Maimonides and the Vilna Gaon: Similar Halachoth, Similar Approaches
“A home becomes transformed when the walls display the likeness of the Rambam or the Vilna Gaon or the other righteous great.”
– Rabbi Avigdor Miller
(Continued from here.)
Three halachoth that we saw in the past week shed light on an approach to Torah study and the halachic process which has been gained popularity recently.
The first halacha is in Hilchoth Sta’’m 10:6. There, Maimonides writes
ולא יאחוז הספר כשהוא ערום, He should not hold the [Torah] scroll while (he/it) is naked.
which is as ambiguous as the source text which appears a few places in the Talmud (Megilla 32a, Sabbath 14a, etc.):
אמר רבי פרנך אמר רבי יוחנן כל האוחז ספר תורה ערום נקבר ערום. ערום סלקא דעתך? אלא אימא נקבר ערום בלא מצות. בלא מצות סלקא דעתך? אלא אמר אביי נקבר ערום בלא אותה מצוה.
R’ Parnach said in the name of R. Yohanan: Whoever holds a Torah scroll naked is buried naked. Naked, you say? — Rather, “naked,” without [the merit of performing] commandments. Without commandments, you say? think you? — Rather, said Abaye, he is buried without [the merit of performing] that commandment.
Does this mean that one should not touch the scroll directly, but rather with have an intervening kerchief, or that one who is not clothed should not hold a Torah scroll? Rashi, and most others who followed him, including the Tosafists, the Rosh, the Tur, and the Shulhan Aruch, takes this to mean the former, and that makes sense, considering that the next line in the Talmud, despite its own inherent ambiguity, discusses the cloth used to cover and protect the Torah scroll:
אמר רבי ינאי בריה דרבי ינאי סבא משמיה דרבי ינאי רבה מוטב תיגלל המטפחת ואל יגלל ספר תורה:
R’ Yannai the son of the elder R’ Yannai said in the name of the R’ Yannai the great: It is better that the covering [of the scroll] be rolled up,and not that the scroll of the Torah should be rolled up.
and that is why you find people, who, when it comes time to roll the scroll, make sure not to directly touch it.
The problem with this approach is that it is unclear, what, if any, problem exists, either ritually or ethically, in directly touching the Torah scroll. Without spoiling the surprise for you, I would mention now that the Vilna Gaon (Orah Hayim 147:1) makes this point, and dismisses the suggestion, made by the Magen Avraham and others, that perhaps because the sages made an enactment that one needs to ritually wash his hands after touching the Torah scroll, which is mentioned in the corresponding text in Shabbath 14a, we should derive that there is something wrong with doing so, or that there would perhaps also be a problem with touching the scroll’s handles.
However, when we look again at the Maimonidean formulation, we see that he does not add Rashi’s interpretation, and as R’ Kappah points out, in context it is clear that Maimonides meant that one should not hold a Torah scroll when he is unclothed, and if the Talmud really meant as Rashi et al. believed, then R’ Parnach should have formulated his rule the way the Shulhan Aruch (Yoreh Deah 282:4) unambiguously did:
ולא יאחוז הספר בלא מטפחתת, He should not hold the [Torah] scroll without a[n intervening] kerchief.
(In Orah Hayim 147, he formulates it differently, but still unambiguously: “It is forbidden to hold a Torah scroll naked, without a kerchief.”)
Maimonides holds of the latter interpretation of R’ Parnach’s teaching, and this fits well with other, similar halachoth regarding the proper respect due to scrolls and t’fillin, e.g., Hilchoth Sta’’m 4:22, which discusses the laws of being properly clothed while wearing t’fillin.
What is the Vilna Gaon’s true opinion? Well there is nothing explicit, but there is much to consider: he brings absolutely no source for the Shulhan Aruch’s ruling that one should not directly touch a Torah scroll, neither in Orah Hayim 147 nor in Yoreh Deah 282. Was the Vilna Gaon not aware of this well-known talmudic teaching, which, because it concludes one of the shorter and “easier” tractates, is one with which even those who don’t regularly study talmud become familiar? (I was just at a Siyum Massecheth Megilla yesterday.) No source what so ever? Rather, by not giving a source, the Vilna Gaon is implying that this halacha has no basis in the Talmud, because all the purported sources that others may marshall actually mean something else, and as we just saw, he explicitly rejects attempts to explain the meaning of a possible alternative explanation. We see from this that the Vilna Gaon, as a matter of practical halacha, follows the simple understanding of the sources, the one Maimonides understood: one should not hold a Torah scroll while he is not clothed.
From Avraham Ben Yehuda, here.