Where is that in the law? Or is that a modification to the law that you or perhaps a rabbinical authority offered up to accommodate for the difficulty in actually complying?
No, nothing like that - It's just inherent in the document. As an example, you are a shopkeeper in ancient Israel... You see a murder occur. Now, Torah says not to let a murderer live in your midst - And one must stone a murderer... That doesn't mean YOU get to start pitching stones at the guy. Torah also says there has to be a trial. There has to be another witness. There has to be a judiciary authority applied. So that part is beyond your personal control.
Personally, YOU would have to report it, and give an honest testimony, and keep yourself and your testimony free of being swayed by any influence... You may be called to throw that stone eventually, once guilt is determined according to jurist prudence...
Likewise, YOU would have *nothing* to do with the running of the Temple, and the dress and deportment of the priests... Now, maybe some priest may not have washed his feet, as is necessary according to Torah... No doubt you could inform him of his mistake, and no doubt you could report him to his betters, but it is not up to YOU to execute any judgement in the thing.
So since Torah speaks to a nation, there is an inherent distribution of powers which certainly reaches beyond the individual. Weights and standards, product assurance, law enforcement, judiciary, military, priestly duties, etc... All of these are beyond the scope of the individual. He cannot enforce these things.
But the individual also is addressed - Hygiene, Kosher, personal honesty, personal integrity personal honor within the larger scope of the whole - YOU, as a shopkeeper, have no control over standards, weights, and measures themselves, BUT YOU have a personal instruction not to shave your weights, not to put your thumb on the scale... to conduct yourself honestly in your contracts, etc.
But I'm an attorney (and a programmer - odd combo, I know).
Hah! I am a programmer too - Re-read Paul and think 'logic bomb'... Sorry... it's an aside, but you just might understand me. Likewise, look at the whole Bible as software - You will come to find out that all the variables are assigned and defined (like almost always) IN THE BEGINNING. The software won't run without Torah.
And as an attorney, put aside your faith, and look at the covenants (to include the inheritance). Look at how they are constructed, couched one inside the next... Look at what is declared explicitly. You and I both know explicit statements stand upon their own, and cannot be altered. Look at where the obligation lies... I will be surprised if you cannot see what I see.
I work with contracts, among other things. And one of the basic principles of contract law is you can't hold somebody to a contract unless all the important terms and conditions are spelled out. By your refusal to elaborate on what constitutes the exact content of Torah, you are asking me to sign on to a contract where I don't know, and maybe can't ever know my obligations.
Nonsense. Read the contract. No, really, DO. I cannot spell out all those things in this short missive - I cannot even summarize it here... I CAN tell you that if you cut to the chase, and head right for Leviticus and Deuteronomy, you will undoubtedly miss the important stuff. And then read the writings and the prophets for more clarity. The OT is BIG, dude. Layer upon layer, all interwoven... If you try to skim over it, you will not see what it says. It is a simply awesome document.
And while IANAL, I was a contractor for most of my life, so I can read a contract too - And I would never be satisfied to have someone tell me what the contract says... Summaries are nice and all, but you and I both know who has to read the contract. I might need a lawyer to help me understand it, but I, me personally, had better understand it completely before I sign anything.
You yourself said it would take forever to work through all the commands. So the very thing you're telling me I'm obligated to do, you won't tell me what it is. Or at least what you think it is. Why would any sane person sign on to a contract like that?
He wouldn't. He would read the contract. Don't forget the part that says ignorance is no excuse (it's in there).
A contract is binding ONLY upon those who are named in it; right?