Lag b'Omer is already a distant memory, but Bechadrei just publicized an interesting psak issued by Rav Yitzchak Zilbershtein, the rav of the Ramat Elchonon neighborhood of Bnei Braq.
The question was brought to Rav Zilbershtein by a fellow who had been invited by a group of boys to be honored by leading the lighting of their bonfire on Lag b'Omer night. When he got to the bonfire, he saw palettes of wood along with good quality beams. It was clear to him that the palettes had been taken form stores, and the other wood from building sites. While it is possible that the owners had forgone their ownership of all this wood, he still suspected that some of it might be outright theft.
This fellow asked Rav Zilbershtein if he would be allowed to light the bonfire in this situation?
Rav Zilbershtein's response was that it is not really a problem, as the wood had been hefker and the owners had given up hope. However, it still remains a problem that by his participation he is encouraging them to do something that is inappropriate. Therefore, Rav Zilbershtein paskened, that he is not allowed to light the bonfire so as not to encourage them and strengthen their hands. he added that the fellow should gather the boys together and have them "testify" as to how they obtained the wood.
Comments:
1. I am not sure what this testimony doe. I can only see it helping if they were above the age of bar mitzva. if they were younger, they aren't qualified to testify.
2. Even if by then the owners of the wood had given up hope of ever retrieving the wood, the boys took the wood before the owner gave up hope. They stole the wood outright (on that assumption that it was actually stolen), and therefore the fact that the owner later gave up hope should not make a difference.
3. If what they did was ok because the wood was hefker, then how is he encouraging them, by his participation, to steal more wood in the future?
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
1) I don't think it's meant to be real "eidus". It's just meant to drive home to the children the severity of stealing.
ReplyDelete2) The question was not on the permissibility of stealing the wood; it's on the person who was asked to light the fire, if he is permitted to do so. Technically, since he didn't steal it, and there was yeush, he would be permitted to burn it. The boys themselves would not have been permitted to burn it, since they were the ones who (presumably) stole it.
3) As mentioned above, it was not OK for them to steal it.
related would be this maharil.
ReplyDeletekt,
josh