- This topic has 139 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
GAON: “However, he does agree that according to the MB’s understanding of the Rambam (as per Magid Mishnah etc) we would at least be “m’tzarif” the shitas ‘Rabanon’ of ‘Lo Asi Rabim um’Vatlin Mechtzos” to the shitos of Shishim Ribo. The only issue he has is with the GR”A, and on the same note, the Demasek Eliezer on the Biur haGr”a (364) is definitely NOT like R”A on the issue of mefulash.”
If you continue on in that same seif katan (10) you would see that Rav Aharon disagrees with the MB, and argues that even the Rambam would require delasos.
I agree the Demasek Eliezer is in opposition to Rav Aharon’s understanding of the Gra. Furthermore, the Gra always sources from a Gemara, so I really don’t understand Rav Ahraon’s proof regarding the mare makom that the Gra cites.
GAON “the Mishnah Berurah was wrong about how most rishonim held and that were he alive today he would correct the “mistake”? Do you have a source that says this?”
“”See the below link that states so in Anef Bais . Sefer Bais Av – He lived in the times of the MIshna Berurah:””See also Rav Yisroel Yaakov Fisher (Even Yisroel 8:36). The Bais Av is incomparable regarding the inyan of eruvin (in fact all of his teshuvos are phenomenal).
GAON: “BTW – I remembered there is a sefer of the Raavad on Hilchos Nidah named “בעלי הנפש”. He writes in his Hakdamah regarding a Baal Nefesh, as the following:
Do you really think every “machmir in Eruvin” fits that description?”See also Tanya regarding who is classified as a Baal Nefesh. When it comes to eruvin it seems that every Tom Dick, and Harry is a Baal Nefesh.
GAON: “Speaking about the Mishkenos Yaakov, I recall his understating on Mefulash (as per Rashi, he quotes a Yerushalmi i think that argues) is not like RM nor R”A .”
I agree the MY’s understanding of mefulash according to Rashi is not in accordance with Rav Moshe nor Rav Aharon. However, the MY ultimately is not clear regarding the criterion of mefulash umechavanim.
Neville ChaimBerlin: ” Is what you’re saying actually mainstream? That the Mishnah Berurah was wrong about how most rishonim held and that were he alive today he would correct the “mistake”? Do you have a source that says this?”
Unfortunately, today one can’t make an argument, that the MB has been supersede, even with proofs. However, since you asked see the Bais Av (as cited by Gaon), and the following:
Even Yisroel:
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=673&st=&pgnum=44
Toldos Shmuel:
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=39121&st=&pgnum=337“you continue on in that same seif katan (10) you would see that Rav Aharon disagrees with the MB,”
That’s is exactly my point, that at the end of the day, Rav Ahron is NOT in accordance with the MB, (Despite the MB being machmir). And his understanding of the Rambam is certainly not like the Shu”A and the Magid Mishnah.
It is also worthy to note, that Mishkenos Yaakov himself acknowledges that his shitah is not the Minhag, even in Karlin (town where he was Rav) they did not abide to his shitahs (I recall a responsum in Zkan Aharon of Karlin permitting delosos like the Rambam in Shu”a, actually I think its components were based on relying on the most lenient shitos…)
You,
Thanks for the link! BTW I had a look at the Toldos Shmuel, in Ois Yud in regards to Shisim Ribo b’Chol Yom, he brings the Avnei Nezer b’shem haGoan m’Kutno’ that the Shishim Ribo does not have to be “Bokin” it is enough that is open to Shishim Ribo etc. (see link – http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1744&st=&pgnum=11)
Actually, the above in his responsa Yeshuos Malko says the exact opposite. Please refer to the below link:
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=39121&st=&pgnum=340It is the da’as Hashoel only, who happened to have written to all Poskim about his concern and no one agreed with him. He is mentioned in Shu”T Marsham, Divrei Chaim of Sanz and Bais Yitzchom of Levov. They all disagreed with him.
“The Bais Av is incomparable regarding the inyan of eruvin (in fact all of his teshuvos are phenomenal).”
Agreed. However, as I see you are familiar with his works, you know why he is not so known?
Bat,
“I tend to think that having an eruv is always safer – if you can afford to arrange for all that property ownership…’
Regardless, you should always consult your Rabbi when implementing an Eruv. Each and every case is different and can easily be confused.
“However, the MY ultimately is not clear regarding the criterion of mefulash umechavanim.”
I think the reason is that he only mentioned the above topic as kind of “BTW” ‘agav’. He didn’t really conclude or elaborate anything on that topic.
Regarding the Zkan Aharon of Karlin I mentioned, I found the responsum see the below link:
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=835&st=&pgnum=50
Read how he describes the situation of the Delasos. He actually applied every Kulah possible, the structure, the technical issue of the Gov not allowing the dlsos to be closed etc…
This in sync with his shitah and many others, that when it comes to Eruvin you should try to apply any Shitah to enable its structure – you do not look for Chumrahs (Halacha Kdivrei Hamekil). See his reponsum in Shu”T Chelkos Yaakov of Rav Breish, regarding the Eruv in Antrewp
youdontsay: Why is that unfortunate? Would you rather live in a world where we can chose a “forgotten gaon of his time” over the Mishnah Berurah? No matter, you guys have shown that the shittah exists, so I’m not saying you’re wrong. I’m still not convinced that it’s mainstream perse to hold the MB didn’t have all the information and made mistakes, and in your last comment you seem to also suggest that it is “unfortunately” not mainstream.
I’m not going any further with the baal gaavah argument. Clearly nobody in the real world holds that holding by Rabbeinu Tam’s tzeis or 16 amos reshus harabim is gaavah with the exception of a few CR posters.
“you know why he is not so known?”
Please tell us, Gaon.
Nev,
“Clearly nobody in the real world holds that holding by Rabbeinu Tam’s tzeis or 16 amos reshus harabim is gaavah”As a BTW, i don’t think the two issues you mentioned are comparable, as R”T is really the shitah of the Shu”A, Magen Avrohom and many others, it is rather the other way around that many had the “minhag” not like R”T, whereas, regarding 16 Amos, all Ashkenozim relied on Rashi and is the Halacha of the Shu”A, Rema, MA, T”Z, Pri Megadim etc.
I have been to Lakewood quite a few times and know the area fairly well. There is an Eruv in Lakewood although I dont know the exact boundaries (Ive never cross route 9 ) Is there more than one communal eruv. and there are signs in certain places telling you that there is no eruv.
Also Route 9 in Lakewood is not exactly the same Rt 9 as further up like in Howell or Freehold where I wouldnt cross route 9 under any circumstance, however I would (and Have) crossed route 9 in lakewood. In Freehold and Howell Rt 9 is more like an expressway and in lakewood is more of a regular st
” I’m still not convinced that it’s mainstream perse to hold the MB didn’t have all the information and made mistakes”
I just noticed he mentioned Even Yisrael, Rav YY Fisher ZTL of the Bedatz Eda was as mainstream as you can get. In fact, when I was in Yeshiva in Jerusalem he was in the same status as Rav Elyashiv and Rav SZ Aurebach ZTL as a posik.
Joseph,
Why would you need to know? Did you study his sefer?
All I can say regarding his Gaonnas, I doubt anyone in the past 50 years comes close to his knowledge and gaaones…(with the exception of Rav Moshe)
ZD,
There are numerous eruvin in Lakewood. No one is contesting that. However, there is not one eruv (or even connecting eruvin) covering the whole Lakewood. I do not believe that there is any Eruv that crosses Route 9.
Route 9 is the same Route 9 as in Howell or Freehold. It is the same continuos thoroughfare, regardless of it is narrower or wider in different places.
In Europe the towns shtetlach whatever you want to call it had an Eiruv.
The towns shtetlach’s main road was a dirt road traveled by a few horse and buggy’s each day.
“The towns shtetlach’s main road was a dirt road traveled by a few horse and buggy’s each day.’
Joseph,
Please enlighten us what difference does it make, once it’s 16 Amos and a public road, how many pass a day?
You either need 600k according to Rashi, or ten is enough according to the other shitas …
GAON:”That’s is exactly my point, that at the end of the day, Rav Ahron is NOT in accordance with the MB, (Despite the MB being machmir). And his understanding of the Rambam is certainly not like the Shu”A and the Magid Mishnah.”
Rav Aharon has many chiddusim in his teshuvah regarding eruivn, including his understanding of the Bais Ephraim and mefulash (in which case he is arguing against the Magen Avraham and many poskim).
“It is also worthy to note, that Mishkenos Yaakov himself acknowledges that his shitah is not the Minhag, even in Karlin (town where he was Rav) they did not abide to his shitahs (I recall a responsum in Zkan Aharon of Karlin permitting delosos like the Rambam in Shu”a, actually I think its components were based on relying on the most lenient shitos…):
There is also the fact that there was an eruv in Karlin in the time of Harav Dovid Friedman. I think the teshuvah is in Zkan Aharon 1:21.
GAON: “Thanks for the link! BTW I had a look at the Toldos Shmuel, in Ois Yud in regards to Shisim Ribo b’Chol Yom, he brings the Avnei Nezer b’shem haGoan m’Kutno’ that the Shishim Ribo does not have to be “Bokin” it is enough that is open to Shishim Ribo etc.
Actually, the above in his responsa Yeshuos Malko says the exact opposite.
It is the da’as Hashoel only, who happened to have written to all Poskim about his concern and no one agreed with him. He is mentioned in Shu”T Marsham, Divrei Chaim of Sanz and Bais Yitzchom of Levov. They all disagreed with him.”I believe that the Avnei Nezer did not see the Yeshuos Malko inside. It was only a shmuah in the name of Rav Yeshua M’Kutno.
No one agreed with this shoel’s arguments, which is proof that we don’t accept the Mishkenos Yaakov’s understanding of the Ritva in Rashi (and other Rishonim).
GAON: “Agreed. However, as I see you are familiar with his works, you know why he is not so known?”
Possibly because of his machlokas with the Agudas Harabanim, which spilled over into the fiasco of chlitza al ydei shliach. However, considering his gadlus it should all be irrelevant. Then again most people today don’t know much about previous poskim.
GAON: “I think the reason is that he only mentioned the above topic as kind of “BTW” ‘agav’. He didn’t really conclude or elaborate anything on that topic.”
I agree. The MY would not have even mentioned asu rabbim if not of the fact that the BE argued the point. Hence, the second teshuvah of the MY rebutting.
Neville ChaimBerlin: “youdontsay: Why is that unfortunate? Would you rather live in a world where we can chose a “forgotten gaon of his time” over the Mishnah Berurah? No matter, you guys have shown that the shittah exists, so I’m not saying you’re wrong. I’m still not convinced that it’s mainstream perse to hold the MB didn’t have all the information and made mistakes, and in your last comment you seem to also suggest that it is “unfortunately” not mainstream.”
He is not really a forgotten gaon. Many poskim refer to his teshuvos, including Rav Shlomo Zalman. Actually, in his first volume the Mishnah Berurah asked him at least one sheila.
I never said that the CC made a mistake c”v, only that his list (or actually the Mishkenos Yaakov’s list), has been superseded. This is not debatable, its a fact. The only question is how off is the MB’s list. There is no doubt that the MB did not see the Bais Ephraim’s list. There is no doubt that even the BE did not see the Rishonim that have been published after his time. If I made a list it would be over fifty who accepted shishim ribo as a criterion, and 14 who do not. I would just add that if the MB would have seen the BE maybe he would agree that this debate is not predicated on numbers but only on minhag, which is/was to accept the criterion.
Neville ChaimBerlin: “I’m not going any further with the baal gaavah argument. Clearly nobody in the real world holds that holding by Rabbeinu Tam’s tzeis or 16 amos reshus harabim is gaavah with the exception of a few CR posters.”
Baal gaavah argument? What? In any case, the argument regarding Rabbeinu Tam is if it was the accepted minhag. However, there is no doubt that shishim ribo was the accepted minhag, witness the eruvin in all shtetlach. Or as the Bais Ephraim argues, that all the Reshonim of Ashknaz accepted shishim ribo as a criterion.
GAON: “All I can say regarding his Gaonnas, I doubt anyone in the past 50 years comes close to his knowledge and gaaones…(with the exception of Rav Moshe)”
I know that this will bring some people out of their hole, but he was a greater posek than Rav Moshe. Definitely in the classic sense. He had it all, breadth and width.
Joseph: “The towns shtetlach’s main road was a dirt road traveled by a few horse and buggy’s each day.”
Sorry these arguments are made by those who don’t know the inyan. Once a road is 16 amos wide you either rely on the criterion of shishim ribo and you can establish an eruv, or you don’t rely on the criterion, and an eruv can’t be made (if there is no other heter).
Gaon: Are you arguing that Rav Moshe’s Psak against an Eruv in Manhattan or Brooklyn would be applied by Rav Moshe to Radun and Mir as well?
YDS: Psak Halacha doesn’t work by counting (for majority or what not) seforim/sh”ut that were long lost but recently found, but were not considered by the corpus of responsa by the gedolei poskim of the intervening centuries.
Gaon -“In fact, I heard from many old time Lakewooder’s that there was a time when the first Pizza shop opened up, many Chushuva yidden refused to go in.”
You must mean the 2nd one. I was in the first one & it was empty. No one dared go in – e/o was scared!
Joseph: “Gaon: Are you arguing that Rav Moshe’s Psak against an Eruv in Manhattan or Brooklyn would be applied by Rav Moshe to Radun and Mir as well?”
First of all, lets establish that Rav Moshe accepted the tenai of shishim ribo lechatchila.
You missed his point. Once a road is 16 amos wide you either rely on the criterion of shishim ribo and you can establish an eruv, or you don’t rely on the criterion, and an eruv can’t be made (if there is no other heter) even if its a tiny shtetl.“YDS: Psak Halacha doesn’t work by counting (for majority or what not) seforim/sh”ut that were long lost but recently found, but were not considered by the corpus of responsa by the gedolei poskim of the intervening centuries.”
First of all, you are mistaken regarding recently found poskim. We accept their opinion as long as it does not overturn established halachah/minhag. In fact this is our argument, shishim ribo is the accepted minhag.
You missed the point. It was the MB/MY who argued that the majority of poskim opposed the criterion of shishim ribo. So by their own argument if we now know that the majority does uphold the criterion of course we can rely on it. But, if we follow the minhag then there is no doubt that we rely on shishim ribo.
YDS: Once you start counting newly discovered Psaks, give it now time and you might discover even more psakim that change the majority back the other way. As stated, we don’t change what it considered the majority based on newly discovered psakim. There may be hundreds of Rishonim/Achronim who issued Psakim on the topic that is still lost.
Joseph: “Once you start counting newly discovered Psaks, give it now time and you might discover even more psakim that change the majority back the other way. As stated, we don’t change what it considered the majority based on newly discovered psakim. There may be hundreds of Rishonim/Achronim who issued Psakim on the topic that is still lost.”
You don’t get it. It was the Mishnah Berurah following the Mishkenos Yaakov, who argued that the Bais Yosef did not mention all the Rishonim, and then they proceeded to list all the Rishonim known, including those that where just printed, such as the Ritva. The Aruch HaShulchan clearly states that the Mishkenos Yaakov argued that we now have more Rishonim unavailable to the previous poskim that state that we do not accept shishim ribo. So it was those who claim that we shouldn’t rely on shishim ribo who where making use of the newly published Rishonim in order to tabulate a majority.
Using their argument, we can demonstrate that we have Rishonim that they did not see.
Joseph –
“Once you start counting newly discovered Psaks, give it now time and you might discover even more psakim that change the majority back the other way. As stated, we don’t change what it considered the majority based on newly discovered psakim. ”As I have stated to you more than once, it would help if you learn the basics before you comment. That means simply opening a Shulchan Aruch and learning mechaber, Tur, Magen Abraham and T”Z. See that they clearly say, that the accepted psak is that the MAJORITY of the poskim uphold that אין לנו רשות הרבים בזה”ז”
That was until the Mishkenos Yaakov compiled a list of other “new” rishonim that say differently. So your above statement indeed holds true regarding the above psak.
As you can see the Bais Efrayim response was that a) the minhag is based on the חכמי צרפת ואשכנז b) that in reality there is indeed a majority as the M”A and T”Z.
The same applies to the MB, that the minhag is supported my the majority, and not the other way around.Meaning, we are to go by what the M”A, T”Z and Mahrit tzahlon have ruled as the majority.
All he is basically doing is proving them correct.
You misread my comment. I didn’t comment on the Eruv question. I only addressed the narrow point about counting a halachic majority of shittos.
Regarding מחזי כיוהרא when you just pick and choose one Chumra as a Baal Nefesh –
I happened to come across the following Terumas haDeshen in Ch 1, regarding davening Maariv right after Plag (though we don’t pasken like that, but the concept is the same – that one that is Machmir has to be consistent and if not “אם “ לא הורגל בשאר פרישות:)דהא דכתב ר”ת דמפלג המנחה ואילך חשוב לילה כר”י ויוצאין מאז ידי ק”ש ותפלה של ערבית. וכתב המרדכי ובהג”ה במיימון וראבי”ה כתב דדברי ר”ת עיקר הם-
והבא להחמיר ע”ע ולהמתין עד כדברי שאר הגאונים מחזי כיוהרא ונקרא הדיוט אם לא הורגל בשאר פרישותדהא דכתב ר”ת דמפלג המנחה ואילך חשוב לילה כר”י ויוצאין מאז ידי ק”ש ותפלה של ערבית. וכתב המרדכי ובהג”ה במיימון וראבי”ה כתב דדברי ר”ת עיקר הם והבא להחמיר ע”ע ולהמתין עד כדברי שאר הגאונים מחזי כיוהרא ונקרא הדיוט אם לא הורגל בשאר פרישות מ”מ זמן זה אינו אלא שעה ורביע קודם צ”ה אבל מנין לנו להקדים כ”כ.
You,
Regarding the Bais Av unknown – it was definitely the Chalitzah issue. Some say he retracted his psak. See below link:http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=20408&st=&pgnum=700
In any case, I don’t know understand why it should effect his status as much, he was basically trying to find a heter for the Russian stranded agunos – you do not have to agree to it, but he is entitled to his opinion.
In another way it shows his Gaones as well, he did not fear anyone.
He basically felt no one really disputed his heter , as you can see from his response to the Ragatchover etc….I know this may sound silly. I also realize the suggestion is probably a big waste of time, but has anyone thought to ask “the Lakewood Rabbonim”?
Shuali,
”
but has anyone thought to ask “the Lakewood Rabbonim”?Why would someone bother asking, we do not live there, nor would it help. And lastly, which Rav exactly would you ask?
There is no Rav who would have the guts to say: yes! it is mutar and officially back it…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.