Obligation, Motivation and Reward: An Analysis of a Talmudic Principle
A Talmudic principle, attributed to Rabbi Chanina, claims that a person who is commanded to perform an action and who obeys is greater than a person who is not so commanded but nonetheless acts in the way the commandment requires. Although the principle mentions only how people act, there is no reas...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
2002
|
| In: |
Journal of law and religion
Year: 2002, Volume: 17, Pages: 1-17 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | A Talmudic principle, attributed to Rabbi Chanina, claims that a person who is commanded to perform an action and who obeys is greater than a person who is not so commanded but nonetheless acts in the way the commandment requires. Although the principle mentions only how people act, there is no reason to think that the principle does not apply equally to omissions—the subjects of negative commandments. Accordingly those who are commanded to refrain from acting in certain ways and comply with these commandments are greater than those who are not commanded in this way but still refrain from the actions proscribed by the commandments.The contexts in which this principle is cited suggest that the principle was accepted by the rabbis. In two places where it occurs, the statement is cited in order to resolve a difficulty and it is not subsequently disputed in the Talmudic discourse on the matter, suggesting its acceptance. In another context, combined with a statement of Rabbi Judah that the blind are exempt from (some) commandments, the principle yields the conclusion that the blind lack the religious potential of the sighted. This conclusion, the Gemara reveals in both places, was deeply disturbing to the blind sage Rabbi Joseph. Rather than rejecting Rabbi Chanina's statement, Rabbi Joseph declared that he would feast the rabbis if any of them could show that the halacha is not in accordance with Rabbi Judah. In other words, he assumed that Rabbi Chanina's view was sound and that the only way to avoid its disturbing implication for the blind was to prove that Rabbi Judah was wrong. The Talmudic endorsement of Rabbi Chanina's statement is confirmed by subsequent halachic authorities. Moses Maimonides cites the principle approvingly in his Mishne Torah as does Joseph Karo in the Shulchan Aruch. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2163-3088 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of law and religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2307/1051393 |