OK, let’s try it again…
1) There is no ”problem” with Rav Chaim’s position.
We were evaluating R. Chaim’s position in relation to Pascal’s Wager. In Pascal’s Wager there is little downside to taking the stricter path — and you aren’t faced with an either/or decision. R. Chaim’s position, OTOH, does lead to an either/or position — if a person finds that they will miss the only available minyan because they don’t have a hat/jacket what should they do? R. Chaim maintains that you should daven alone. But perhaps t’fillah b’tzibur takes precedence, as it seems to be for most people.
2) Rav Chaim’s position is in concurrence with ”common practice.”.
Considering that I have yet to see a rav kick someone out of a shul for lack of a hat/jacket, and considering the fact that I don’t know of anyone who has seen it, I would say that it’s not, in fact, common practice.
3) Rav Chaim is in fact following an open Mishna Berura.
Yes, but there are two factors to consider here:
1. The MB is not always the final word in halacha.
2. The MB is predicated (IIRC) on the fact that we generally wear hats/jackets in the street. Since that’s not always the norm, the premise of the MB may not apply here — and hence the final halacha as well.
4) ”Most of the world” takes this approach.
Obviously not. If you think that people are kicked out of shuls in the majority of the world for not having hats/jackets, then you should look up the meanings of “most of” or “the world” in the dictionary.
5) In fact, not one poster on this thread thus far has cited a specific identified opposing Rov, and certainly not anyone near the stature of Rav Chaim.
That may or may not be true, but WADR to R. Chaim, he is not the final word in halacha either. Furthermore, it seems fairly clear that, your assertion to the contrary, most of the world does not hold like him in this instance.
6) Even if someone of such stature is found, the disagreement at most will be whether minyan or hat/jacket takes precedance. There will be no disagreement with Rav Chaim by anyone of stature over the critical nature of a hat/jacket where possible.
But considering the fact that we’re evaluating R. Chaim’s position vis-a-vis a Pascal’s Wager approach, then we’re not discussing a “where possible” question. We’re discussion an either/or question.
The above may not suit well your American ears, but the Emes is the Emes.
Oh, my “American Ears” may be getting a bit deaf with the years, but I have no problem hearing the truth. It’s discerning what, exactly, is the truth, that’s the problem.
The Wolf