Anonymous

Klalei Halacha: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
Line 3: Line 3:
# Some say that everyone agrees that safek isur derabbanan lkula is permitted even initially, but only a safek mitzvah derabbanan lkula is to be avoided initially.<Ref>Rav Ovadia citing the Mutzal M'esh 13 based on Menachot 68b, Michtam LDovid 17 s.v. amnam</ref>
# Some say that everyone agrees that safek isur derabbanan lkula is permitted even initially, but only a safek mitzvah derabbanan lkula is to be avoided initially.<Ref>Rav Ovadia citing the Mutzal M'esh 13 based on Menachot 68b, Michtam LDovid 17 s.v. amnam</ref>
==Safek Derabbanan Lkula Bchezkat Isur==
==Safek Derabbanan Lkula Bchezkat Isur==
# The Shach<ref>Klalei Safek 110:21, Shach 111:4</ref> holds that when there is a chazaka of an isur we're strict about a safek derabbanan, while the Pri Chadash disagrees. Gilyon Hashas Brachot 12a explains that the Ri holds like the Shach. Rashba Niddah 61b s.v. ha clearly seems to side with the Pri Chadash who is lenient. See further in Yabia Omer YD 8:5 and Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 11. Sidrei Tahara end of 199 cites Taz who is lenient. Rash Mikavot 2:2 implies that he's lenient. Shaar Hamelech Mikvaot 10:7 writes that the dispute in the Tosfot Pesachim 9a centers around whether you can have a safek derabbanan lkula if there was a chazaka of it being asur. How do we pasken on those answers? (See Gra YD 331:84 who says we’re lenient but Derech Emunah Maaser 3:63 disagrees.) Shach YD 110:21 is strict. Pri Chadash 110:34 and Taz 198:21 are lenient. Sidrei Tahara 199:40 and Taharat Habayit (v. 3, pp. 85-6) discuss this at length. Taz 69:24 is lenient and the Shaar Hamelech Mikvaot 10:7 disagrees. Meor Yisrael Pesachim 9a answers locally for the Taz but also that we’re lenient on every safek derabbanan where there’s a chezkat isur. Chida in Machzik Bracha 69:14 agrees.
# The Shach<ref>Klalei Safek 110:21, Shach 111:4</ref> holds that when there is a chazaka of an isur we're strict about a safek derabbanan, while the Pri Chadash disagrees. Gilyon Hashas Brachot 12a explains that the Ri holds like the Shach. Rashba Niddah 61b s.v. ha clearly seems to side with the Pri Chadash who is lenient. See further in Yabia Omer YD 8:5 and Taharat Habayit v. 3 p. 11. Sidrei Tahara end of 199 cites Taz in Hilchot Chatzitza who is lenient. Rash Mikavot 2:2 implies that he's lenient. Shaar Hamelech Mikvaot 10:7 writes that the dispute in the Tosfot Pesachim 9a centers around whether you can have a safek derabbanan lkula if there was a chazaka of it being asur. How do we pasken on those answers? (See Gra YD 331:84 who says we’re lenient but Derech Emunah Maaser 3:63 disagrees.) Shach YD 110:21 is strict. Pri Chadash 110:34 and Taz 198:21 are lenient. Sidrei Tahara 199:40 and Taharat Habayit (v. 3, pp. 85-6) discuss this at length. Taz YD 69:24 is lenient and the Shaar Hamelech Mikvaot 10:7 disagrees. Meor Yisrael Pesachim 9a answers locally for the Taz but also that we’re lenient on every safek derabbanan where there’s a chezkat isur. Chida in Machzik Bracha 69:14 agrees with Pri Chadash. Meor Yisrael Pesachim 4a brings a proof for the Pri Chadash from Rosh Pesachim 1:2.
# If there was a piece of something rabbinically forbidden that was recognizable in its own place before it fell into a mixture then it isn't considered itchazek isura and we're lenient to apply ''safek derabbanan lkula''. If the pieces weren't recognizable when they fell into a mixture then it is considered itchazek isur and according to the Shach we don't apply ''safek derabbanan lkula''.<ref>Shach 111:4, Pri Megadim S"D 110:38</ref>
# If there was a piece of something rabbinically forbidden that was recognizable in its own place before it fell into a mixture then it isn't considered itchazek isura and we're lenient to apply ''safek derabbanan lkula''. If the pieces weren't recognizable when they fell into a mixture then it is considered itchazek isur and according to the Shach we don't apply ''safek derabbanan lkula''.<ref>Shach 111:4, Pri Megadim S"D 110:38</ref>


Anonymous user