Commento su Esodo 35:3

לא תבערו אש YE SHALL NOT KINDLE A FIRE [THROUGHOUT YOUR HABITATIONS ON THEE SABBATH DAY] — There are some of our Rabbis who say that the law about kindling fire is singled out (more lit., goes forth from the general proposition; i. e. it is specially mentioned here although it is included in לא תעשה כל מלאכה, the law prohibiting all work on Sabbath) in order to constitute it a mere negative command (thus indicating that, like all other negative commands, its infringement is punishable by lashes but does not make the offender liable to death as does the doing of other work on Sabbath). Others, however, say that it was singled out in order to separate the various kinds of work comprised in the term כל מלאכה (thus indicating that each transgression of the Sabbath law is to be atoned for separately if several of them have been committed at the same time and under the same circumstances) (cf. Shabbat 70a; Yevamot 6b; Sanhedrin 35b; cf. also Pesachim 5b).

YE SHALL KINDLE NO FIRE THROUGHOUT YOUR HABITATIONS UPON THE SABBATH DAY. The meaning of this verse is clearly to prohibit also on the Sabbath doing any work necessary for the preparation of food, since He said, whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death,⁹Verse 2. and He further explained that they should also not kindle fire, in order to bake bread and boil meat, for fire is needed in the preparation of all food. This had to be stated because He did not say here: “whosoever doeth ‘any manner’ of work,” just as He said in the Ten Commandments, thou shalt not do any manner of work,¹⁰Above, 20:10. but instead He merely said “work” without specifying any type. Therefore we might have excluded from the general statement [whosoever doeth work …] all activity necessary for the preparation of food, for we find it said about the feast of unleavened bread, thou shalt not do work therein,¹¹Deuteronomy 16:8. and yet the preparation of food is not included [in the scope of its prohibition]. It is for this reason that here He mentioned expressly that the preparation of food is also forbidden on the Sabbath.
I have found a similar text in the Midrash:¹²Mechilta here. “Rabbi Nathan says: Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the Sabbath-day. Why is this said? Because it is stated, And Moses assembled all the congregation of the children of Israel.¹³Verse 1. — Reference here in the Mechilta is of course to Verse 2: whosoever doeth work therein…, and as Ramban explained above. The insertion of the word “etc.” at the end of the verse mentioned in the text of Ramban, would clarify the matter completely. It is present in texts of the Mechilta. I might think that one should be allowed to light a candle, to put away food to be kept warm, and to make a fire on the Sabbath. Therefore Scripture says, Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the Sabbath-day.” This corresponds closely to that which we have said, that these works [mentioned in the Mechilta], since they are of direct benefit to the body, were not included in the first prohibition. Thus Rabbi Nathan wanted to say that the purpose of the verse here is not to prohibit baking, cooking, and the rest of the activities involved in the preparation of food, for these have already been prohibited to them by the verse, Bake that [on the sixth day of the week] which ye will bake [i.e., which ye intend to bake on the Sabbath], and seethe that which ye will seethe.¹⁴Above, 16:23. But yet I might think that all activities which benefit man in such a way that the benefit is only to the body — such as lighting a candle, making fire, or washing one’s whole body in hot water — should be allowed, for these are part of the delight of the Sabbath.¹⁵See Isaiah 58:13. Therefore it says, Ye shall kindle no fire — to prohibit all [mentioned activities even if done for these purposes].
Our Rabbis in the Talmud¹⁶Shabbath 70a. have yet another Midrash on this verse, because it does not say: “whosoever doeth any manner of work therein shall be put to death,” or: “whosoever kindles fire throughout your habitations shall be put to death.” Therefore they said that the kindling of fire was singled out in order to make it punishable in a less stringent manner, [namely by stripe], since it is a mere negative command, [whereas violation of the Sabbath by doing any of the other kinds of work is punishable by death]. But another Sage¹⁷This is Rabbi Nathan. holds that it was singled out in order to separate it, since it was included in the prohibition, thou shalt not do any manner of work.¹⁸Above, 20:10. It was thus singled out to indicate a general principle: just as in the case of kindling, which is specifically mentioned although it is included in the prohibition, thou shalt not do any manner of work in it, one becomes liable to punishment for transgressing it alone, so also in the case of all the other thirty-nine categories of forbidden work on the Sabbath, one becomes liable upon transgressing each one of them by itself. For otherwise we might have thought that only if one has done all thirty-nine main classes of “work” he is liable to punishment; therefore kindling of fire was singled out in order to teach that the punishment applies even if he has done but one kind of “work” (Rashi, Yebamoth 6 b). For it is one of the thirteen rules of interpretation of the Torah: “If anything is included in a general proposition and is then made the subject of a special statement, that which is predicated of it is not to be understood as limited to itself alone, but is to be applied to the whole of the general proposition.” Similarly we might have thought that if one has done all thirty-nine main classes of “work” on the Sabbath through error he is liable to bring but one sin-offering, therefore kindling of fire was singled out to teach that he is liable to bring such an offering for each of the main classes of “work” he has done.

לא תבערו אש, even though generally speaking, lighting a fire is not a productive but a destructive activity, seeing that it is an almost indispensable ingredient in most activities the Torah prohibited it as unsuitable for the Sabbath.

לא תבערו אש, seeing that in connection with the festivals the Torah wrote that work in connection with the preparation of food was permitted on such days, meaning that the handling of fire was permitted. (Exodus 12.16) Moses had specifically permitted baking and cooking (Exodus 16,23). In view of this the Torah considered it as necessary to repeat the prohibition of handling fire on the Sabbath. If this kind of work was prohibited on the Sabbath, other work which was far less urgent was certainly prohibited also.

לא תבערו אש בכל מושבותיכם, “do not kindle any fire in any of your dwellings;” we find a disagreement between the scholars of the Talmud (Shabbat 70) concerning this particular verse. Some hold that the reason why this particular work prohibition is the only one specifically mentioned in the Torah, is to place it in a different category from the other prohibited categories of activities, i.e. all the others are subject to the death penalty, whereas this one is punishable only by thirty nine lashes, (according to Rashi, not even that) as are most other negative commandments when violated deliberately. [the technical term for this view by Rabbi Yossi is ללאו יצאה, “it was singled out as a lesser transgression.” The other opinion views this prohibition as an example, לחלק יצאה, “singled out, [as representative of the rules applying to all thirty nine categories. Ed.] The thirty-nine categories themselves are based on activities without which the work on the Tabernacle could not have been carried out successfully; hence they are appropriate as guidelines as to what is and what is not prohibited on the Sabbath. Some scholars feel that the reason why kindling a fire had to be mentioned especially, is that the general public does not view this activity as “work,” seeing that it is permitted on the festivals when used to prepare food. Still other commentators feel that a basic activity, such as kindling a fire, is so necessary that people could not have imagined that it was forbidden on pain of death if the Torah had not spelled it out for them specifically. Nachmanides writes that seeing the Torah does not add here that anyone performing forbidden work will be put to death, we might have thought that when this kindling of fire is performed in order to enable us to have hot meals on the Sabbath, that this is not forbidden, just as it is not forbidden on Passover or the other festivals, although the Torah writes that no work may be performed on those festivals. By specifically stating that lighting a fire on the Sabbath, for whatever reason, is forbidden, we are reminded that the Sabbath is different from the festivals in this respect.

Some of our Sages say: Kindling. . . Rashi is answering the question: Is kindling not already included in the prohibition, “You must not do any manner of work”?

V. 3. לא תבערו אש וגו׳. Feueranzünden stellt sich einerseits an sich nicht als eine produktive, schaffende, vielmehr zunächst als eine zerstörende Tätigkeit dar. Andererseits ist aber die Hervorbringung des künstlichen Feuers eben jene Fähigkeit, die erst dem Menschen in Wahrheit seine Herrschaft über die Dinge der Erdwelt gebracht und gesichert. Nur durch Feuer schafft er sich sein Werkzeug und dringt er trennend und gestaltend in das Innere der Dinge. Wir begreifen daher, wie die besondere Hervorhebung der Kategorie הבערה aus allen anderen אבות מלאכה in diesem Verse nach einer Auffassung (Schabbat 70 a). ללאו יוצאת, das Feueranzünden als lediglich verboten, aber nicht unter die im vorangehenden Verse mit Todesstrafe bedrohten מלאכות begreift, nach einer anderen, als Halacha rezipierten (ebendaselbst), jedoch gerade als mustergültig für alle anderen, לחלק יוצאת — nach dem hermeneutischen Grundsatze: דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא מן הכלל ללמד לא ללמד על עצמו יצא אלא ללמד על הכלל כלו יצא, dass das an einem aus einem Kollektivbegriff hervorgehobenen Fall Gelehrte exemplifikatorisch für den ganzen Kollektivbegriff gilt — für den ganzen איסור מלאכה des Schabbats die bereits durch אלה הדברים וגו׳ des V. 1 vorbereitete Bestimmung präzisiert, dass die Schabbatheiligung sich in jeder einzelnen verbotenen Werktätigkeit also selbständig wiederholt, dass, wenn am Schabbat verschiedene מלאכות in Fahrlässigkeit, בשגגה, geübt worden, eben so viele Schabbatverletzungen, als verschiedene מלאכות geübt worden, zur Sühne dastehen und durch eben so viele חטאות zum Bewusstsein zu bringen sind. Hätte z. B. jemand geackert, gesäet und geschnitten am Schabbat, so hat er für jede Produktionskategorie ein חטאת, somit drei חטאות zu bringen. Dies heißt חלוק מלאכות לשבת, und unterscheidet sich darin charakteristisch der איסור מלאכה am Schabbat von dem des יש חלוק מלאכות בשבת ואין חלוק מלאכות בי׳׳ט :י׳׳ט Mackot 21 b). Am Jomtob ist) die Werkeinstellung lediglich Konsequenz des Moedbegriffes; עבודת ד׳, zu der wir berufen, schließt מלאכת עבודה aus. Es ist dies ein Totalbegriff, der durch jede מלאכה in gleicher Weise verletzt wird. Am Schabbat aber ist שביתת מלאכה das Bekenntnis, dass die dem Menschen innewohnende Fähigkeit der Schöpferherrschaft über die Dinge eine ihm von Gott verliehene und nur in seinem Dienste zu übende sei. Dieses Bekenntnis wiederholt sich selbständig in Beziehung auf jede einzelne Kategorie dieser Fähigkeiten. Erwägen wir, dass nicht die verschiedenen Gegenstände, sondern die verschiedenen Produktionsarten die Wiederholung der Schabbatverletzung konstituieren, wenn z. B. Korn und Wein und Baumfrucht geschnitten worden, nur ein חטאת, dagegen wenn Korn gesäet, geschnitten und aufgesammelt drei חטאות zu bringen wären, so haben wir den Schabbatbegriff nicht sowohl als eine gotthuldigende Zufüßenlegung der Welt, sondern vielmehr als eine gotthuldigende Zufüßenlegung des Menschen in Beziehung auf seine Welt zu begreifen.

לא תבערו אש, “do not kindle fire;” the reason that the Torah singled out lighting a fire on the Sabbath as a forbidden activity by naming it, is that to the average person lighting a fire seems hardly as something that can be called “work.” If it had not been specifically singled out, people might have said that they would certainly not perform activities even remotely connected to creative activity, but they would never have dreamt that lighting a match would be considered by the Torah as on a par with that of sowing, ploughing, or kneading a dough, for instance. In the Talmud, tractate Shabbat folio 70, there is a dispute about whether this activity has been mentioned specifically in order to tell us that the penalty for violating it is not the same as for other work prohibitions, or that it has been singled out to tell us that even such an activity is forbidden on pain of the death penalty.

לא תבערו אש, “do not kindle a fire;” some of our Rabbis claim that the reason that of all the work prohibitions on the Sabbath, only the act of kindling a fire has been singled out by name, is to teach us that lighting a fire is the only one of these prohibitions which, instead of being punishable by death when performed knowingly, is punishable only by 39 lashes, as are other negative commandments when violated on purpose. This is the view of Rabbi Yossi in the Talmud, tractate Shabbat folio 70. Rabbi Nathan, on the other hand, holds that the reason why this mode of activity has been singled out by name is: לחלק, i.e. to give us a definition of the nature of the activities that are prohibited on the Sabbath. It was singled out as a basic activity. Just as this activity is prohibited on the Sabbath on pain of death, so are all the other activities which were indispensable for building a Tabernacle equally forbidden to be performed on any Sabbath for any purpose. Any activity required to be performed for building or functioning of the Tabernacle is considered a basic activity, or אב מלאכה, in Hebrew, and is punishable separately even if performed as part of a number of activities. We have a rule in the Talmud, that if something had at one time been part of a number of items under the same heading, and had subsequently been singled out, it was singled out as an example in order to teach that what applies to it now, also applies to the other items that it had been part of under the same heading, i.e. been under the same “umbrella.” In our situation it means that the other 38 types of basic activities connected with the construction of the Tabernacle or its functions must also not be performed on the Sabbath, each such on pain of death. This is the way in which Rashi explains the verse in general terms. The reason why just the activity of kindling light was chosen by the Torah as the example in question, is that lighting a fire is something that for the onlooker hardly seems like an activity at all, involving neither skill, nor physical strain. If you were to say that granted that actually lighting a fire on the Sabbath is forbidden, but activities preparatory to lighting a fire after the Sabbath are permitted, this too is prohibited. The Sabbath is not a day to be used as a preparation for the activities on the six weekdays. A different interpretation: the reason that the legislation about work prohibition is repeated here is in order that people would not say that just as in Parshat Bo (Exodus 12,16) certain kinds of work were prohibited on the festivals, but preparation of foodnecessitating lighting a fire was exempted, the same was true during the Sabbaths during which work on the Tabernacle was in progress. The Torah therefore categorically prohibited this kind of work, implying that, of course, all other kind of work would be prohibited also.

“Went out” to be a לאו . I.e., it is not a principle category of labor, punishable by kareis and stoning, but merely a negative precept.

בכל מושבותיכם, in all of your dwellings, i.e. the Tabernacle was exempt from all of these restrictions as it was not a residence for human beings. Communal sacrifices were offered as usual. (Mechilta Vayakhel 7)

Others say it “went out” to separate. I.e., we would have thought that if someone did all thirty-nine types of labor within one lapse of awareness, he is obligated to bring only one sin offering. Therefore, it “went out” to separate: [just as kindling was singled out here, so should all the thirty-nine types of labor be singled out one from another, each requiring its own sin offering].