Page 360 - 20818_park-c_efi

20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 12 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Cyan
20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 12 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Black
#20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 12 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Yellow
20818_efi-ab - 20818_park-C_efi-ab | 12 - A | 18-08-20 | 13:46:25 | SR:-- | Magenta
it into a synagogue, can be rejected, especially since many of
our Rabbanim are of the view that even in a permanent syna-
gogue one does not recite the blessings over the lighting. [See
Be’er Heitev (Orach Chaim #671:10) and Sha’arei Teshuvah.
(ibid, s.k 10).]
The Sefer Shalmei Moed (p. 237) writes that one should not recite
#
the blessings on the Chanukah candles in any public place other than
a synagogue. The source for reciting the blessings in the synagogue is
based on the principle that one makes a blessing on a custom, such
as the blessing over reciting Hallel on Rosh Chodesh. Therefore, it is
sufficient for us to do what is customary without adding on anything
else. Likewise, there is no need to light Chanukah candles in a Beis
Midrash that houses an evening kollel but no evening prayers. The Kaf
HaChaim (#671:68) write that the “beis midrash” which the poskim
refer to is only a place where people pray.
It seems to me that one can recite the first two blessings without
saying Hashem’s regal and majestic names, while the blessing of She-
hecheyanu can be recited with Shem Hashem (Hashem’s name), if the
person making the blessing has a new fruit or garment.
If a physician or nurse on duty was sleeping in the clinic and eating
two meals there, it would be permissible to recite all the blessings,
because he is obligated to light there. According to the view of Pri
Chadash (cited in Bi’ur Halacha #677:1 s.v. b’makom) he has to be there
at least most of the days of Chanukah.
1 AnsweR to Question 2
Regarding a gentile who wants to light Chanukah lights to fulfill a
mitzvah, the Rambam (Hilchos Melachim 10:10) writes: If a Noahide
wants to do a mitzvah other than his own seven mitzvos, in order to
receive reward, we do not prevent him from doing so according to
the halacha. If he brings a burnt offering [in the Temple] we accept it
from him, and if he gives charity, we accept it… and give it to the poor
among the gentiles. (The exceptions are the mitzvos of tefillin, Sefer To-
rah and mezuzah, as explained there in the Radvaz.) So, if he wants to
346 1 Medical-HalacHic Responsa of Rav ZilbeRstein
in medicine because the words of the Radvaz did not satisfy them.
According to their reasoning “You shall not deviate” was only said
in regard to the rulings of the Sanhedrin in Torah reasoning and the
thirteen principles by which the Torah is interpreted, as explained in
the Rambam (Hilchos Mamrim, Ch. 4). Clarification of a fact, such as
whether this remedy is a segulah or a proven natural remedy, which
the Sanhedrin clarifies through the power of their knowledge of med-
icine, would not fall under this category. When it comes to this, the
Sanhedrin is like any other physician, and does not have the special
power of the Lishkas Hagazis. Thus, the ruling of the beis din in a
matter like this would not obligate other physcians with dissenting
opinions. This requires further study.
The Radvaz wrote an additional novelty (chiddush) as to why the
Sanhedrin needs to have knowledge of medicine. This is so that they 12
can rule the death penalty to someone who killed his friend by giving
him poison to drink. The Sanhedrin needs to study medicine to know
whether or not that potion can be fatal. This answer also demands
explanation. Why can’t the Sanhedrin rely on the views of physicians
regarding the potion?
In Tractate Sanhedrin (78b) we learn that if one hits another with
a stone or his fist, and an estimation indicates that the victim may die
from the blow, then if at first the vicitm was only wounded but then
his situation worsened and he died, the peron who hit him is guilty
and liable to the death penalty. Rav Nechemiah says he is exempt.
Rashi writes that “an estimation indicates that the victim may die” re-
fers to an estimation of the beis din. This needs explanation. Why do
we follow an estimation of the beis din and not a doctor’s assessment?
Mahari Assad has already dealt with this question. (Yehudah
Ya’aleh, Vol. 1, Yoreh De’ah #193) He answers that Rashi’s intent is
to nullify the value of a doctor’s assessment. A physician’s reliability
in matters not plainly seen but based on the science of medicine is
considered doubtful and is not definite. Even though in regard to
desecration of Shabbos for the patient or in regard to eating on Yom
Kippur, the physicians are believed, this is only becaue even if there
is a mere possibility of pikuach nefesh, we desecrate Shabbos and Yom
Shabbos Desecration by a Physician Who Says there is No Danger 2 363