Two witnesses go to the beit din and claim that so and so violated the sabbath on a biblical level. The witnesses claim they warned him in accordance with the rules and they did their part as witnesses. When so and so is brought to beis din, he claims he did a melacha (such as digging a hole), but he claims it was for the dirt. Which would only be a rabbinical prohibition because it's a מלאכה שאין צריכה לגופה. If a person were to use this as their defense to deflect the death penalty would it theoretically work?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
readings - Appending 内 to a company name is read ない or うち?
For example, if I say マイクロソフト内のパートナーシップは強いです, is the 内 here read as うち or ない? Answer 「内」 in the form: 「Proper Noun + 内」 is always read 「ない...
-
The verb わかる can be written using either 分かる, 判る, or 解る - what's the semantic difference between these forms, if any? Answer The answe...
-
Shalom friends do the Jews believe that prophet Muhamned is their prophet do the Jews follow his teachings also what do the Jews think of pr...
-
what is the difference between 暖かい and 温かい?
-
In English, we just have one word for the conjunction and which works just fine for many categories, but in Japanese, there are separate wo...
No comments:
Post a Comment