[Avodah] Al petach beito mabachutz

[Zev Sero]

A & C Walters wrote:
> I wrote:
>>> The fact that originally there was a din to light outside is
>>> irrelevant; chazal were mevatel it
> 
> My source is Shu"t Dvar Yehoshua

Who's he?

> "after the sealing of the talmud which was beshas sakono, chazal
> were oyker the mitsvah of lighting outside

What's his source for this assertion?


> For a list of rishoinim that say:
> (now, we all light inside)

Irrelevant.  That is descriptive, not prescriptive.


> (even though there is no sakono)
> baal haitor hil' chanuka
> oyhel moed derech rishon nsiv 5
> tzfnes penes (rivan) chanuka perek 3 halocho 3

Who are the last two?  AFAIK the Rivan who was Rashi's son-in-law
wrote commentaries on gemara (including the one that's published in
place of Rashi for Nazir), but not on halacha.  So this must be
a different Rivan.

Assuming that they do actually say this, do they give a reason,
or do they just say "nowadays we all light inside even though there
is no sakana"?




-- 
Zev Sero               Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's
zev at sero.name          interpretation of the Constitution.
                       	                          - Clarence Thomas