I am making the starting assumption that we would not bump a post in order to change the reference of a now-deceased Torah authority to reflect the current reality. However, if it is already on the top page for other reasons, should we update the references which are now out-of-date?

As a corollary, since (for now) the status of שליט"א is unfortunately temporary, should we discourage its use in general?

| |
  • 4
    You know, Rav Yez Shlita, the issue applies to non Torah authorities too – Double AA Mar 29 '19 at 15:20
  • @DoubleAA Certainly, but they don't get referred to by there vital-status as often. – Y     e     z Apr 1 '19 at 4:47

I don't think we should make such changes. The issue existed in printed texts too and it's best to let a work reflect accurately on how it was written originally.

| |
  • 1
    Just my opinion of course – Double AA Mar 29 '19 at 15:20
  • 1
    I hear. But sometimes written works, if referenced by a later work, often make an update in the form of (שליט"א) [Zatza"l] -- (I couldn't get the right-to-left to be happy with my paren/brackets, but Zatza"l means זצ"ל). In our case, it's easier to make such updates than it is in print. – Y     e     z Apr 1 '19 at 4:54

Perhaps if they are at the top anyways, we could update the posts in a way which preserves the original writing but also reflects the current reality, such as putting שליט"א into parentheses and זצ"ל in brackets. I have seen this done in contemporary sefarim which cite a recent work in which someone who was at the time a שליט"א is now a זצ"ל.

| |
  • 1
    Not necessarily my opinion, just posting for opinion. – Y     e     z Apr 1 '19 at 4:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .