Musar for Pesachim 47:12
וכי תימא אין מזהירין מן הדין הקישא הוא דכתיב (דברים יב, יז) לא תוכל לאכול בשעריך מעשר דגנך תירושך ויצהרך ובכורות בקרך וגו'
comes to assign a negative injunction [specifically] for itself? For if [we learn] from R'Eleazar ['s dictum], we do flagellate for an implied negative injunction!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., where the action is not explicitly forbidden but only by an injunction stated in general terms, which includes a number of other actions too.');"><sup>17</sup></span> - Rather, said R'Papa: [It<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 108, n. 9.');"><sup>18</sup></span>
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
[The author continues for several columns to discuss the pros and cons of how to interpret that particular discussion in the Talmud. The conclusion he comes to is that Maimonides can certainly claim to base his ruling not only on the Sifri but also on Rava in the section of the Talmud quoted. Ed].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy