[Avodah] Street Minyanim

[Zev Sero]

On 17/5/20 8:15 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
> 
> That's not my understanding. To me, even when we are accustomed to 
> accommodating the stricter opinions, we can follow the ikar hadin when 
> the stricter views are merely inconvenient or difficult. You don't need 
> a "no alternative" situation to justify following the ikar hadin. Why on 
> earth *would* you?
> 
> Let's focus on the phrase "Kedai hu lismoch alav bish'as had'chak." In 
> particular, the words "kedai hu". It seems clear to me that this refers 
> to an individual, i.e., a daas yachid, but one of sufficient stature 
> that he can be relied upon bish'as had'chak. Why on earth would we need 
> to rely on this individual if his views were that of the ikar hadin? 
> Rather, when the ikar hadin puts you in a "no alternative" situation, 
> *that's* when one might fall back on a minority opinion.

I think we are simply working from different definitions of the term 
"ikar hadin".  By that term I mean that when you get right down to it 
the halacha allows us to follow this opinion, but since there are so 
many who disagree with it we shouldn't unless there is no alternative. 
The stronger the opposition to it, the more we should avoid relying on 
it, and thus the narrower the circumstances in which we consider 
ourselves to have no alternative.  But if the bedrock halacha says "no, 
this shita is rejected and cannot be relied on", then lack of 
alternative can't change that to a "yes".


> Getting back to the thread's topic of "street minyanim", I remember once 
> asking, many decades ago, about a particular shita which allowed a child 
> to be the tenth for a minyan, but only if it was a sh'as had'chak. I 
> asked what "sh'as had'chak" means in this context; wouldn't it apply to 
> *every* case of where only nine show up? And if so, then haven't we 
> redefined the minyan henceforth and forevermore? How would one 
> distinguish between a normal case of nine men and a boy being a 
> non-minyan, versus a sha'as had'chak case where nine men and a boy *is* 
> allowed to be a minyan?

In that case I have an easy answer.  Bearing in mind that I come from a 
tradition that does not rely on that shita *even* bish'as had'chak, my 
understanding of those who do is that sh'as had'chak means not only that 
there is no tenth man but that there is no prospect of getting one, even 
by waiting, or searching for one on the street, or going to people's 
homes to fetch them.  So long as one *can* get a tenth man, that is the 
alternative; if one can't, then it's an emergency.


-- 
Zev Sero            Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy summer
zev at sero.name       Seek Jerusalem's peace; may all who love you prosper