Why are the lakewood rabbanim so against an eruv in thier Town??

Home Coffeeroom Bais Medrash Minhagim Why are the lakewood rabbanim so against an eruv in thier Town??

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 138 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1419175

    GAON
    Participant

    Nev,
    “โ€œIf not, then each and every road (wider than 16 Amos), even your quiet upstate road has a status of Reshus haRabim.โ€

    Yes, your point? ”

    My point is, it seems to be kind of an Am Ha’aratzos regarding RT 9. As some are under the assumption that there is a concept of a Reshus haRabim as a real “busy” street ans then there is a R”H of 16 Amos.

    In reality, it is either you need 600K and if its anything of the less – even with 550K passing – it won’t have a criteria of a Reshus haRabim , or any public (mefulash) street wider than 16 Amos is R”H no matter how quiet remote – So why again is “RT 9” any diff than any other neighborhood Streets..?

    #1419180

    GAON
    Participant

    Joseph,

    So according to your logic – Yerushulayim, Bnei Brak, Bet Shemesh, Monsey, anywhere else – All should demolish there Eruvin, due to the above Shu”A women issue?!

    Hmm it sure indicates your sense of logic…

    #1419183

    GAON
    Participant

    Joseph,

    I think you should rather figure out where you put your “head” than your “HAT” by shachris? ๐Ÿ™‚

    #1419189

    Gadolhadorah
    Participant

    Gaon: There was a chassidish-western song titled something like “Looking for logic in all the wrong places” (or was it “love”)….either way don’t invest too much time search for a “logic” in certain trolling comments. Eruvin are here to stay and probably are an important factor keeping lots of younger families in the expanding number of shomer Shabbos couples we see in cities around the country pushing baby carriages and overall contributing to the explosion of yiddeshkeit. At some point, responding to trolling only seems to energize the troller to post even more outrageous stuff.

    #1419214

    Phil
    Participant

    If previous posts are any indication, I think this is where Joseph labels entire swaths of Jewry as “sinful”.

    #1419146

    Gadolhadorah
    Participant

    Joseph Says: “The Shulchan Aruch and Rambam pasken lโ€™halacha that women shouldnโ€™t be out of the home much”

    The usual nareshnkeit from our resident msycoginst troll .

    “Kinder, Kรผche, Kirche” or the 3 Ks, is the 19th century German slogan translated as โ€œchildren, kitchen, churchโ€. It shares the derogatory connotation extracted out of context by Joseph describing what is obviously meant to be an antiquated female role model in contemporary Western society from the Mullahs of Iran and Riyadh. The phrase is vaguely equivalent to the medieval English “barefoot and pregnant” or the Victorian ode:

    โ€œTake hold of kettle, broom and pan,
    Then youโ€™ll surely get a man!
    Shop and office leave alone,
    Your true life work lies at home.โ€

    Sadly, and most ominously, is the worldview of the Nazi philosopher, Y’S, who wrote:
    โ€œThe mission of women is to bring children into the world. This is not at all asโ€ฆโ€ฆโ€ฆunmodern as it sounds. The female bird pretties herself for her mate and hatches eggs for him. In exchange, the male takes care of gathering food, and stands guard and wards off the enemy.โ€
    Joseph Goebbels, 1929

    #1419300

    Joseph
    Participant

    If you don’t like Shulchan Aruch and Rambam you’re in the wrong company.

    #1419301

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    Gaon: There’s a shittah that the 600K only applies to cities and intra-city roads require fewer than 600K. I don’t know if this has anything to do with Rt. 9. I have absolutely no idea what the “Route 9” situation is that people are talking about, so I’m just guessing. For the other eruv communities you mentioned, could it be that, based on trends in American Jewry, it was decided that Lakewood wouldn’t handle an eruv as well as those communities you mentioned?

    Joseph: The Machaber and Rambam saying so doesn’t mean we pasken that way, and it certainly doesn’t mean that it should be used as a basis against eruvs. We don’t know that that’s actually the issue with a Lakewood eruv; that post earlier seemed like anecdotal evidence. You’ll have to do better than that to convince me, but it’s not a bad argument inherently.

    Gadol: I’m not trolling, but I will apologize in advance if what I’m about to say offends you. Based on CR history, you clearly proudly align yourself with the very modern side of the Orthodox hemisphere (which I’m not condemning here). Lakewood clearly represents a farther right-wing community. Could it be that they want to avoid the eruv for the very reason that they want to keep out the more modern side that tends to be more dependent on eruvs to preserve what they perceive to be the integrity of Lakewood?

    #1419333

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    And Gadol, I get what you’re trying to say, but you just directly called the Machaber and Rambam narishkeit and compared them to Christianity and Islam. You might want to rethink the emotional responses before you click submit.

    I’m still hung up on the restaurants thing. Did the anti-restaurant stuff ever catch on? I’ve never heard of a frum yid saying it’s against his minhag to never eat at a restaurant. Are there any hechshers that refuse to certify restaurants for that reason?

    #1419345

    Joseph
    Participant

    Neville:

    The Mechaber (and Rambam) I referenced we certainly do pasken in accordance with. In fact, the Halacha is brought by Chazal in the Gemorah. Furthermore, in the entire corpus of Halacha there is not a single shitta disagreeing with said Halacha.

    #1419507

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    Joseph, yet clearly, in practice, women do leave the houses all the time in frum communities, so it’s hard for me to see how we officially hold by it as you’re presenting it.

    #1419640

    GAON
    Participant

    Nev,

    “Gaon: Thereโ€™s a shittah that the 600K only applies to cities and intra-city roads require fewer than 600K.”

    I am aware of that shitah – it is the shitas haRamban in Eruvin 59 (i think that’s the daf). that a “sratya” does not require 600k, he says that “bederch efsher” to answer shitas Rashi. However the Shu”a and the TUR seem like they don’t go with that shitah. (I recall the Avnei Nezer ruling that most Rishonim clearly say not like the above Ramban)

    #1419681

    Joseph
    Participant

    Neville:

    Yeridos hadoros. It isn’t ideal. We should strive to reach as close as possible as the Halacha b’feirush says we should, even if we can’t completely follow it as is ideal.

    #1419770

    iacisrmma
    Participant

    GH: You wrote “there are enough younger bnos yisorel who do accept them and it is crucial for their ability to get out of the house on Shabbos with the kids and live a normal life.”

    Are you saying that women who live in places without an eiruv don’t live a normal life?

    #1419789

    GAON
    Participant

    “Are there any hechshers that refuse to certify restaurants for that reason?”

    I remember the Eda Hachredis in Jerusalem require all sit down eateries to close at a certain hour, due to preventing any hangouts and mingling etc. I recall they actually took off more than one Hechsher due to violating the above.

    Anyways, my point was not about the above, it was just to refute the “tznius” concern when regarding Eruvin. The ones that are demanding those standards should demand it at all aspects โ€“ not only Eruvin.

    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. And it was sort of an embarrassment to go in. Well, itโ€™s something that most people today cannot even relate to comprehend, however, those were the standards of the Bnei Torah, at the time. People lived by the most simple life style and standards possible.

    #1420648

    youdontsay
    Participant

    @joseph
    “The rabbonim of a city absolutely have the right to enact and enforce a takana above and beyond plain halachic permissiveness.”

    No they do not. It is either a gezeirah or a takanah and unless this is hora’as shaโ€™ah, only a Sanhedrin has a right to implement a gezeirah forever or as Rav Moshe states that rabbanim may only enact a takanah for their particular locale and only for a short period of time (Igraos Moshe, 4:49).

    #1420650

    youdontsay
    Participant

    @gaon
    “”such reid would make them an eino modeh bโ€™eruv””
    “I donโ€™t think that is exactly the definition of ืื™ื ื• ืžื•ื“ื” ื‘ืขื™ืจื•ื‘ which was originally for ืฆื“ื•ืงื™ื who donโ€™t believe at all about the very concept of Eruvin. It might be silly reason, given the above, but they do make Eruvei Chatzeros in their driveways etc โ€“ so how can they be labeled as โ€œeino modeh bโ€™eruvโ€™?”

    Because their arguments would do away with driveway eruvin as well. There could be mingling in shared driveways, also. In any case, they are eino modeh bshtufei mavaos.

    #1420651

    youdontsay
    Participant

    @Neville ChaimBerlin
    “From my understanding the Mishnah Berurah says a Baal Nefesh holds by this definition. The Kitzur definitely advocates for the stricter definition in line with the Rif, Rambam, and Rashba.”

    There is no doubt that we accept the criterion of shishim ribo lechtchila. The fact is we know today, contrary to the Mishnah Beurah, that the overwhelming majority of Rishonim uphold shishim ribo. In other words the MB’s list has been superseded.

    “I never really understood the 600K shittah (even though I rely on it). Itโ€™s always stated in books like, โ€œin our times there are no reshus harabimโ€ (books written before big cities like NYC). That just doesnโ€™t really add up since it implies that in the past they DID have to worry about it, when back then it would have required more than half of klal Yisroel to casually walk down the road.”

    The point being, that early walled cities required that all people enter and exit through a particular street. Consequentially, these streets where the reshus harrabim of the city. Rashi states (Eruvin, 6b) that the main roads of Yerushalayim and Mechuza were classified a s a reshus harabbim (read Rashi carefully).

    #1420652

    youdontsay
    Participant

    “Most young women with children wonโ€™t be out in the streets on Shabbos if thereโ€™s no eruv.”

    These arguments smack of apikorsis.

    #1420653

    youdontsay
    Participant

    @joseph
    “The Shulchan Aruch and Rambam pasken lโ€™halacha that women shouldnโ€™t be out of the home much. So the general concern (aside from an eruv) is certainly a valid one. (Unless the Sโ€A doesnโ€™t mean much to you.)”

    What does this have to do with Shabbos and eruvin?

    #1420654

    youdontsay
    Participant

    @gaon
    “My point is, it seems to be kind of an Am Haโ€™aratzos regarding RT 9. As some are under the assumption that there is a concept of a Reshus haRabim as a real โ€œbusyโ€ street ans then there is a Rโ€H of 16 Amos.
    In reality, it is either you need 600K and if its anything of the less โ€“ even with 550K passing โ€“ it wonโ€™t have a criteria of a Reshus haRabim , or any public (mefulash) street wider than 16 Amos is Rโ€H no matter how quiet remote โ€“ So why again is โ€œRT 9โ€ any diff than any other neighborhood Streets..?”

    Well said.

    #1420658

    youdontsay
    Participant

    @Neville ChaimBerlin
    “Gaon: Thereโ€™s a shittah that the 600K only applies to cities and intra-city roads require fewer than 600K. I donโ€™t know if this has anything to do with Rt. 9. I have absolutely no idea what the โ€œRoute 9โ€ situation is that people are talking about, so Iโ€™m just guessing. ”

    This is argued by the Ramban (Eruvin 59a, and maybe the Tosfos Rid), however we do not paskin like this shita.

    However, this can’t be the argument about Rav Aharon and RT 9. Rav Ahron followed the Mishkinos Yaakov who does not accept shishim ribo as a criterion of a reshus harabbim at all.

    #1420660

    Gadolhadorah
    Participant

    “Are you saying that women who live in places without an eiruv donโ€™t live a normal life? ”

    No…I’m saying that those who do have the benefit of an eruv (an obviously those who hold by eruvim) are able to enjoy menuchas Shabbos with their children and families, come to shul with the little ones, etc, go out for a walk Shabbos afternoon and visit friends/family). Those who hold by eruvim but live in areas that do not yet have an eruv (or where its not practical) cannot engage in what most consider “normal’ activities that are consistent with Shabbos. You make a good point regarding the threshold issue of whether those who move to Lakewood deliberately want to escape the “normal” of an MO neighborhood. However, I know many families in Lakewood and do not believe the anti-eruv shita is as pervasive and universal as some here would suggest.

    #1420736

    youdontsay
    Participant

    An eruv helps to increase our oneg Shabbos, e.g., families with young children, the elderly, and the infirm are no longer confined to their homes (Perishah, O.C. 395:1).

    #1420871

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    youdontsay: I don’t think the Mishnah Berurah is contradicted at all. He allowed the 600K shittah, and just said it’s a nice thing to hold by the stricter one. I don’t think anyone here has denied that if an individual wants to hold by the machmir shittah, it’s a good thing. Enforcing it on an entire town is a completely different story.

    #1421041

    maskildoresh
    Participant

    Would be a nice idea for those interested in pursuing greater understanding of the Halchos being discussed to study the sources inside. To understand Rav Ahron’s shita, please see his teshuva in Shu”t Mishnas Rav Ahron. Good place to start.

    It’s interesting how many people commented how “they don’t know why Rt 9 would be different than any other road wider than 16 Amos”, and then proceeded to disparage the idea. It would be far more intelligent to actually find out the answer….

    #1421150

    GAON
    Participant

    You,
    “Rav Ahron followed the Mishkinos Yaakov who does not accept shishim ribo as a criterion of a reshus harabbim at all.”

    I am aware that Rav Ahron accepted the Mishkenos Yaakov regarding Mechitzos in opposing the Bais Efraiyim (as per his responsum in Mishnas R”A) , but where does he pasken like the Mishkenos Yaakov regarding Shishim Ribo?
    That is going against all previous poskim, like Magen Avrohom, T”Z, and even the MB leHalacha.

    Especially if there is a Tzuras Hapesach involved, many poskim uphold that its in any case (even with 600K) not a Reshus haRabim M’Doraisa and is only D’Rabonon that a Tzuras Hapesach won’t suffice…(see Shulchan Aruch Harav 364, Avnei Nezer CM 107)

    #1421153

    GAON
    Participant

    Nev,

    “I donโ€™t think anyone here has denied that if an individual wants to hold by the machmir shittah, itโ€™s a good thing.”

    Agreed, however, that will be true if that individual is Machmir on each and every Halcha were it is states “Baal Nefesh” should be Yotza all.
    And last time I checked, i don’t recall women to follow that rule at all, so why when it comes to Eruvin are some so obsessed with “baal Nefesh” leHachmir?

    Even the Brisker’s allow the women to carry in Jerusalem…

    #1421154

    GAON
    Participant

    “(Perishah, O.C. 395:1).”

    You,

    Go explain that to Joseph in here, he doesn’t think taking a “stroll” is permissive for women on Shabbos…

    Welcome to the world that the Prisha/SM”A is not frum enough for him…

    #1421201

    GAON
    Participant

    You,

    โ€œThe point being, that early walled cities required that all people enter and exit through a particular street. Consequentially, these streets where the reshus harrabim of the city. Rashi states (Eruvin, 6b) that the main roads of Yerushalayim and Mechuza were classified a s a reshus harabbim (read Rashi carefully).โ€

    True, as explained by the Aruch HaSulchan (345) who holds that only towns that have that particular structure of one main street are to be classified as a Reshus Harabim.

    In fact, if you look into Rashi Eruvin (59b) he says as the following:

    ืืœื ืœืื•ืจื›ื” – ื“ืจืš ืขื™ื™ืจื•ืช ืœื”ื™ื•ืช ืคืชื—ื™ ืคื™ืœื•ืฉื™ื”ืŸ ืœืื•ืจื›ื ื•ืจื””ืจ ืขื•ื‘ืจืช ืžืคืชื— ืœืคืชื— ื•ื—ืœื•ืงื” ืœืื•ืจื›ื” ื”ืœื›ืš ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื™ ืขื‘ืจ ื”ืœื– ืจืฉืื™ืŸ ืœืขืจื‘ ืœื‘ื“ืŸ ื•ื‘ื ื™ ืขื‘ืจ ื”ืœื– ืœื‘ื“ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื“ื”ื ื™ ื•ื”ื ื™ ื“ืจืกื™ ื‘ื”ืš ืจื””ืจ ื•ื™ื•ืฆืื™ืŸ ื•ื ื›ื ืกื™ืŸ ื“ืจืš ืคืชื—ื™ื ืœื›ืืŸ ื•ืœื›ืืŸ ื•ืจื””ืจ ื–ื• ืžื—ื‘ืจืชื ืฉื›ื•ืœื ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ื•ืืกืจื™ ืื”ื“ื“ื™

    As you can see the typical structure explained by Rashi, in the times of the Talmud, was with one main street.

    #1421198

    Joseph
    Participant

    “And last time I checked, i donโ€™t recall women to follow that rule at all… Even the Briskerโ€™s allow the women to carry in Jerusalemโ€ฆ”

    GAON: Why are you differentiating men and women regarding this Halacha? And which “rule” don’t women follow?

    #1421184

    GAON
    Participant

    Maskil,
    “Itโ€™s interesting how many people commented how โ€œthey donโ€™t know why Rt 9 would be different than any other road wider than 16 Amosโ€, and then proceeded to disparage the idea. It would be far more intelligent to actually find out the answerโ€ฆ.”
    “To understand Rav Ahronโ€™s shita, please see his teshuva in Shuโ€t Mishnas Rav Ahron. Good place to start.”

    Well, I am past that stage (as mentioned in my previous comment) – can you please enlighten us?

    #1421234

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    Joseph, he was talking about holding by 16 amos l’chumrah. Some men might have the stringency to not use the eruv, while their wives do use it.

    #1421242

    GAON
    Participant

    Joseph,
    โ€œAnd last time I checked, i donโ€™t recall women to follow that rule at allโ€ฆ Even the Briskerโ€™s allow the women to carry in Jerusalemโ€ฆโ€

    GAON: Why are you differentiating men and women regarding this Halacha? And which โ€œruleโ€ donโ€™t women follow?”

    Rule = “Baal Hanefesh” leHachmir.
    “Why are you differentiating” – I’m just stating a fact. All Briker Ravs kids permitted/ed their wives to carry in Jerusalem – that is a fact.

    Now why?

    “Baal Hanefesh” leHachmir’ is not for anyone to claim so, if you learn through the inyan and determine from that there are shitos leHachmir, then you can say you want to be machmir, otherwise you should just follow basic halacha and the minhag.

    Yes, I know nowadays each and every Am Haaretz proclaim themselves as a Ba’al Nefesh’.
    However – ask most of these Anti-Eruv hotheads which Siman in Shulcchan Aruch you can find these particular Halachas? and they won’t even know to answer…

    #1421233

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    “Agreed, however, that will be true if that individual is Machmir on each and every Halcha were it is states โ€œBaal Nefeshโ€ should be Yotza all.”

    Ummm no. Nobody has ever held that way until you just now. You’re implying that we should just follow the letter of a law, and if somebody wants to take on one chumrah as a nice thing, they have to take on every chumrah that exists? That’s absurd. There are some select things like Rabbeinu Tam’s tefillin where you aren’t supposed to take it on unless you’re known for being machmir elsewhere for risk of looking like a baal gaavah. The same caution does not exist if someone wants to start keeping Rabbeinu Tam’s tzeis. The point being, the baal gaavah concern (which is the only thing I can assume you were going for) is not universal across all things. I’ve never heard it applied to eruvim.

    Anyway, we digress. Maskil, if you have the teshuva handy and know the answer as to why he didn’t want an eruv in Lakewood, why don’t you just sum it up so that you can stop us from hitting 100 posts by people theorizing who (obviously) don’t have ready access to the teshuvah. Or is it that you don’t know the answer or have the sefer and your post essentially just comes down to “the answer is out there. I don’t know what it is either, but I’m going to criticize the intelligence of everyone else for not knowing.”

    #1421269

    GAON
    Participant

    Nev,
    “Youโ€™re implying that we should just follow the letter of a law, and if somebody wants to take on one chumrah as a nice thing, they have to take on every chumrah that exists? Thatโ€™s absurd.”

    Yes – Read my above comment on how and when you can pick a certain Halacha as a “Ba’al Nefesh” , otherwise, why is R”T teffilin the only point where you say so – why wouldn’t you apply any other Chumra to ” Mechza “k’Yehora” ?

    FYI – “Ba’al Nefesh” is a certain level you have achieved as a Yirai Shomayim – it is across the entire spectrum of Halacha. You don’t exactly pick and chose, unless perhaps you have a specific reason to, as above.

    Rashi in Pesachim 40a says:
    “ื‘ืขืœ ื ืคืฉ – “ื—ืกื™ื“:
    ื”ื›ื™ ืงืืžืจ ืืคื™ืœื• ื—ื™ื˜ – ….. ื‘ืขืœ ื ืคืฉ ืœื ื™ืœืชื•ืช ืื‘ืœ” ื“ืœืื• ื‘ืขืœ ื ืคืฉ “ื“ืœื ืžื—ืžื™ืจ ืขืœ ื ืคืฉื™ื” ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™”: ื“ืฉืจื™ืจืŸ.:
    This is across all halachos – not one or two.

    #1422361

    youdontsay
    Participant

    GAON: :True, as explained by the Aruch HaSulchan (345) who holds that only towns that have that particular structure of one main street are to be classified as a Reshus Harabim.”

    Since some disagree with the AH i always cite the rayos from the Gemara.

    “In fact, if you look into Rashi Eruvin (59b) he says as the following
    ืืœื ืœืื•ืจื›ื” โ€“ ื“ืจืš ืขื™ื™ืจื•ืช ืœื”ื™ื•ืช ืคืชื—ื™ ืคื™ืœื•ืฉื™ื”ืŸ ืœืื•ืจื›ื ื•ืจื”โ€ืจ ืขื•ื‘ืจืช ืžืคืชื— ืœืคืชื— ื•ื—ืœื•ืงื” ืœืื•ืจื›ื” ื”ืœื›ืš ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื ื™ ืขื‘ืจ ื”ืœื– ืจืฉืื™ืŸ ืœืขืจื‘ ืœื‘ื“ืŸ ื•ื‘ื ื™ ืขื‘ืจ ื”ืœื– ืœื‘ื“ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื“ื”ื ื™ ื•ื”ื ื™ ื“ืจืกื™ ื‘ื”ืš ืจื”โ€ืจ ื•ื™ื•ืฆืื™ืŸ ื•ื ื›ื ืกื™ืŸ ื“ืจืš ืคืชื—ื™ื ืœื›ืืŸ ื•ืœื›ืืŸ ื•ืจื”โ€ืจ ื–ื• ืžื—ื‘ืจืชื ืฉื›ื•ืœื ืžืขื•ืจื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ื•ืืกืจื™ ืื”ื“ื“ื™
    As you can see the typical structure explained by Rashi, in the times of the Talmud, was with one main street.”

    Correct, there are more proofs from the Rishonim that this is what they are referring to when the use the qualifier, “city.” (E.g. the Tosfos Rid and Semag.)

    #1422359

    youdontsay
    Participant

    GAON: “I am aware that Rav Ahron accepted the Mishkenos Yaakov regarding Mechitzos in opposing the Bais Efraiyim (as per his responsum in Mishnas Rโ€A) , but where does he pasken like the Mishkenos Yaakov regarding Shishim Ribo?
    That is going against all previous poskim, like Magen Avrohom, Tโ€Z, and even the MB leHalacha.”

    Rav Aharon states (MRA, 6:10) that that the MB maintains that the majority of Rishonim do not accept shishim ribo, and therefore, Rav Aharon argues the heter is mefulash umechavanim (but then he came up with a chiddush in how we apply this criterion). This is in opposition to the MA and Taz (he obviously understood that the MB was really machmir). However, since Rav Aharon is following the Mishkenos Yaakov, it is understandable.

    “Especially if there is a Tzuras Hapesach involved, many poskim uphold that its in any case (even with 600K) not a Reshus haRabim Mโ€™Doraisa and is only Dโ€™Rabonon that a Tzuras Hapesach wonโ€™t sufficeโ€ฆ(see Shulchan Aruch Harav 364, Avnei Nezer CM 107)”

    Rav Aharon followed the MY who maintains that we require delasos even in a karmelis. However, you are correct, the majority of poskim upheld that a tzuras hapesach would be sufficient on a Doraysa level, and that we only require delasos if all criteria of a reshus hrabbim are met.

    #1422335

    youdontsay
    Participant

    Neville ChaimBerlin: “I donโ€™t think the Mishnah Berurah is contradicted at all. He allowed the 600K shittah, and just said itโ€™s a nice thing to hold by the stricter one. I donโ€™t think anyone here has denied that if an individual wants to hold by the machmir shittah, itโ€™s a good thing. Enforcing it on an entire town is a completely different story.”

    While I agree with your basic premise, it is more nuanced than you are stating as fact. The Mishnah Berurah is following the Mishkenos Yaakov, who clearly maintained that one cannot rely on shishim ribo at all. The MB realized that the minhag is to rely on the criterion, thus he suggested that a baal nefesh should be stringent. My argument is that the main reason why the MB upheld one should be machmir was because of the MY’s argument that the overwhelming majority of Rishonim did not accept the criterion of shishim ribo. However, we now know that the opposite is true, and that all the Rishonim of Tzarfas and Ashkenaz upheld the criterion of shishim ribo. Therefore, even the MB should/would admit that a baal nefesh can rely on the criterion.

    #1422506

    Haimy
    Participant

    V’ahi bimei Shfot Hashoftim…
    It’s not the place to discuss the merits of opinions of the Rabonim of Lakewood.
    These anonymous conversations usually lead to bezui talmidei Chachomim.

    #1422390

    GAON
    Participant

    You,

    “Rav Aharon states (MRA, 6:10) that that the MB maintains that the majority of Rishonim do not accept shishim ribo, and therefore, Rav Aharon argues the heter is mefulash umechavanim ”

    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.

    #1422463

    GAON
    Participant

    “Therefore, even the MB should/would admit that a baal nefesh can rely on the criterion.”

    The MB is not the only one – the Shulchan Aruch HaRav also agrees that a Baal Nefesh should be Machmir:
    I will quote his words (345:11):

    “ื•ื™ืฉ ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืฉื›ืœ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืฉืฉื™ื ืจื‘ื•ื ืขื•ื‘ืจื™ื ื‘ื• ื‘ื›ืœ ื™ื•ื ื›ื“ื’ืœื™ ืžื“ื‘ืจ ืื™ื ื• ืจืฉื•ืช ื”ืจื‘ื™ื ืืœื ื›ืจืžืœื™ืช
    ื•ืขืœ ืคื™ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื”ื ื ืชืคืฉื˜ ื”ืžื ื”ื’ ื‘ืžื“ื™ื ื•ืช ืืœื• ืœื”ืงืœ ื•ืœื•ืžืจ “ืฉืื™ืŸ ืœื ื• ืขื›ืฉื™ื• ืจืฉื•ืช ื”ืจื‘ื™ื ื’ืžื•ืจื”” ื•ืื™ืŸ ืœืžื—ื•ืช ื‘ื™ื“ื ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื”ื ืขืœ ืžื™ ืฉื™ืกืžื›ื• (ื•ื›ืœ ื™ืจื ืฉืžื™ื ื™ื—ืžื™ืจ ืœืขืฆืžื•ืคื•)

    However, We can argue that he is not speaking in a case where there is a Tzuras haPesach..

    Also, the ones that are to be Machmir should be consistent with Baal Nefesh as above..

    #1422484

    hershh
    Participant

    Gaon; seems agav churfeI toah. Just because a halacha is complex then we can’t do it? Id that what lakewood is all about

    #1422485

    GAON
    Participant

    ” Rav Aharon argues the heter is mefulash umechavanim (but then he came up with a chiddush in how we apply this criterion)”

    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 .

    #1422489

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    Gaon, I didn’t say Rabbeinu Tam tefillin is the only case, that just an example of where it’s spelled out. The point is, if there is a concern of being machmir leading to gaavah, it will be spelled out explicitly, which it is not in the case of eruvim. Why WOULD you apply it to a case where it does not say so explicitly?

    youdontsay: 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?

    #1422548

    GAON
    Participant

    Nev,
    “the Mishnah Berurah was wrong about how most rishonim held and that were he alive today he would correct the โ€œmistakeโ€? 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:

    http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=2151&st=&pgnum=89

    He seems to be one of the forgotten great gaonim in his times, he has an probation of the Minkser Gadol (who rarely gave any Haskamos – see below link) and the Sdei Chemed quotes him many times with highh regards.:

    http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=10002&st=&pgnum=3

    #1422558

    GAON
    Participant

    ” that just an example ”

    I agree there is a diff with R”T but the concept in essence is still the same – that if you are NOT a true Ba’al Nefesh you should not pick and choose chumras – it should be across the board.

    Tefillin Lechurah pertains to even if you are a Machmir on all. That is the diff.

    BTW – I remembered there is a sefer of the Raavad on Hilchos Nidah named “ื‘ืขืœื™ ื”ื ืคืฉ”. He writes in his Hakdamah regarding a Baal Nefesh, as the following:

    ื•ื—ื‘ืจืชื™ ืžื”ื ืกืคืจ ื•ืงืจืืชื™ ืืช ืฉืžื• ืกืคืจ ื‘ืขืœื™ ื”ื ืคืฉ, ืขืœ ืฉื ื›ื™ ื”ื•ื ื—ื•ืง ื•ืžืฉืคื˜ ืœืžื•ืฉืœื™ื ืขืœ ื ืคืฉื ื•ืื™ืŸ ื ืคืฉื ืžื•ืฉืœืช ืขืœื™ื”ื. ืจื•ืฆื” ืื ื™ ืœื•ืžืจ, ื”ื ืคืฉ ื”ืžืชืื•ื” ื”ื™ื ื”ื ืคืฉ ื”ื‘ื”ืžื™ืช ื”ืžื•ืฉืœืช ืขืœ ื”ื›ืกื™ืœื™ื ื•ื”ืžื•ืฉื›ืช ืื•ืชื ืœืชืื•ืช ื”ืขื•ืœื ื•ื”ื ืื•ืชื™ื•, ืขื“ ืืฉืจ ื™ืฉื›ื—ื• ื ืคืœืื•ืช ื”ื‘ื•ืจื ื•ื’ื•ื“ืœ ืžืขืฉื™ื• ื•ื™ืืžืจื• ืžื™ ืจื•ืื™ื ื• ื•ืžื™ ื™ื•ื“ืขื™ื ื• ื›ืขื ื™ืŸ ืฉื ืืžืจ (ืชื”ืœื™ื ื™, ื’) ื›ื™ ื”ืœืœ ืจืฉืข ืขืœ ืชืื•ืช ื ืคืฉื•. ืืš ื”ืฆื“ื™ืง ื”ืžื•ืฉืœ ื‘ื™ืจืืช ืืœื”ื™ื, ืจื•ื— ื”’ ื ื•ืกืกื” ื‘ื•, ื•ื™ืื—ื– ืฆื“ื™ืง ื“ืจื›ื• ื•ื™ืงื— ื‘ื™ื“ื• ื ืคืฉ ื”ืฉื›ืœ ืœื”ืœื—ื ืขื ื”ื‘ื”ืžื™ืช ื›ื’ื‘ื•ืจ ื”ื ืœื—ื ื‘ื›ืœื™ ืžืœื—ืžืชื•, ื•ื‘ืขืช ืขืœื•ืชื” ื™ืฉืคื™ืœื ื”, ื•ื‘ืขืช ื”ืชื’ื‘ืจื” ื™ื—ืœื™ืฉื ื”, ืขื“ ืืฉืจ ื™ืฉื‘ ื‘ื˜ื— ื•ืฉืœื•ื” ื•ื™ืžืฆื ืฉืœื•ื ืœื ืคืฉื•. ื›ืขื ื™ืŸ ืฉื ืืžืจ (ืžืฉืœื™ ื™ื’, ื™ื˜) ืชืื•ื” ื ื”ื™ื” ืชืขืจื‘ ืœื ืคืฉ ื•ืชื•ืขื‘ืช ื›ืกื™ืœื™ื ืกื•ืจ ืžืจืข. ื ื”ื™ื”, ืžืฉืจืฉ ื ื”ื™ื™ืชื™ ื•ื ื—ืœื™ืชื™, ื•ื”ื•ื ืขืœ ืžืฉืงืœ ื ืคืฉ ื ืขื ื” ืชืฉื‘ื™ืข (ื™ืฉืขื™ื” ื ื—, ื™). ืจ”ืœ ืชืื•ื” ื”ื ืฉื‘ืจืช ืื—ืจื™ืชื” ืชืขืจื‘ ืœื ืคืฉื• ื•ื”ื•ื ื ืคืฉ ื”ืฉื›ืœ. ื•ืชื•ืขื‘ืช ื›ืกื™ืœื™ื ืกื•ืจ ืžืจืข, ื›ื™ ื”ื›ืกื™ืœื™ื ื”ืชืขื™ื‘ื• ืืช ื”ื˜ื•ื‘ ื•ื‘ื—ืจื• ืืช ื”ืจืข, ื•ืœื ื™ื•ื›ืœื• ืœืกื•ืจ ืžืื—ืจื™ ืชืื•ืชื ื•ืžืฉืจื™ืจื•ืช ืœื‘ื ื”ืจืข. ื•ืขืœ ื–ื” ื”ื“ืจืš ื ืงืจืื• ื”ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื ื‘ืขืœื™ ื”ื ืคืฉ ื›ื™ ื”ืžื” ื‘ืขืœื™ื ืœื ืคืฉื ื•ื”ื ืื“ื•ื ื™ื ืœืชืื•ืชื. ื•ืขืœ ื›ืŸ ืงืจืืชื™ ืฉื ื”ืกืคืจ ื”ื–ื” ืกืคืจ ื‘ืขืœื™ ื”ื ืคืฉ.

    Do you really think every “machmir in Eruvin” fits that description?

    #1422560

    GAON
    Participant

    Hersh,
    “Gaon; seems agav churfeI toah. Just because a halacha is complex then we canโ€™t do it? Id that what lakewood is all about”

    I fail to follow your logic – which Halacha is complex? What part? Eruvin?

    #1422638

    batHH
    Participant

    off topic but I heard over Shabbes from someone from the UK that in his kehillah there’s an eruv but no one carries within it and if anyone does, he will even be denied an aliyah!!!

    You can always have politics, eruv or no eruv… I tend to think that having an eruv is always safer – if you can afford to arrange for all that property ownership…

    #1422670

    youdontsay
    Participant

    GAON: “The MB is not the only one โ€“ the Shulchan Aruch HaRav also agrees that a Baal Nefesh should be Machmir: I will quote his words (345:11):
    โ€œื•ื™ืฉ ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืฉื›ืœ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืฉืฉื™ื ืจื‘ื•ื ืขื•ื‘ืจื™ื ื‘ื• ื‘ื›ืœ ื™ื•ื ื›ื“ื’ืœื™ ืžื“ื‘ืจ ืื™ื ื• ืจืฉื•ืช ื”ืจื‘ื™ื ืืœื ื›ืจืžืœื™ืช
    ื•ืขืœ ืคื™ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื”ื ื ืชืคืฉื˜ ื”ืžื ื”ื’ ื‘ืžื“ื™ื ื•ืช ืืœื• ืœื”ืงืœ ื•ืœื•ืžืจ โ€œืฉืื™ืŸ ืœื ื• ืขื›ืฉื™ื• ืจืฉื•ืช ื”ืจื‘ื™ื ื’ืžื•ืจื”โ€ ื•ืื™ืŸ ืœืžื—ื•ืช ื‘ื™ื“ื ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื”ื ืขืœ ืžื™ ืฉื™ืกืžื›ื• (ื•ื›ืœ ื™ืจื ืฉืžื™ื ื™ื—ืžื™ืจ ืœืขืฆืžื•ืคื•)”

    However I will quote Rav Avraham Chaim Naah ื‘ืงื•ื ื˜ืจืก ื”ืฉืœื—ืŸ (ืข’ ืœ”ื• ื”ืขืจื” ืก”ื˜) :
    ื‘ื“ืคื•ืก ืงืืคื•ืกื˜ ืชื™ื‘ื•ืช “ื•ื›ืœ ื™ืจ”ืฉ ื™ื—ืžื™ืจ ืœืขืฆืžื•” ื ื“ืคืกื• ื‘ื—ืฆืื™ ืขื™ื’ื•ืœ ื‘ืžืืžืจ ืžื•ืกื’ืจ, ื•ื›ืŸ ื‘ื“ืคื•ืก ื˜ืฉืขืจื ืื•ื•ื™ืฅ ื ื“ืคืก ืžืžืฉ ื›ืžื• ื‘ืงืืคื•ืกื˜ ื•ืœืคื™”ื– ืืคืฉืจ ืฉื”ืžืืžืจ ื”ืžื•ืกื’ืจ ื”ื–ื” ืื™ื ื• ืžืจื‘ื™ื ื• ื–”ืœ ืืœื ื”ื•ืกืคื”, ื•ืœื›ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ืขืœื™ื• ืฆื™ื•ืŸ ื‘ืžืจืื” ืžืงื•ื ื‘ื™ืŸ ื›ืœ ื”ืž”ืž ืืœื ืฆื™ื•ืŸ ืžื™ื•ื—ื“ ื‘ื›ื•ื›ื‘ ืฉื”ื•ืกื™ืคื• ืื—”ื› ื”ืžืืžืจ ื•ื”ืฆื™ื•ืŸ, ื•ื”ื ื” ืžืงื•ืจ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ืืœื• ื”ื ื‘ื˜”ื– ืก”ืง ื•’ ื•ื–”ืœ ื•ืข”ื› ื”ืžื—ืžื™ืจ ื™ื—ืžื™ืจ ืœืขืฆืžื• ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื™ื“ื• ืœืžื—ื•ืช ืœืžื” ืฉื ื•ื”ื’ื™ืŸ ืขื›ืฉื™ื• ื›ืื•ืชืŸ ื”ืจื‘ื™ื ืฉืžืงืœื™ืœื™ืŸ ืขื›”ืœ, ื•ืœื ื›ืชื‘ ืฉื›ืœ ื™ืจ”ืฉ ื™ื—ืžื™ืจ ืœืขืฆืžื• ืืœื ื”ืžื—ืžื™ืจ ื™ื—ืžื™ืจ, ื•ื‘ืงื•ื ื˜ืจืก ืื—ืจื•ืŸ ื‘’ ื‘ืกื™’ ืจื ”ื‘ ื›ืชื‘ ืจื‘ื™ื ื• ื‘ื–ื””ืœ “ื•ืืฃ ืžื™ ืฉื™ืจืฆื” ืœื”ื—ืžื™ืจ ื‘ืจื””ืจ ืฉืœื ื• ื›ื”ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื• ื“ื™ืŸ ืจื””ืจ” ื•ืœื ื›ืชื‘ ื•ืืฃ ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื™ืจ”ืฉ ืœื”ื—ืžื™ืจ ื›ื•’, ืžื›ืœ ื–ื” ื ืจืื” ื“ืžื” ืฉื›ืชื•ื‘ ื›ืืŸ ื•ื›ืœ ื™ืจ”ืฉ ื™ื—ืžื™ืจ ืœืขืฆืžื•, ื”ื•ื ืžืืžืจ ืžื•ืกื’ืจ, ื›ืžื• ืฉื ื“ืคืก ื‘ืงืืคื•ืกื˜, ื•ื”ื•ื ื”ื•ืกืคืช ืžื”ืจื™”ืœ ื›ื•’ ืขื›”ืœ.

    “However, We can argue that he is not speaking in a case where there is a Tzuras haPesach..”
    I agree, but following the above, it’s irrelevant.

    “Also, the ones that are to be Machmir should be consistent with Baal Nefesh as above.”

    I couldn’t agree with you more. When it comes to eruvin people are inconsistent, mainly because of am haaratzus.

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 138 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending