Q&A: Zimmun
Zimmun
Question
Generally speaking, I should start by saying that it always sounded illogical to me to obligate an individual in something that requires a group, such as a minyan, so when I heard your view about a minyan it fit very well with that way of thinking of mine.
The question is about zimmun: let’s say I ate with two other people and one of them left. Can one say that I “committed a transgression,” even if it was under duress? It’s hard for me to say that, in my opinion. What does the Rabbi think?
Answer
I don’t know. This is hairsplitting that I don’t see having any practical implication. What’s the practical difference whether you transgressed under duress or didn’t transgress at all? On the face of it, this is indeed a transgression under duress. All three of you became obligated, and one of you prevented the others from fulfilling their obligation.
That is how it works with communal commandments as well (building the Temple, conquering the Land, appointing a king). What would you say there? See column 600.
Discussion on Answer
Then say here too that the group of three committed a transgression. See my columns mentioned above.
What I always assumed there was simply that you can’t say about me as an individual that I committed a transgression, since it’s a communal commandment, and cases where people say about a commandment that it’s an individual commandment but it requires a group were always difficult for me.