Comments on: The Dangers of “Soft Stringency:” Hearing Aids, Chumrot, and Moral Sensitivity in Halakhic Handbooks

By: Jacob Suslovich

Jacob Suslovich — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:46:20 +0000

Could you provide the citation for your statement that ” the Ohr Sameach [rules] that borer does not apply to silverware”?

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:25:27 +0000

There is also a flip side of this issue which seeps into the process of Psak Halacha ,and especially its transmission, as well, as illustrated by the following example, courtesy of one of my long time chavrusas. A friend of his recently asked R Elyashiv a halachic inquiry, and received an answer that the halacha on the issue follows most Poskim, notwithstanding Posek A that is LHachmir. R Elyashiv stated very clearly that there was no need to follow Posek A. The Shamash who relayed the Psak restated the Psak as follows:Even though Rov Poskim are Lkulah, one should be be Machmir for the views of Posek A-which was clearly not the view as heard directly from Rav Elyashiv. One can only imagine when and how this Psak will be rendered in Sefarim of Psak Halacha, let alone English digests of halacha that are devoid of footnotes.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:28:52 +0000

I think that one of the most obvious issues, yet one which warrants special emphasis, is that one should avoid English works on Halacha or translations without footnotes. Shmiras Shabbos Khilchasa ( “SSK”), despite the chumros that appear in the text, has volumninous footnotes, in which the differing views many Poskim are accepted, together with the comments of R Neubert. In my opinion, the English translation suffers substantially from the absence of the same. The 39 Melachos suffers from a tendency to be Machmir in unwarranted circumstances, as does Piskei Teshuvos, a nice likut of ShuT with a Chasidishe orientation. When my chavrusa and I began learning years ago, we chose SSK over the works of R Eider ZL for a simple reason-”kli Sheni Eino Mbashel”. Halacha works rendered in English, especially without footnotes, are devoid of the halachic arguments considered by Rishonim, Acharonim and Poskim. That is why, in my opinion, the Halacha Brurah series and the Encyclopedia Talmudis and seforim such as a Frankel Rambam and the Mossad HaRav Ritvas and the Otzar Mfarshei Talmud series are far preferable to the ArtScroll Talmud.

By: Yisrael Kassel

Yisrael Kassel — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:43:23 +0000

It is quite surprising that the author of this post does not include any references to the work of Rabbi J. David Bleich, who has done extensive research on the issue of hearing aids and halakha.

By: Rael

Rael — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:39:29 +0000

See here for a transcript of Rav Lichtenstein’s hesped for Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurebach (http://www.ottmall.com/mj_ht_arch/v20/mj_v20i36.html) where he mentions the following incident:

“Once I visited Rav Shlomo Zalman and I asked him about the issue of
wearing a hearing aid on Shabbat. He permitted it. At the same time he
told me, “You know – I can’t believe it. Someone sent me a letter from
the States, saying that Rav Kotler zt”l was careful not to talk to a
person wearing a hearing aid on Shabbat for fear of speaking into the
hearing aid and thereby performing a melakhah.” He told me that he
didn’t believe this. He said, “Imagine – as if it’s not enough that this
person has been punished by Heaven in that he’s deaf! The Gemara states
that if someone is wounded in such a way that he becomes deaf, he is
paid full damages, as though he has ceased to function altogether, as if
he has died. This punishment isn’t sufficient,” he said. “Imagine – you
meet him in the street, and instead of greeting him, you say
m..m..m..”. For him this was completely out of place. He couldn’t bring
himself to believe that this is what the situation required.”

By: Gedalia Walls

Gedalia Walls — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 04:32:49 +0000

As much as I admire the author of the sefer for collecting such a myriad of halacha into such an easily accessible volume (with what I might add has extensive footnotes)- I agree that this form of presentation has not weighed the issues correctly. Were the author to be concerned about the honor due Rav Moshe z”l, mentioning the teshuva in his notes would have offered it sufficient treatment. This is where the halacha books of the modern era should treat the myriad of opinions- making them accessible to scholar and layman, avoiding accusations that they are, say, “looking for leniencies” (as it were).

By: joel rich

joel rich — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:48:02 +0000

IMHO :
1. What are the consumers looking for? :Having lost the touch of His presence, they seek now solace in the pressure of His yoke.

2.No one ever was lambasted for going with a soft chumra over kula (e.g some of the changes made between the first and second edition of shmirat shabbat khilchata)

3.In the micro why not be a little machmir (don’t see the macro implications of a system converging to chumra)
KT