IS OLD AGE A DISEASE?
works—including the judicial opinion—it can be evaluated according to its success as an act of writing.” Accordingly, it may be of significance that Rabbi Feinstein composed these teshuvot in a distinctive, declarative literary style. They are short and to the point; in them, their author recites the Halakhah without supplying much in the way of source citation or accompanying argument. This does not mean, of course, that there are no talmudic or halakhic sources that could have been cited, since all Jewish legal decision proceeds from an interpretation and an application of traditional texts. Feinstein has chosen, rather, for whatever reason, to omit these sources from his teshuvot. And, as a matter of fact, this choice of style has much to recommend it. It is clear and straightforward, leaving the reader in no doubt as to the pesak, the legal conclusion. If we assume that Rabbi Feinstein’s readers are interested primarily in that conclusion, the haiakhic“bottom line,” these responsa certainly offer them what they want.
Yet if we determine to measure these responsa by a literary yardstick, we cannot let matters end there. The fact is that most responsa, including those of Rabbi Feinstein, are not written in such a simple and declarative style.’ This is because the audience of a responsum, the community of rabbinic and lay scholars that constitute its primary readership, usually want a great deal more than the bottom line. Although these readers are certainly interested in the answer a posek gives to a question of Halakhah , they also want to know how he arrives at that answer, how he supports his ruling according to the texts and sources of Jewish law. They want this information because the law is seldom as simple, obvious, and free of doubt as Feinstein makes it appear in this case. The most interesting questions of Halakhah are those that are neither undisputed nor indisputable. For many issues, especially those of great
50