X hits on this document

Word document






106 / 157

2, note 9, p. 52, concur. (See, however, Halikhot Beita, Petah haBayyit, no. 25, who suggest an alternate understanding of Magen Avraham). R. Yehuda Herzl Henkin, Tsibbur Nashim biKri’at haMegilla, Keshot, 4 (Adar II/Nisan 5755), sec 14, pp. 8-10, reprinted in Resp. Benei Vanim, III, sec. 7, suggests that this is the meaning of the cryptic suggestion of Behag, Halakhot Gedolot, Hilkhot Megilla, s.v. haKol hayyavin”; cited in Rama, O.H. sec. 689, no. 2, that women are obligated in hearing the Megilla [in private] and not in reading it [in public]. R. Mordechai Jacob Breisch, ibid., argues that women are obligated in neither be-rov am hadrat melekh (“In the multitude of people is the King’s glory,” Proverbs 14:28; vide infra, sec. B.6 for a discussion of this term) nor in pirsumei nisa (publicizing the miracle). A similar position is maintained by: R. Moses Sternbuch, Mo’adim uZmanim, II, sec. 173; R. Raphael Evers, Resp. vaShav veRafa, O.H., sec. 31; and R. David Auerbach, Halikhot Beita, Petah haBayyit, sec. 25. This also seems to be the view of R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited by R. Nahum Stepansky, veAleihu Lo Yibol, I, O.H., sec. 431 and by R. Tuvia Friend, Shalmei Mo’ed – beInyanei Hag uMo’ed, sec. 58, p. 274.

105.R. Israel David Harfeness, Resp. VaYvarekh David, I, O.H. sec. 82, and R. Gavriel Zinner, Nitei Gavriel—Dinei uMinhagei Purim, sec. 13, no. 3, note 6, dissent, however, maintaining that women are obligated in be-rov am. At first blush, this would also seem to be the view of Hayyei Adam, kelal 155, no. 7, who writes, “. . . Even if one can gather a minyan in his home, it is still highly preferable (mitsvah min ha-mu-vhar) to go to the synagogue—he, his wife and his children—to hear the Megilla.” Similar language is found in Bah, O.H., end of sec. 687 and Ateret Zekenim. Nevertheless, one could well argue that Hayyei Adam, Bah and Ateret Zekenim maintain that children and certainly women contribute by their presence to the be-rov am hadrat melekh of others, though they themselves are not obligated therein. See R. Joshua M.M. Ehrenberg, Resp. Devar Yehoshua, I, sec. 96. Alternatively, these posekim may consider the presence of women and minors preferable because of pirsumei nisa (even in the absence of be-rov am). This is in fact the implication of Or Zaru’a, Hilkhot Megilla sec. 368, who states that one should be accompanied to the reading of the Megilla by his wife and children because of pirsumei nisa.

106.R. Mas’ud Raphael Alfasi, Resp. Mash’ha deRabvata, addenda at end of II, sec. 689; R. Joseph Hayyim, Resp. Rav Pe’alim, O.H. II, sec. 62; R. Moses Hayyim Lits Rosenbaum, Sha’arei Emet, Hilkhot Megilla, sec. 4, Hemdat Arye, sec. 4, no. 5; Hug haArets, sec. 3;

Document info
Document views544
Page views545
Page last viewedSat Jan 21 02:36:38 UTC 2017