Obligation – moral, halakhic, and Torah
Hello Rabbi,
Now I saw in your comments on the last article (State of Halacha, Smotrich) that you admit that there is a Torah obligation to be moral (and do what is right and good), but it is not a halachic obligation.
I would be happy to explain the difference between a Torah obligation and a halakhic obligation. A halakhic obligation means an obligation imposed by the Torah.
A halakhic obligation is based on a commandment. A Torah obligation that is not halakhic is not the product of a commandment. This is the will of God. Therefore, “and you shall do what is right and good” is not included in the list of commandments.
By the way, this is the real issue today, the giving of the Torah. The innovation that began with the giving of the Torah is not the revelation of God’s will, but the commandment toward us. Even before the giving of the Torah, the patriarchs could know what God wanted. But as long as they were not commanded, they were not obligated to do so, and it was not a law. It is like running a red light without the Knesset enacting a prohibition on it. It makes perfect sense to be careful and not to cross because it is dangerous. But there is no prohibition. It is the legislation that creates the legal validity of a commandment.
I don't understand, then, why the Rambam did include a positive commandment of "Love your neighbor as yourself," and also included "You shall not go astray" and "You shall not hate your brother in your heart," is there a halakhic obligation on the details of morality? (And I don't understand why the commandment "Love your neighbor" is considered a "details," it actually includes life).
In addition, I think that there is indeed a halakhic obligation on the details of morality, why do you divide and say that the commandment "Do what is right and good" includes me, why do you divide it like that?
Thanks in advance.
My argument is that even the “moral” obligations in the law are halachic and not moral. For example, when the Torah says “Thou shalt not murder,” it is not a moral commandment, but rather its purpose is to add a religious layer on top of the moral layer that already existed before. After all, God came to Cain to sue him for murdering his brother, even before He commanded the prohibition of murder. Therefore, I argue that there are no moral obligations in the law at all, even those that seem like such.
How did the poskim learn that “You shall do what is right” and “Do good” are not religious commands on top of morality? Perhaps because they are general. A general commandment to do good sounds like an expression of an expectation of moral behavior. In contrast, “You shall not murder,” “You shall not gossip,” or “Love the one who is as gentle as you” are more specific commands.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
