Makkot

— [Yes, but] R. Jose1 takes [the two terms used] — seritah2 and gedidah3 as having the same import, and in the case of the latter it is said ‘for the dead’.4 Samuel said: One who cuts himself with an instrument is liable.5 An objection [against this] was raised from the following: seritah and gedidah are one [and the same] thing, save that seritah is done with the hand, while gedidah is done with an instrument! — He [Samuel] shares the view of R. Jose.6 A tanna recited in the presence of R. Johanan: [One who cuts himself] for the dead, whether with the hand or with instrument, is liable [to a flogging]; [if he does so] as an idolatrous practice, if with hand he is liable, if with instrument, he is exempt. But, is it not written [of the priests of Baal] the other way about, and they cut themselves after their manner with swords and lances?7 — But rather say, ‘If with the hand, he is exempt,8 if with an instrument, he is liable.’ ON [ROUNDING] THE HEAD [HE IS LIABLE] FOR TWO CORNERS, ONE FOR ONE SIDE AND ONE FOR THE OTHER. R.Shesheth pointed them out between the two [lateral] joints9 of the head. ON [MARRING] THE BEARD [HE IS LIABLE] FOR TWO [CORNERS] ON THIS SIDE, FOR TWO ON THE OTHER SIDE AND FOR ONE LOWER DOWN. R. Shesheth pointed them out between the [several] junctions of the beard.10 R. ELIEZER SAYS: IF THEY WERE ALL TAKEN OFF AS ONE, HE IS LIABLE ONLY ON ONE COUNT. [That is,] he considers the whole [process as comprised under the] one prohibition. AND HE IS ONLY LIABLE ON TAKING OFF11 WITH A RAZOR. Our Rabbis taught: [It is written], Neither shall they [the priests] shave off the corner of their beard.12 One might suppose that [he is liable] even if he removed it with scissors; we are therefore told, neither shalt thou mar [destroy]13 Reading, ‘neither shalt thou mar’; one might suppose that he is liable14 even if he picked off the hairs with tweezers or with pincers; we are therefore told, ‘they shall not shave,’ to show that it must be shaving that involves destruction,15 which is the kind of shaving that involves destruction? You must say, it is [that done] by the [use of the] razor.16 R. ELIEZER SAYS: EVEN IF HE PICKS OFF THE HAIRS WITH TWEEZERS OR PINCERS HE IS LIABLE. However you wish [to take this statement, it is difficult]. If he received on tradition17 the Gezerah shawah,18 he should insist only on the razor [as the forbidden instrument]; if [on the other hand], he does not receive on tradition the Gezerah shawah, he should not permit even scissors!?19 — Indeed, he did receive on tradition the Gezerah shawah, but he considers [the process of] those instruments20 practically as shaving. MISHNAH. HE WHO WRITES AN ‘INCISED’-IMPRINT [IN HIS FLESH, IS FLOGGED]. IF HE WRITES [ON HIS FLESH] WITHOUT INCISING, OR INCISES [HIS FLESH] WITHOUT IMPRINTING, HE IS NOT LIABLE: [HE IS] NOT LIABLE UNTIL HE WRITES AND IMPRINTS THE INCISION WITH INK, EYE-PAINT21 OR ANYTHING THAT MARKS. R. SIMEON B. JUDAH SAYS IN THE NAME OF R. SIMEON [B. YOHAI] THAT HE IS NOT LIABLE UNTIL HE HAS WRITTEN THERE THE NAME, AS IT IS SAID: NOR PUT ON YOU ANY WRITTEN-IMPRINT, I AM THE LORD.22 GEMARA. Said R. Aha the son of Raba to R. Ashi: [Does it mean, not] until he has actually inscribed the words, I am the Lord? — No, replied he, it means, as Bar Kappara taught,23 [viz.:] He is not liable [to a flogging] until he inscribed the name of some profane deity, as it is said: Nor put on you any written-imprint, I am the Lord,22 [that is,] ‘I am the Lord’ and no other.24 R. Malkiah, as citing R. Adda b. Ahabah, said: It is prohibited to powder one's wound with burnt wood ash, because it gives the appearance of an incised imprint. R. Nahman25 the son of R. Ika said: ‘Spit’,26 ‘Maids’27 and ‘Follicles’28 were subjects of comment by R. Malkio,29 while the ‘Belorith-tresses’,30 ‘Wood-ash’31 and ‘Cheeses’32 were subjects of comment by R. Malkiah. R. Papa said: Malkiah comments on ‘Our Mishnah’ and [other] Mishnahs,33 while R. Malkio comments on ‘Reported-pronouncements’:34 your mnemonic [for this] is, The Mishnahs35 are Malkatha36 [‘Queens’]. What is the difference between the two? The point of ‘Maids’.37 R. Bibi b. Abaye was particular even about [powdering] the scorings of the cupping instruments. R. Ashi observed [that this was going too far, as] wherever there is a wound the wound attests the [man's] purpose. MISHNAH. IF A NAZIRITE HAS BEEN DRINKING WINE38 ALL DAY, HE IS LIABLE ONCE ONLY; IF THEY SAID TO HIM, ‘DRINK NOT [WINE]!’ ‘DRINK NOT [WINE]!’ AND HE DRANK [EACH TIME], HE IS LIABLE ON EACH [INSTANCE]. IF HE HAS BEEN DEFILING HIMSELF FOR THE DEAD39 ALL DAY, HE IS LIABLE ONCE ONLY; IF THEY SAID TO HIM, ‘DEFILE NOT YOURSELF!’ DEFILE NOT YOURSELF!’ AND HE DID DEFILE HIMSELF [EACH TIME], HE IS LIABLE ON EACH [INSTANCE]. IF HE WAS SHAVING40 ALL DAY HE IS LIABLE ONCE ONLY; IF THEY SAID TO HIM, SHAVE NOT!’ ‘SHAVE NOT!’ AND HE DID’ SHAVE [EACH TIME], HE IS LIABLE ON EACH [INSTANCE]. IF ONE WEARS A GARB OF ‘LINSEY-WOOLSEY’41 ALL DAY, HE IS LIABLE ONCE ONLY; IF THEY SAID TO HIM, ‘DO NOT PUT IT ON!’ ‘DO NOT PUT IT ON!’ AND HE TAKES IT OFF AND PUTS IT ON, HE IS LIABLE ON EACH [INSTANCE]. explicitly forbidden. ritual-cleansing of the leper, when head, beard, etc. must be shaven. How? By a razor, as inferred from the ritual-purification of the Levites, Num. VIII, 7, where the razor is specified as the shaving instrument. The razor alone, therefore, is to be the forbidden or recommended instrument, authentically, v. Nazir 40b-41 but cf. Kid. 35b-36. again on the Festival day; but R. Malkio, citing R. Adda b. Ahabah, said it may be put aside at the time. v. Bezah, 28b. insist on her doing work with wool, on the ground that idleness is demoralising. On this R. Malkio's comment (as citing R. Adda b. Ahabah) is that the halachah follows R. Eliezer; Keth. 61b. (citing R. A. b. Ah.) that the follicles alone even without the hairs are sufficient indication of pubes; Nid. 52a. b. Ahabah. touching the top-tresses for these were usually consecrated to some deity. On this R. Malkiah commented (in the name of his Master) that he should begin to withdraw his hand at a distance of three fingers’ breadth, on each side. A.Z. 29a. On belorith v. Sanh. (Sonc. ed.) p. 114, n. 5. comments that they are forbidden because they are smeared over with lard. A.Z. 35b. V. A.Z. (Sonc. ed.) p. 145. 11, or to put on oneself, in Lev. XIX, 19.