1)

(a)The Amora'im query our Mishnah with eight possible La'avin that the Tana could have included in our Mishnah (some of them which, even remotely, have nothing to do with plowing). The Si'man 'Sh.N.B.A.Y. Sh.N.Z' is - acronym of the names of the Amora'im concerned.

(b)The La'av ...

1. ... Rav Hoshaya is referring to when he quotes the Pasuk in Shoftim "asher Lo Ye'abed ba ve'Lo Yizare'a is that of - not sowing in an infertile valley, with regard to an Eglah Arufah.

2. ... Rav Chananya is referring to when he quotes the Pasuk ib Re'ei "ve'Ibadtem es Sh'mam ... Lo Sa'asun Kein la'Hashem ... " is that of - not erasing the Name of Hash-m as he walks.

(c)The Pasuk in ...

1. ... Ki Seitzei that serves as the source for the La'av of not cutting off the mark of Tzara'as cited by Rebbi Avahu is - "Hishamer be'Nega ha'Tzara'as".

2. ... Terumah that serves as the source for the La'av for not moving the Choshen from on the Eifod cited by Abaye is "ve'Lo Yizach ha'Choshen me'al ha'Eifod".

(d)The La'av ...

1. ... Abaye is referring to when he cites the Pasuk in Tetzaveh "Lo Yasuru mimenu" - is that of removing the staves from the Aron.

2. ... Rav Ashi is referring to when he cites the Pasuk in Re'ei (that we cited above) "ve'Lo Yiidbak be'Yadcha Me'umah" is - that of plowing with the wood of an Asheirah (a tree of Avodah-Zarah).

2)

(a)Ravina queries our Mishnah from the La'av of not cutting down fruit-trees whilst Rebbi Avira asked Rebbi Mani that the Tana could have asked from where the sinner contravened his oath that he would not plow on Yom-tov. The Pasuk in Shoftim that serves as the source for Ravina's Kashya is - "ki mimenu Sochel ... ve'Oso Lo Sichros".

(b)We reject this latter query however - because, bearing in mind that he is already Mushba me'Har Sinai (sworn from Har Sinai not to do so) the Shevu'ah is invalid.

(c)We nevertheless reinstate it - by establishing our Mishnah where he swore that he would not plow during the week either, in which case the Shevu'ah on Yom-Tov takes effect too via an Isur Kolel (Since the Shevu'ah is effective regarding the week, it is also effective regarding Yom-Tov).

(d)We refute the suggestion that the Tana does not include the case of Shevu'ah, because he is not concerned with something that can be rescinded, from Hekdesh and Nazir, which the Tana mentions despite the fact that both can be rescinded. We reinstate the Kashya however, by rejecting the Pircha from ...

1. ... Hekdesh - by establishing the case by B'chor (which cannot be rescinded).

2. ... Nazir - by attempting to establishing it by a N'zir Shimshon ...

(e)... which we immediately reject, because a N'zir Shimshon is not subject to the Isur of Tum'ah.

3)

(a)We finally answer the Kashya from Shevu'ah - by ascribing the omission to the principle of 'Ein Shevu'ah Chalah al Shevu'ah' as we explained earlier, and by adding that the Tana does not hold of Isur Kolel.

(b)All the other Kashyos however, remain unanswered. In fact, the Tana omits them - due to the principle 'Tana ve'Shiyer' (see Tosfos DH 'Maskif'.

4)

(a)Rebbi Hoshaya rules that someone who breeds a Shor Pesulei ha'Mukdashin - (an ox of Hekdesh that becomes blemished and is subsequently redeemed) is subject to two sets of Malkos ...

(b)... because the Torah gives it a double status, of Chulin and of Hekdesh (as if it was two animals).

(c)This dual status is based on the fact that - on the one hand, the animal may be eaten anywhere, even be'Tum'ah (like Chulin), whilst on the other, it may not be worked with.

(d)The ruling will apply - even if the cow is a Pesulei ha'Mukdashin, too.

(e)In the same vein, Rebbi Yitzchak rules that someone who leads a 'Shor Pesulei ha'Mukdashin' that is hitched to a plow - is Chayav Malkos for transgressing the La'av of "Lo Sacharosh be'Shor u'va'Chamor Yachdav".

(f)The problem with the current ruling is - what is the source for Hekdesh and Chulin being considered Kil'ayim? See Tosfos DH 'she'Harei Guf Echad'.

5)

(a)Our Mishnah learns from the Pasuk "be'Mispar ... Arba'im" that - Malkos comprises thirty-nine lashes (the number that leads up to forty), and not forty.

(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah, one receives forty lashes. The 'extra' one is administered - between the shoulder-blades.

(c)The Mishnah requires 'Makos Re'uyos le'Hishtalesh' - meaning a number of lashes divisible by three (two thirds at the back, and one third, at the front). Consequently, if for example, the Chachamim assess that a person can take twenty lashes, he will receive eighteen.

6)

(a)The Tana rules that, in a case where someone is assessed ...

1. ... for 'forty' lashes, and after he has received some of them, it is discovered that he cannot take the full amount - since he was disgraced in Beis-Din, he is Patur from the rest.

2. ... for eighteen lashes, and after he has received them, they conclude that he is able to take the full quota - he is Patur from the rest (for the same reason).

(b)But in a case where he is assessed ...

1. ... for 'forty' lashes, and before he has received any, it is discovered that he cannot take any Malkos at all - they wait until he becomes stronger, and is able to take the full forty.

2. ... for eighteen lashes, and before he has received any, they conclude that he is able to take the full quota - he receives the full amount.

7)

(a)Our Mishnah extrapolates from the Pasuk "be'Mispar ... Arba'im" that Malkos comprises thirty-nine lashes. Had the Torah meant the sinner to receive forty - it ought to have written "Arba'im ... be'Mispar".

(b)Based on this D'rashah, Rava refers to most people as foolish - because they rise for a Seifer-Torah, but not for a great man (a Talmid-Chacham), seeing as the latter has the power to interpret the former (such as here, where the Torah writes "forty", and the Chachamim change it to thirty-nine.

(c)Rebbi Yehudah learns from the Pasuk "Mah ha'Makos ha'Eileh bein Yadecha, ve'Amar asher Hukeisi Beis Me'ahavai" that - a sinner receives one extra stroke between his shoulder-blades.

(d)The Rabbanan interpret this Pasuk - with regard to a child in Cheder, getting lashed because he is not learning properly (and not to someone who is Chayav Malkos).

8)

(a)We reconcile our Mishnah, which rules that if the Chachamim assessed a sinner to receive a certain amount of lashes and before having receiving any, they reassessed that he can take more or less than the original assessment, he will receive the higher assessment, with the Beraisa, which sentences him to the lower amount either way - by establishing the former where they assessed him for that day, and then discovered that he could take more or less that their original assessment, a clear indication that their original assessment was erroneous. Consequently, Beis-Din will wait until he gains strength, and make a fresh assessment then. Similarly, where he was assessed for eighteen and on the same day, they reassessed him for forty, it is clear that their first assessment was made in error, and we go after the second one. Whereas the latter speaks where the assessment was made for a different day, by which time he may well have changed for the better or for the worse, in which case the original assessment stands (even if he did not yet receive anything, either because he is Yotze with the eighteen that he received, or because the assessment itself was an embarrassment that rendered him Yotzei).

(b)We reject the explanation that if Beis-Din assessed him for that day, then we cannot exempt him before he has received at least some of the Malkos. One, because it would make no sense to give him Malkos on the basis of the original assessment, when now Beis-Din claim that any Malkos that he receives will kill him, the other - because the Mishnah says that if he received Malkos, he is Patur, but not that Lechatchilah, he must receive it in order to be Patur.

(c)In a case where Beis-Din assess that, someone who committed a double-sin (he plowed with an ox and a donkey, and at the same time, he sowed Kil'ayim in a vineyard), is fit to receive the entire set of Malkos for the one sin, but not for both, our Mishnah rules that - if the Malkos that he received covered some of the second La'av (e.g. forty-two), then he is Patur from the rest; otherwise, he remains due to receive another thirty-nine.

(d)To reconcile this with the Beraisa 'Ein Omdin Omed Echad li'Shenei La'avin', Rav Sheishes interprets the Beraisa - where they assessed him for forty-one lashes, in which case, he will receive thirty-nine lashes for one of the La'avin, and when he has gained strength, he will receive the full quota for the second La'av (but not if they assessed him for forty-two, as we explained).

9)

(a)Presumably the post to which they tied the sinner's hands, is the width of a person. Its height is - one and a half to two Amos.

(b)The Shali'ach Beis-Din - then takes hold of the sinner's clothes from the hem, and pulls them up, to uncover his body as far as the heart.

(c)In the event that his clothes tear in the process - the Shali'ach is not obligated to pay.

(d)The Shali'ach Beis-Din stands - on a stone behind the sinner, but slightly to his left (assuming he [the Shali'ach] is right-handed).

10)

(a)The Shali'ach Beis-Din folds the two calf straps with which he is about to lash the sinner lengthwise (to make four).

(b)He attaches - a strap of donkey hide to inside the fold of each of the two doubled calf straps.

(c)The size of the handle must be - a Tefach wide and a Tefach thick.

(d)Each strap is - one Tefach wide and sufficiently long to curl round the sinner's back and reach the beginning of his stomach.

11)

(a)The thirty-nine lashes are divided - one third in front and two-thirds at the back.

(b)We learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Vehipilo ha'Shofet" that - the sinner has to bend over when receiving Malkos (to enable the lashes to strike him across his back or across his stomach, as we explained).

(c)The Shali'ach Beis-Din strikes the sinner - with full force.

12)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk in Kedoshim (in connection with a Shifchah Charufah) "Bikores Tih'yeh" that - one Dayan reads a Parshah whilst the Malkos is being delivered.

(b)He reads - the Parshah from Ki Savo "Im Lo Sishmor La'asos ... ve'Hifla Hash-m es Makoscha ... ".

(c)And he concludes - with the Pasuk "ve'Hu Rachum ... ".

(d)If he finishes reading before the sinner had received all his Malkos - he reads the Parshah again.

13)

(a)If the sinner dies ...

1. ... in the course of the Malkos - the Shali'ach Beis-Din is Patur.

2. ... as a result of the Shali'ach Beis-Din adding an extra stroke - then he (the Shali'ach) is Chayav to go into Galus.

(b)Our Mishnah learns from the Pasuk "ve'Niklah Achicha le'Einecha" that - if the sinner wets or sullies himself during the course of the Malkos, he is Patur (since he has been duly embarrassed).

(c)Rebbi Yehudah - agrees with this with regard to a woman, but, in his opinion, a man will only be Patur if he sullies himself.