armies. And becaufe this may be too general, though it is 
fpecial with refpeift to the firft, this is again reftrained by 
the fecond general, “ All that openeth the matrix.” 
VIII. When any thing is taught generally, and there is fome- 
thing particular fpecified, that fpecification is not for its own 
fake, but to flow that the general rule is to be generally under- 
food. Thus, Exod. xxxv. y. it is faid, “Ye (hall kindle 
no fire throughout your habitations upon the labbath- 
day.V This exception, or rather fpecification, ftrengthens 
the general command, “ In it thou (halt do no manner of 
work.” If this fo obvious, and generally lpeaking fo 
ncceffary, a work be forbidden, how much more all the 
reft ? So Levit. vii. 29. “ The foul that eateth of the flefh 
of the facrifice of peace-offerings, having his uncleannefs 
upon him, even that foul fhall be cut off from his people.” 
This fpecification of peace-offerings is not intended to be 
reftrained to them alone, but to fhow that vvhatfoever is 
eaten that is facred muff; be eaten by thofe that are clean. 
Again, Levit. xx. 27. the law fays, “A man alfo or wo¬ 
man that hath a familiar fpirit, or that is a wizzard, fhall 
furely be put to death; they fhall ftone them with (tones.” 
And in Detit. xviii. 10, 11. where the confulter of fami¬ 
liar fpirits and the wizzard are joined with witches, though 
the -wocBmecaficpk, which we render witch, is fuppofed to 
comprehend the lpecified forts of “dealers with evil fpi¬ 
rits.” So alfo, Lev. xx. 2. the law is exprefs : “ Thou 
(halt fay to the children of Ifrael, whofoever he be of the 
children of Ifrael, or of the ftrangers that fojourn in Ifrael, 
that giveth any of his feed unto Molech, he fhall furely 
be put to death ; the people of the land fhall ftone him 
with (tones.” The mention hereof this particular lpecies 
of idolatrous worfhip is not intended to excufe the reft, 
but rather to confirm the punifhmentof (toning, to which 
all idolaters of what fort loever were liable. Hal. Olam. p. 
165. and Buxtorf v. Celal. 
IX. When anything that comes under a general rule is except¬ 
ed, to lay a particular obligation upon that thing which otherwife 
would be comprifed in the general ; in this cafe the exception alle¬ 
viates, and not aggravates. This is well explained by Bux¬ 
torf by the cafe of the man-flayer, Deut. xix. 5. “ When 
a man goeth into the wood with his neighbour to hew 
wood, and his hand fetcheth a ftroke with the axe to cut 
down the tree, and the head flippeth from the helve, and 
lighteth upon his neighbour that he die, he fhall flee unto 
one of thofe cities, and live.” This is an exception to 
the general law, Exod. xxi. 12. “ He thatfmiteth a man fo 
that he die, fhall furely be put to death :” Now, if it 
were not for this exception, there could be no diftinftion 
as to the penalty between the man that killed his neigh¬ 
bour cafually, to whom he bore no ill-will before, and 
hint that fmote him through prepenfe malice. The ex¬ 
ception then here excufes him. This exception is in- 
trinfically juft, and therefore God in mercy to fuch un¬ 
fortunate men, who without defign, and utterly againft 
their wills, dipped their hands in their neighbours’ 
blood, appointed cities of refuge for them, to which 
they might fly, and where they were obliged to ftay till 
the high-prieft for the time being died. The Talmudifts 
give alfo this following inftance : Levit. xiii. 46. it is 
commanded concerning the leprous man, “that he fliouid 
dwell alone, without the camp fhould his habitation be.” 
This, were there nothing'elfe, might be thought very fe- 
vere : therefore, where there might be hopes of his reco¬ 
very, he was only to be “ fhut up feven days,” and that 
twice fuccefflvely, ver.4, 5. Thefe exceptions confequently 
alleviate. Hall Olam. p. 167. 
X. When any thing that comes under a general rule is ex¬ 
cepted, to lay a particular obligation not agreeing with the fenfe 
of the general rule ; in which cafe, the exception both alleviates 
mnd aggravates. As for inftance, in Levit. xiii. 3. when 
the hair of the perfon fufpefted is white, he is ordered to 
be fhut up for a leper; but ver. 29. the “ hairs of the head 
and beard” are excepted, left grey hairs fnould be fuf- 
pected to be figns of leprofy; and then the prieft was to 
lee if they were yellowifh and thin 5 for then the cafe was 
W. 8 \Q 
different, and it was a fcall, not a leprofy. Here now 
there is an alleviation, becaufe ail white hairs are not in¬ 
cluded in the enquiry, ver. 3. . And there is an aggrava¬ 
tion likewife, becaufe of the new cafe. Another inftance 
of this way of reafoning from Exod. xxi. 2. is produced 
by Buxtorf, and after him by Dr. Clavering. (Not. in Mai- 
mon. de Studio Legis, p. 114.) There the law is, “ If thou 
buy a Hebrew fervant, fix years he fhall ferve ; and in the 
feventh he fhall go out free for nothing.” Under J'ervant 
here, both fexes may be included, becaufe it is fo inter¬ 
preted by Mofes himfelf, Deut. xv. iz. But then that ge¬ 
neral law in Deuteronomy muft be reftrained as it is here ; 
becaufe, when a maid-l'ervant is fold to any man, (lie fhall 
not go out as the men-fervants do, Exod. xxi. 7. for (he 
may have her freedom before, if fire is betrothed either to 
her mafter or to his fon; in which cafe, if they break their 
word with her, they are bound to difmifs her immediately. 
Here then is an alleviation, and there is an aggravation 
too. The alleviation is, that if (he is abufed they muft 
let her go. The aggravation confifts in this, that the 
mafter or his fon may betroth her to themfelves without 
afkirtg her confent. 
XL When there is an exception from a general rule, in order 
to determine a new matter, that new matter cannot be brought 
back to its general rule again, unlejs it may be exprfsly menti¬ 
oned in the text. As thus, Levit. xxii. io-iy. “There 
fhall no ftranger eat of the holy thing, a fojourner of the 
prieft or an hired fervant fhall not eat of the holy thing ; 
but, if the prielt buy any foul with his money, he (hail 
eat of it, and he that is born in his houfe, they fnall eat 
of his meat. If the prieft’s daughter alfo be married unto 
a ftranger, fhe may not eat of an offering of the holy 
things ; but, if the prieft’s daughter be a widow or di¬ 
vorced, and have no child, and is returned unto her fa¬ 
ther’s houle as in her youth, (lie fhall eat of her father’s 
meat, hut there fhall no ftranger eat thereof.” The law 
here is, that the prieft, his fervant bought with his money, 
and his child, may eat of the holy thing; that is general; 
the prieft’s daughter married to a ftranger, i. e. to one 
that is not of the facerdotal race, is excepted. Now this 
exception would have always flood good if (lie had died a 
wife to that ftranger, or had children, or had not returned' 
to her father’s houfe; therefore there is a new law to give 
her frefh leave to eat of the holy thing which die had for¬ 
feited by being married to a ftranger ; and that is,' if fhe 
is a widow or divorced, and has no child, and returns to 
her father’s houfe, then (lie may eat of the holy thing as 
fhe might’at firft. Buxtorf There is another inftance of 
this rule given by the Talmudifts, which is this: Levit. 
xiv. J2. the leper that is to be cleanfed is to offer a tref- 
pafs-offering ; this trefpafs-offering is faid in the next verfe 
to be as a fin-cjfering ; confequently then the rites of of¬ 
fering both ought to be the fame; that they might there¬ 
fore be effeftually diftinguifhed from each other, there are 
new ■ particulars added to this facrifice, which are the 
putting of its blood upon the tip of the right ear, and 
the thumb of the right hand, and the great toe of the 
right foot, of the perfon that was to be cleanfed. Hal. Olam. 
p. 168. 
XII. Things that teach from the fubjeEl, and things that 
teach from the end. This rule is double ; in the firft part 
the fubjeS is the context, in which there is fomething 
clear, by which we 'may explain what is obfeure. The 
cafe put in the Halicoth Olam. p. 171. is very extraordi¬ 
nary : “ Thou (halt not lteal,” fays the law. What is the 
punifhment ? If it be meant of Healing a man, (which we 
in Englifh commonly call kidnapping,) the punifhment is 
capital. This, lays the Mechilta, (a very, ancient com¬ 
mentary upon Exodus,) may be gathered from the “ Thir¬ 
teen Ways of Reafoning, by which the Law is explained 
For fince, in the decalogue, “ thou (halt not fteal” is 
joined to “thou (halt not commit adultery,” and “ thou 
(halt do no murder,” the punifhment of both which is 
death by the law of Mofes; therefore this fort of dealing,, 
which certainly comes within the letter of the eighth coin, 
mandmenty. 
