to take a break from the head spinning sugya...
We touched on this once before, why is it that an עשה overrides a לאו and yet the punishment for transgressing a לאו is much stricter that one for not fulfilling an עשה?
I once heard from a Rebbi of mine like this: If one is used to bringing flowers to his wife every week and forgets once, he might be in trouble but has hope, if however he is caught cheating once he is in real trouble. Still if one would be married and not cheat ever but also not do anything positive to the marriage, he is in fact 'not married'.
another example, if a trucker is hired to truck a load cross country and the owner warns him not to go beyond speed limit and not to crash the car etc. if the trucker does everything perfectly but doesn't unload the goods at his destination but goes and comes back with the same load, what good does it do for us that he obeyed the speed limit.
meaning, that our job is to accomplish in this world and 'build the love', therefor this building overrides the transgressions, because the לאוין are only there to protect what has been build not to suffocate the building. There is a Gaon in Mishlei (6:36) that says 3 מלאכים greed a person after 120' 1 to count his עשה,s 1 the לאוין and one to see what he accomplished as far as his תפקיד and he says that last one is familiar, because he was the one to teach you תורה in the womb, meaning to teach you your true essence.
5 comments:
i once heard a similar parable - if one sleeps from the start of shabbos until it is over, did he keep shabbos? but regarding the wife mashal, even if he never buys her flowers, she still needs a get for remarriage!
The concept is pretty clearly expressed in the ramban in yisro, that the kiyum aseh is ahava, and non-violation of the lo sa'aseh is yirah. the act of ahava overrides yirah, but the violation of yirah (lo sa'seh) is worse than the violation of ahava (aseh).
In terms of why the less severe "aseh" can push off the more severe "lo sa'aseh", I recently saw in a manuscript of an unpublished volume on klalei hamitzvos that Rav Nissim Gaon explains that each lav is built in with the tenai that the issur does not apply b'makom mitzvah. Thus the aseh is not really being docheh the lav. The lav simply doesn't exist b'makom the aseh.
this idea is printed in rabbeinu nissim goan on the side of maseches shabbos 132 - it is a big chiddush and follows along the lines of mitzvaso bechach, but goes further and says that even though the aseh can be fulfilled without the lav, there is still an automatic stipulation that the lav was never said when an aseh stands against it.
i was a little ahead of ourselfs, see gemara later and gilyon hashas there, also see משך חכמה on the ramban reb avi mentioned in יתרו עה"פ זכור את יום השבת brought in the "kook" rambans
sounds like Rabbi Nissim Gaon understands it to be a chok, no?
Post a Comment