[Avodah] Halachic who is right from "The Lost Scotch"

[Samuel Svarc]

In what must be first on A/A, I side with R' MS. I fail to see the oneis by
the singer. As he and RN' CL have pointed out, the oneis that is referenced
in SA is an "Act of G-d". *Choosing* not to have him sing is no "Act of
G-d", but rather an act of man. Why is the singer faulted if Yehoshua chose
not have him sing in conjunction with Chaim ben Zundel?

As for R' MK's counter argument, that "[t]his is exactly comparable to the
case in the Gemara - I hired poalim to irrigate my field, and then it rained
or the river irrigated the fields for me.  The poalim certainly could have,
if they were bored, carried water to my field from the well, but it would
have served no benefit.
Oness in this context means that for unforseen reasons the work agreement
was not carried out.  It could be because the poeil got sick mid-day or a
relative of his died, or it could be because the BH"B no longer needs the
work done (such as the cases mentioned above).  The Gemara calls all of
these oness." I differ, because watering a field once it has been watered is
harmful. Whereas, what harm is there if both singers would sing?

R' YM makes an argument that I heard from a lurker as well. The contractual
agreement starts with Davidi preparing for the chasuna, and as such he
should receive at least partial payment. The lurker embellished this
argument with the following: the story makes clear that Yehoshua was
requesting a special request that Davidi had to make preparations for, so
even if in a regular case the obligation would only start when he sings, in
this special case it should start as soon as he makes special preparations.

KT,
MSS