Commentary for Kiddushin 67:4
אמר רבי יוחנן אין למדין מן הכללות ואפילו במקום שנאמר בו חוץ
Now, is this a general principle? But unleavened bread,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To eat which on the first evening of Passover is a positive command: Ex. XII, 18.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
R. Yohanan says that we simply do not learn from general rules, even if the rule cites a particular exception. He proves this from the case of food used to make an eruv (a common meal that transforms a courtyard into the domain of one person) or a shittuf (the same thing but with an alleyway). The mishnah states that any food product can be used except water or salt because these are not really foods. However, there is another exception—mushrooms, which also are not considered a food, assumedly because they don’t really have any true substance to them.
So what then is the point of a general rule? It seems like these are rules of thumb. They are there because they are generally true, and they help one remember the rule. But they are not strong enough to derive from them any halakhah. Knowing that women are exempt from positive time bound commandments helps one remember what they are obligated in and what they are not. But one cannot derive from here any halakhah.
So what then is the point of a general rule? It seems like these are rules of thumb. They are there because they are generally true, and they help one remember the rule. But they are not strong enough to derive from them any halakhah. Knowing that women are exempt from positive time bound commandments helps one remember what they are obligated in and what they are not. But one cannot derive from here any halakhah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy