Aruch Hashulchan and Mishna Berura
The two 20th Century halachic works considered to be among the most authoritative, even today, are certainly the Mishna Berura (written by Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan, more commonly known as “The Chafetz Chaim,” 1838-1933) and the Aruch Hashulchan (written by Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein 1829 -1908). As can be expected, however, these two halachic giants don’t always agree. As a result, the question is repeatedly asked: When there is a machloket between the Mishna Berura and the Aruch Hashulchan, whose opinion should we follow?
Rav Yehuda Henkin cites his grandfather, Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin, as having ruled that the Aruch Hashulchan is to be followed in the event of a machloket with the Mishna Berura. He was of the opinion that the Aruch Hashulchan is the more definitive and authoritative decisor of halacha.[1] He offers a number of reasons for this. One reason is that most of the Aruch Hashulchan was written after the Mishna Berura. What this means is that Rav Epstein took into account the arguments and rulings of the Mishna Berura before issuing his own, often opposing, rulings. Indeed, the Aruch Hashulchan occasionally cites the rulings of the Mishna Berura before issuing his own.
Another reason that the Aruch Hashulchan should be preferred is because it covers the entire Shulchan Aruch while the Mishna Berura only covers the Orach Chaim section. This has led some to suggest that Rav Epstein likely had greater mastery over the entire Shulchan Aruch than Rav Kagan. So too, the Aruch Hashulchan is an independent work that analyzes all the relevant Talmudic sources and commentaries before reaching a conclusion, while the Mishna Berura is essentially a running commentary on the Shulchan Aruch and the rulings of others.
Furthermore, the Mishna Berura generally follows a more text-based approach to deciding halacha, often trying to comply with as many opinions as possible, while the Aruch Hashulchan emphasizes common custom as a major factor when issuing a ruling. As a result, the Mishna Berura is usually more stringent in its halachic conclusions while the Aruch Hashulchan is usually more lenient. Indeed, as the Aruch Hashulchan writes about himself, “I always try to find leniencies where needed.”[2] This, and other such details, is discussed at length by Haym Soloveitchik in his renowned essay, Rupture and Reconstruction: The Transformation of Contemporary Orthodoxy.[3]
Finally, although the Mishna Berura was written by a great sage, he was not a practicing rabbi. The author of the Aruch Hashulchan, however, was both a great sage and a practicing rabbi. As such, Rav Epstein was much more involved with the community and had first-hand familiarity with the problems and challenges that people faced. Because of this, he had much more skill and experience in applying halacha to real-life situations and individual needs. Indeed, Rav Moshe Feinstein is reported to have said that the Aruch Hashulchan is to take precedence over the Mishna Berura for this reason alone.[4] There is a growing list of other contemporary halachic authorities who concur, as well.
Rabbi Micha Berger of Passaic, NJ, suggests that Rav Kagan never intended the Mishna Berura to be a source for practical halacha.[5] He cites as evidence for this approach, that in his personal life, Rav Kagan followed the rulings of the Aruch Hashulchan more than he did his own. For example, Rav Kagan relied on community eruvin, wore his tzitzit inside his pants, did not recite brich shmei when the Torah was being removed from the aron kodesh, and would drink less wine for Kiddush than one would think – all in contrast to what is written in the Mishna Berura.[6] It is also noted that Rav Kagan observed many of the minhagim of the Vilna Gaon yet he never decided halacha in the Mishna Berura in accordance with his view.
Rabbi Berger claims (and many others agree) that it was primarily Rav Aharon Kotler who advocated accepting the Mishna Berura as a “posek acharon,” the final work of authoritative halacha in our day. As mentioned above, however, it appears that the Aruch Hashulchan should be deemed the final authority in a dispute between the Mishna Berura and Aruch Hashulchan. Indeed, although Rav Kotler did author some halachic responsa, he was far more renowned for Talmudic scholarship and textual analysis (“pilpul”) than for halachic authority. Some have called the Mishna Berura the posek of the yeshivishe world and the Aruch Hashulchan the posek of the baalabatishe world.
For those unfamiliar, it is interesting to note that the Mishna Berura was actually compiled and written by a team of scholars under the guidance of Rav Kagan who was essentially the redactor.[7] According to some sources, it took eleven years to complete the Mishna Berura. According to most other sources, however, it actually took twenty-eight years.
Oddly enough, the “author’s introduction” to the Aruch Hashulchan is to be found in the beginning of the Choshen Mishpat section. This is because it was the Choshen Mishpat sections of the Aruch Hashulchan that were the first installments to be published.[8] Most of the other sections of the Aruch Hashulchan were published posthumously by the author’s daughter, Rabbanit Brina Walbrinska.[9]
Although the Aruch Hashulchan covers virtually every chapter of Shulchan Aruch, the various editions of the Aruch Hashulchan that we have today are incomplete. It wasn’t until 1992 that chapters 203-239 of Yoreh Deah, that deal with the laws of vows, were found and published, having previously assumed to have been lost. Also missing are chapters 123-182 of Yoreh Deah, that deal with the laws of idolatry, and chapters 66-118 of Even Ha’ezer, that deal with the laws of Ketubot, which are also assumed to have been lost. It is clear, however, that the missing Even Ha’ezer chapters were indeed written, as they are mentioned and referenced in other sections of the Aruch Hashulchan.[10]
[1] Bnei Banim 2:8.
[2] Kitvet Ha’aruch Hashulchan p. 74.
[3] See http://www.lookstein.org/links/orthodoxy.htm.
[4] Two Sons, Two Views, One Vision - A Conversation with the Legendary Sons of Rav Moshe Feinstein, ztz”l: Rav Dovid and Rav Reuven Feinstein, shlita by Rabbi Yitzchok Frankfurter, Mishpacha Magazine - 4 Sivan 5769 5.27.09
[5] See here for his view: http://www.aishdas.org/asp/texualism-and-the-mishnah-berurah. See also the comments to this short essay: http://www.torahmusings.com/2014/07/rabbis-drasha.
[6] There are conflicting reports whether or not Rav Kagan relied upon community eruvin.
[7] Kol Kitvei Chafetz Chaim p. 15, 23-24, 36-37, cited in “The Making of a Halachic Decision” by Rabbi Moshe Walter p.96
[8] The Aruch Hashulchan was originally published in numerous small volumes or booklets.
[9] For more on this see: http://seforim.blogspot.co.il/2007/07/printing-of-aruch-hashulchan.html.
[10] See for example, Aruch Hashulchan, EH 178:25.