Explanation
The use of this concept is best explained with an example from the Talmud:
In comparison to the holidays of Passover and Sukkot, Shavuot is a relatively short Jewish holiday. This posed a problem in the times of the Holy Temple because there simply would not be enough time for the holiday sacrificial offerings of the entire nation to be sacrificed; Passover and Sukkot were seven and eight days, respectively, while Shavuot was but a single day. The Talmud explains that there was an extended period of time, referred to as tashlumin (period during which the remaining sacrifices could be completed), that was appended to Shavuot to make up for the relative shortness of the holiday.
The question is: for how long can the Shavuot holiday offerings be brought? With the presence of an extra mention of both Passover and Sukkot, both could be used to determine an equivalent period of time—comparing Shavuot to Passover would yield a seven-day period, while comparing it to Sukkot would yield an eight-day period, and there is nothing pressing one choice over another.
The Talmud concludes that Shavuot is compared to Passover to yield a comparable seven-day period to complete the sacrificial offerings. Why not compare Shavuot to Sukkot and gain an extra day? So the rule of tafasta meruba lo tafasta comes to show us that we cannot take more time than we are sure is allowed. Either way we're following the precedent and Shavuot will last at least seven days, but it is only by presuming, without grounds, that it should be compared to Sukkot that we can get the eighth day. In order to stay on the safe side, we must use the limit of seven days from Passover.
Read more about this topic: Tafasta Meruba Lo Tafasta
Famous quotes containing the word explanation:
“Are cans constitutionally iffy? Whenever, that is, we say that we can do something, or could do something, or could have done something, is there an if in the offing—suppressed, it may be, but due nevertheless to appear when we set out our sentence in full or when we give an explanation of its meaning?”
—J.L. (John Langshaw)
“The explanation of the propensity of the English people to portrait painting is to be found in their relish for a Fact. Let a man do the grandest things, fight the greatest battles, or be distinguished by the most brilliant personal heroism, yet the English people would prefer his portrait to a painting of the great deed. The likeness they can judge of; his existence is a Fact. But the truth of the picture of his deeds they cannot judge of, for they have no imagination.”
—Benjamin Haydon (1786–1846)
“Auden, MacNeice, Day Lewis, I have read them all,
Hoping against hope to hear the authentic call . . .
And know the explanation I must pass is this
MYou cannot light a match on a crumbling wall.”
—Hugh MacDiarmid (1892–1978)