Q&A: A Tremendous Puzzle About the Words of a Certain Genius
A Tremendous Puzzle About the Words of a Certain Genius
Question
The Maharam Schick? Maharsham composed, among other things, a book called Ein HaRo’im (https://download.hebrewbooks.org/downloadhandler.ashx?req=21499), which contains novellae on principles found throughout the Talmud, such as mnemonic formulas like matzasehzg.
There, under the entry “A commandment fulfilled through a transgression,” section 6, he brings that Rashi and Tosafot disagree whether, in the case of a commandment fulfilled through a rabbinic transgression, one has fulfilled the obligation or not. Rashi (Pesachim 35b, s.v. “tevul”) argues that even here one does not fulfill the obligation, while Tosafot (Sukkah 30a, s.v. “since one fulfills it with a borrowed one”) argue that one does fulfill it.
And this is truly a tremendous difficulty, because Tosafot is not discussing a Torah-level commandment that comes through a rabbinic transgression (as Rashi is there in Pesachim), but rather a rabbinic commandment (taking the lulav on the second day) that comes through a Torah-level transgression (theft).
These two things are not remotely comparable. It really makes no sense at all.
I was sure this would interest you.
Answer
It really is strange. Moreover, on the face of it this is a statement of the Talmud and not Rashi, though perhaps one could understand that this is a different rule from “a commandment fulfilled through a transgression.”
Discussion on Answer
“6) Even with a rabbinic transgression, it is considered a commandment fulfilled through a transgression; Rashi, Pesachim 35b, s.v. ‘tevul,’ etc., see there. But Tosafot in Sukkah 30a, s.v. ‘since,’ etc., wrote that with a rabbinic transgression it is not considered a commandment fulfilled through a transgression, see there.”
Looks like a mistake.
The truth is that there was another genius who made the same mistake as well. See the responsa Zaken Aharon by Rabbi Aharon Volkin (https://download.hebrewbooks.org/downloadhandler.ashx?req=835), who also explicitly wrote that Tosafot were discussing a rabbinic transgression (whereas in fact it is a Torah-level transgression and a rabbinic commandment):
Image here https://www.dropbox.com/s/ygir2aqrcqi4exy/Fichier.jpeg?dl=0
Can you copy or photograph his words here?