[Avodah] Street Minyanim

[Chana Luntz]

RJR writes:

>You might find the following analysis of interest. Having listen to a
number of shiurim i?ve come to the conclusion that while there are technical
points to debate , the mega shaat hadechak issue looms large

>https://aiayk.org/wp-content/uploads/2020audio/VYK4.30.20HaRavShmuelGelley.
mp3
>HARAV SHMUEL GELLEY-PORCH AND ZOOM MINYANIM

Note that RSG mentioned above holds that a porch minyan is mikar hadin, ie
as per my previous post, he is from the second camp of poskening.
Fundamentally start with the Shulchan Aruch and look at the nosei kelim on
the page, and the Mishna Brura, rather than gemora and rishonim as key to
understanding the Shulchan Aruch.  Note also that he (or those on whom he
relies for poskening, I don't know who that is, but he makes it clear this
is not his decision making) holds that maybe one should be machmir and not
say chazarat hashatz, based on Rav Moshe Igeros Moshe Orech Chaim chelek 2
siman 18.  Rav Moshe there is discussing adding a katan to make the tenth,
and he suggests no chazarat hashatz, based on the Rambam holding that bracha
l'vatala is a d'orisa.  But Rav Moshe there (unlike Rav Miller as quoted in
my previous post) even though he is concerned for bracha l'vatala for
chazarat hashatz, holds that there is not a concern with saying the bracha
over krias haTorah as this bracha is really l'kovod haTorah, and not really
over the mitzvah, and so it is only a rabbinic requirement not to say it if
there are not ten.  Rav Moshe does not discuss the question of nedava that I
brought in my previous discussion - but from the preamble discussing that
the shul will close if the katan is not counted for the minyan, and the
focus on kriat haTorah, I suspect that the question was about a Shabbas
minyan, not a regular weekday one; and, as mentioned nedavos cannot be
brought on Shabbat.  It is interesting though, that Rav Moshe is choshesh
for the Rambam for chazarat haShatz, given that he is not when it comes to
Ashkenazi women making brachos over mitzvos aseh shehazman grama, given that
the two would seem to go hand in hand, as per Tosphos. (Rav Moshe,
admittedly, is one of the strongest proponents of the idea that women are
performing full-fledged mitzvos when they eg take a lulav, and presumably
that is the distinction he would make).

Regarding RJR's comment:

>i?ve come to the conclusion that while there are technical points to debate
, the mega shaat hadechak issue looms large

But let's think a little deeper as to what is meant by shaat hadchak here:

a) is the shaas hadchak that if we don't allow these porch or zoom minyanim,
then there will not be minyanim anywhere in the world (other than the few
where there are ten over barmitzvah in one household), with the loss of the
benefits of tefilla b'tzibbur, such as HaShem accepting the tefilos?  Is
this based on a view that what we rule down here, HaShem accepts (lo
beshamayim he) even in our own times?  Because otherwise surely just because
we say it is a minyan doesn't mean that HaShem has to treat it as a minyan.
Especially as He created the virus spread that means we don't have
full-fledged, no questions asked, minyanim.  If the question is whether
HaShem is sanctified b'toch bnei Israel by divrei shebkedusha at one of
these minyanim, that might be an interesting learning question, but why are
we being machmir and holding these minyanim? From our perspective, if
Halachically we are patur from forming regular minyanim, then we are patur,
just as we are patur from bringing korbanos and wearing techeles (if you
hold we don't have it) and other mitzvos that we just can't do at the
moment. We don't say, because there is a shaas hadchak, we should bring
korbanos reliant on minority opinions, or wear techeles unless we are
convinced that this is the real thing and there is no counter-pressure of
even rabbinic concern.   While here, there would seem clearly to be rabbinic
concerns, at the very least, if indeed these are not considered minyanim.
That is additionally why, right at the beginning, I raised the question of
us all being in nidui.  Someone in nidui is not counted for a minyan,
regardless of whether the other technical requirements are met.  There is a
judgment therefore being made here about HaShem's views on all this.  If
HaShem created a situation where a minyan was Halachically incompatible with
pikuach nefesh, and the law of the land, should we be substituting
Halachically dubious minyanim instead, on the grounds this is a shaas
hadchak?

b) is the shaas hadchak that if we don't matir these minyanim, people will
go off and form regular ones, thereby endangering themselves, their family,
and their friends.  That is, we need to matir these minyanim for pikuach
nefesh reasons.  It is a bit like, well you can lie to save lives, so you
can bend the halacha to potentially save lives.  But note that this assumes
that the potential minyan goers are sufficiently callous about human life
and the mitzvah of pikuach nefesh that they will ignore all pleading and
form regular minyanim if they are denied the comfort of believing these
porch minyanim are Halachically kosher.  What does that say about the
halachic observance (or assumed halachic observance) of the participants?

c) is the shaas hadchak the mental health of the participants (particularly
avelim, perhaps), who derive immense comfort from davening in a "minyan",
even if that minyan may Halachically not be a minyan.  The, if we don't have
a etrog, take a lemon, idea, otherwise people will be upset.  Note however
the can of worms that potentially opens up, even if you restrict it to
violating (or possibly violating) rabbinic prohibitions only, and not Torah
ones.  Of the three, this is, to my mind, the most palatable, but there are
lots of concerns in the literature for doing this kind of thing.  How far
can one go in bending the halacha to provide mental comfort in difficult
times?  This is not your classic shaas hadchak because of hefsed meruba (ie
people will lose money), this is saying there is a shaas hadchak because
people are struggling emotionally with the "real" halacha of doing without
minyanim. 

>Joel rich

Regards

Chana