Q&A: Definitions
Definitions
Question
Hello Rabbi, I’d be glad if you could help me sharpen the definitions of several things.
I’ll just say beforehand that all these technical questions, including the ones I’ve asked recently, are because as I understand it, one has to classify and define Jewish law clearly and fully in order to even begin really learning it in depth. I mention this because I’m asking myself whether these questions are really appropriate for this forum, given how technically simple they are. Unfortunately, I also can’t think of another forum where I could ask… So based on your answer I’ll understand whether it’s okay, from your perspective, for me to keep asking or not.
You wrote in the third book: "Concerns are public practices that were not instituted by an authorized body, but rather developed on their own due to certain circumstances that prevailed at the time."
– Is the word "concerns" an accepted term in the tradition for the definition you gave, or is it a term you coined for the definition you formulated?
– In light of the definition of a concern, then is a custom something that spread after being instituted by an authorized body? If so, what counts as an authorized body for this purpose—a rabbi? "The greatest of the rabbis"? A quorum?
– Also, how can one define an enactment as opposed to a decree?
Answer
See the column on legumes here on the site. In Jewish law there are concerns, but this is not a concept with a defined halakhic meaning.
A concern is not itself something binding, but rather a concern about something else. Sometimes concerns become binding law in their own right, and that is only when an authorized body establishes them as an enactment or a decree. For this purpose, an authorized body is the Sanhedrin for the Jewish people as a whole, or a local religious court for its own community.
A decree is a prohibition established by the Sages (through an authorized body) out of concern lest you come to commit some transgression. This is as opposed to a concern, where I am worried about something but there has been no determination by an authorized body that turned it into a prohibition. An enactment, in contrast to both of those, is not connected to concerns at all; rather, it is a rule the rabbis instituted for various reasons (usually a positive commandment rather than a prohibition), such as lighting Sabbath candles, lighting Hanukkah candles, reading the Megillah on Purim, and the like.
My feeling is that your search for definitions is overly meticulous and obsessive. There is no point in dealing with all this. You understand perfectly well what is meant. Moreover, there is absolutely no obstacle to learning without getting into all this meticulousness. It certainly is not a condition for being able to begin learning. On the contrary, usually these definitions take shape in the course of learning.
Thank you very much, Rabbi.
I’m aware of the issue of over-precision. Unfortunately and fortunately, I have a natural ability that has advantages and disadvantages: I arrive at a total analysis of things. I can significantly condense very large amounts of text, something that takes a lot of time and energy, but I have no way to change my nature when it comes to learning things. The truth is that the disadvantages I see in this are only in terms of personal cost, but as far as the outcome of my work goes, I always see only advantages. By the way, I saw that I spoke about this in passing in the column on the concept of "halot".
From now on I’ll try to direct to you questions that are less definition-oriented in style. Sorry.