservative halakha]].

=== Historical analysis ===
{{Eras of the Halakha}}
The antiquity of the rules can be determined only by the dates of the authorities who quote them; in general, they cannot safely be declared older than the [[tannaim|tanna]] ("repeater") to whom they are first ascribed. It is certain, however, that the seven middot ("measurements", and referring to [good] behavior) of Hillel and the thirteen of Ishmael are earlier than the time of Hillel himself, who was the first to transmit them.

The Talmud gives no information concerning the origin of the middot, although the Geonim ("Sages") regarded them as Sinaitic ([[Law given to Moses at Sinai]]).

The middot seem to have been first laid down as abstract rules by the teachers of Hillel, though they were not immediately recognized by all as valid and binding. Different schools interpreted and modified them, restricted or expanded them, in various ways. [[Rabbi Akiva]] and [[Rabbi Ishmael]] and their scholars especially contributed to the development or establishment of these rules. "It must be borne in mind, however, that neither Hillel, Ishmael, nor [a contemporary of theirs named] [[Eliezer ben Jose]] sought to give a complete enumeration of the rules of interpretation current in his day, but that they omitted from their collections many rules which were then followed."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10801-middot-the-seven-of-hillel|title=TALMUD HERMENEUTICS - JewishEncyclopedia.com|website=www.jewishencyclopedia.com|access-date=2019-09-25}}</ref>

Akiva devoted his attention particularly to the grammatical and exegetical rules, while Ishmael developed the logical. The rules laid down by one school were frequently rejected by another because the principles that guided them in their respective formulations were essentially different. According to Akiva, the divine language of the Torah is distinguished from the speech of men by the fact that in the former no word or sound is superfluous.

Some scholars have observed a similarity between these rabbinic rules of interpretation and the hermeneutics of ancient Hellenistic culture. For example, Saul Lieberman argues that the names of rabbi Ishmael's ''middot'' (e. g., ''kal vahomer'', a combination of the archaic form of the word for "straw" and the word for "clay" – "straw and clay", referring to the obvious [means of making a mud brick]) are Hebrew translations of Greek terms, although the methods of those ''middot'' are not Greek in origin.<ref>{{cite book |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0OcaAAAAMAAJ |access-date=10 October 2018 |last=Lieberman |first=Saul |chapter=Rabbinic interpretation of scripture |year=1962 |title=Hellenism in Jewish Palestine |publisher=Jewish Theological Seminary of America |page=47}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0OcaAAAAMAAJ |access-date=10 October 2018 |last=Lieberman |first=Saul |chapter=The Hermeneutic Rules of the ''Aggadah'' |year=1962 |title=Hellenism in Jewish Palestine |publisher=Jewish Theological Seminary of America |page=68}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |title=Rabbinic methods of interpretation and Hellenistic rhetoric |first=David |last=Daube |journal=Hebrew Union College Annual |volume=22 |year=1949 |pages=239–264 |jstor=23506588}}</ref>