출애굽기 34:2의 Halakhah

To not do work on Shabbat: To not do work on the day of Shabbat ourselves; and not allow our children, slaves and animals to do so, as it is stated (Exodus 20:10), "you shall not do work, etc." There is no doubt that even though the verse issues a [single blanket] prohibition on us, our children, servants, and animals, they are not all equal; as we see that one who volitionaly does work with his own body will be liable for the death penalty in a court. But with the work of others - even though he is warned about them with a negative commandment - he is not liable for them; [not] even with lashes, as lashes are never for the act of others. And from the language of Rambam, may his memory be blessed, (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Sabbath 20:1) it is implied that he holds that this prohibition of " you shall not do work, you [...] and your animal," comes upon letting an animal work (mechamer) while being behind it - for example, that he is using it to plow. As, according to his opinion, letting an animal work by itself is only a prohibition [embedded] in a positive commandment. And hence, according to his opinion, they said in the Gemara (Shabbat 154a) that this negative commandment of letting your animals do work is a negative commandment that is given over to the warning of a death penalty from the court - meaning to say, that a man is killed for it, and [so] there are no lashes for it. But Ramban, may his memory be blessed, (on Sefer HaMitzvot LaRambam, Shorashim 14) wrangles with him greatly on this explanation, and says that this negative commandment of letting your animals do work is only about walking behind his animal laden with his load, while the man does not do any act with his hands. And therefore neither lashes nor the death penalty would ever come to him; and it is as that which has been established for us, we do not administer lashes for any negative commandment that does not have an act. [And it is] like they, may their memory be blessed, expounded (Shabbat 154b), "'You [...] and your animal' - let it write, you shall not do work and your animal'; why do I need 'you?' [To tell you] that when he does work, he is liable; but for the work of his animal he is not lia work ble." Rather, he is [just] warned about it with a negative commandment, like with the work of his young child and his Canaanite slave. But for his own actual work - for that there was no reason to say that he is liable, as behold, his punishment is explicit (Exodus 34:2), "any one who does work on it shall die." And according to the opinion of Ramban, may his memory be blessed, the explanation of that which they said in the Gemara about the negative commandment of letting your animal do work, that it is a negative commandment that is given over to the warning of a death penalty from the court, is that since it also includes the other [types of] work which [come] with a warning of a death penalty from the court - even though with letting your animal work there is certainly only a negative commandment, as there is also not [even] lashes with it - nonetheless, this negative commandment is [called] a negative commandment that is given over to the warning of a death penalty from the court because of those things that it includes that have death penalties of the court. And similar to this did they, may their memory be blessed, say in the first chapter of Eruvin 17b about the negative commandment of "let no man leave his place": Since it also includes carrying out from one domain to another - like the teaching that they expounded, [read, do not go out (yetseh), as] do not carry out (yotsee) - that it is from now a negative commandment that is given over to the warning of a death penalty from the court in some of its matters. And since it is so, we can say that we do not administer lashes for it, in all of its matters. And in exactly the same way, we can explain the negative commandment of not letting your animal do work here.