Are We Allowed to Chain Up Kal Vechomers in the Laws of Sacrifices?

Provided courtesy of Real Clear Daf

We discussed this question on 50b in the Daf this week as part of a series of questions regarding the acceptability of combining various types of drasha methodologies when expounding verses of sacrificial law. For example the Gemara concluded that we’re not allowed to expound a hekish (Scriptual comparison) followed by another hekish. So if the Torah taught that a certain law applies to B by comparing it to A, that law cannot be applied to C on the basis of a hekish between C and B. A Hekish/ gezeira shava (when the Torah links two passages based on shared terminology in each) combination is also illegal, though we are allowed to add a kal vechomer (fortiori argument) to either a hekish or a gezeira shava.

The Gemara wonders: what about doing a kal vechomer followed by another kal vechomer? The Gemara answers: Sure we can do that! How do we know? It’s a kal vechomer! Here goes..If even a gezeira shava, which cannot follow a hekish, can still teach through a kal vechomer, then surely a kal vechomer, which is even able to follow a hekish, should possess the power to teach through a kal vechomer!

Now things start to get very interesting. The Gemara points out that the above kal vechomer utilizes a premise (i.e. that a gezeira shava has the power to teach through a kal vechomer) that itself is based upon a kal vechomer! Hence a kal vechomer/kal vechomer combination is actually an attempt to make a kal vechomer that is based on two other kal vechomers! But precisely why is this objectionable? On this question we have a dispute between Rashi and Tosfos. The approach of Tosfos is both simple and powerful: The Gemara is pointing out that it’s circular logic to answer the question of whether we can make a kal vechomer/kal vechomer based on a kal vechomer/kal vechomer.

Rashi, however, explains the Gemara’s question differently: The Gemara is asking that according to the current proposed argument we’re actually chaining up three kal vechomers, and we cannot presume the right to add a third kal vechomer. It bothered me: Why didn’t Rashi go with the simple and compelling interpretation of Tosfos? After all, isn’t this a glaring case of circular logic?

Perhaps Rashi would respond that no, the Gemara’s logic in its initial proposal is not necessarily circular. For let’s step back for a moment and consider the overarching issue of this Gemara. We are dealing with the limitations on applying classic drasha methods for the purpose of deriving the laws of sacrifices. Let me reiterate that last bit: it’s a question of deriving laws, specifically, sacrificial laws. So when the Gemara originally asked whether we can do a kal vechomer/kal vechomer the specific question was whether we can derive a sacrificial law via a kal vechomer/kal vechomer. By contrast, the Gemara’s current observation that we’re utilizing a triple-kal vechomer is not that we’re using multiple kal vechomers for the purpose of actually deriving a sacrificial law. Instead the triple kal vechomer in question is being used to establish the capability of the kal vechomer itself.

So, Rashi would say, the Gemara’s current proposal is not circular at all, for our question is about taking a law with kal vechomer #1, applying that to B, and then using kal vechomer #2 to further apply that law to C. To answer this question, the Gemara departs from the world of extrapolating laws to the world of comparing the exegetical methods themselves. In this other world, unconstrained by the limitations of the world of deriving sacrificial law, we are free to chain up as many exegetical methods that we’d like, and by chaining up two kal vechomers we arrive at the conclusion that surely a kal vechomer can teach through another kal vechomer. In the end, however, the Gemara rejects this proposal with the observation that, in the final analysis, we are using three kal vechomers to in order to ultimately use a kal vechomer to teach a sacrifical law, which, it can be argued, violates the limitations imposed on using chains to derive sacrificial law.

If you have any further thoughts on the discussion, feel free to send them in.