Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

If the point of giving us mitzvot is to allow us to earn a reward in olam haba and to perfect creation (there's all of Jewish philosophy boiled down into 102 characters), why wouldn't all Jewish adults be equally obligated in all mitzvot?

I understand someone who is physically unable to perform certain mitzvot but outside of that it would seem to be unfair to someone to exempt them. I realize that in some circumstances they can still perform the mitzvah even if they are not obligated to do so, but the rule is one who is obligated and performs is greater than one who is not obligated and performs.

So then why not simply obligate all who (can) perform equally?

share|improve this question
Korach asked the same question... the answer is that there are different kinds of people. Since HKB"H made the Torah and its laws and He also made "natural" laws, you might as well ask why not everybody is able to conceive children and give birth... in fact, more than half of all humans cannot do this! Seems unfair, no? – yoel Jul 2 '12 at 23:24
@yoel The questioner specifically limited his 'request' to "obligat[ing] all who (can) perform equally" (emphasis mine), meaning accepting nature the way it is, why not obligate more people? He's not asking why men can't bring korbanei zavah; he's asking why I can't accept pidyon peter chamor. – Double AA Jul 3 '12 at 5:45
@DoubleAA, but the fact that Hashem made different people different by physical nature also shows that they are different by spiritual nature. – Yishai Jul 3 '12 at 19:40
@Yishai First of all, no it doesn't. Second of all, so what? I'm physically different from my brother, but we are both obligated in exactly the same mitzvot. So this hasn't really helped answer the question at all. – Double AA Jul 3 '12 at 19:53
@DoubleAA, that only makes sense if you view the spiritual and physical as disconnected. But really one flows from the other. And of course people have different Mitzva observances at the individual level. Different communities, different hiddurim, "Ba Meh Haveh Zahir Tfei," Perek Echad Shacharis, vs. Toroso Umnoso, etc. – Yishai Jul 3 '12 at 19:56

The result of having different people have different levels of mitzvah obligation, is that it requires all of Klal Yisroel to acheive all of the mitzvos. See here by Rav Zechariah Tubi, Kerem B'Yavneh Rosh Kollel Rabbanut and an extract:

All of Israel are responsible for one another, and through Klal Yisrael's observance – all receive reward. The entire Israeli nation is considered as one person, as it says: "You are My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, you are Man." (Yechezkel 34:31) Just as a person has a head, eyes, and a heart – so, too, in Klal Yisrael there are those who are called, "the heads of the congregation," and others, "the eyes of the congregation." The righteous are the heart of Israel. Each person has to observe the mitzvot that is relevent to him, and in the aggegrate – Am Yisrael is a whole person. However, an individual Jew cannot fulfill all of the mitzvot of the Torah.

In (my) addition, we cannot know the ultimate point of giving us mitzvot and cannot judge what is fair from the viewpoint of HKB"H.

share|improve this answer
This implies that the righteous have different mitzvot then everyone else. – Double AA Jul 3 '12 at 22:37
"However, an individual Jew cannot fulfill all of the mitzvot of the Torah." -- no one claimed everyone needs to be obligated in everything; just everything they can do. I'm personally capable of opening the doors in the mikdash, but I'm not allowed to since I'm not a Levi. Why not give me more opportunities? – Double AA Jul 3 '12 at 22:46
@DoubleAA I think what he means is that since you're not a Levi and are therefore not responsible for opening the gates, you have more time on your hands to do other things which society needs. Basically by giving certain people and only them specific responsibilities, you not only insure that those things get taken care of, but you also give a certain freedom to the others - which automatically places the other responsibilities on them, which makes for a healthy society where everyone is involved. Letting everyone do as they feel might not achieve this goal. I think it's a great answer. +1 – Dov F Jul 3 '12 at 23:14
@DovF I think that is a great answer, but I don't see it in this post. I encourage you to post that comment separately. – Double AA Jul 3 '12 at 23:20
:) thanks, though I suppose I should wait until @AvrohomYitzchok clarifies whether or not this is what he meant. – Dov F Jul 3 '12 at 23:26

To build upon the answer given by Avrohom Yitzchok: By giving specific people specific responsibilities, you not only insure that those things get taken care of, you also give a certain freedom to all the others - which automatically translates into various societal responsibilities being placed upon them, which makes for a healthy society where everyone is involved. Such a society can breed mutual respect in that each person recognizes that the other has a necessary role that I cannot fill - that I need the other. It also imbues special meaning in to a whole lot of actions which would have much less meaning otherwise. The Kohen feels special that he's the one delegated to perform the service, and the Israelite feels special that he is the one who has time and is therefore responsible for the upkeep of the land; and so on and so forth. Perhaps this is the reasoning behind the various levels of obligation for different people.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.