Current
ONA'AH
> Short Shaila Form
> Shaila:
> In 227 3 the curriculum brought a machene Efraim that makes an argument
> between the Rosh and the rambam based on the rambams use of rov. In mechira
> chap 12 Hal 4 rambam uses the lashon of kol and sounds like the Rosh. How
> can we understand the machane Efraim ?
>You could answer the rambam by making a distinction between money and coins that is only rov and purchasing items that there it is kol.
Response:
Your teretz sounds great. In fact the Yerios Hachoshen in siman 227 (page 835) asks precisely your question and therefore answers exactly your answer as an alternative way of learning the Rambam and ARGUES WITH THE MACHANE EFRAIM being that the whole diyuk of the Machane Efraim from coins is in order to learn out the exact same halacha that applies to regular ona'ah. So l'ma'ase, that can't be the way to answer the contradiction according to the Machane Efraim. So we're back to square one.
L'aniyus da'ati, we can propose the following original teretz in order to answer up the contradiction according to the Machane Efraim "l'shi'taso" in that siman. The Rambam by coins is discussing the issur of ona'ah if he'll use it for business later on being that according to the Machane Efraim l'shitaso ona'ah is gezel and not a z'chus t'viah as Rav Chaim holds, and as the Maharsham says (in vol. 1: 151) according to Tumim that says that safaik gezel is permitted that that is only if he received it in a permitted fashion and here it's beforehand. So therefore we need to say that there's a rov on his side it'll at least be omaid to be nituk l'esai post facto, as the the Shu'T Yad Rama says (of R' Refael Mordechai Halaivi Solovoi in Siman 60: 2) and the Imrai Bina in Shu'T O'CH (Siman 4 "U'mai'hei Ta'a'ma" in which he explains why there is no lifnei iver on the part of the nis'a'ne) and is therefor not restricted to keep it. For that he has a rov to say that the person that he'll sell it to will be mochel the ona'ah and he therefor can use it later on. This is as far as the issur is concerned. However, in hilchos mechirah the Rambam is talking about having to return the ona'ah back to the nis'a'ne and not about forcing the nis'a'ne to pay the pachos mishtus to him. For that he holds that there's no chashash at all once it was given to him because once it was already given then the "derech hakol" is to be mochel it. However before it was actually given then there is only a rov to rely on and the nis'a'ne can still claim that he is from the mi'ut. However, there isn't anyone anywhere that I can locate that answers this apparent contradiction according to the Machane Efraim.
> Shaila:
> In 227 3 the curriculum brought a machene Efraim that makes an argument
> between the Rosh and the rambam based on the rambams use of rov. In mechira
> chap 12 Hal 4 rambam uses the lashon of kol and sounds like the Rosh. How
> can we understand the machane Efraim ?
>You could answer the rambam by making a distinction between money and coins that is only rov and purchasing items that there it is kol.
Response:
Your teretz sounds great. In fact the Yerios Hachoshen in siman 227 (page 835) asks precisely your question and therefore answers exactly your answer as an alternative way of learning the Rambam and ARGUES WITH THE MACHANE EFRAIM being that the whole diyuk of the Machane Efraim from coins is in order to learn out the exact same halacha that applies to regular ona'ah. So l'ma'ase, that can't be the way to answer the contradiction according to the Machane Efraim. So we're back to square one.
L'aniyus da'ati, we can propose the following original teretz in order to answer up the contradiction according to the Machane Efraim "l'shi'taso" in that siman. The Rambam by coins is discussing the issur of ona'ah if he'll use it for business later on being that according to the Machane Efraim l'shitaso ona'ah is gezel and not a z'chus t'viah as Rav Chaim holds, and as the Maharsham says (in vol. 1: 151) according to Tumim that says that safaik gezel is permitted that that is only if he received it in a permitted fashion and here it's beforehand. So therefore we need to say that there's a rov on his side it'll at least be omaid to be nituk l'esai post facto, as the the Shu'T Yad Rama says (of R' Refael Mordechai Halaivi Solovoi in Siman 60: 2) and the Imrai Bina in Shu'T O'CH (Siman 4 "U'mai'hei Ta'a'ma" in which he explains why there is no lifnei iver on the part of the nis'a'ne) and is therefor not restricted to keep it. For that he has a rov to say that the person that he'll sell it to will be mochel the ona'ah and he therefor can use it later on. This is as far as the issur is concerned. However, in hilchos mechirah the Rambam is talking about having to return the ona'ah back to the nis'a'ne and not about forcing the nis'a'ne to pay the pachos mishtus to him. For that he holds that there's no chashash at all once it was given to him because once it was already given then the "derech hakol" is to be mochel it. However before it was actually given then there is only a rov to rely on and the nis'a'ne can still claim that he is from the mi'ut. However, there isn't anyone anywhere that I can locate that answers this apparent contradiction according to the Machane Efraim.
Archives
BAL TOLIN
BKN NATIONWIDE FORUM SHIURIM ON BAL TOLIN
As with the 5-Minute daily shiurim, we have kept it very short and concise, perfect for on the go.
Forum 01: Topics discussed: 1. The manager of a companies status pertaining to bal tolin (question submitted by the Chicago branch) 2. Is there "byomo titen scharo" when there is no bal tolin (question submitted by the Minneapolis branch) 3. Is there "Byomo" immediately upon work completion, before Bal talin kicks in (question submitted by the Lakweood Branch) 4. Is there "byomo" or Bal talin by an Akum (question submitted by the Deal Branch) 5. An interesting tshuvah about bal talin and early Shabbos (thank you to HaRav Gavriel Cohen of the Los Angeles branch for pointing it out) |
Forum 02: Topics discussed:1. Paying a worker with a monetary equivalent - shaveh kessef.
2. Is there Bal Talin when hiring a serviceman who works for a company? 3. Dealing with your landlord through a secretary, or management company. 4. Payment for after hours labor. |
KINYANIM
| |||
