Continuing our discussion about nullification and exceptions to the rule, our Gemara on Amud Beis references the principle of something that potentially can be permitted. The idea is that an item that gets blended in a majority, which ordinarily should be nullified, if it is something that could eventually be permitted, the nullification process does not work. A classic example is an egg laid on Yom Tov, which is muktzah; even if it gets mixed into a majority of non-muktzah eggs, since the muktzah will be permitted after Yom Tov, it cannot be nullified.
This principle might be due to the idea that the rabbis were reluctant to allow for the leniency of nullification if the item will soon be permitted entirely (see Rashi Beitzah 3b). Davar sheyesh lo matirin. A deeper lomdishe reason is famously given by the Ran (Nedarim 52a): nullification depends on contrast; the forbidden item in comparison to the majority of permitted items is made insignificant—essentially “outvoted.” Therefore, a soon-to-be-permitted item is too close to the already-permitted items to create contrast, and therefore no nullification is activated.
The Beis Yisrael (Emes L’Yaakov, Likkutim 35) raises a question. If there is a general Torah principle that the majority nullifies the minority, why do we not say that a small amount of sins are nullified by a majority of mitzvos? At first this may sound strange, but really think about it. Why is the soul not considered cleansed of sin even without repentance? As I think about it, perhaps that is the concept of the beinonim (the middle—not evil nor righteous) being judged on Rosh Hashanah. If a beinoni is 50-50, then a righteous person in terms of Rosh Hashanah is anybody who has a majority of good deeds over sins, and is sealed immediately in the Scroll of Life. (This is how the Rambam defines it; see Laws of Repentance 3:1–3.) Perhaps this is indeed due to the major majority of good deeds nullifying the bad ones.
However, Beis Yisrael does not suggest that answer, perhaps because he believes according to that logic, the minority of sins should be utterly erased, not requiring any repentance, which is not the case. He answers that since sometimes sins are permitted in the case of life-threatening danger, it is a davar sheyesh lo matirin. However, he asks: What about the three sins that one must martyr himself for (Idolatry, Sexual immorality, and Murder)? Why are those not nullified in a majority of good deeds, since they do not have circumstances where they would be permitted?
He answers that we also have a principle that something which is forbidden in the tiniest amount (instead of a requisite amount such as a kezayis volume of an olive) is not nullified. We find with these sins, even the smallest related transgression gets included in the requirement for martyrdom, even if the actual aspect of violation is less severe. For example, in the famous case of the love-sick man in Sanhedrin (75a), the man is forbidden even the sexual impropriety such as talking to his forbidden object of love “from behind a fence.” Since she is forbidden, even though his life is in danger, he is not permitted any minor transgression if it is related, although strictly speaking such a minor sin is not the same as adultery.
Additionally, he argues that since God judges the righteous over a sin that is a hair’s breadth (Bava Kama 50a), each sin may be greatly magnified, depending on the person, and is not necessarily nullified in the majority.
It also occurs to me, based on our studies from Zevachim daf 72, we could also say that since God counts the sins and merits, as we say in the Nesaneh Tokef liturgy, it is then a davar shebeminyan, something which is distinct and counted, therefore not subject to nullification.
After all is said and done, we must acknowledge that no sin nor any mitzvah is trivial. One cannot cleanse the other. The same person is capable of goodness and evil, sometimes even at extremes. Inconsistency, even hypocrisy, is not uncommon in human behavior. An honest, growing person must acknowledge and take accountability for the sins, and without using them as a way to rationalize or excuse them, still allow for the sense of accomplishment for his achievements.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation
Free resource for couples/families:
Over 80 lectures on heathy communication, marriage and sexuality from a Torah perspective Click here
If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.
Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, LMFT, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com