Makkot Daf 22a summary
Big thank you to dafyomi.co.il for their help in outlining this daf!
(Abaye - Mishnah): One who cooks Gid ha'Nasheh in milk on Yom Tov, and eats it, is lashed five times - for eating Gid ha'Nasheh, for cooking unnecessarily on Yom Tov, for cooking meat and milk, for eating meat and milk, and for burning on Yom Tov.
(Question) But here he is lashed twice for Melachos on Yom Tov! Why would we punish for the same thing twice?
Answer (Rava): The text of the Mishnah is mistaken. It should not mention the burning on Yom Tov, and instead it should say that the Gid was of a Neveilah (the fifth lashes are for eating Neveilah).
(Question) R. Chiya taught that he is lashed twice for eating and three times for cooking!
Answer (Rava): Rather, it should omit burning, and instead it should say that the wood was from an Asherah, and he therefore transgressed "v'Lo Yidbak b'Yadcha Me'umah Min ha'Cherem"!
Objection (Rav Acha brei d'Rava): If so, he also transgresses "v'Lo Savi To'evah El Beisecha"!
Answer (Rav Acha brei d'Rava): Rather, the wood was Hekdesh, and he transgressed "va'Ashereihem Tisrefun ba'Esh...; Lo Sa'asun Ken la'Shem."
Question (why our Mishnah (21b) say that he is lashed only eight times - R. Hoshaya): He can transgress also planting in a Nachal Eisan (a valley where an Eglah Arufah was beheaded) - "Asher Lo Ye'aved Bo v'Lo Yizare'a"!
Question (R. Chananya): He can transgress also erasing Hash-m's name (by plowing through it) - "v'Ibadtem Es Shemam... Lo Sa'asun Ken la'Shem."
Question (R. Avahu): He can transgress also cutting off Tzara'as - "Hishamer b'Nega ha'Tzara'as"!
Question (Abaye): He can transgress also displacing the Choshen from the Efod (garments of the Kohen Gadol), and removing the poles that carry the Aron from the rings on the Aron! (Ritva - if he plows with the poles while wearing the Choshen, he is liable for not returning them.)
Question (Rav Ashi): He can transgress also plowing with wood of an Asherah - "v'Lo Yidbak b'Yadcha Me'umah Min ha'Cherem"!
Question (Ravina): He can transgress also cutting good trees - "Ki Mimenu Sochel v'Oso Lo Sichros."
Question (R. Ze'ira): He can transgress also a false oath, if he had sworn not to plow on Yom Tov!
Objection (R. Mani): That oath does not take effect, for the oath of Sinai (when Yisrael accepted the Torah) already forbids this!
Answer (1) : The case is, he swore not to plow on Chol or Yom Tov. Since the oath takes effect regarding Chol, it also takes effect regarding Yom Tov.
Answer (#1 to R. Zei'ra's Question): The Mishnah does not list transgressions that can be annulled (he can permit his oath).
Question: the Mishnah lists Hekdesh. He can annul his Hekdesh!
Answer: The case is, it is a Bechor. (It is Hekdesh due to birth. He cannot annul it!)
Question: The Mishnah lists Tum'ah of a Nazir. He can annul his Nezirus!
Answer: The case is, he is a Nazir Shimshon (which cannot be annulled).
Objection: A Nazir Shimshon may become Tamei!
Answer (#2 to R. Zei'ra's Question): The Tana holds that Isur Kolel does not take effect. (Normally, another Isur does not take effect on something already forbidden. Some say that it does if it is Kolel, i.e. it also forbids things that were permitted, therefore, it takes effect also on what was already Asur. Our Tana disagrees. Therefore, the oath not to plow on Chol takes effect, but it does not take effect regarding Yom Tov. Answer (1) is not true, so R. Mani's objection answers R. Zei'ra's Question.)
(R. Hoshaya): One who mates a blemished Korban (after it was redeemed) is lashed (even if he mates it with its own species. It is like two species, Chulin (one may eat it, like Chulin) and Kodshim (one may not shear it or work with it). Therefore, one is lashed for crossbreeding diverse species. Our text says that he is lashed twice. Mating is considered work, so he is lashed also for working with a blemished Korban. Many delete this from the text.)
(R. Yitzchak): One who conducts (works with) a blemished Korban (after it was redeemed) is lashed (for working with diverse species);
-Even though it is one animal, the Torah considers it like two species.
---------------------------------------------
(Mishnah): One who is lashed receives 39 lashes. "B'Mispar Arba'im" means the number followed by 40;
R. Yehudah says, he receives a full 40 lashes;
(The Mishnah on 22B teaches that the lashes are evenly divided among three places.) The extra (40th) lash is between his shoulders.
We estimate (how many lashes he can survive) only a number divisible by three.
If we estimated that he can survive 40 (really, 39) and after he was lashed some of them we estimate that he cannot bear them, he is exempt (for he was already humiliated).
________________________________________
Question: The Mishnah in 21b talks about how it is possible for a person to plow a single furrow and thereby transgress eight Torah prohibitions, which the Mishnah then lists. The Amora'im then continue to add more prohibitions that they felt the Mishnah should have listed, which the person could transgress through his act of plowing. Why do you think a person can get punished so many times for one mistake. That does not see fair. You do one thing wrong, and all of a sudden your getting 100 punishments. You probably learned your lesson from just getting punished for one. Why do you have to continue to get punished, when chances are you have already learned your lesson. Also, didn't we learn last year the idea that when a person does two things wrong in the same act, you only get punished for the worst one? Even if that is not exactly the case, is it not the same idea?
If I am remembering correctly, I think we only apply the concept of kim leih b'd'rabba mineih when one of the punishments is worse than the other(s). In this case, all of the punishments-- makkot-- were the same.
ReplyDeleteThe rule from this sugya may seem harsh, but maybe it is important, because without it, a person might think that because they are committing more than one aveirah at once, they will be let off easy. This could lead to even more aveirot being done. Also, we have the concept that the more a person is punished in this world, the less s/he will be punished in the World to Come. Perhaps it is better for him/her to receive many punishments now, so as to mitigate the consequences later.
Transgressing a commandment from the Torah is a major averiah and even though you might learn your lesson the first time you are punished for one of the aspects of the act, you can get punished multiple times because of the severity of breaking a law in the Torah. It reinforces the Torah’s status and strictness to be punished several times for one wrong act and make us more weary of what we do.
ReplyDeleteThe person can be punished for each of the mistakes that he made because all of those rules should have deterred him from doing the act. Instead, he ignored all of the prohibitions around plowing the furrow and thereby committed many aveirot with one action.
ReplyDeletePerhaps another way of looking at it could be that each of the punishments respond to another aspect of the sin that is wrong. If one was only punished for one part of it, they would think that that is the only reason they are being punished but it is very important to include all 8+ punishments so they know exactly what they did that was wrong.
ReplyDeleteAgreeing with what others have said, we see time and time again that halacha goes into extensive detail and must highlight every prohibition related to a single act. Dropping half of the charges would be dishonest
ReplyDeleteI agree with the above comments. If this person is not punished all 8 times, he would only think that he did one thing wrong, or that he got away with the other aveirot.
ReplyDeleteI think that the fact that a person can be punished so many times for one sin shows, like many said above, that each punishment represents a different aspect of the sin. Therefore, the person is actually receiving a seperate punishment for each aspect/sin they committed that falls under the general sin they committed. This can teach us an important lesson that even if we only do a small sin, or "partial sin," we are still held accountable. I think this can also explain why a person has to give a chatat offering even if they did a sin by accident, because it shows that no matter the sin, even if it was b'shogeg, it still occurred and is still wrong.
ReplyDelete