[Avodah] [Areivim] Asifa - Lose Olam Haba

Chana Luntz Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk
Thu May 24 04:25:17 PDT 2012


RMB wrote (On Areivim):

>I think RnTK is right. Anyone who was firmly within the target audience
>realized it was guzma. I -- and I'm not from that population -- listened
>to the audio stream, it never struck me otherwise.

>Halakhah is made by going to your own rav, or his rav, or... and so on.
>Posqim know it, even if publishers and promulgators might pretend
>otherwise. Daas Torah is (as I wrote on Avodah) a system for getting
>Torah-influenced advice, not pesaq. So, not following the rules for pesaq
>is not shocking, and I would not take the words of a gadol baTorah in
>a way that does surprise when other alternatives exist.

I am not so sure that you are right, or within the mindset of the people who
were making the claim.

There is a teshuvah of the Chatam Sofer (Choshen Mishpat 116) which
discussed the calling of an "assifas hamevorim".  The local Sar had put a
new tax on the community, and the community leaders were trying to work out
how to raise the money to pay it.  So they called for all individuals to
come to the asifa but only around 30 baalei battim came, and they agreed to
choose nine balei battim - 3 wealthy, 3 middle class and 3 poor and they
would agree with the  community leaders how to raise the money - and they
all agreed to raise money in a certain way, all except one of the nine balei
battim, who disagreed with the plan.  And the question to the Chatam Sofer
was could they go ahead with the plan, even though it involved taking money,
inter alia, from this one of the nine balei batim against his will and from
the rest of the community which seems to have been passive in this whole
thing.

And the Chatam Sofer held that they could.  He held that despite only thirty
baal habatim coming to the asifa (spelt aleph samech yud feh heh) in any
event, since it was announced publically that all the community in the city
should come to determine what to do about such and such business one who did
not come  behold it is like he gave over to those who did come the
permission to make whatever decision they wanted.  And he then held that
even though one of the nine objected, it was legitimate to follow majority
rule of those who did come.  He added though the need for the agreement of
the Chaver HaIr or Morah D'asra for a community enactment to be enacted on
the community (noting that some hold this is only needed when we are dealing
with a fine or with artisan enactments and the like) so they needed to get
the Rav on board as well.

Note this is (of course, and as the Chatam Sofer references) only a small
part of a huge literature on community enactments, their force and validity.
Asifos are not a new radical, unheard of, halachic entity.  They are
something of a known quantity - albeit only to those who spend a fair bit of
time in Choshen Mispat (the reality of today's halachic life and the role
played by the non Jewish or Israeli government means that these halachos
have not really been halacha l'ma'ase for a while).

Now in the case the Chatam Sofer was discussing, there was no question as to
who was the community (the ones subject to the tax, after all).  In our
case, part of the fuzziness is "who is the community".  While the Chatam
Sofer might well legitimately say that those who heard about and did not
come to the asifa gave their proxy to those who did, he would not say the
same about those who might have been in that town on that day, and heard
about it, but lived elsewhere.  So those card carrying Modern Orthodox, who
would not go near such a thing with a barge pole, can probably only be
included to the extent that you write them out of Orthodoxy altogether.  BUT
for those who *did* heed the call - and it was very clear that within
numerous communities there was serious and sustained pressure to come (eg
the reported case of the Rav who said if people didn't go, they needn't
bother coming back to his shiur) -there is an argument to say that by doing
so, they joined themselves to the community and are thus subject to any
decrees that the community made.  And my guess as to the supposed role of
the Shevet haLevi was to function as the Chaver HaIr (who in the ideal
should be one of the gadolei hador, although Yiftach b'dor etc as the poskim
frequently cite).

Of course, the Asifa of the Chatam Sofer did what it set out to do on the
tin, it worked out how they were going to pay the new tax.  I can
legitimately see the complaint of those that were promised one thing, where
the Asifa turned out to be something completely different, to which they
were not intending to sign up.  It seems reasonably clear that if the Asifa
had been announced to be about some completel different community issue, and
turned out to be about how to deal with the tax, the Chatam Sofer would not
so readily have deemed the agreement of the community.  

However I doubt the organisers thought they had promised one thing and
delivered something different, so I really am not at all convinced that this
was meant as guzma rather than a serious halachic reference.  I agree may be
upping the ante to start bringing Choshen Mishpat ideas last seriously
implemented during the Council of the Four Lands into modern day American
life - but isn't that the way these communities are increasingly trying to
go?

>Tir'u baTov!
>-Micha

Regards

Chana







More information about the Avodah mailing list