are extrapolated from context. Why was it mentioned separately?
way the laws of exegesis work, if all 39 were derived by the same derashah, the same oddity in the text, then all 39 would be the same prohibition. Someone who violates more than one would have committed only one sin. R’ Akiva explains (Pesachim 5b) that by specifying one separately, it shows that all 39 are distinct. They are related to the 39 activities required to construct the Tabernacle. This connection is implied by the juxtaposition of the two topics — Shabbos work and building the Tabernacle — in the book of Exodus, as well as the fact that both speak of “melachah” or “meleches avodah” [melachah of avodah, losing yourself in construction]. This connection to construction follows through to the laws. For example, tearing is one of the 39. However, the Torah’s prohibition only includes tearing as part of repairing or to measure out a portion. To do so just to destroy is not Torahitically prohibited. The philosophical connection is implied by the number 39, particularly as the m
