א לא מצית אמרת דכתיב (ויקרא יט, יד) לא תקלל חרש ואי אמרת בשלמא לקלל את חבירו אזהרתיה מהכא דכתיב לא תקלל חרש אלא אי אמרת מוציא ש"ש לבטלה אזהרתיה מהיכא
1 - You cannot say this, since it is written: Thou shalt not curse the deaf.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIX, 14. Implying whether without the Name or with the Name, for which there is a prohibitory law. The texts therefore, 'If thou wilt not observe to do' and 'Then the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful' inform us that there is punishment of lashes for one who curses his fellow with the Name. Aliter: You cannot say that atonement with lashes alone is not sufficient in a case where one curses his fellow with the Name, for by means of an analogy in Sanh. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> Or if you prefer [another solution] I may say:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Rashi.');"><sup>2</sup></span> There is no difficulty [if the text above]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'If thou wilt not observe to do'.');"><sup>3</sup></span> refers to one who curses his fellow [with the Name]; its warning<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' in order that the transgression of a prohibition should entail lashes, a text giving the warning is first necessary.');"><sup>4</sup></span> in that case would be derived from here, since it is written: Thou shalt not curse the deaf.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And we have explained that the text implies even with the Name. Therefore here we have the warning, and the punishment of lashes is derived from the text: If thou wilt not observe to do.');"><sup>5</sup></span>