144 Mark Washofsky
Perplexed?2:31 and 3:32; Nahmanides to Exodus 20:7; Sefer Hahinukh, mitzvah 32; Hidushey HaRitva, Shabbat 119b; Magid Mishneh, Yad, Shabbat 30:15; R. Yosef Albo, Sefer Ha ikarim 3:26.
77. This follows the classic Rabbinic distinction between the differing versions of this mitzvah in the two renditions of the Decalogue . In Exodus 20:8, we read “Remember(zakhor) the Sabbath day,” while in Deuteronomy 5:12 the text is “Observe(shamor) the Sabbath day.” That zakhor refers to the ritual(“thou shalt”) aspects of Shabbat practice while shamor covers the prohibitions against labor (“thou shalt not”) is indicated in B. Berakhot, 20b, in the discussion of why women are Toraitically obligated to recite kiddush even though it is the sort of positive time-bound obligation, from which they are normally exempt: since women are already included in the category of shamor(they are prohibited from working on the Sabbath ), they are also obligated to“remember” the Sabbath by verbally declaring it to be holy. Perhaps the best presentation of the zakhor/shamor distinction is the commentary of Nahmanides to Exodus 20:7.
78. The phrase is minhag avoteihem beyadeihem, which would remind Ettlinger’s Talmudically-educated readership of the statement by R. Yohanan(B. Hulin 13b) that“Gentiles living outside the land of Israel are not truly idolaters; rather, they are simply following their ancestral custom.” This statement becomes a tool with which medieval halakhists can“purify” the Gentiles of their time from the stain of paganism: these Gentiles maintain the habitual behavior patterns of their forebears but do not intentionally choose to practice idolatry(Rashi, Yevamot 23a, s.v. ella lerabanan; Hil. Harosh, Avodah Zarah 1:1; Resp. Rivashno. 394). Ettlinger applies the same thought pattern here.
79. This is predicated on the theory that one who chooses to follow the more stringent of two permitted options has reached a higher or more demanding level of religious observance; see B. Berakhot 22a.
80. Many of these studies are collected in his Halakhah vekabalah(note 14, above). My discussion of his approach is drawn from the introduction to the volume, 1-6. The studies cover, among other topics: the question of halakhah and mysticism as potential rivals in the educational curriculum; the tendency to prefer halitzah to levirate marriage; the custom in northern Europe to pray ma ariv(the evening service) prior to nightfall; the ordination controversy in 16th-century Safed ; the Jewish status of Jews who convert to Christianity.