Q&A: Preparation for a Commandment
Preparation for a Commandment
Question
In the tenth root you explained that preparation for a commandment has a certain halakhic status (as a means to a commandment), and nevertheless it is not counted in the enumeration of the commandments.
A. In the end, why is it not counted? Because it is still not a commandment in the full sense of the word (an analytical reason), or because one should not count the details of commandments (an enumeration-related reason)? If the first is correct, why do we need the second reason?
B. Where do you derive the distinction between a preparatory act that we were commanded regarding, which has a certain halakhic status, and a factual preparation (not necessarily indispensable) such as buying the lulav, which has no halakhic status at all?
Answer
A. Either reason could apply, and seemingly it depends on whether one views the preparation itself as part of the commandment. I am no longer sure (this was written a long time ago), but as far as I remember our conclusion was that Maimonides meant that it is not counted because it is a component of the commandment, whereas Nachmanides understood that it is not counted because it is not itself a commandment.
B. A preparation regarding which we were not commanded is not counted, because something for which there is no command cannot be counted. This is Maimonides’ approach throughout the roots. That is true even if this preparation is a halakhic obligation (or a detail within a commandment).
Discussion on Answer
I
Someone argued to me that apparently there is no “commandment fulfilled through a transgression” in the case of procreation and multiplication (someone who had relations with a mamzeret and a son was born to him has fulfilled procreation and multiplication), and that this proves that preparation for a commandment (the sexual act) is not considered part of the commandment (that I should have a son and a daughter).
And I said to him that even if one accepts his logical inference (if there is no commandment fulfilled through a transgression, then it is not part of the commandment itself. By the way, do you agree?), there is a difference between preparation for a commandment and sexual relations. The difference is that sexual relations, with respect to the commandment of procreation and multiplication, are not a preparation but the commanded act itself; except that the commandment is the result, while the act is the action of sexual relations, so this is not merely preparation (and it would seem that even regarding the act of the commandment itself, “commandment fulfilled through a transgression” does not apply). He did not accept what I said and claimed there is no difference, and essentially:
The action of the commandment in result-oriented commandments = preparation for a commandment.
Who is right in your opinion?