Shabbos 3
“Although one who performs the action is exempt by Torah law, his action isprohibited by rabbinic law.”
I found today’s reading about hands going in and out of the four domains and what is permitted vs. what is prohibited rather dense to get through. In case it is helpful I mapped out the four domains:
· The private domain: An area that is four handbreadths and separated from its surroundings by ten handbreadths, usually by a wall. It is referred to as a private home in yesterday’s reading, but the online description at Sefaria.org says it can also be a publicly owned space that is separated by some sort of partition.
· The public domain: An area that is a minimum of sixteen cubits wide, with the airspace at least ten handbreadths off the ground.
· The Karmelit: This is an intermediate space that is similar in size to the private space but may not be surrounded by an enclosure. The area may be large enough to be a public space but gets a low volume of foot traffic, such as an isolated field.
· The exempt domain: An area of less than four handbreadths by four handbreadths and has airspace more than ten handbreadths above the public domain or Karmelit. This space is exempt from any prohibition of carrying an object back and forth.
Today’s discussion differentiates between what is permitted by Torah vs. rabbinic law. This distinction appeared in earlier texts, but I am not sure I ever really understood its importance. There are laws that come directly from the Torah and laws that were enacted by the Rabbis that are derived from the Torah. One is considered the laws of God and the other, those of man. The debate between Abaye and Rav Mattana gets at the heart of a potential conflict: some actions are permitted by Torah law and prohibited by rabbinic law. It appears from my limited knowledge that the rabbinic laws are stricter than the Torah ones, but there is also more flexibility in how they are followed. In the example offered in today’s text of objects being handed back and forth between the various domains, we are told that if the act of transferring is completed by two people, it violates rabbinic but not Torah law.
We are offered an interesting dilemma: What should one do if a rabbinical prohibition would result in the violation of a Talmudic one? The question is never really answered, although Shmuel says that regardless, rabbinic law must be followed. Many of us have experienced this dilemma in our own lives when we are faced with civil laws that might violate our ethical codes or for the very orthodox, our religious laws. This is central to an act of civil disobedience, when observing a civil law would violate a religious or personal belief. This was demonstrated during the 1970s, when young men were faced with this dilemma when they were drafted to fight in the Vietnam War. More recent examples are the protests against the detention of innocent immigrant children at the United States’ border who are separated from their parents and sent to government facilities. Jane Fonda, who was very active in protests against the Vietnam War, has been arrested multiple times recently in protest of government policies on climate change. Whether you agree with her activism or not, she has lived her life disobeying civil laws when they conflicted with her moral code.
This article explains the difference between Torah and rabbinic law, although it does not offer much guidance in explaining how to resolve potential conflicts between the two:
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/halakhah-the-laws-of-jewish-life/