In daf 4 amud 1 the gemara is arguing as to whether a par heelem davar is brought when an entire mitzva is 'uprooted'. The gemara asks how does "Ve'Nelam Davar" imply part of a Mitzvah only & not the entire mitzva? The gemara answers that it is written 'mitzvat' with only 1 vav which is singular & not plural.
The following is my question.
in the sefer entire Torah I do not recall one instance where the words mitzvot is written with 2 vavs, so how does teh absence of 2 vavs in this instance proove anything?
Joseph Benzaquen, Gibraltar
The Gemara never suggested that the Torah should have written the word "Mitzvos" with 2 Vavs. Rather, the Gemara is discussing what one should learn from the fact that the Torah writes this word with only one Vav. The question is
1) Does one look at the way one says this word - if so, one says it as if it was written with 2 Vavs and therefore this means many Mitzvos, or
2) does one look at the way the word is written - if so, since there is only one Vav this indicates only one Mitzvah. (See CHOK NASSAN, printed at back of Gemara p. 34, who explains why this is different from the dispute in many places in the Gemara - see SUKAH 6b for instance whether one follows the way the word is read or is written.)
Chizkia attempted to learn from "From all of the Mitzvos", that a person only transgressed some of the Mitzvah but did not uproot it all. The Gemara asked on this that the way "Mitzvos" is said implies many, which means he may have uprooted Shabbos (for instance) entirely, which is one of the many Torah Mitzvos. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak replied that "Mitzvos" is written with only one Vav which implies he transgressed one of the Mitzvos of the Torah, e.g. one Mitzvah of Shabbos, but did not uproot Shabbos entirely.
KOL TUV
D. Bloom