Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) GALUS WITHIN AN "IR MIKLAT"

(a) (Mishnah): If a murderer went to Galus and killed in the Ir Miklat, he is exiled to a different neighborhood in the city;
(b) If a Levi killed in his city, he is exiled to a different Ir Miklat.
(c) (Gemara - Beraisa): "V'Samti *Lecha* Makom" - in your (Moshe's) lifetime (you will separate Arei Miklat);

1. "Makom" - from your place (the Arei Miklat will be the Leviyim's cities).
2. "Asher Yanus Shamah" - this teaches that Galus applied in the Midbar.
3. Question: Which place was Kolet?
4. Answer: Machaneh Levi.
5. This is the source that if a Levi killed, he is exiled to a different Ir Miklat; if he exiled himself to a different part of his city, it is Kolet.
6. (Rav Acha brei d'Rav Ika): We learn from "Ki *v'Ir Miklato* Yeshev" - the city that was already Kolet him.

(d) (Mishnah): Similarly - if a murderer was exiled to a city, and the people wanted to honor him, he must tell them 'I am a murderer';

1. If they still want to honor him, he should let them - "V'Zeh Davar ha'Rotze'ach".

(e) R. Yehudah says, the murderers would pay rent to the Leviyim of the city;
(f) R. Meir says, they would not pay rent.
(g) R. Meir says, if the murderer used to have a position of authority, when he goes free (after the Kohen Gadol dies), he returns to it;
(h) R. Yehudah says, he does not return to his old authority.
(i) (Gemara - Rav Kahana): They argue about paying rent in the six Arei Miklat mentioned in the Torah:

1. R. Yehudah explains "Lachem" - for Klitah (but they receive no other free benefits);
2. R. Meir explains "Lachem" - for all your needs (including free rent).
3. All agree that they pay rent in the other 42 Arei Miklat.

(j) (Rava): All expound "Lachem" - for all your needs, in the six cities they do not pay rent.

1. They argue about the other 42 cities - R. Yehudah expounds "Va'Aleihem Titnu Arba'im u'Shtayim Ir" - the other cities are also Kolet;
2. R. Meir expounds "Va'Aleihem Titnu: - the other cities are also for all your needs.

(k) (Mishnah - R. Meir): He returns to his old authority.
(l) (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): "V'Shav El Mishpachto v'El Achuzas Avosav Yashuv" - (when a Yisrael slave goes free,) he returns to his family, he does not return to the authority of his fathers;

1. R. Meir says, he also returns to the authority of his fathers - "V'El Achuzas Avosav", like his fathers.

(m) (Each Tana learns) similarly regarding a returning murderer:

1. "Yashuv" - this includes a returning murderer.

(n) (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): "Yashuv ha'Rotze'ach El Eretz Achuzaso" - a murderer returns to his family, he does not return to the authority of his fathers;

1. R. Meir says, he also returns to the authority of his fathers - we learn from a Gezerah Shavah "Shivah-Shivah" from a slave.

2) WHICH TRANSGRESSIONS ARE PUNISHED BY "MALKUS"

(a) (Mishnah): The following are lashed:

1. One who has relations with his sister, with the sister of his father, mother, wife or brother, with his paternal uncle's wife, or with a Nidah (whenever he is lashed, she is also);
2. A Kohen Gadol who has relations with a widow, any Kohen that has relations with a divorcee or Chalutzah, a Yisrael who has relations with a Mamzeres or Nesinah, a Mamzer or Nasin who has relations with a Bas Yisrael;

i. If a Kohen Gadol has relations with a widow who is a divrocee, he is liable for two transgressions (receives two sets of lashes);
ii. If any Kohen has relations with a divorcee who is a Chalutzah, he is only liable once.

3. A Tamei person who eats Kodesh or enters the Mikdash;
4. One who eats Chelev, blood, Nosar, Pigul or Tamei Kodshim, or Chametz during Pesach;
5. One who slaughters and offers a sacrifice outside the Mikdash;
6. One who eats or does Melachah on Yom Kipur;
7. One who prepares (scented oil according to the formula for the) Shemen ha'Mishchah (anointing oil) or incense (according to the formula for the incense offered to Hash-m, for his own use), or anoints with Shemen ha'Mishchah (the very oil used to anoint the Mishkan, Kohanim Gedolim, and kings);
8. One who eats Neveilos, Treifos, Shekatzim u'Rmashim (insects or creeping creatures);
9. One who eats Tevel, Ma'aser Rishon from which Terumas Ma'aser was not taken, or Ma'aser Sheni or Hekdesh which were not redeemed.

(b) R. Shimon says, one who eats any amount of Tevel is liable (lashed);
(c) Chachamim say, he is not lashed unless he eats a Kezayis (an olive's worth).

1. R. Shimon: Don't you agree that one is liable for eating a (full) ant of any size?
2. Chachamim: That is because it is a full creation.
3. R. Shimon: A wheat kernel is also a full creation!

(d) (Gemara): The Mishnah lists Chayavei Kerisus, it omits Chayavei Misas Beis Din - it is like R. Akiva.

1. (Beraisa - R. Yishmael): Chayavei Kerisus and Chayavei Misas Beis Din are both lashed;

2. R. Akiva says, Chayavei Kerisus are lashed, for if they will do Teshuvah, Hash-m will pardon them from Kares;

i. Chayavei Misas are not lashed, for even if they do Teshuvah, Beis Din kills them.

3. R. Yitzchak says, the Torah taught that (all) Arayos are Chayavei Kerisus, and (superfluously) mentions Kares for relations with a sister;

i. This teaches that it (and all other Chayavei Kerisus) are punishable by Kares, not by lashes.

(e) Question: What is R. Yishmael's reason? (We are thinking that he obligates lashes for Chayavei Misos, even when the transgressor will be killed.)
(f) Answer #1: "Im Lo Sishmor La'asos Es Kol Divrei ha'Torah...v'Hifla Hash-m Es Makoscha";

1. Question: What does Hafla'ah refer to?
2. Answer: "V'Hipilu ha'Shofet v'Hikahu" - it refers to lashes.

(g) Question: "Im Lo Sishmor La'asos" - we should say that one is lashed for not fulfilling an Ase!
(h) Answer #1: It says, "Im Lo Sishmor";

1. (R. Avin): Wherever it says 'Hishamer', 'Pen' or 'Al', this is a Lav.

(i) Question: We should say that one is lashed for a Lav *she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh* (without an action)!
(j) Answer #1: It says "La'asos".
(k) Question: We should say that one is lashed for a Lav *she'Nitak l'Ase* (for which there is an Ase to 'fix' transgressing the Lav)!
(l) Answer (and Answer #2 to questions (g) and (i)): Lashes are for transgressions like muzzling an animal (regarding which it explicitly says that one is lashed), which is not Nitak l'Ase.

(a) Question: What is R. Akiva's reason?
(b) Answer #1: "Kedei Rish'aso" - a person only receives one punishment for his evil;

1. R. Yishmael says, this teaches that one who is lashed or killed does not pay, but it does not apply to lashes and Misah, for this is like a protracted death (i.e. one punishment).

(c) Question: R. Akiva should also exempt Chayavei Kerisus from lashes on account of "Kedei Rish'aso"!

1. Granted, if they will do Teshuvah, Hash-m will pardon them from Kares - but if we lash them before they do Teshuvah, this is a second punishment!

(d) Answer (R. Avahu): The Torah explicitly teaches that Chayavei Kerisus are lashed - we learn from a Gezerah Shavah "l'Einei (written regarding Kares for incest with a sister) -l'Einecha (written regarding lashes)".
(e) Question (R. Aba bar Mamal): If so, we should also learn Chayavei Misos from a Gezerah Shavah "me'Einei (written regarding idolatry) -l'Einecha"!
(f) Answer: We learn from "l'Einei" from "l'Einecha", we do not learn "me'Einei" from "l'Einecha".
(g) Question #1: A Gezeirah Shavah may be learned even from a different word altogether!

1. (Beraisa - Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): "V'Shav ha'Kohen-U'Va ha'Kohen" - this (Gezeirah Shavah) equates the law (of a house with Tzara'as) when the Kohen (first) returns with when he comes (another week later).

(h) Question #2: We should learn "me'Einei" from "l'Einei" (Chayav Misos from Chayavei Kerisus) - these are no less similar than "l'Einei" and "l'Einecha", which are learned from each other!
(i) Answer (Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak): "Kedei Rish'aso" - a person only receives one punishment *from Beis Din* for his evil.
(j) (Rava): R. Yishmael agrees that one who is killed is not lashed, they only argue when he was only warned that he will be lashed for transgressing.
(k) Answer #2 (to Questions 2:e and 3:a - Rava): R. Yishmael holds that one is lashed for a Lav punishable by Misas Beis Din (if he was warned for lashes), R. Akiva says that one is not lashed (because the Lav warns for Misah, not for lashes).
(l) Question: If so, R. Akiva should also exempt for Chayavei Kerisus (the Lav warns for Kares, not for lashes)!
(m) Answer (Rav Mordechai citing Rava): Kares does not need a Lav, there is no Lav regarding Korban Pesach and Milah (circumcision), yet they are Chayavei Kerisus.
(n) Question: Perhaps the Lav (regarding the other Kerisus) is to obligate a Korban (for Shogeg);

1. Support: There is no Lav for Pesach and Milah, therefore one who neglects them does not bring a Korban (Chatas).

(o) Answer: No, they are exempt because the Torah only obligates a Chatas for transgressions similar to idolatry, i.e. we are commanded to refrain - Pesach and Milah are Mitzvos to do an action.
(p) Defense of Answer #1 (3:c - Ravina): R. Akiva learns from "Kedei Rish'aso".

1. Question: (We asked,) before Teshuvah, there is also Kares, lashes is a second punishment!
2. Answer (Ravina): Since he can avoid one punishment (by doing Teshuvah), this is not considered two punishments.