REVACH L'DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
daf@dafyomi.co.il http://www.dafyomi.co.il
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
|
|
SUMMARY
1. When a Bas Kohen is Mezanah, her father is cursed.
2. A person who is Chayav Sereifah is not burned at the stake.
3. There is a Machlokes regarding whether the Adas Korach and Aharon's sons, Nadav and Avihu, were completely burned or only their insides were burned.
4. Nadav and Avihu asked, "When will Moshe and Aharon die and we will become the leaders?"
5. Once a Talmid Chacham derives benefit from an Am ha'Aretz, the Am ha'Aretz will no longer respect him.
6. According to the Tana Kama, when a person is Chayav Hereg, Beis Din severs his head with a sword in the same manner that the Malchus executes people.
7. It is permissible to burn a king's bed and utensils after his death and it is not considered Darkei Emori.
8. The Misah of Hereg is administered to a murderer and to the residents of an Ir ha'Nidachas.
9. A person who is Chayav Chenek (strangulation) is choked with a cloth.
10. A person who is Mezaneh with an Eishes Ish is Chayav Chenek.
11. Whenever the Torah states that Beis Din should punish a person with Misah but does not specify which form of Misah should be given, it refers to Chenek.
|
A BIT MORE
1. If the father had previously been honored, he is now treated with disrespect. People curse the father who brought into the world and raised a girl who was Mezanah.
2. According to the Tana Kama, the procedure of Sereifah is as follows. First, the Beis Din places the condemned person in manure up to his knees to prevent him from moving. Then a hard cloth is wrapped inside a soft cloth and used to choke him until he opens his mouth. Then a hot piece of lead is thrown in his mouth, and his insides are burned. Rebbi Yehudah maintains that Beis Din does not choke him because they might accidentally kill him that way and fail to fulfill the requirement of Sereifah. Rather, they use an instrument to force his mouth open.
3. One opinion maintains that the Adas Korach were burned only internally but their bodies remained intact, whereas Nadav and Avihu were completely burned to death. According to this opinion, the Chachamim derive from the deaths of the Adas Korach that Sereifah can be fulfilled by merely burning the insides of a person. The other opinion maintains that the bodies of the Adas Korach were also burned, but Nadav and Avihu were burned only internally and their bodies remained intact. According to this opinion, the Din that Sereifah can be fulfilled by burning a person internally is derived from the deaths of Nadav and Avihu. Since the requirement of Sereifah can be fulfilled by merely burning a person internally, it is forbidden to carry out Sereifah by burning a person at the stake, because the Mitzvah to "love your friend as you love yourself" requires Beis Din to carry out executions in the least painful manner possible.
4. Nadav and Avihu died because they power and positions of leadership. When they made this statement, Hakadosh Baruch Hu said, "We will see who will bury whom," indicating that Nadav and Avihu would be buried by Moshe and Aharon rather than inheriting their positions. Rav Papa comments that this is in accordance with the popular saying that there are many old camels who are carrying on their backs the hides of young camels.
5. An Am ha'Aretz initially considers a Talmid Chacham to be similar to a golden flask. Once he has spoken with the Talmid Chacham, he loses some respect for him and considers him only like a silver flask. If the Am ha'Aretz then provides benefit for the Talmid Chacham, he regards him only like an earthenware flask, which cannot be repaired once it has been broken.
6. Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with the Tana Kama and maintains that when a person is Chayav Hereg, Beis Din places his head on a tree stump and cuts it off with an axe. The Rabanan do not permit this form of Hereg because it is a terribly gory death, but Rebbi Yehudah maintains that it is not an option to cut off his head with a sword because it is forbidden to follow the Chukim of the non-Jews and that is the way the non-Jewish Malchus executes people. The Rabanan justify their position with the fact that the Misah of Sayif is mentioned in the Torah; consequently, when Beis Din carries out the Misah of Sayif, they are considered to be following the Torah's instructions rather than imitating the practices of the non-Jews.
7. Even though non-Jews also burn their kings' utensils when the kings die, this practice is not included in the prohibition of following the Chukim of non-Jews since it is described in a verse.
8. The Torah states that the penalty for murdering an Eved is death by the sword. According to the view that maintains that Sayif is a more stringent form of Misah than Chenek, it follows logically that a person who murders a Ben Chorin must also be subject to Sayif, because it would be illogical for him to be subject to a less severe penalty. According to Rebbi Shimon, who maintains that Chenek is a more stringent form of Misah than Sayif, the Torah compares the punishment of a murderer to the death of an Eglah Arufah, which is killed with a sword; this indicates that the punishment of a murderer is also death by the sword.
9. The Chenek procedure is as follows: The person is placed in manure up to his knees, and a hard cloth is wrapped inside a soft cloth and wrapped around his neck. Two people take hold of the cloth from each end and stand on either side of him, and each person pulls his end of the cloth until the person chokes to death.
10. The punishment of Chenek is given only to a person who is Mezaneh with the wife of an adult Jew. A person who is Mezaneh with the wife of a Katan or with the wife of a non-Jew is Patur because a Katan and a non-Jew cannot effect Kidushin and consequently their wives are not considered to be really married to them.
11. Rebbi Yoshiyah maintains that the reason an unspecified Misah is assumed to be Chenek is that Chenek is the most lenient Misah, and Beis Din cannot impose a more stringent form of Misah unless the Torah specifies that they should do so. Rebbi Yonasan disagrees and maintains that even according to Rebbi Shimon, who maintains that Chenek is not the most lenient form of Misah, any unspecified Misah in the Torah always refers to Chenek. Rebbi explains that every Stam Misah must refer to Chenek because any unspecified Misas Beis Din must be a type of Misah which does not leave a mark on the body, just as Misah b'Yedei Shamayim does not leave a mark on the body. Even though the Misah of Sereifah also does not leave a mark on the body, the Torah specifies that a Bas Kohen who commits Zenus is punished with Sereifah, which implies that a Bas Yisrael who commits Zenus is not Chayav Sereifah, yet the Torah calls for an unspecified Misah to be admistered to a person who is guilty of Zenus. Thus, Stam Misah in the Torah cannot be Sereifah, and the only other form of Misah that does not leave a mark is Chenek.
|
Next Daf
Index to Revach for Maseches Sanhedrin
|
