Rejection of Torah commandments due to the regulations of the Sages
Hello Rabbi Michael,
I wanted to ask how it is possible that on the second day of the month of Galyot, the commandment of tefillin, which is a Torah commandment, is canceled by virtue of a Sage ruling that is a rabbinic one?
Best regards,
The rule is that the Sages remove something from the Torah in the Shabbat. For example, they ruled not to blow the shofar on the first day of Sukkot that falls on the Sabbath, and also not to shake four species on the first Yom Kippur of Sukkot that falls on the Sabbath. This is when there is a good reason, as there was in their time due to confusion in dates.
Recently I remembered that a detestable act is a deed that is not done, and hence the question arises, if the Sages eradicate a deed in vain, wouldn't it be even more likely that they would be able to eradicate a deed in vain, since a detestable act is a deed in vain? The question can also be asked the other way around, if the Sages cannot eradicate a deed, wouldn't it be even more likely that they would not be able to eradicate a deed in vain?
In addition, by actually observing a second Yom Tov of Galyot, don't the Sages also eradicate the prohibition of not adding? And here we can't say that they eradicate a deed in vain, right?
A. This line has a twist: the displacement of a good is in vain, and the displacement of a bad is in vain. Therefore, the displacement of a good is easier than the displacement of a bad. Regarding a good that rejects a bad, this is an interesting calculation in itself (since the offense of a bad is more serious than the cancellation of a good), but it is difficult for me to extend in an email.
B. Regarding the question of why every ruling of the Sages is not an offense of not adding or not subtracting, Toss and Rashba disagreed on this in Bar 16:2. According to most systems, the rulings of the Sages are excluded from offenses of not adding because the Torah itself authorized them to do so.
Regarding the question of whether the removal of Bel Tasif is a removal in the sense of a verse, even though the prohibition that was removed was itself removed in the sense of a verse, I remember a discussion by Baal Turi Even (the novellas to the Shas of the author of the Shagat Arya) on this, and if it interests you, I will try to find it.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
