Responsa for Bava Batra 260:11
דתניא אין אומרים בטרפות זו דומה לזו ואל תתמה שהרי חותכה מכאן ומתה חותכה מכאן וחיתה
— [One] Master holds [that] an <i>halachah</i> is preferable<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since a halachah may be regarded as a general rule; while one practical decision which happens to agree with R. Johanan's views would not show that the law is always to be administered in accordance with these views. Other factors and circumstances may have led to the decision in that particular case. ');"><sup>10</sup></span>
Shut min haShamayim
They responded: we do not make comparisons between commandments. 3cf. Bava Batra 130b:11, אין אומרין בטרפות זו דומה לזו. For there are simple commandments, such as Sukkah and Lulav, and the punishment for negating them is severe, because it is tantamount to a rejection. Negating part of a commandment is not the same as negating all of it, for 'the Torah was not given to heavenly angels'.4The Torah is not stricter than normal people can bear. Cf. Yoma 30a:2 etc. All this they responded to me in truth. It seems that the punishment is not as severe as for one who negates the commandment of sitting in a Sukkah. Nonetheless, we are still at fault. For we do not put on tefillin for fear lest we flatulate or fall asleep while wearing them. Yet it is better to negate part of a commandment than all of it.*A similar ambiguity is noted by Tosafot on Shabbat 49a:6 - without denying that Tefillin should ideally be worn all day long, they note that 'we are lax with tefillin, just as they were lax in Talmudic times too'.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy