Three codes of Jewish law were written in the mid-sixteenth century and each reached its legal conclusions in different ways. The user of these codes was – and is – faced with a rather stark choice about the law. Shulḥan `aruk with Isserles’s glosses may have been printed as one book but it represented two distinct methods for deciding the law. Caro often based himself on his idiosyncratic “majority rule” among three medieval jurists. Isserles’s rulings generally reflected Ashkenazic traditions as expressed in local customs and the decisions of the most recent rabbinic authorities. Solomon Luria’s Yam shel Shelomoh was for the erudite student of Talmud and halakah. It went back to the sources, reexamined them, and came to independent, indeed sometimes bold conclusions. It demanded that readers follow difficult talmudic argumentation if they were ever to try and evaluate Luria’s thought. In many ways, Yam shel Shelomoh was more appropriate for the study hall than it was for the student, teacher, or rabbi who often needed quick answers. Joseph Caro’s Shulḥan `aruk with Moses Isserles’s comments filled this latter niche very well. Its brief, apodictic rulings provided immediate direction.