Q&A: One Does Not Administer Punishment Based on Inference
One Does Not Administer Punishment Based on Inference
Question
Hello and blessings,
A few years ago I heard a lesson from you in which you mentioned Maimonides' view that for a prohibition that is not explicit in the verses, but is derived through the thirteen hermeneutical principles, one does not receive lashes for it.
A. Where does Maimonides say this?
B. Does Maimonides treat a prohibition derived through the thirteen hermeneutical principles as a rabbinic prohibition also with respect to ruling leniently in cases of doubt (and likewise the authority of the Sages to be lenient)?
C. Is Maimonides consistent about this in the Mishneh Torah, in that every commandment derived through the thirteen hermeneutical principles he refers to as rabbinic?
D. How do you understand Maimonides' view regarding the four prohibitions of the Sabbatical year? All the other prohibitions of the Sabbatical year are derived through the thirteen hermeneutical principles (see Sifra, Behar), and Maimonides writes that they are rabbinic, and also writes that the Sages were lenient about them in a case of loss. In your opinion, did he understand their source to be the thirteen hermeneutical principles, or that they were merely attached to the verses as a scriptural support?
With blessings
Answer
1. See the second principle and the introduction to Sefer HaMitzvot (at the end of the fourteenth principle).
2. I think not. I explained this in detail in my article on the second principle in the book He Sends Forth His Roots (there is a link on the site).
3. This is a question over which a great deal of ink has been spilled. There are major debates surrounding each such Jewish law. See my article there.
4. I am not currently immersed in this topic. But if, in his view, what is derived from the hermeneutical principles are rabbinic prohibitions, then I do not see why not.