Q&A: Full Obligations or Recommendations
Full Obligations or Recommendations
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I was learning in Peninei Halakha on the Sabbath and came across an issue that raised a certain question for me — Rabbi Melamed explains there about “half for God and half for yourselves,” regarding the obligation to study Torah on the Sabbath. He actually calculates, based on several assumptions (the nighttime hours when one sleeps do not count, the prayers can be counted as study, etc.), that one must study Torah every Sabbath for at least 6 hours.
My feeling is that this is more of a statement (of the Sages) that is a recommendation or general encouragement. On the other hand, it sounds like actual sources are brought, with discussions among the medieval authorities (Rishonim) and halakhic decisors about it. So perhaps that is just a feeling stemming from my lack of knowledge and from the fact that I was not so familiar with this topic (and from the fact that six hours sounds like quite a lot to me, unfortunately…).
So basically my question is first of all specifically here — is this a full obligation or a recommendation?
And also more generally — are there instructions of this kind that are only non-binding recommendations at all? If so, then 2 additional questions please —
A. Could the Rabbi mention examples? (A few topics that come to mind, again perhaps completely mistakenly — preparations for the Sabbath, “twice Scripture and once translation,” distancing practices from women)
B. How does one know whether a certain instruction is a full obligation or a recommendation? What are the criteria?
Thank you very much!
Answer
Hello.
I am not currently up to speed on this topic and do not remember the relevant discussions. Off the top of my head, it seems to me that the “half” here is not necessarily exactly 50% but rather a portion, like “half a measure.” Beyond that, there is also room to discuss to what extent this is a full halakhic obligation. It is not clear to me.
Not long ago, a discussion came up here about the Shulchan Arukh’s treatment of women and intercourse. I wrote there that it does not always insist on distinguishing between law, custom, and a virtuous practice. In the Kitzur Shulchan Arukh this is even more pronounced, as is well known.
There are no sharp criteria. It is a matter of impression from the language of the Talmud and the context. Of course, a law has to be the product of a verse, an exposition, a law given to Moses at Sinai, or a rabbinic enactment/decree. Anything else is not law.