Why does Elijah need

It does not say that they did not rule like him because he heard it from Elijah. On the contrary, they made the law more difficult than they heard from Elijah, and it is proven that Elijah's words were accepted as halakhic, and therefore they had to settle the law that Beit Sha'ar is a Ma'aliot. Indeed, Chazon Ish, 4:67, explained that without this fact, there would be no reason to say that a person is not obligated to suffer harm for the sake of the poor and that it is not an obligation under the law of charity, and this was truly the opinion of that Hassid. And the innovation they learned from Elijah was that the criterion of Hassidism is not to make a Beit Shear (and in truth it is only a criterion of Hassidism and not a complete obligation). And this is what they emphasized in the Gemara here, that since the criterion of Hassidism is not to make a Beit Shear, again one cannot force his fellow to participate in Beit Shear. In other words, they did not rule the law like Elijah, but Elijah taught that it is a criterion of Hassidism, and in any case, the law does not force someone who does not want to participate in Beit Shear. It is true that this should be discussed, because if the public decided to build and they did so anyway, then what benefit would it have for the one who does not participate? In practice, there will be a gatehouse and the poor will not be heard, and in reality he only saved himself money and did not benefit anything. Therefore, ostensibly, he has an obligation to participate even if it is against the virtue of Hasidism. But it should be rejected that perhaps if he does not participate, the others will not build. And if they build anyway – they deserve it to be at their expense.