Makkot

THEY USED TO PAY1 RENT TO THE LEVITES: THESE ARE THE WORDS OF R. JUDAH; R. MEIR SAYS THAT THEY DID NOT PAY THEM ANY RENT. AND [ON HIS RETURN HOME] HE RETURNS TO THE OFFICE HE FORMERLY HELD, THESE ARE THE WORDS OF R. MEIR; R. JUDAH SAYS THAT HE DOES NOT RETURN TO THE OFFICE HE FORMERLY HELD. GEMARA. Said R. Kahana: The difference of opinion [on the question of rent] is only in regard to the [main] six cities [of refuge], as one Master takes the words, and the cities shall be unto you for refuge2 [to mean,] for the purpose of refuge [and no more], while the other Master takes ‘unto you’ [to mean,] yours for all your needs; but, as regards the other forty-two [additional] cities3 they are agreed that they did pay them rent. Said Raba to him: The expression ‘unto you’ certainly implies here ‘for all your requirements’! But, said Raba, the difference of opinion is rather about [the claim of] the other forty-two [additional] cities, one Master taking the words, and to them ye shall add forty and two cities4 to mean that these [additional] cities shall be for refuge [mainly, like the six], while the other master takes the words, and to them ye shall add forty and two cities to mean that just as the other six are for all your requirements, so are these [additional] cities [to be] for all your requirements; but as regards the [main] six they are fully in agreement that no rent was paid to them. AND HE RETURNS TO THE OFFICE HE FORMERLY HELD etc. Our Rabbis taught: [It is written], And he shall return to his family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he return;5 this means that he returns [strictly] to his ‘family’ [possessions] but he does not return to the station occupied by his fathers;6 these are the words of R. Judah;7 R. Meir says that he even returns to the station occupied by his fathers,[since it says] ‘to the possession of his fathers’, [that is, exactly] like his fathers. Similarly in the case of the exile, as the text says, he shall return, it is meant to apply the same rule to the manslayer [by way of allusion]. What is meant [exactly] by saying, ‘Similarly in the case of the exile’? — It refers to what is taught [on the following text]: [And after the death of the high priest] the slayer shall return to the land of his possession,8 which means that he returns only to ‘the land of his possession’ but not to the station occupied by his fathers;6 these are the words of R. Judah;9 but R. Meir says that he returns also to the station occupied by his fathers, [and] he derives [this interpretation] from the use of the same expression yashub [‘he shall return’], both here10 and there.11 MISHNAH.12 AND THESE INCUR A [JUDICIAL] FLOGGING:13 ONE WHO CAME [CARNALLY] TO HIS SISTER.14 TO HIS FATHER'S SISTER, TO HIS MOTHER'S SISTER,15 TO HIS WIFE'S SISTER;16 TO HIS BROTHER'S WIFE,17 TO HIS FATHER'S BROTHER'S WIFE18 OR TO A NIDDAH;19 A HIGH PRIEST ON TAKING TO WIFE A WIDOW,20 OR AN ORDINARY PRIEST ON TAKING A DIVORCEE21 OR HALUZAH;22 ANY ISRAELITE ON TAKING TO WIFE A MAMZERETH23 OR NATHINITE24 WOMAN, OR ANY ISRAELITESS BECOMING THE WIFE OF A MAMZER25 OR NATHINITE.26 IN THE CASE OF A DIVORCEE-WIDOW [A HIGH PRIEST] IS LIABLE ON TWO COUNTS,27 BUT [AN ORDINARY PRIEST,] IN THE CASE OF A DIVORCEE-HALUZAH,IS LIABLE ONLY ON ONE COUNT.28 ONE WHO WHILE UNCLEAN,29 ATE HOLY MEAT30 OR ENTERED THE SANCTUARY; ONE WHO ATE HELEB,31 BLOOD,32 OR ‘LEAVINGS’ [OF SACRIFICIAL MEATS],33 OR PIGGUL;34 OR [AN OFFERING] THAT HAS BECAME UNCLEAN;35 , ONE WHO SLAUGHTERS,36 OR OFFERS UP37 A SACRIFICE, OUT-OF-PRECINCTS;38 ONE WHO ATE ‘LEAVENED [BREAD] DURING THE PASSOVER;39 ONE WHO PARTAKES OF FOOD [OR DRINK]40 OR DOES WORK ON THE DAY OF ATONEMENT;41 ONE WHO COMPOUNDS INGREDIENTS [AS] FOR THE [ANOINTING] OIL,42 OR THE INGREDIENTS [AS] FOR THE INCENSE,43 OR ANOINTS44 WITH THE [HOLY] OIL FOR ANOINTING: ONE WHO EATS OF NEBELAH45 OR TREFA,46 OR ANY OF THE [CREATURES DEEMED] ‘ABOMINABLE’ AND ‘TEEMING’.47 WHO EATS OF TEBEL48 OR ‘FIRST-TITHE STILL COMPRISING49 ITS ‘PRIME-DUE’, OR ‘SECOND-TITHE UNREDEEMED,50 OR OF ‘SANCTUARY- GIFTS’ UNREDEEMED.51 HOW MUCH OF TEBEL52 IS ONE TO EAT TO BECOME LIABLE?53 R. SIMEON SAYS THE MEREST MORSEL; THE SAGES SAY AN OLIVE'S SIZE.54 SAID R. SIMEON: DO YOU NOT ADMIT THAT IF ONE ATE THE MINUTEST ANT HE WOULD BE LIABLE?53 — SAID THEY TO HIM: [ONLY] BECAUSE IT IS A SEPARATE CREATURE;55 SAID HE TO THEM: EVEN SO A [GRAIN OF] WHEAT IS A SEPARATE ENTITY: GEMARA. [AND THESE INCUR A FLOGGING etc.] This Mishnah [it should be noted] mentions instances of [a flogging for] such as incurred the penalty of kareth but not any of such as have incurred the penalty of death by sentence of the Court.56 Whose is the view presented in this Mishnah? — It is R. Akiba's, as may be gathered from what is taught [in the following]: Both offenders who are liable to kareth, and offenders who are liable to death by sentence of the Court mentioned, but only the possessions and the family. V. Malbim, Sifra on Lev. XXV, 10. remembered is that, (a) every prohibited act must be clearly specified in Holy Writ and (b) the threatened punishment plainly stated. This Mishnah enumerates various types of offences that entail a judicial flogging at least. Tosaf. As the Biblical references of each prohibition and its threatened punishment (if any) are to be indicated, it will be necessary to make use of the following notation: — B denotes — ‘let him (her, them) bear his (her, their) iniquity,’ i.e. bear the punishment for their sin, kareth, usually. q.v.; C denotes — threatened with the death of childlessness; D denotes — threatened with death by Divine dispensation; K denotes — kareth — ,rf — ‘cut off’; extirpation of the soul, v. Glos. It will be noticed that B, C, D and K amount more or less to the same thing, namely, Divine retribution; N denotes — No punishment prescribed in Holy Writ for the particular offence, though distinctly prohibited. brother died absolutely childless. Cf. Deut. XXV, 5ff. debarred from regular marriage within the community: the stigma is perpetual. V. Deut. XXIII, 3 N. Israelites by a ruse, and were reduced to communal serfs in the time of Joshua. V. Josh. IX, 3, 15, 18, 23. A Hivite intermarriage with Israelites was forbidden, Deut. VII, 1ff. Their vindictiveness in the time of David (II Sam. XXI, 1ff.) and their continued identity as Hivites in their status as serfs (v. Ezra, II, 13, 58; VIII, 20, and Nehem. X, 29) contributed to their unenviable distinction as pariahs. Cf. Yeb. 78b. divorced by her man’ being taken to mean, ‘any woman rejected by her man’ (i.e. on whom she had some claim to be his lawful wife). 39-40; XII, 2ff; Num. XIX, 11-13. days and the night; after that, the leavings had to be burnt, Lev. VII, 15-18 B. Cf. Ex. XXIX, 34 and XII, 10; P.B. pp. 12-13, sections 5-8. flesh, and is not to be eaten, Lev. VII, 18 B; XIX, 7-8 K. Traditionally, any beast or fowl not killed in accordance with the Jewish laws of shechitah, is nebelah. also Ezek. IV, 14. the eater. V. Lev. XI, 4-8 (animals); 10-13 (fishes); 13-20 (fowl); 29ff(reptiles) and generally 41ff. Deut. XIV, 7-21, N. the priest) of corn, wine and oil (Num. XVIII, 11-12) and hallah of dough or bread (ibid. XV, 19-21); ‘first-tithe’ (to Levite or priest); ‘second-tithe’ (to be eaten at Jerusalem) and poor-tithe’. called ‘tithe-of-the-tithe’, and was strictly forbidden to the Levite, Num. XVIII, 26-32, BD. Jerusalem. It could not be sold or bartered, but could be redeemed by the owner (outside Jerusalem) at the market price enhanced by a fifth of its value with good silver coin. Deut. XIV, 22-29; Lev. XXVII, 16, 19. Cf. M. Sh. I, 1; IV, 2, 7. required atonement. It was, however, redeemable at its value enhanced by a fifth. Lev. V, 15-16; XXVII, 9ff. (16, 19, 30-31).