{
  "url": "https://workbench-jerusalem-salt.thenewjew.org/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/936-937-934-935-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer.json",
  "path": "/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/936-937-934-935-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer",
  "format": "json",
  "type": "siddur-page",
  "title": "Explanation of “R’ Yishmael Omer”",
  "summary": "Explanation of “R’ Yishmael Omer”, pages 934-935, with pointed Hebrew, English, and transliteration.",
  "breadcrumbs": [
    {
      "title": "The New Jew",
      "href": "/index.json"
    },
    {
      "title": "Siddurim",
      "href": "/siddur.json"
    },
    {
      "title": "Siddur Tehillat Hashem, Weiss Edition",
      "href": "/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss.json"
    },
    {
      "title": "Explanation of “R’ Yishmael Omer”",
      "href": "/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/936-937-934-935-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer.json"
    }
  ],
  "alternates": {
    "html": "https://workbench-jerusalem-salt.thenewjew.org/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/936-937-934-935-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer",
    "json": "https://workbench-jerusalem-salt.thenewjew.org/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/936-937-934-935-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer.json",
    "xml": "https://workbench-jerusalem-salt.thenewjew.org/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/936-937-934-935-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer.xml"
  },
  "data": {
    "book": {
      "slug": "tehillat-hashem-weiss",
      "title": "Siddur Tehillat Hashem, Weiss Edition",
      "nusach": "Chabad"
    },
    "page": {
      "slug": "936-937-934-935-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer",
      "section": "Appendix",
      "topic": "Explanation of “R’ Yishmael Omer”",
      "printPages": "934-935",
      "pdfPages": "936-937",
      "header": {
        "section": {
          "english": "Appendix",
          "transliteration": {}
        },
        "topic": {
          "english": "Explanation of “R’ Yishmael Omer”",
          "transliteration": {}
        },
        "printPages": "934-935"
      },
      "body": [
        {
          "type": "heading",
          "english": "Elucidation of “R’ Yishmael Omer”",
          "transliteration": {}
        },
        {
          "type": "Instructions",
          "text": "(Appearing on page 54)"
        },
        {
          "type": "Instructions",
          "text": "The sages employed thirteen principles when drawing statutes from the language of the Torah. Each principle is set forth here together with an instance of a statute they infer by that principle:"
        },
        {
          "type": "Passage",
          "hebrew": "קַל וָחֹמֶר",
          "english": "<b>If the Torah states a principle for a lenient matter (kal), we infer that the principle would surely hold in a stricter matter (chomer).</b> By way of illustration, King David accorded Achitofel honor although Achitofel instructed him in only two matters. From this we gather that we, ordinary folk in contrast to King David, must surely honor those who instruct us in some matter.",
          "transliteration": {
            "israeli": "kal va|CHO|mer",
            "orthographic": "qal va|ḥO|mer",
            "sephardic": "qal va|ḥO|mer",
            "chabad": "kal vo|CHOY|mer"
          }
        },
        {
          "type": "Passage",
          "hebrew": "גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה",
          "english": "<b>If the Torah employs a like term in two distinct locations, we infer that a given principle governing one location governs the other location as well.</b> By way of illustration, the Torah forbids tearing out hair as a token of mourning, and elsewhere it forbids Kohanim to tear out their hair. The Torah employs the term “karchah” (“making bald”) at each of those locations. From this we gather that the ban on Kohanim tearing out their hair holds only when done as a token of mourning.",
          "transliteration": {
            "israeli": "g'ze|RAH sha|VAH",
            "orthographic": "ge|ze|RAH sha|VAH",
            "sephardic": "ge|ze|RAH sha|VAH",
            "chabad": "g'zei|ROH sho|VOH"
          }
        },
        {
          "type": "Passage",
          "hebrew": "בִּנְיַן אָב מִכָּתוּב\nאֶחָד וּבִנְיַן אָב\nמִשְּׁנֵי כְתוּבִים",
          "english": "<b>If the Torah sets down a general principle in a single verse or in two verses, reckoned as a “binyan av”—a “father case”—that principle is extended to further cases resembling the “father” case.</b> By way of illustration, the Torah permits the cooking of food on Pesach. This “father case” shows that cooking is permitted on the remaining festivals likewise.",
          "transliteration": {
            "israeli": "bin|YAN av mi|ka|TUV\ne|CHAD u|vin|YAN av\nmish|NEI ch'tu|VIM",
            "orthographic": "bin|YAN ʾav mik|ka|THUV\nʾe|ḥADH u|vin|YAN ʾav\nmis|she|NE khe|thu|VIM",
            "sephardic": "bin|YAN av mik|ka|TUV\ne|ḥAD u|vin|YAN av\nmis|she|NE khe|tu|VIM",
            "chabad": "bin|YAN ov mi|ko|SUV\ne|CHOD u|vin|YAN ov\nmish'|NEI ch'su|VIM"
          }
        },
        {
          "type": "Passage",
          "hebrew": "כְּלָל וּפְרָט",
          "english": "<b>If a general clause (klal) within a verse is succeeded by a particular instance (prat), the verse’s principle governs those instances alone, and no further case.</b> By way of illustration, the verse states: “When someone brings an offering... of an animal, of cattle, or sheep.” “Animal” is the general clause, for it embraces <b>all</b> animals; “cattle” and “sheep” are the particular instances. From this we gather that one may bring cattle or sheep alone for the offering, and nothing besides.",
          "transliteration": {
            "israeli": "k'LAL uf|RAT",
            "orthographic": "ke|LAL u|fe|RAṭ",
            "sephardic": "ke|LAL u|fe|RAT",
            "chabad": "k'LOL uf'|ROT"
          }
        },
        {
          "type": "Passage",
          "hebrew": "פְּרָט וּכְלָל",
          "english": "<b>If a particular instance within a verse is succeeded by a general clause, we infer that the verse’s principle governs in general, and not merely the particular instances.</b> By way of illustration, the Torah says that upon finding your friend’s “donkey” or “clothes,” you ought to restore them to him. Thereafter it states, “You should do so for any lost thing.” From this we gather that returning any lost thing is a mitzvah, not merely donkeys or clothes.",
          "transliteration": {
            "israeli": "p'RAT uch|LAL",
            "orthographic": "pe|RAṭ u|khe|LAL",
            "sephardic": "pe|RAT u|khe|LAL",
            "chabad": "p'ROT uch'|LOL"
          }
        },
        {
          "type": "Passage",
          "hebrew": "כְּלָל וּפְרָט\nוּכְלָל, אִי\nאַתָּה דָן אֶלָּא\nכְּעֵין הַפְּרָט",
          "english": "<b>If the Torah presents a klal uprat uklal—a general clause, then a particular instance, then a further general clause—the verse’s principle is applied only to cases resembling the particular instance.</b> By way of illustration, when the Torah treats a thief’s punishment, it states, “For every dishonest thing, whether it is for a [stolen] ox... for any lost item.” The phrases “Every dishonest thing” and “any lost item” function as general clauses, whereas “ox” functions as a particular instance. From this we gather that the punishment is imposed only when the stolen item resembles an ox—a movable object rather than land.",
          "transliteration": {
            "israeli": "k'LAL uf|RAT\nuch|LAL, i\na|TAH dan e|LA\nke-EIN hap|RAT",
            "orthographic": "ke|LAL u|fe|RAṭ\nu|khe|LAL, ʾi\nʾat|TAH dhan ʾel|LAʾ\nke|ʿEN hap|pe|RAṭ",
            "sephardic": "ke|LAL u|fe|RAT\nu|khe|LAL, i\nat|TAH dan el|LA\nke|ʿEN hap|pe|RAT",
            "chabad": "k'LOL uf'|ROT\nuch'|LOL, i\na|TOH don e|LO\nk'EIN hap'|ROT"
          }
        },
        {
          "type": "Passage",
          "hebrew": "כְּלָל שֶׁהוּא\nצָרִיךְ לִפְרָט,\nוּפְרָט שֶׁהוּא\nצָרִיךְ לִכְלָל",
          "english": "<b>If the Torah presents a general clause together with a particular instance, and the general clause requires the particular instance in order to clarify it, and likewise the particular instance requires the general clause in order to clarify it, the principle is applied to the general clause and the particular instance alike.</b> By way of illustration, the Torah states that the “firstborn, the one that opens the womb, should be holy to Me.” This is a general clause, for it takes in firstborn daughters no less than sons. Yet elsewhere the Torah states, “male only,” which is a particular instance. In this latter verse, however, it is not stipulated that the reference is solely the one that “opens the womb,” so it could signify that the earliest male counts as firstborn, even should a female have been born before him. Hence the Torah must also give the general clause, to inform us that firstborn status requires being “the one that opens the womb,” which clarifies the particular instance. Thus it is clear that such a one must be <b>both</b> the firstborn child <b>and</b> male.",
          "transliteration": {
            "israeli": "k'LAL she|HU\ntza|RICH lif|RAT,\nuf|RAT she|HU\ntza|RICH lich|LAL",
            "orthographic": "ke|LAL she|HUʾ\ntza|RIKH lif|RAṭ,\nu|fe|RAṭ she|HUʾ\ntza|RIKH likh|LAL",
            "sephardic": "ke|LAL she|HU\ntza|RIKH lif|RAT,\nu|fe|RAT she|HU\ntza|RIKH likh|LAL",
            "chabad": "k'LOL she|HU\ntzo|RICH lif|ROT,\nuf'|ROT she|HU\ntzo|RICH lich|LOL"
          }
        }
      ],
      "footer": []
    }
  },
  "links": [
    {
      "rel": "parent",
      "title": "Siddur Tehillat Hashem, Weiss Edition",
      "href": "/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss.json"
    },
    {
      "rel": "prev",
      "title": "Chapter 140",
      "href": "/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/918-919-918-919-psalms-chapter-140.json"
    },
    {
      "rel": "next",
      "title": "Explanation of “R’ Yishmael Omer”",
      "href": "/siddur/tehillat-hashem-weiss/938-939-936-937-appendix-explanation-of-r-yishmael-omer.json"
    }
  ]
}