Halakhah su Ecclesiaste 9:78

It is taught in a baraita (Eruvin 13a): Rabbi Meir said, when I came to Rabbi Ishmael, he said to me “My son, what is your trade?” I said to him “I am a scribe.” He said to me “My son, be meticulous in your work, for it is the work of heaven, and if you should omit a single letter or add a single letter, you destroy the entire world.” From this we may see that a scribe must be in extreme awe of God, for if he makes one error or fails to make one necessary correction, his soul will perish, because he steals from the masses and causes them to sin – they remain in a state of not performing commandments, and every day make blessings in vain. Of him it is written “One sinner destroys much good” (Kohelet 9:18), and “Cursed is he who does God’s work deceitfully” (Jeremiah 48:10). Therefore, those who have the power to appoint scribes should appoint worthy scribes, men of truth who hate bribes and know Torah, fear God and tremble at his words, just as we appoint kosher butchers. All who write tefillin as good and fit as they possibly can will have their reward doubled and doubled again, and will be saved from the judgement of Gehinnom. (From the laws of writing tefillin by R’ Avraham Mazinsheim and in the Levush.)

However negation of the positive is a different matter. And that is that you negate the predicate from the subject. As when you say, "X did not eat yesterday; y did not drink today; Reuven is not Shimon's father" - and that which is similar to this - it has nothing to do with the notion of a commandment at all. Behold this is all negation of the positive, and there is no trace of a command in it. And the word with which to negate in Arabic is generally mah, but they also negate with the word, lah. But the Hebrews generally negate with the word, lo, which is exactly the same word they use to prohibit. However they also negate with ayin and that which is connected to it, such as eino, einam, einchem and the other ones. Indeed negation in Hebrew is with the word lo, as when it states, "Lo arose another prophet like Moshe" (Deuteronomy 34:10); "Lo a man is God that He should be untrue" (Numbers 23:19); and many like these. And negation with ayin is like its saying, "and man was ayin" (Genesis 2:8); "but the dead einam know anything" (Ecclesiastes 9:5); and many others. Hence behold that the difference between a prohibition and a negation is already clear to you - and that is that a prohibition is a type of command and will only come with the exact verb of a command. That means to say, just like the verb of a command will always be in the future, so too will [the verb of] a prohibition. It is not possible for a command to be in the past, and so too with a prohibition. And there is no room to group a command as a [type of] narrative sentence: For a narrative sentence requires a predicate and a subject; whereas a command is a complete sentence (without an explicit subject) - as is explained in the books written about this. And a prohibition is also not to be included with a narrative sentence. But a negation is not like this, for a negation can be a narrative sentence. And negation can be in the past, the future or the present. And this is all self-evident with some observation. And since this is so, it is inappropriate to include negative statements that are negations as negative commandments in any way. And this is a demonstrable matter - there is no need for affirmation of it, besides that which we mentioned about the understanding of the nature of words, so as to differentiate between a prohibition and a negation.