Aseh Docheh Lo Taaseh Vi-aseh - Part 2

Continuing the previous post....

Since we found the Shaar Hamelech problematic, we will pave a new path.

We have to understand the question of the Rishonim that we should say עשה דוחה לא תעשה and keep the mitzva even though he made a neder not to do so. The gemara [Menachos 40a] says that עשה is not דוחה לא תעשה in an instance where אפשר לקיים שניהם and the דחייה is not necessary. Here also, it is not necessary to be דוחה the לא תעשה if he is just שואל and uproots his neder.

We can answer that indeed in an instance where you can uproot the neder you must do so and keep the mitzva without violating the neder. They were asking about an instance where it is not possible to uproot the neder such as where there is no beis din or there is no available פתח enabling the שאלה על הנדר.

Based on this we can answer the question of the Shaar Hamelech [who asked - what is the question of the rishonim?? We have a pasuk that teaches us that a neder is חל on a דבר מצוה so how can they ask the question that the עשה should be דוחה the לא תעשה of neder. The pasuk says otherwise and if we have a pasuk, that is a "sof pasuk" end of story?!!]. Maybe the pasuk from which we learn that a נדר is חל על דבר מצוה is not saying that the עשה is not דוחה but that one should employ the means of שאלה thus enabling him to fulfill the mitzva. In other words, since the נדר is חל, it is incumbent upon the person to be שואל on the neder. The pasuk says כי ידור נדר להשם - even if the neder is to Hashem is should not be violated [ט"ז עמוד ב] - so that means that you must remove the neder. However, the Rishonim understood that the mishna is going further and telling us that he should actually not fulfill the mitzva. It says אומר קונם סוכה שאני עושה לולב שאני נוטל וכו' בנדרים אסור meaning it is forbidden to fulfill the mitzva [without any implication that one should uproot the vow]. Based on this understanding the Rishonim asked that we should say עשה דוחה לא תעשה. The Rishonim are not asking why we follow the pasuk which allows us to override the fulfillment of a mitzva. They understood that the pasuk is telling us to uproot the neder and thus be safe on both ends. Neder not violated, mitzva fulfilled. They were asking on the mishna which seems to say that one should actually not do the mitzva - why not?? Let the עשה be דוחה לא תעשה?

The Shaar Hamelech apparently understood that even the pasuk [not just the mishna] is telling us not to fulfill the mitzva because the neder is חל even when one cannot do שאלה. Based on this understanding, he wondered how the Rishonim could be bothered how we fulfill a pasuk and don't follow the general rule of עשה דוחה לא תעשה. But based on our understanding, the pasuk never said that the עשה should not be דוחה the  לא תעשה - only the mishna said that.

ולכאורה הגמרא ביבמות האומרת שעשה דוחה ל"ת ועשה בדאיתא ע"י שאלה ולכן עשה דמצורע דוחה ל"ת ועשה של נזירות מיירי בגוונא שא"א לשאול כגון שאין ב"ד וכדומה, אחרת עדיף לשאול על הנזירות ולא לדחות כדאיתא במנחות - ד"ע

[Based on the manuscripts of chiddushei HaGaon Ha-Gadol Rav Avraham Genechovski ztz"l]