Makkot 20a 

Braita: If one has a tevel fig, and he declares that the stem of the fig is for terumah, the northernmost tenth of the fig is for ma’aser rishon, the bottom part of the fig is for ma’aser sheni (or Ma’aser Ani, depending on the year) and then eats it. If he is a Cohen, he gets lashed once for eating fruit without designating terumat ma’aser. If he is a non-Cohen, he gets lashed twice for eating tevel and for eating terumah.

Attack: It is implied that the reason the non-Cohen gets lashed twice is because he is in Yerushalyim and therefore he did not do anything wrong by eating Ma’aser Sheni. If he would have been outside Yerushalyim, then he would have been lashed three times, once for tevel, once for terumah, and once for ma’aser sheni. This would mean that the non-Cohen would have been punished for ma’aser sheni even if the fruit had never been brought into Yerushalyim!

Answer: The case in the Braita is a case where the fig was brought into Yerushalyim first,

Question: What are we supposed to learn from this? It seems as though it doesn’t teach anything new.

Answer:  The scenario here is that the fruit was brought into Yerushalyim but was taken out before ma’aser sheni was designated. The author of the Braita holds that even if the portions were not yet separated, it is as if they were separated.

Question: Both Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel agree that fruit that entered Yerushalyim and then left before the final processing, were able to be redeemed and eaten anywhere. They did disagree, though, on fruits that had entered Yerushalyim after the final process. Beit Shamai says that their ma’aser sheni must be eating in Yerushalyim while Beit Hillel says the ma’aser sheni can be eaten anywhere. The braita agrees with Beit Hillel so therefore, why is the fruit allowed to be eaten after it has entered Yerushalyim?

Answer #1: Rava- Midoraitta, ma’aser sheni may only be eaten within Yerushalyim. However, midiraban, once the ma’aser has entered Yerushalyim, it can no longer be eaten. The rule dirabanan only applies if the fruit has already been designated. If it has not yet been designated, then it can still be eaten.

Answer #2: Ravina- the third set of lashes for eating ma’aser sheni outside of Yerushalyim apply in a case where the person is carrying the ma’aser on a stick outside of Yerushalyim. Even if the fruit technically hasn’t entered Yerushalyim, it is as if it has entered.    

Mishna

1.       A person is liable for lashes if they make a bald patch on their head in mourning for a dead person, cut their sideburns, destroy the corners of their beard, or cut themselves in mourning for a dead person.

a.       If a person makes one cut for five people, or five cuts for one person, he gets a separate lashing for each person or cut (five in total).

b.      For cutting ones sideburns, he is liable to two slashes, one for each side of the head.

c.       For destroying the corners of one’s beard, he is liable to five lashes for the five corners of the beard. However, R’ Eliezer says that if all the corners were destroyed at the same time, then one only gets one lash.

                                                         i.            The Tana Kama says that one is only liable if they use a razor to cut off their beard but R’ Eliezer says he is liable even if he used a planning tool.

Gemara   

Braita: The Torah says “Lo Yikrechu”- do not make a bald spot- to teach that each spot is another prohibition. “Brosham”- on their head- teaches that this prohibition applies to the full head, not only to between the eyes.

Question: This posuk is the source that it is prohibited for Cohanim. What it is the source that it is prohibited for non-Cohanim?

Answer: We learn it from a Gezarah Sheva between “Korchah”. Just as a Cohen is punished for each bald spot he creates, so to a non-Cohen is punished for each bald spot he makes.   

Question to think about: Ravina says that fruit that is being carried on a stick and has not yet entered Yerushalyim, even if the person holding it has entered, is considered to already be in Yerushalyim. Do you think that it makes sense that the status of food is strict? Would it not make more sense to be lenient so people have more food to eat?