Just as a rabbi may not permit that which is forbidden, so must he be careful not preciso forbid that which is permitted. Therefore, if per rabbi must forbid something merely because of per question of law, because of a custom, or because of special circumstances, he must state his reason so as not preciso establish an erroneous precedent.
Nevertheless, it is forbidden for verso city puro split into two congregations primarily because of a 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 preciso erroneous conclusions. It is for this reason that there are cases which are permitted only sopra the case of verso scholar, and which may not be taught sicuro the ignorant.
When a rabbi renders per decision sopra verso case sopra which there are in nessun caso clear precedents, he must strive esatto bring as many proofs as possible…
When verso rabbi renders a decision con per question of law, the Torah recognizes it as binding. Therefore, when verso rabbi decides on verso 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 a majority rule.
An erroneous decision cannot render verso case intrinsically forbidden. Therefore, if a second rabbi is able preciso show that the original decision is refuted by generally accepted authorities or codes, he may reverse the original decision.
Similarly, verso decision that is retracted with good reason does not render verso case intrinsically forbidden. Therefore, if per second rabbi is able sicuro determine that common practice traditionally opposes the initial ong authorities, he may convince the first rabbi puro retract his decision and permit the case sopra question. Individual logic and judgment, however, are not considered sufficient reason for verso rabbi esatto reverse even his own decision…
Mediante order esatto prevent controversy, one should not present verso 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 esatto be erroneous
Although the Torah demands per certain degree of uniformity mediante practice, it does recognize geographical differences. Therefore, different communities may follow varying opinions in minor questions of Torah law.
However, where there is mai geographical or similar justification for varied practices, such differences are liable puro be associated with ideological divergences and are forbidden. Within verso scapolo community, the Torah requires per high degree of uniformity per religious practice. Durante in nessun caso case should it be made puro 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 sicuro mutilate one’s body, so is it prohibited esatto mutilate the body of Judaism by dividing it into factions. Esatto do so is onesto disaffirm the universal fatherhood of God and the unity of His Torah.
It is therefore forbidden for members of verso single congregation to form factions, each following verso different practice or opinion. It is likewise forbidden for a solo rabbinical trapu preciso issue a split decision.
However, where a city has more than one congregation, or more than one rabbinical courtaud, the following of each one is counted as a separate community, and each one may follow different practices.