[Avodah] Ein MeFarsemin HaDavar

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 01:04:11PM +0300, Rabbi Meir G. Rabi via Avodah wrote:
> Rashi Chulin 12a writes,
>> Ein MeFarsemin HaDavar

> Are we to assume this is not the same as Halachah VeEin Morin Kein?

It sure sounds the same, but then why didn't Rashi pick a more common
idiom.
...

> What are the guidelines that direct us to not publicise such rulings?

When the question involves an issur that people would be tempted to
find heterim for to the point of being able to accept specious ones.
Or even if to the point of being able to say to themselves, "it may
not be mutar, but it's not so terrible -- look so-and-so was given
a heter".

I can think of two cases, offhand, when a poseiq may give such a pesaq:

1- The person is going to sin. The rav cannot precent that. All he can
do is advise how to minimize the sin, or (E.g. it's better for a kohein
to live with a gerushah without chupah veqiddushin.)

2- A situation came up where all the possiblities are assur for one
reason or another, and the poseiq has to decide which is dechuyah.

In both cases, the poseiq is forced to recommend violating an issur
(or at least a minhag) either (1) because the sho'el is unwilling
to be moseir nefesh or (2) there is no choice.

EDIT, I thought of a third case before approving my own message for
distribution:
3- There is a tzad heter that can be relied on for a hefsed meruba,
but (again) the aveira is such that people will weaken their resolve
in other cases too if they heard of it.
--- END EDIT --

And if everyone hears that there is a situations where Rav R said
that one can do issur X, the masses will lose at least some of their
aversion to doing X.

Lemashal:

There are some posqim who hold it is mutar to invite someone who otherwise
would have no Shabbos and never have an opportunity to experience a
Shabbos even though it is nearly certain that lemaaseh they'll drive
home after dinner. As long as you give them the option of staying.

How does this differ from the CLJS's Driving Responsum allowing their
congregants to drive to shul rather than never going to one. This
responsum is based on giving up on trying to get more of the masses
to C-nagugue during the week, or to move withing walking distance of
their C-nagogue.

But if one holds that it's a case of violating one Shabbos for a change
of being able to keep future ones, the only difference between their
pesaq and the C ruling is that the CLJS published their ruling, the
masses heard a message that further lessened their perception of the
severity of driving on Shabbos, and it *increased* driving (to places
other than services) and Shabbos violation in general, r"l.

A second example:

A rabbi on NY's Upper West Side quietly told sexually active single women
in his community to go to the miqvah. As they were going to sin either
way, at least it won't be an issur kareis.

Word got out, and even though he didn't intend to be moreh kein, it became
common knowledge.

(The usual minhag is the reverse: Not letting single women use the miqvah,
not even erev RH or erev YK. Because keeping relations being a greater
issur means fewer people will be doing it. I don't know if in our day,
this reasoning is valid. But I'm not a rav leading a community, so my
opinion is neither informed nor of any import.)

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 In today's rush we all think too much,
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   seek too much, want too much and
Author: Widen Your Tent      forget about the joy of just Being.
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF                - Eckhart Tolle