ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler of Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
(a) Our Mishnah lists the thirty-six cases of Chayvei Kareis, on the assumption that there was no warning. If there was - then he will be subject to - either Sekilah, Sereifah or Chenek, and in any case (with few exceptions), Malkos.
(b) Rebbi includes K'risus in Kodshim (see Shitah Mekubetzes 1) - because the overwhelming majority of Chayvei Kareis have to bring a Korban Chatas for sinning be'Shogeg.
(c) Of the nineteen K'risos connected with the Parshah of Arayos, the Tana begins with someone who has relations with his mother, father's wife, daughter-in-law, a male, an animal, and a woman who has relations with a male animal - since these are all Chayvei Sekilah (the most stringent of all the punishments).
(d) This is followed by 'Ishah u'Bitah', incorporating (besides one's daughter, daughter's daughter and son's daughter, mother-in law, mother-in-law's mother and father-in-law's mother) - one's daughter's granddaughter, and one's son's granddaughter.
(a) The Tana then lists adultery with a married woman and incest with one's sister - one's father sister, one's mother's sister and one wife's sister.
(b) The Mishnah omits Achi Imo and Eim Eim Chamoso from the list of incest - because they are Sheniyos (mi'de'Rabbanan, and not mi'd'Oraysa at all).
(c) The last case of Arayos that the Tana mentions is that of Nidah. Besides one's brother's wife, he also includes - one's father's brother's wife.
(a) The Tana then lists Megadef - which is either cursing Hash-m or someone who plays (music) or sings to Avodah-Zarah.
(b) And he follows with Oveid Avodas-Kochavim, Nosein mi'Zar'o la'Molech, Ba'al Ov and Mechalel Shabbos, which, like the opening list of Arayos, are all Chayvei S'kilah.
(c) A Tamei person is Chayav Kareis for eating Kodesh - and for entering the Beis-Hamikdash.
(d) The Tana then lists four Chayvei Kareis in connection with eating (besides Chametz on Pesach); Cheilev, Dam, Nosar - and Pigul.
(a) There are two Kerisus connected with Korbanos outside the Azarah. One of them is Shechutei Chutz, the other - Ha'ala'as (offering a Korban) Chutz.
(b) The two K'risus that pertain to Yom Kipur are - eating and performing Melachah.
(c) Besides Kareis for making a replica of the Shemen ha'Mishchah, the Tana also lists - anointing oneself with the original oil.
(d) And one also receives Kareis - for making a replica of the Ketores.
(a) For there to be Kareis - the Torah must specifically mention both a La'av (see Shitah Mekubetzes 1) and Kareis (though these are sometimes learned from a Gezeirah-Shavah or a Hekesh).
(b) The two exceptions to the rule are - not bringing the Korban Pesach and not performing one's own B'ris Milah (assuming that one's father did not do it) ...
(c) ... because they are Mitzvos Asei.
(d) The source for Chayvei Kareis bringing a Chatas be'Shogeg is the Pasuk in Korach "ve'Hikrivah Eiz bas Shenasah" - which is written in connection with Avodah-Zarah (and we learn all the other Chayvei Kareis from it with a 'Binyan Av').
(e) The definition of ...
1. ... Kareis is - dying without leaving behind any children (though many commentaries disagree with this [see Tosfos, Shabbos 25a DH 'Kareis']).
2. ... Shogeg is - performing the act deliberately, but not knowing that the circumstances render the act Asur ('Omer Mutar' is a Machlokes Amora'im [see Makos 7b]).
(a) One is Chayav an Asham Taluy for all of the above cases (besides Pesach and Milah) - if one has a Safek whether one is Chayav a Chatas or not.
(b) Rebbi Meir precludes a Tamei Mikdash ve'Kodashav from Asham Taluy - because it is subject to a Korban Olah ve'Yoreid, and not a fixed Chatas.
(c) Based on the Pasuk in Korach "Torah Achas Yih'yeh lachem la'Oseh bi'Shegagah", the Chachamim add to that - 'Megadef', since, they say, the sinner has not performed an act (and this will be explained in the Sugya).
(a) Rebbi Yochanan explains that both here and in Shabbos the Tana finds it necessary to specifically state that there are thirty-six K'risos (and thirty-nine Melachos 0despite the fact that we are perfectly capable of counting the cases ourselves) - to teach us that someone who transgresses all the cases listed be'Shogeg in one He'elam (bout of forgetfulness), has to bring thirty-four Chata'os (precluding Pesach and Milah) in our Mishnah, and thirty-nine in Shabbos.
(b) The Tana in the second Perek sees fit to mention ...
1. ... 'Arba'ah Mechusrei Kaparah', to preclude from Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov, who says - that a Ger too, is considered a Mechusar Kaparah (and is forbidden to eat Kodshim), until he brings his Korban (just as Yisrael brought theirs at Sinai), according to whom there are therefore five cases.
2. ... Arba'ah Mevi'in al ha'Zadon ki'Shegagah', we cite Rebbi Shimon, who says - that one does not bring a Korban for Shevu'as ha'Pikadon on purpose. Consequently, according to him, there are only three cases.
(c) And we know that 'four' comes to preclude, and is not 'La'av Davka' - because whenever the Tana mentions a number, it is always specific.
(a) We ascribe the Tana's need there to state 'Chamishah Mevi'in Korban Echad al Aveiros Harbeh' to the fact that one of the cases is a Nazir who became Tamei a number of times before his Nezirus terminated, and we establish it, according to Rebbi Yossi bar Yehudah, where he became Tamei twice on the seventh day - with reference to the seventh day after he became Tamei the first time, and which is the day when he is due to end his days of Tum'ah and to resume the Nezirus of Taharah.
(b) The Tana needs to present a case where the Nazir became Tamei twice on the seventh day - in order to accommodate the Lashon 'Tum'os Harbeh' with which he began ...
(c) ... because as long as he is still in the middle of his Nezirus of Tum'ah, it is considered one Tum'ah, and not many Tum'os.
(a) Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah holds that the Neziras Taharah begins on the seventh day; Rebbi holds - that it begins on the eighth.
(b) According to Rebbi, the words "ba'Yom ha'Hu" (in the Pasuk in Naso "ve'Kidesh es Rosho (a reference to the commencement of the Nezirus Taharah) ba'Yom ha'Hu") refers to the day that he brings his Korban (the eighth day); whereas according to Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah, it refers to - the day that he shaves his hair (the seventh day).
(c) What the Mishnah therefore means according to Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah is - that since the subsequent Tum'os took place at a time when the Nazir had already begun counting his Nezirus of Taharah, they are considered many Tum'os. Nevertheless, since they occurred before he was due to bring his Korban for the first Tum'ah, he is able to bring the one Korban for all of them.
(d) The problem with establishing the Mishnah according to Rebbi, is that assuming that the subsequent Tum'os took place on ...
1. ... the seventh day (before the Neziras Taharah began) - they are all considered one extended Tum'ah (like the first six days according to Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah).
2. ... the eighth day - the original Korban would not cover Tum'os that took place after it had already fallen due, and he would be Chayav a separate Korban for each Tum'ah.
(e) This explains the Tana's need to state that there are five cases ... - in that it precludes the opinion of Rebbi, according to whom there are only four.
(a) The Mishnah there 'Chamishah Mevi'in Korban Olah ve'Yored' comes to preclude the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer, who says - that a Nasi brings a goat (a Chatas Kavu'a) for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav.
(b) The author of the Mishnah cannot then be Rebbi Eliezer - because 'Chamishah Mevi'in ... ' implies that whoever brings a Chatas for any of the five sins listed there, does not bring a Chatas Kevu'ah.
(c) It must therefore be either Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili or Rebbi Akiva. According to Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili, a Nasi is Patur altogether for Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav. Rebbi Akiva maintains - that he is Chayav a Korban Olah ve'Yored.
(d) The Mishnah in Bava Kama states that there are four Avos Nezikin to preclude from the thirteen of Rebbi Oshaya. According to Rebbi Oshaya (who is an Amora, and who cannot therefore argue with a Mishnah), it comes to preclude - the twenty-four Avos Nezikin of Rebbi Chiya.
(e) According to Rebbi Chiya (who is an Amora too) the Mishnah comes to preclude Masur (who divulges to Nochrim where money belonging to Jews is hidden) and Mefagel (a Kohen who renders Pigul the Korban of a Yisrael with his words) - which both fall under the category of Hezek she'Eino Nikar (since the damage they cause is merely verbal), and from which one is therefore Patur from paying from the best of one's property.
(a) We cited Rebbi Yochanan, who extrapolates from our Mishnah that if one transgressed all the K'risos in one He'elam, he is Chayav thirty-four Chata'os. We learn this from Kareis by Achoso (from the Pasuk in Kedoshim "ve'Ish asher Yikach es Achoso ... ve'Nichresu") - from the fact that the Torah repeats the Chiyuv Kareis even though it has already written it with regard to all the Arayos in general.
(b) We initially reject Rav Bibi bar Abaye's Kashya that this should be confined to Achoso, on whom one will always be Chayav independently, but not to all other K'risos - on the basis of the principle 'Davar she'Hayah bi'Chelal ve'Yatza min ha'Kelal Lelamed, Lo Lelamed al Atzmo Yazta, Ela Lelamed al ha'Kelal Kulo Yatza' (incorporating all other cases in the wider statement [a principle of which Rav Bibi bar Abaye was apparently unaware]).
(c) And we learn from the Pasuk in Tzav "ve'ha'Nefesh asher Tochal Basar ... ve'Nichresah" (from the fact that Shelamim are already included in Kodshim in other regards) - that, since the Torah teaches us Kareis specifically by Shelamim, it now extends to all Kodshei Mizbe'ach ...
(d) ... precluding - Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis, which are not brought on the Mizbe'ach like Shelamim.
(a) In fact, Rav Bibi bar Abaye was well aware of the principle 'Kol Davar she'Hayah bi'Chelal ... ' - only he thought that the very example of 'Achoso' comes to preclude (from being be'He'elam Echad with other cases of Chatas) - Eishes Ish, who, unlike Achoso, has a Heter during the lifetime of the one who renders her Asur.
(b) To counter that, Rebbi Yonah (or Rav Huna b'rei de'Rav Yehoshua) cites the Pasuk "Ki Kol asher Ya'aseh mi'Kol ha'To'eivos ha'Eileh ve'Nichr'su" - comparing all the Arayos to Achoso, rendering them all Chayav be'He'elam Echad together with other Chayvei K'risos (even Eishes Ish).
(c) Rebbi Yitzchak learns from the Hekesh of Rebbi Yonah that all the Arayos, like Achoso, are Chayav Kareis and not Malkos - creating the problem from where he then learns Lechalek.
(d) He therefore learns from the words "ve'el Ishah" (in the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "ve'el Ishah be'Nidas Tum'asah Lo Yikrav") - 'Lechalek al Kol Ishah ve'Ishah'.
(a) We conclude that the Rabbanan also learn 'Lechalek al Kol Ishah ve'Ishah' from "ve'el Ishah". And we object to the suggestion that they learn from Kareis of Achoso that if someone committed incest with Achoso, Achos Aviv and Achos Imo, he is Chayav three Chata'os - because, seeing as they are three independent Isurim and three independent women, this is obvious and does not require a Pasuk.
(b) So we establish it by Achoso who is also Achos Aviv and Achos Imo (and which involves only one body). This is possible - in the case of a Rasha ben Rasha; where a man had relations with his mother who bore him two daughters. Then he had relations with one of his daughters, who bore him a son. And finally, the son had relations with the other daughter, who is his sister, his father's sister and his mother's sister.
(c) Rebbi Yitzchak learns Kareis by Achoso who is also Achos Aviv and Achos Imo from the second "Achoso" (in the Pasuk in Kedoshim "Ervas Achoso Gilah"), and the Rabbanan learn from there Kareis by Achoso she'Hi bas Aviv u'Bas Imo - which we would otherwise not know, because the Torah only mentions Kareis by either Achoso min ha'Av or Achoso min ha'Eim, but not both. And we cannot incorporate a sister who is both, due to the principle 'Ein Onshin min ha'Din'.
(d) Rebbi Yitzchak might hold 'Onshin min ha'Din'. Alternatively, he might hold that she is Chayav even if he holds 'Ein Onshin min ha'Din' - because he learns the Onesh (in Kedoshim) from the Azharah (in Acharei-Mos).
(e) From the words in the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "Achoscha Hi" (which follow "Ervas bas Avicha O bas Imecha"), we learn - that the Azharah by Achoso extends to a sister who is both Achoso min ha'Av and Achoso min ha'Eim.