ורבנן האי יעשו אותו מאי עבדי ליה מיבעי ליה שאין שוחטין את הפסח על היחיד דכמה דאפשר לאהדורי מהדרינן
is not exact, then say that it is like a particularization and a general proposition, whereby the general proposition is accounted as adding to the particularization, so that even all regulations [are included]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a general principle of exegesis that if a law is first stated in a particular instance and then in a general form, the former does not limit the latter but on the contrary the latter generalizes the former, so that all instances are included. Here a particular instance of similarity between the first Passover and the second is stated in v. 11 while in v. 12 a general law is stated that the two are alike in all respects.');"><sup>10</sup></span> hence he informs us [that It is not so].
Sefer HaChinukh
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, taught in Pesachim 95a in the chapter [entitled] Mi Shehaya Tamei, "What [are the differences] between first and second? On the first all leaven is forbidden to be seen or kept in one's possession; on the second both leaven and matsa are with him in the house. The second is only observed one day, and there is no holiday or prohibition of labor. The first requires Hallel while eating it; the second does not require Hallel while eating it - though this and that require Hallel during the offering. Both are eaten roasted with matsa and marror," as it is explicitly stated like that in the verse. "Both supersede the Shabbat, and neither may be left over or have bones broken in them," as the verse explicitly warns about this too, with "do not leave over" and "they shall not break a bone in it."
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
