Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Reference for Sanhedrin 225:5

דמר אית ליה דרבי אבין ומר לית ליה דרבי אבין

R. SIMEON SAID: THE HOLY ONE BLESSED BE HE, DECLARED etc. Shall we say that they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Jose the Galilean and R. Akiba. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> disagree in respect of the dictum of R. Abin in R. Elai's name: For R. Abin said in the name of R. Elai: Wherever you find a general proposition in the form of a positive command and a particular specification in the form of a negative injunction, they are not interpreted as a general proposition followed by a particular specification:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The rule in such a case is: the general proposition includes only what is enumerated in the particular specification. But when one is thrown into the form of a positive command and the other stated as a negative injunction this does not apply. Now, in the passage under discussion, And it shall be an heap forever is a general proposition, implying that it may not be turned even into parks or orchards; whilst it shall not be built again is a particular specification, denoting a prohibition against the erection of houses, etc., which require building, but not against parks, etc. Now had they both been expressed in the form of a positive or negative command, the rule of exegesis would be as stated, the particularized expression defining the general proposition. Thus: It shall be an heap for ever, and that only in respect of rebuilding, but not in respect of parks, etc. Since, however, they are not both expressed in the same form, this method of exegesis is not followed, but the two clauses are regarded as distinct, a different exegetical rule being followed; viz., 'That which was included in the general proposition and was then separately stated is intended to illumine the former' (for it shall not be built again, which refers to houses, etc., was really included in the general proposition). Thus: And it shall be an heap for ever implies a prohibition of parks and orchards. Now, how is this implication understood? Because Scripture continues, it shall not be built again, from which we deduce, just as a building is anything erected in a human settlement, so it shall be an heap for ever prohibits everything that finds a place in civilization, and therefore includes gardens, etc. ');"><sup>10</sup></span>

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Available for Premium members only

Jastrow

Available for Premium members only

Jastrow

Available for Premium members only
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse