Tevillah Bizmana Mitzvah

Rambam in Shevisas Asor 3:2 -

וְכָל חַיָּבֵי טְבִילוֹת טוֹבְלִין כְּדַרְכָּן, בֵּין בְּתִשְׁעָה בְּאָב בֵּין בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים

According to the simple explanation of this halacha the Rambam is paskening here that tevillah bizmana mitzvah. This would mean that someone who needs to go to the mikvah (baal keri, zav, etc.) it is a mitzvah to go at the first opportunity. Thus, if that falls out on Yom Kippur or Tisha B'Av, even though there is usually a prohibition on washing one's body, the mitzvah is docheh the issur and thus the Rambam says one can go to the mikvah.

However, this Rambam stands against another Rambam which seems to hold that tevillah bizmana lav mitzvah:

Yesodai HaTorah 6:6 -

נִזְדַּמְּנָה לוֹ טְבִילָה שֶׁלְּמִצְוָה--כּוֹרֵךְ עָלָיו גֳּמִי, וְטוֹבֵל; וְאִם לֹא מָצָא גֳּמִי, מְסַבֵּב אַחֲרָיו. וְלֹא יְהַדַּק, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָחֹץ--שֶׁלֹּא אָמְרוּ לִכְרֹךְ עָלָיו, אֵלָא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָסוּר לַעֲמֹד בִּפְנֵי הַשֵּׁם עָרֹם

Here the Rambam seems to hold that if the Shem Hashem is written on one's body he should even push off the tevillah in order to cover it up before he does the tevillah.

The source for both these Rambam's in the gemara in Shabbos 121a. If you look at Tosafos there (d"h Hachi) Tosafos points out a girsa issue. Tosafos prefer the girsa that even if one holds tevillah bizmana is not a mitzvah, still it is ok to be toveil on Yom Kippur or Tisha B'Av for people chayav tevillah. This would seem to be the position of the Rambam as well. Even though tevillah bizmana lav mitzvah, still one can be toveil on Yom Kippur or Tisha B'Av. The question is, why?
(See the Lechem Mishna in Yesodei HaTorah that points to this Tosafos as a possible resolution for the Rambam.)

If you look at the Rambam in Shevisas Asor in more detail it seems the Rambam himself answers the question:

ב מִי שֶׁהָיָה מְלֻכְלָךְ בְּצוֹאָה אוֹ טִיט--רוֹחֵץ מְקוֹם הַטִּנּוֹפוֹת כְּדַרְכּוֹ, וְאֵינוּ חוֹשֵׁשׁ. וּמְדִיחָה אִשָּׁה יָדָהּ אַחַת בַּמַּיִם, וְנוֹתֶנֶת פַּת לִבְנָהּ. וְהַחוֹלֶה רוֹחֵץ כְּדַרְכּוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי שְׁאֵינוּ מְסֻכָּן. וְכָל חַיָּבֵי טְבִילוֹת טוֹבְלִין כְּדַרְכָּן, בֵּין בְּתִשְׁעָה בְּאָב בֵּין בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים

The Rambam here bunches the halacha of chayvei tevillos with someone who needs to wash dirt off his skin or one who needs to bathe because he is sick. All of these cases of rechitza are muttar. Why? Apparently it is because only rechitza of taanug, only pleasurable bathing, was part of the issur. The Rambam is saying that rechitza of chayvei tevillos was never included in the issur of rechitza in the first place.

Thus, we have two ways of learning the heter for chayvei tevillos. One way is to assume that the mitzvah of tevillah is docheh the issur rechitza. This assumes tevillah bizmana mitzvah. The other approach, that of the Rambam, assumes that rechitza of chayvei tevillos is a different type of rechitza. This type of rechitza never was assured on Yom Kippur and Tisha B'Av in the first place.

Believing in the Prophets

Rambam in Yesodei HaTorah Perek 8:
ו נִמְצֵאתָ אוֹמֵר, שֶׁכָּל נָבִיא שֶׁיַּעֲמֹד אַחַר מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ, אֵין אָנוּ מַאֲמִינִין בּוֹ מִפְּנֵי הָאוֹת לְבַדּוֹ, כְּדֵי שֶׁנֹּאמַר אִם יַעֲשֶׂה אוֹת נִשְׁמַע לוֹ לְכָל מַה שֶׁיֹּאמַר; אֵלָא מִפְּנֵי הַמִּצְוָה שֶׁצִּוָּנוּ מֹשֶׁה בַּתּוֹרָה, וְאָמַר אִם נָתַן אוֹת, "אֵלָיו, תִּשְׁמָעוּן" (דברים יח,טו): כְּמוֹ שֶׁצִּוָּנוּ לַחְתֹּךְ הַדָּבָר עַל פִּי שְׁנֵי עֵדִים, וְאַף עַל פִּי שְׁאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין אִם אֱמֶת הֵעִידוּ אִם שֶׁקֶר; כָּךְ מִצְוָה לִשְׁמֹעַ מִזֶּה הַנָּבִיא, אִם הָאוֹת אֱמֶת אוֹ בְּכִשּׁוּף וְלָאט

The halacha is that if a person comes along and says he is a navi, we don't believe him immediately. Rather, we must test the person. He has to make a prediction that comes true that establishes the he is in fact a navi. Once a navi establishes that he is a true navi by this method, we believe that he is a navi and we must listen to his words. There are more details to these halachos which can be found in the 7th through 10th chapters of Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah in the Rambam.

The Rambam there establishes that our belief as a nation in Moshe Rabbeinu's nevuah did not come about through the miracles that Moshe performed. For, as the Rambam says, anyone can fool someone with magic. Rather, the nation believed in Moshe Rabbeinu because they actually witnessed Hashem speaking to Moshe on Har Sinai. Miracles alone according to the Rambam cannot establish full emunah.

If so, why do we believe in a navi just because he performs a "miraculous" prediction. Perhaps he is fooling us with magic?

To this the Rambam answers here - yes perhaps it is so. Still, we believe the navi because that is the halacha. Just like the halacha is we believe two eidim even though they may be lying. Nevertheless, this is the standard the halacha established to believing eidim. So too, the standard the halacha has for believing a navi is based on performance of a miracle, despite the fact that he may be fooling us.

For this reason, a navi can never come along and argue with Toras Moshe Rabbeinu. The idea being that the only reason we believe the navi is because Toras Moshe says we must. Otherwise, the miracle alone wouldn't establish independent belief in the navi. So, obviously, if we are only believing the navi because it says to believe him in the torah, so certainly his word cannot overturn the word of the Torah.

[Note: the halacha is different if the navi is only overturning the halacha b'horaas shaah like Eliyahu at Har HaCarmel. See the Rambam inside for details.]

Akeidas Yitzchak - The Rambam's Unique Pshat

I found a Rambam in Moreh Nevuchim that gives a completely opposite pshat in Akeidas Yitzchak from the pshat you hear in almost every mussar shmooze on the akeidah. Absolutely mind boggling...

The famous question that is asked is, what is the big deal about the akeidah? If God told you to do something directly wouldn't you do it? Wouldn't you do anything for Hashem?

The famous answer that is given is that in fact Avraham wasn't a Navi at the level of Moshe Rabbeinu. Avraham's nevuah was at the level of Aspaklaria She'einah Meirah. He saw the word of Hashem, but not perfectly clearly. Therefore, the greatness of Avraham was that he didn't interpret the prophecy in a way that suited him better. He could have easily interpreted the nevuah in a more convenient fashion. But he didn't. Instead he went with the simple explanation, and proceeded with the akeidah.

If you want to see this pshat inside I found it in the Avi Ezri on Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 7:6 (last paragraph). But it's not only in the Avi Ezri. I have heard this pshat numerous times. The basic idea being that the lesson of the akeidah is not to ask questions, not to find excuses, but just to follow the simple word of Hashem.

Before we get to the Rambam, there is a glaring difficulty with this pshat. The halacha most certainly is safek nefashos l'hakeil. If Avraham wasn't 100% sure what Hashem was telling him, wouldn't the halacha dictate to be on the safe side and not kill his son?

Here now is the quote from Moreh Nevuchim (3:24):

The second purpose [of the akeidah] is to show how the prophets believed in the truth of that which came to them from God by way of inspiration. We shall not think that what the prophets heard or saw in allegorical figures may at times have included incorrect or doubtful elements, since the Divine communication was made to them, as we have shown, in a dream or a vision and through the imaginative faculty. Scripture tells us that whatever the Prophet perceives in a prophetic vision, he considers as true and correct and not open to any doubt; it is in his eyes like all other things perceived by the senses or by the intellect. This is proved by the consent of Abraham to slay "his only son whom he loved," as he was commanded, although the commandment was received in a dream or a vision. If the Prophets had any doubt or suspicion as regards the truth of what they saw in a prophetic dream or perceived in a prophetic vision, they would not have consented to do what was unnatural, and Abraham would not have found in his soul strength enough to perform that act, if he had any doubt [as regards the truth of the commandment]. It was just the right thing that this lesson derived from the akeida should be taught through Abraham and a man like Isaac. For Abraham was the first to teach the Unity of God, to establish the faith [in Him] etc.

Amazing. The Rambam here says that the lesson of the akeidah is specifically to teach us not to think that the prophets had any doubts regarding their nevuah, even if they did see in dreams or visions. The whole point is that since Avraham was even willing to kill his son based on this prophecy it shows that the prophecy was 100% clear to Avraham with no doubts as to its interpretation. Had there been any doubt, the Rambam even says that Avraham surely would not have followed through! This is the exact opposite pshat of the standard pshat I have heard numerous times in countless shmuessim and of the pshat given by the Avi Ezri. Not only is it the opposite pshat, it's actually the lesson being conveyed by the akeidah not to think this way!

Note one other point. The Rambam (a little earlier in the same piece) says there is another lesson to the Akeidah. The lesson being just how far one must go in the fear of Hashem. He must be willing even to give up his child. The Rambam says this lesson despite the fact that the Rambam says that the nevuah was 100% clear to Avraham. In other words, the Rambam isn't bothered at all by the question of the Avi Ezri, what is the big deal about the akeidah if Hashem said so? No, it is a big deal to the Rambam even if Avraham heard it directly from Hashem! It's still shows Avraham's greatness that he was willing to follow through with the akeidah.