More Discussions for this daf
1. Mevushal Mevushal 2. Unusual syntax? 3. Chamei Teverya
4. רש״י ד״ה ובשל מבושל
DAF DISCUSSIONS - PESACHIM 41

Q. Reese asked:

Tosfos proves from the Gemara that the we can deduce a new Halachah when the Torah uses the "strange" syntax of repeating a verb using a different verb-form for emphasis (i.e. when it says Nason Titen as opposed to Nason Nason or Titen Titen).

In Kidushin 4a, when the Tana makes a Drasha from the "extra Yud" in the word "Ein," the Gemara asks "how does the Tana know that the Yud is extra," i.e. where do we ever find the word without the Yud. It finds an example of a word with Yud/Tzerei Nun and no Yud.

We should be able to ask the same question here; where do we ever find that the Torah does use a double verb with the same verb-form. If there is not such instance, then how does the Tana know to make a Drasha from the fact that the Torah does not use the same verb?

Thank you for your help,

Q. Reese, Atlanta, GA

The Kollel replies:

Dear Q Reese,

I found a few examples where the Torah does use a double verb with the same verb form. See:

1. Bemidbar 35:26 YOTSO YAITSA (cited in Makos 12a)

2. Vayikra 5:19 ASHOM ASHAM

3. Vayikra 10:16 DOROSH DORASH

4. Bereshis 44:28 TOROF TORAF

We see therefore, that this is an acceptable way of writing and therefore it is possible to derive Halochos from the fact that the Torah changed the verb, in the same way that the Gemara derives a Halachah from the extra Yud of "Ein"

A KOSHER UN FREILECHER PESACH !

D.Bloom