More Discussions for this daf
1. Two days of Rosh Hashanah 2. Rosh Hashanah - 1 Day or 2 3. The Bais ha'Mikdash will...
4. Rosh Hashanah 5. Insights: Annuling an enactment of Beis Din 6. Akravas and Eilat
7. Mistake in Outlines 8. bi'Meshoch ha'Yovel 9. Niskalkelu ha'Leviyim b'Shir
10. Ha Lan Ha Lehu 11. When did the witnesses see the new moon 12. "Meherah Yibaneh"
13. Pushing off Rosh Chodesh 14. Two days of Rosh Hashanah, two Dinim 15. Egg laid on two days of ...
16. Saying the wrong Shir Shel Yom 17. Expiration of a Takanah 18. Covering an Egg
19. מהרה יבנה בית המקדש

J. Z. Siegel asked:

The gemara gives two mekoros for the idea that a takanah or tzivuy cannot easily be changed or disregarded. One from the pasuk, for doraysa. The other, for takanos dirabanan, is a maaseh from R. Eliezer by Kerem Rivai. I am wondering, how can the gemara argue that a takanas chachamim cannot easily be changed from a maaseh invilving the chachamim? It seems that the Torah only considers that Dioraysahs need a minyan, but Drabanans do not. It seems that the rabanan themselves applied the idea of ain davar takanos dirabanan.

J. Z. Siegel

The Kollel replies:

Thanks for your question. Your assumption is definitely correct. The Torah requirement for a Minyan Acher, only applies to Torah prohibitions. When Chachamim made a Takanah, they had the option of applying the same rule to their Takanah, or to decide that their Takanos can be overridden in an easier manner. For this we bring two sources, the first shows us that the rule is a Torah rule. The second source with R. Eliezer shows us that the requirement applies even with regard to Takanos Chachamim. What you say however is correct, they sure could have declared otherwise with regard to their Takanos.

Kol Tuv

Y. Landy