Baal Tosif
The Rambam in Hilchos Lulav Perek 7 states that if one adds an extra Lulav or other min (besides for Hadas) he is oiver on the isur of ba'al Tosif and the lulav is pasul. The question that arises is why is it that the Mitzva is pasul just because he does an aveira of ba'al toisif?
The Rambam Le'shitaso says the same thing in Hilchos Tzitzis perek 1 halacha 15 that if one makes an extra gdil on his beged of arba kanfos that begad cannot be fixed anymore even if he takes off the extra gdil of tzitzis off the beged it is b'egeder ta'aseh velo min ha'asuy and the beged will remain pasul forever until he takes it off and makes new tzitzis. The Ra'avad on both Rambam's is masig, he argues at length. Although it is not so clear what the main point of his argument is, the Aruch Hashulcan in Hilchos Tzitzis says that this is exactly the main point of contention. The Ra'avad does not agree that just because you did an Avaira of Ba'al Toisif that the mitzvah itself should be pasul both by lulav and by tzitzis.
(forgetting about all the Torah with regard to lulav tzarich eged and therefore if you can say "hai lechuday kahiy v'ehaiy lechudei kahiy") we still need a simple explanation and to why ba'al toisif pasils a mitzvah)
This can be explained with a svara that Rabbi Moshe Feinstein expounds upon in Igros Moshe Orach Chaim 13 regarding wearing two pairs of tfillin. Rabbi Moshe is discussing the Rash that says that you can wear two pairs of tfillin, the gemara that states that it is ba'al Toisif, and the mishneh limelech that discusses the rambam with regard to the difference between two lulavim and two pairs of tfillin. Rav Moshe says that the reason you are not oiver ba'al toisif if you decide to make a 614th mitzva is because ba'al toisif is only when you are adding on to an existing mitzvah but not just adding a mitzva. (my brother in law claims that the vilna gaon in aderes eliyahu says explicitely that there is an issur of ba'al toisif in that situation and he based his son's bar mitzva pshetel on the concept of two types of ba'al toisif, one changing a mitzvah and the other one, adding a new mitzvah). Rav Moshe goes further to say that the reason that one who sleeps in the succah on shmini atzeres is oiver on ba'al toisif and one who sleeps in the succah on any other day of the year is not is because you have to not only add to an existing mitzvah in order to be oiver but also you must fundamentally change the existing mitzvah by adding to it.
Using this theory we can now possibly understand the Rambam. the Rambam understands ba'al toisif like R' Moshe explains that it is a fundamental change in the mitzvah accomplished by adding to the mitzvah but still a change. This change is and has to be extensive enough that the mitzvah is not recognizable anymore and therefore pasul. Even thogh ba'al Toisif is an aveirah that should have nothing to do with the kashrut or paslut of the mitzva itself if the addition adds so much that the mitzah is changed then we can understand that it should be pasul.
The Rambam Le'shitaso says the same thing in Hilchos Tzitzis perek 1 halacha 15 that if one makes an extra gdil on his beged of arba kanfos that begad cannot be fixed anymore even if he takes off the extra gdil of tzitzis off the beged it is b'egeder ta'aseh velo min ha'asuy and the beged will remain pasul forever until he takes it off and makes new tzitzis. The Ra'avad on both Rambam's is masig, he argues at length. Although it is not so clear what the main point of his argument is, the Aruch Hashulcan in Hilchos Tzitzis says that this is exactly the main point of contention. The Ra'avad does not agree that just because you did an Avaira of Ba'al Toisif that the mitzvah itself should be pasul both by lulav and by tzitzis.
(forgetting about all the Torah with regard to lulav tzarich eged and therefore if you can say "hai lechuday kahiy v'ehaiy lechudei kahiy") we still need a simple explanation and to why ba'al toisif pasils a mitzvah)
This can be explained with a svara that Rabbi Moshe Feinstein expounds upon in Igros Moshe Orach Chaim 13 regarding wearing two pairs of tfillin. Rabbi Moshe is discussing the Rash that says that you can wear two pairs of tfillin, the gemara that states that it is ba'al Toisif, and the mishneh limelech that discusses the rambam with regard to the difference between two lulavim and two pairs of tfillin. Rav Moshe says that the reason you are not oiver ba'al toisif if you decide to make a 614th mitzva is because ba'al toisif is only when you are adding on to an existing mitzvah but not just adding a mitzva. (my brother in law claims that the vilna gaon in aderes eliyahu says explicitely that there is an issur of ba'al toisif in that situation and he based his son's bar mitzva pshetel on the concept of two types of ba'al toisif, one changing a mitzvah and the other one, adding a new mitzvah). Rav Moshe goes further to say that the reason that one who sleeps in the succah on shmini atzeres is oiver on ba'al toisif and one who sleeps in the succah on any other day of the year is not is because you have to not only add to an existing mitzvah in order to be oiver but also you must fundamentally change the existing mitzvah by adding to it.
Using this theory we can now possibly understand the Rambam. the Rambam understands ba'al toisif like R' Moshe explains that it is a fundamental change in the mitzvah accomplished by adding to the mitzvah but still a change. This change is and has to be extensive enough that the mitzvah is not recognizable anymore and therefore pasul. Even thogh ba'al Toisif is an aveirah that should have nothing to do with the kashrut or paslut of the mitzva itself if the addition adds so much that the mitzah is changed then we can understand that it should be pasul.
posted by funnyfundamentalist at 7:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home