Thursday, February 05, 2015

kafah aleihem har k'gigis: is a coerced agreement valid?

Chazal tell us that Hashem held Har Sinai over the heads of Klal Yisrael to force them to accept the Torah or else…  It sounds like they were strong-armed into the agreement. 

Is an agreement arrived at through coercion valid?  The gemara in Baba Basra has a rule that “talu’hu v’zavin – zvini zevini,” that if a person is coerced into making a sale, the sale is considered valid.  The reason people sell things is because they need cash – every sale is to some degree something the seller would prefer not to do, but which he must do.  Coercion is just an explicit form of pressure instead of the usual implicit form.
The Ba’al haIttur, however, holds that while someone can be forced to sell, he/she cannot be forced to buy (see Rama C.M. 205:12).  Bnei Yisrael were in effect buyers of the Torah, not sellers.  They were being forced to agree to accept something, not to give something away.  So what good was their coerced agreement?

Lots of answers, but I won't spoil the fun of working it out yourself.

7 comments:

  1. I'm confused... The gemara (Shabbos 87a) that says "kafah aleihem hahar kegigis" continues with R' Acha bar Yaaqov saying that for this reason it's not binding. And then Rava says -- only until Purim, when "qiymu veqibly haYhudim" without compulsion. The gemara doesn't leave your question open.

    But since you raise it... Compare "kafa aleihem hahar" with "kofin oso ad sheyomar 'rozeh ani!'" in hilkhos gitin.

    The Meshekh Chokhmah writes that the mountain over their heads was a metaphor for life with nisim geluyim. When Hashem sent a tribe to attack them every time they sinned, and a shofeit or gave the king a military victim every time they did teshuvah, the nation's acceptance of the mitzvos was not entirely free. This is why it's on Purim, with its message of "hasteir astir Panai" and hidden miracles, Hashem's "Hand" visible only if we choose to look for it, that "qiymu veqiblu" really began.

    ReplyDelete
  2. >>>continues with R' Acha bar Yaaqov saying that for this reason it's not binding... The gemara doesn't leave your question open.

    If the kabbalah was not binding then there should have been a ptur ones and no onshim until a real kabbalah at the time of Purim -- which is absurd. See Rashba, also Parashas Derachim comes to mind, who therefore interpret the gemara differently.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to the Tanchuma, the kefiyah/ptur was only on Torah sh'ba'al peh. The onshim up to purim were only on Torah sh'bi'ksav. [Avodah Zarah, giluy arayos, shefichas domim...]

      Delete
  3. Thank you. And, thank you for the Shabbos afternoon entertainment, be"H.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If the kabbalah was not binding then there should have been a ptur ones and no onshim until a real kabbalah at the time of Purim -- which is absurd.

    I don't know where it is but I believe I heard someone say the Chasam Sofer says something similar to this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. So what's the answer (s)?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Chazal tell us that Hashem held Har Sinai over the heads..." Not exactly. He carved a hole inside the bottom of the mountain and put the mountain down on top of them and around them. A) Rashi says so in parshas haazinu. B) otherwise the word and drasha of besachtis makes no sense. C) Think of the words kofoh aleihem... as in kofeh olov kli if one finds chometz on pesach. D) according to conventional wisdom, why davka gigis?

    ReplyDelete