Previous Daf

KESUVOS 32

Ask A Question

click for question
1)
(a) We learn from the Pasuk in Ki Setzei (in connection with Malkus) "Kedei Rish'aso" - that (with regard to punishments meted out by Beis Din) a person can receive only one punishment for one act, but not two (even when the act incorporates two punishments).
(b) The Mishnah in Makos lists a number of Arayos who receive Malkus (a sister, a father's or mother's sister ... ). This poses a Kashya on our Mishnah ('Eilu Na'aros she'Yesh Lahen Kenas') - where the culprit appears to be obligated to pay Kenas despite the Mishnah in Makos, which declares him Chayav Malkus (two punishments).

click for question
2)
(a) When it is a question of Mamon versus Malkus - Ula holds that he pays Mamon ('Mamona Mechalsm, Milka Lo Laki').
(b) To resolve the contradiction between them two Mishnahs - Ula establishes the Mishnah in Makos by a Bogeres, where there is no Kenas.
(c) A rapist is also obligated to pay 'Boshes (shame), Pegam (depreciation) and Tza'ar' (pain) ...
(d) ... each of which is considered Mamon, and not Kenas.

click for question
3)
(a) Ula has established the Mishnah in Makos by a Bogeres. He solves the problem regarding ...
1. ... Boshes u'Pegam, which are Mamon, (as we just explained), yet they apply by a Bogeres, too - by establishing the Mishnah by a Shotah, to whom Boshes and Pegam are not applicable.
2. ... Tza'ar (which applies even by a Shotah) - by establishing it by a girl who was seduced and who does not receive Tza'ar (because her pleasure overrides the pain).
(b) We now establish the Mishnah in Makos even by a Na'arah - who is both an orphan (who is personally due to receive whatever the man is obligated to pay - in lieu of her father), and a Mefutah (who automatically forgoes the Boshes, the Pegam and the Tza'ar, as we just explained).

click for question
4)
(a) We try to learn Ula's principle ('Mamona Meshalem, Milka Lo Laki') from every case of Chovel ba'Chavero (creating a wound), where, besides the obligation to pay, the damager has also contravened two Lavin, for which he ought to receive Malkus (but does not [even if he was warned]).
(b) We learn that Chovel ba'Chavero is subject to Malkus - from the Pasuk in Ki Setzei "Lo Yosif ... Pen Yosif".
(c) We are uncertain whether Mamon is stricter than Chovel ba'Chavero or more lenient than it.
(d) We cannot learn Mamon from Chovel ba'Chavero, assuming that Mamon is ...
1. ... more stringent - because one is not obligated to pay the five things (pain, healing, work-loss and shame [besides the depreciation]) that one has to pay by Chovel.
2. ... more lenient - because Chovel ba'Chavero has a Chumra, inasmuch as he is subject to Malkus (by a wound that is less than a Shaveh Perutah, which other cases of Mamon (such as Ones and Mefateh [who are not Chayavei Kares]), are not.

click for question
5)
(a) We also attempt to use - Edim Zomemin (who pay [when that is what they tried to cause the defendant to do] but do not receive Malkus) as Ula's source.
(b) We learn that Edim Zomemin are subject to ...
1. ... Mamon - from "Ka'asher Zamam La'asos l'Achiv".
2. ... Malkus (even when "Ka'asher Zamam" is not applicable) - from "Lo Sa'aneh" (in the Aseres ha'Dibros).
(c) Here too - we are uncertain whether Mamon is stricter than Edim Zomemin or more lenient.
(d) We cannot learn Mamon from Edim Zomemin, assuming that Mamon is ...
1. ... more stringent than them - because Mamon requires warning (for Malkus to be applicable), whereas Edim Zomemin do not (as we will soon see).
2. ... more lenient - because in the case of Mamon, the culprit performed an act, whereas Edim Zomemin only sinned with their mouths.

click for question
6)
(a) We cannot even learn Mamon from the 'Tzad ha'Shaveh' (the combination) of Chovel ba'Chavero and Edim Zomemin - because the Tzad ha'Shaveh is different inasmuch as it has a 'Tzad Chamur' (the Chumros of both of them are unique (see Tosfos DH 'she'Ken'), or, if we consider Mamon to be more lenient, that it has a 'Tzad Kal' (both leniencies are unique).
(b) So Ula ultimately learns his principle from the 'Gezeirah Shavah' "Tachas" (Asher Inah) "Ayin Tachas Ayin" - in connection with Chovel ba'Chavero.

click for question
7)
(a) In the opinion of Rebbi Yochanan, whenever there is a question of Mamon or Malkus, the rule is 'Milka Laki, Mamona Lo Meshalem'. In his opinion therefore - our Mishnah (which obligates the rapist to pay), speaks when there has been no warning (for which reason he will not receive Malkus, so he pays Kenas); whereas the Mishnah in Makos speaks when the rapist was warned, in which case, he receives Malkus.
(b) The Machlokes between Ula and Rebbi Yochanan ...
1. ... in our Mishnah (which, both agree, speaks about a Na'arah) is - whether the Tana speaks specifically when the rapist was not warned (Rebbi Yochanan), or whether it speaks even when he was (Ula)
2. ... in the Mishnah in Makos is - whether the Tana speaks specifically about a Bogeres (Ula), or even about a Na'arah, but when the rapist was warned (Rebbi Yochanan).
(c) Rebbi Yochanan, like Ula, learns that one can only receive one punishment from "Kedei Rish'aso". Only he gives precedence to Malkus, on account of the Pasuk which the Torah juxtaposes next to this one - namely, that of "Arba'im Yakenu" (the source for Malkus).

click for question
8)
(a) We query Rebbi Yochanan from Chovel ba'Chavero, where the sinner is sentenced to pay, and does not receive Malkus. To vindicate Rebbi Yochanan - we initially establish that ruling in a case where there was no warning.
(b) We refute this suggestion however, based on a statement by Rebbi Ami Amar Rebbi Yochanan, who says - that for striking Shimon without creating a wound worth a Perutah, Reuven receives Malkus, which must be speaking when the sinner was warned ...
(c) ... because otherwise, he would not receive Malkus ...
(d) ... posing a Kashya on the current answer - since we now see that he receives Malkus only for a wound that is worth less than a Shaveh Perutah, implying that for one that is worth more, he would have to pay.

click for question
9)
(a) We finally resolve the problem from Chovel ba'Chavero (according to Rebbi Yochanan) with a statement by Rebbi Ila'a - who says that (even though normally, when there is a question of Malkus and Mamon, Malkus takes precedence) by Edim Zomemin, we learn from a Gezeiras ha'Kasuv that teaches that they pay Mamon rather than receive Malkus ...
(b) ... and the same applies to Chovel ba'Chavero (as we shall see shortly).

click for question
10)
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, if Edim Zomemin attempt to obligate someone to pay two hundred Zuz, they are sentenced to pay two hundred Zuz in addition to receiving Malkus - because the two obligations stem from two different sources: the one from "Lo Sa'aneh", and the other, from "Ka'asher Zamam La'asos l'Achiv".
(b) The Chachamim hold 'Kol ha'Meshalem Eino Lokeh'.
(c) Rebbi Ila'a learns from the Pasuk in Shoftim "Yad b'Yad" - (Davar ha'Niten mi'Yad l'Yad), that, according to the Chachamim, Edim Zomemin are obligated to pay rather than receive Malkus.
(d) And Rebbi Yochanan learns from the Pasuk in Emor "Ka'asher Asah Ken Yea's Lo ... Ken Yinasen Bo" - that Chovel ba'Chavero too, has to pay, and does not receive Malkus ('Davar she'Yesh Bo Nesinah').

Next Daf