אי הכי תיתי במה הצד
Said R'Mordecai to R'Ashi: We have learnt the following on the authority of R'Simeon B'Lakish: An inference drawn from cases with common features can be refuted only by those [cases] and not by other [cases].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the refutation must be in the nature of a peculiar characteristic possessed by the cases that determine the common features and which is absent from the case proposed to be inferred from the common features - e.g. the demonstration of a special characteristic peculiar to 'orlah and to leaven during Passover but absent from flesh cooked in milk would indeed be a valid refutation. It is, however, no refutation of the argument by adducing cases wherein the common features are not found, for such an argument, as here the case of nebelah, is irrelevant.');"><sup>24</sup></span>
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Although our sages say in Chulin 115 that the repetition of this prohibition in the Torah on three separate occasions teaches that the mixture is forbidden to be eaten, to be boiled, and to be otherwise enjoyed, we count this prohibition in the list of prohibitions only as two (not three). The reason for this is that the prohibition to eat the mixture includes the prohibition to enjoy it in some other way. Our sages have stated in Pesachim 21 that wherever we find the wording לא תאכל, do not eat, this includes the prohibition of eating and enjoying it in another way. This is why the prohibition to benefit from something forbidden in any form is always couched in the expression "do not eat!" Eating is the most common form of enjoying or benefiting from forbidden food. It is also a necessary form of enjoying something. When the Torah speaks of the nobles of the Children of Israel "seeing a vision of G–d, and eating and drinking" (Exodus 24,11), the Torah compares their pleasurable experience of having such a vision to eating and drinking.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
