Halakhah for Sanhedrin 112:19

I mention this interpretation to counter the heretics who do not believe the words of our Rabbis that the Sabbath extends from dusk to dusk. The true interpretation is what the Rabbis recorded, namely, that the Sabbath was given at Marah.⁷ “Israel was instructed in ten laws at Marah. Seven of these were accepted by the descendents of Noah. Three additional laws were courts, Sabbath, and respect for parents” (Sanhedrin 56b). The incident at Marah (Exodus 15:22–26) took place before the appearance of the manna (ibid., chapter 16). Scripture mentions “tomorrow” and not “this night,” for Scripture usually speaks of what is common, namely, that people work during the day. The meaning of “holy Sabbath” is that they should rest, and that is what they did, “The nation rested on the seventh day” (ibid. 16:30). In Jeremiah it is written: “to sanctify the Sabbath day by not working on it” (17:24). Moses mentioned “tomorrow,” which is daytime, because he addressed what is common. Similarly, “Man goes out to his activity and to his work until evening” (Psalms 104:23). Likewise, “You should not eat meat that was torn in the field” (Exodus 22:30), although the same prohibition applies to what was torn in a house. Similarly, “an occurrence at night” (Deuteronomy 23:11);⁸ This does not exclude an occurrence of the day. “an ox or a donkey fell there” (Exodus 21:33);⁹ Ox or donkey are not exclusive. and many more in the Torah like these.

Not to slaughter consecrated animals outside of the [Temple] yard: Not to sacrifice consecrated animals outside of the [Temple] yard - and that is called 'those slaughtered outside' - as it is stated (Leviticus 17:3-4), "that slaughters an ox or sheep or goat, etc. And does not bring it to the opening of the Tent of Meeting, etc., he has shed blood and shall be cut off." And the warning (negative commandment) does not come to us from this verse, as this verse only expresses the punishment. And it is established for us, [that] He does not punish unless he warned (Sanhedrin 56b). And our Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, said that we learn the warning for this with an inferential comparison, as it is [found] in the Gemara, Zevachim 106a. As there, they, may their memory be blessed, said, "One who slaughters and brings up outside is liable for the slaughter and liable for the bringing up" - the understanding of bringing up is burning with fire. And they challenged there, "Bringing up is fine, the punishment is written, and the warning is written - the punishment, 'And does not bring it to the opening of the Tent of Meeting [...] and shall be cut off'; the warning, 'guard yourself lest you bring up your burnt-offering' (Deuteronomy 12:13), like Rabbi Avin, as Rabbi Avin said, 'Every place that it is stated, "guard," "lest" or "not," it is nothing but a negative commandment'; but slaughter, it is fine that the punishment is written, 'And to the opening of the Tent of Meeting, etc.,' but from where is the warning?" And after great effort, they said there that since Scripture states (Deuteronomy 12:14), "there you shall do, and there you shall bring up," it compares bringing up and doing: Just like bringing up, it punished and warned; so too doing, it punished and warned - and the understanding of doing includes everything, whether slaughter or burning.

And it is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. All people of the world are also obligated about it, since it is a branch of the commandment [against] theft, which is one of the seven commandments that all people of the world were commanded. And do not err, my son, with this well-known tally of the seven commandments of the Noachides mentioned in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 56b); as truthfully these seven are [only] like general principles, but they have many details. So you will find that the prohibition of sexual immorality is considered for them to be one commandment as a general principle, but there are details in it; such as the prohibition of the mother, and the prohibition of the sister from the mother's side, and the prohibition of a married woman, and the wife of the father, and the male, and the animal (Sanhedrin 58a). And so [too,] the matter of idolatry is all considered one commandment for them, but there are many, many details; as behold, they are the same regarding it as Israel, since they are liable for everything that an Israelite court would kill about (Sanhedrin 56b). And so too can we say that since they are warned about the matter of theft, that they were also warned about all of its distancings. And my intention is not to say that they are warned about this with a negative commandment like Israel. Rather, they were warned about it more generally in these seven. It is as if you would say, for example, that Scripture warned them, "Each man, shall not come close to the flesh of his relatives; to the mother, to the sister and to all of the family." And so too also with idolatry [that the command be] in general. And so with theft, [it is] as if it was stated to them, "You shall not steal, but distance yourselves from it completely" - and within the distancing is not to covet. But the matter is not like this with Israel, as the Omnipresent wanted to bring them merit, and [so] he multiplied the commandments for them, more than for [the gentiles]; and also in those that we were commanded, He commanded upon them with separate positive commandments and negative commandments - as every one that does one commandment acquires one defender for himself. And the one who transgresses this and fixes his thought to desire that which is of someone else transgresses this negative commandment. But there are no lashes for it, as there is no act [connected with it], yet his punishment is very great; as it is a cause for several mishaps, as is well-known [from] the story of Achav and Navot.