Makkot 21
My thanks to Artscroll.
R' Yose: A "seritah" cut and a "gedidah" cut are the same and therefore both prohibited, as it says, "lameit"-- you may not cut yourself for "a dead person" (in mourning).
Shmuel: Someone who makes a "seritah" cut with a kli is chayav (Artscroll: for two lavim).
Challenge: "Seritah" and "gedidah" are the same, but a "seritah" is done by hand and a "gedidah" is with a kli. This contradicts Shmuel.
Answer: No, Shmuel agrees with R' Yose, who believes they are the same.
They taught before R' Yochanan: If someone cuts themselves with a kli or by hand in mourning, they are chayav. If they do it as a form of avodah zarah, by hand, they are chayav, and with a kli, they are patur.
Challenge: There is a pasuk that says that cutting oneself with a kli was a form of avodah zarah!
Correction: The Braita should have said by kli, they are chayav, and by hand, they are patur.
R' Sheshet: the parts of the head where men can't remove hair are the temples.
R' Sheshet: the five points of the beard where men can't remove hair are the joints of the beard.
R' Eliezer: shaving the five points is one lav.
Rabanan: You might think that if he shaved with scissors (not a razor), he would still be chayav, because the Torah says, "lo yigalechu", and you might think that if he shaved with planes (not a razor), he would still be chayav, because the Torah says, "lo tashchit", but each pasuk exists so both are fine.
Question: How could they both be ok when both pesukim exist??
Answer: The lav is only "shaving with destruction", which is a razor.
(Mishnah) R' Eliezer: Even if he removed the corners with planes, he is chayav.
Question: What is he saying? If he learned it from a gezeirah shavah, he should require a razor to be chayav, and if he learned it from just the pasuk, then scissors should also make him chayav.
Answer: He learns it from the gezeirah shavah, but he holds that planes also count as shaving.
---------------------------------------------------------
MISHNAH:
Someone who writes a tattoo is chayav, but if s/he writes on top of the skin without breaking it or breaks the skin without making a tattoo. S/he is chayav if there is a mark made, such as with black or blue ink.
R' Shimon: S/he is only chayav if they tattoo God's name.
----------------------------------------------------------
GEMARA:
R' Acha: Does R' Shimon really limit the lav to God's name?!
R' Ashi: No, he holds like Bar Kappara-- the lav is tattooing the name of an avodah zarah god.
R' Malkiya: A person can't heal a wound with mikleh ashes because it leaves a tattoo-like mark.
(Digression) R' Nachman: R' Malkiyo ruled on the cases of a spit, maidservants, and pores, while R' Malkiya ruled on the cases of locks of hair, ashes, and cheese.
R' Papa: R' Malkiya is the author of statements concerning Mishnayot or Braitot, while R' Malkiyo is the author of statements concerning Amoraic statements.
Question: What is the difference between R' Nachman and R' Papa's opinions here?
Answer: The case of the maidservants.
R' Bibi agrees with R' Malkiya regarding the ashes, even for a tiny cut.
R' Ashi: You can use the ashes, because the wound will allow people to know that it is not a tattoo.
---------------------------------------------------------
MISHNAH:
A nazir who drinks wine all day is only chayav for one makkot penalty, unless he was warned before every drink (if so, he is chayav for every warning). The same goes for a nazir and tumat meit, as well as a nazir who shaves all day. It also applies to a regular person who wears kilayim (shaatnez) all day.
Case: A person plows one furrow and incurs eight sets of makkot. How? He a) uses an ox and donkey yoked together, b+c) they are both hekdesh, d) the furrow covers kilayim in a vineyard, e) during Shemittah, f) on Yom Tov, g+h) he is a kohen and a nazir in a tumah place.
R' Chananya: There can be nine if he's wearing shaatnez.
Chachamim: That's a different kind of lav!
R' Chananya: So is nazir!!
---------------------------------------------------------
GEMARA:
R' Bibi: In regards to the person who removed and then put on a shaatnez garment over and over: does this include someone who merely put his/her arm in and out of the sleeve?
<R' Acha demonstrates this to his students>
R' Ashi: Even if s/he just stood still while being warned for the amount of time it takes to take it off and put it on, s/he is chayav.
R' Yannai: They decided that covering kilayim with earth is the chiyuv-equivalent of actually sowing those seeds.
R' Yochanan: Isn't that what the Mishnah is saying? Why do we need to "decide" it? Otherwise, what lav would the Mishnah be counting?
R' Yannai: <Mashal that means...> if I hadn't said my statement, you would have understood the Mishnah differently.
Reish Lakish (defends R' Yannai): Without R' Yannai's statement, I would have thought the Mishnah was the opinion of R' Akiva, who says that someone who maintains kilayim is chayav makkot, because of the pasuk "kilayim sad'cha lo."
Ulla: If covering is like sowing, then it should be nine lavim-- sowing on Yom Tov (in addition to plowing on Yom Tov)!
R' Nachman: The Mishnah was only giving some of the prohibitions.
Ulla: How could it only be some?!? It lists *eight*!!
Rava: Sowing and plowing count as one melacha here because it's Yom Tov, not Shabbat.
Ulla: agrees.
Challenge to Rava: Abaye: Is there really no separation of melachot on Yom Tov?! Mishnah: If you cook a gid hanasheh in milk on Yom Tov and eat it, you get five sets of makkot: a) eating gid hanasheh, b) cooking unnecessarily on Yom Tov, c) cooking the gid hanasheh in milk, d) eating milk and meat that was cooked together, and e) for lighting an unnecessary fire on Yom Tov.
---------------------------------------------------------
QUESTION:
The Gemara discusses the prohibition against self-harm in mourning. This practice was one often done by idol worshipers, but could also be seen as a very human reaction to intense grief. In cases such as the latter, one could posit that the shorashim of this mitzvah are to preserve human health and well-being during difficult times. Can you think of another time that the Torah makes something assur that is a harmful but human action, so that the Torah is actually keeping us safe?
I think another example of such a mitzvah is the prohibition to get a tattoo. Although it is a common practice in the secular world, it can be harmful to the skin and creates a blemish to the body that Hashem gave us.
ReplyDeleteI think this idea is similar to Rav Moshe Feinstein’s opinion to why smoking is assur. Smoking damages the body and even if people claim that people are not harmed, their intelligence is harmed, which is a worse damage than damaging the body. It prevents one from understanding Torah, davening, and keeping mitzvot properly.
ReplyDeleteI have heard that another example of this could be the prohibition against being intimate with one's partner for a period of time after giving birth. It is human nature to want to be with them after such an event- yet many doctors and health centers strongly advise against doing so since it is harmful to the woman. The Torah had this insight long before medical studies and prohibited these acts to protect the woman and her body.
ReplyDeleteAh Ellie! I was all prepared with an answer that I thought was so original and then I looked at the previous comments and Ellie had the same one. So ditto to what she said.
ReplyDeleteActually, here is another example of this that I just thought of. The Torah prohibits us from taking revenge. Usually, only harm can come from taking revenge because you are often out to harm another person in retaliation for what they did to you. We also learned in psychology a few months ago that it is actually more cathartic for someone to forgive than to take revenge.
ReplyDeleteWe have a prohibition from being gluttonous (we have the idea of a ben sorter u'moreh being punished partly for this action). As people, we enjoy food, but from a nutritious point of view, we understand that eating too much of anything can be dangerous for our health and we need a balance.
ReplyDeleteI remember learning last year in Halacha the opinion of the Rambam on Kashrut, that a possible reason behind Kashrut could be for health. Many of the forbidden foods, such as pork, are unhealthy and can damage the body after overconsumption; this is an example where HaShem is protecting us through Halachot from the unhealthiness of foods around us.
ReplyDeleteI think we can see this even nowadays - all the fast food restaurants and places to eat are very unhealthy and without the laws of Kashrut it would be very easy for us to go ahead and eat at all those places. But, the laws of Kashrut protect us from some of these places that we might otherwise always go to.
I agree with what Yehudit said about smoking. It damages ones body, and their health, ans although it's gives them pleasure, and it may relax them, they are hurting themselves and not taking care of their body.
ReplyDelete