Commentary for Temurah 35:8

אלא קרא מיבעי ליה דאי עבר ומקריב קאי בעשה

But is not this too a traditiona law, for it is said: 'Wherever the law is that a sin-offering is left to die, a guilt-offering is left to pastur Rather the text ['rak'] is required for the case where he transgressed and offered, making him guilty of breaking a positive command.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both in connection with a sin-offering and a guilt-offering there is a breach of a positive command if the offering actually took place, since the text says: 'Only thy holy things, etc.', referring to the exchange of a burnt-offering and a peace-offering, their offspring and their exchange, and the text continues: 'And thou shalt offer thy burnt-offering etc.' implying, but not other dedications as, for example, a sin-offering or a guilt-offering. This prohibition being derived by implication from a positive command is itself equivalent to a positive command (Rashi) .');">⁴</span>

Explore commentary for Temurah 35:8. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.