ת"ש הכניסה לרבקה ודשה כשירה בשביל שתינק ותדוש פסולה
- Because [the references to] the separation of the ashes and the priestly garments are two verses written with the same purpose,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'which come as one .');"><sup>19</sup></span> and the teaching of two such verses does not illumine [other cases].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a general principle of exegesis. When a law is taught in one case it may be extended to other cases too by general analogy. But when it is taught in two cases it cannot be extended; for if it were intended to illumine others too, it would be written in one instance only, and the second, together with all others, would follow from it.');"><sup>20</sup></span>
Contemporary Halakhic Problems, Vol VI
The remaining factor to be considered is whether mere visual examination undertaken solely for aesthetic or recreational purposes constitutes a forbidden form of benefit. "Benefit," in the fundamental halakhic meaning of the term, connotes tangible physical benefit such as eating, drinking, anointing the skin or financial enrichment. Thus, the Gemara, Pesaḥim 26a, declares, "Sound, sight and smell do not constitute me'ilah (kol, mareh vareaḥ ein ba-hen mishum me'ilah)." "Me'ilah" refers to prohibited use of consecrated property for mundane benefit. In context, the Gemara is defining and limiting the concept of hana'ah, or benefit. Although other forms of sensual pleasure do constitute hana'ah, benefit derived by means of "sight" does not rise to the level of a prohibited "benefit." The principle is made explicit with regard to the prohibitions concerning me'ilah but, logically, it is equally applicable to all categories of issurei hana'ah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
