Makkot 15

Chapter 15

א והאמר רב יצחק בר' יוסף אמר רבי יוחנן רבי ורבי יהודה בן רועץ וב"ש ור"ש ור"ע כולהו סבירי להו יש אם למקרא היינו דקאמר להו ועוד
1 But it was stated: Rav Yitzhak bar Yoseph said [in the name of] Rabbi Yohanan: Rebi, and Rabbi Yehudah ben Roetz, and the School of Shammai, and Rabbi Shimon, and Rabbi Akiva, all of them hold that the pronunciation [how we actually read the word] is what matters! This is why Rebi said "and furthermore!" [He needed to give another reason because in general he does hold that pronunciation is what matters.]
ב אמר רב פפא מאן דשדא פיסא לדיקלא ואתר תמרי ואזול תמרי וקטול באנו למחלוקת דרבי ורבנן פשיטא מהו דתימא ככח כחו דמי קמ"ל
2 Rav Pappa said: One who threw a clod of dirt at a palm tree, and [the clod of dirt] knocked dates, and the dates fell and killed someone—[in this case] we have arrived at the disagreement between Rebi and the Sages! But this is obvious! Since you might have said that [the death in this instance is] like a case of secondary force, therefore this teaches you that this is not the case [and that this is a case where the death is a result of primary force, and therefore this case is parallel to the Mishnah].
ג אלא כח כחו לרבי היכי משכחת לה כגון דשדא פיסא ומחיה לגרמא ואזיל גרמא ומחיה לכבאסא ואתר תמרי ואזול תמרי וקטול:
3 However, where can we find a case where Rebi [would exempt someone from exile] in an instance of secondary force? This is like [a case where] someone threw a clod of dirt and it struck a twig and the twig then went and hit a cluster of dates and the dates then fell and killed.
ד <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> הזורק אבן לרה"ר והרג ה"ז גולה ר"א בן יעקב אומר אם מכשיצאתה האבן מידו הוציא הלה את ראשו וקבלה ה"ז פטור
4 Mishnah: The one who throws a stone into the public domain and killed [someone], behold, he is exiled. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: If, from when the stone left his hand, another person stuck out their head and received [the stone and was killed], behold, he is exempt [from exile].
ה זרק את האבן לחצרו והרג אם יש רשות לניזק ליכנס לשם גולה ואם לאו אינו גולה שנאמר (דברים יט, ה) ואשר יבא את רעהו ביער מה היער רשות לניזק ולמזיק ליכנס לשם אף כל רשות לניזק ולמזיק להכנס לשם יצא חצר בעל הבית שאין רשות לניזק (ולמזיק) ליכנס לשם
5 The one who threw a stone into his courtyard and he killed [someone], if there was permission for the victim to enter there, [the thrower] is exiled. And if [the victim does] not [have permission], he is not exiled. As it was said: “When a person comes upon his friend in a forest” (Deuteronomy 19:5). Just as in a forest it is permitted for the perpetrator and the victim to enter there [because it is public space], so too [the same rules apply in] any [place where it is] permitted for the perpetrator and the victim to enter there, except the courtyard [in which] the owner has not given permission to the victim (or the perpetrator) to enter there.
ו אבא שאול אומר מה חטבת עצים רשות אף כל רשות יצא האב המכה את בנו והרב הרודה את תלמידו ושליח ב"ד:
6 Abba Shaul says: Just as cutting wood is optional [for someone and therefore he should not be punished], so too, anything that is optional [should not receive punishment] except the father who strikes his son, the teacher who rebukes his student [through beating], and the messenger of the court [who gives punishments through lashings].
ז <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> לרה"ר מזיד הוא אמר רב שמואל בר יצחק בסותר את כותלו איבעי ליה לעיוני בסותר את כותלו בלילה בלילה נמי איבעי ליה לעיוני
7 Gemara: [The one who throws a stone] into the public domain is an intentional [sinner]! Rav Shmuel bar Yitzchak said: [Rather this is in a case when] he is taking down his wall. He should have been paying attention! [Rather this is in a case when] he is taking down his wall at night. At night also, he should have been paying attention!
ח בסותר את כותלו לאשפה האי אשפה ה"ד אי שכיחי בה רבים פושע הוא אי לא שכיחי בה רבים אנוס הוא
8 [Rather this is in a case when] he is taking down his wall towards the garbage heap. This garbage heap, what is the case? If it is common for many [people] to be in it [the garbage heap], he is [considered] a criminal. If it is not common for many [people] to be in it, it is [considered a situation of] one who had no choice [meaning that it was a freak accident or totally unexpected].
ט א"ר פפא לא צריכא אלא לאשפה העשויה ליפנות בה בלילה ואין עשויה ליפנות בה ביום ואיכא דמקרי ויתיב פושע לא הוי דהא אינה עשויה ליפנות בה ביום אונס נמי לא הוי דהא איכא דמקרי ויתיב:
9 Rav Papa said: This is only necessary to teach [a case of] a garbage heap that is regularly used [as a bathroom] at night, and not one that is regularly used during the day, because it is possible that someone will be sitting there, [therefore] he is not a [considered] a criminal. [In a case] that it is not regularly used during the day, it is also not [considered] totally unexpected, because it is possible that someone will be sitting there.
י רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר וכו': ת"ר (דברים יט, ה) ומצא פרט לממציא את עצמו מכאן אמר רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אם משיצתה האבן מידו הוציא הלה את ראשו וקבלה פטור
10 Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says, etc. Our Rabbis taught [in a baraita]: And “and found [his neighbor]” (Deuteronomy 19:5) excludes the one who places himself [in danger]. From here [it follows that] Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: If, from when the stone left his hand, another person stuck out their head and received [the stone and was killed], he is exempt [from exile].
יא למימרא דמצא מעיקרא משמע ורמינהי (ויקרא כה, כו) ומצא פרט למצוי שלא ימכור ברחוק ויגאול בקרוב ברעה ויגאול ביפה
11 Is that to say that “found” [means that the person] was already there from the outset? And pit them against each other [this baraita and the baraita that follows]: “And he found” (Leviticus 25:26) [This verse describes a case in which someone has a third party redeem a field because they do not have funds. If that person is trying to subvert the system and already has the money to redeem, he is not permitted to go through this process of including a third party] excludes [what was already] found, because he may not sell a far [field] and redeem it with [a field that is] close, [nor a field that is] bad and redeem it for a good [quality field].
יב אמר רבא הכא מענייניה דקרא והתם מענייניה דקרא התם מענייניה דקרא ומצא דומיא (ויקרא כה, כו) דוהשיגה ידו מה השיגה ידו מהשתא אף מצא נמי מהשתא הכא מענייניה דקרא ומצא דומיא דיער מה יער מידי דאיתיה מעיקרא אף ומצא נמי מידי דאיתיה מעיקרא:
12 Rava said: here, the verse [in the second baraita] is according to its context, and there, the verse [in the first baraita] is according to its context. There, according to the context of the verse, “he found” is the same as “he obtained it in his hand” (Leviticus 25:26). Just as he obtained it in his hand from now [meaning already in the past] so too, he also found from now [meaning already in the past]. Here, according to the context of the verse, “he found” is the same as the forest. Just as the forest something was there from the outset, so too, also [in the case of] “he found” something was there from the outset.
יג הזורק את האבן וכו': א"ל ההוא מרבנן לרבא ממאי דמחטבת עצים דרשות דלמא מחטבת עצים דסוכה ומחטבת עצים דמערכה ואפ"ה אמר רחמנא ליגלי א"ל כיון דאם מצא חטוב (אינו חוטב) לאו מצוה השתא נמי לאו מצוה
13 The one who throws the stone, etc. One of the rabbis said to Rava: From what [basis are we stating the case] that he is cutting wood because it is optional? Perhaps he is cutting wood because [it is for a] sukkah or cutting wood [for the altar] (which would be a requirement and not an option), and even this, Scripture said, he should be exiled [for doing something required]?! He (Rava) said to him: since he found it cut and he does not cut [it himself], it is not a mitzvah, also now [regarding cutting wood] is not a mitzvah.
יד איתיביה רבינא לרבא יצא האב המכה את בנו והרב הרודה את תלמידו ושליח ב"ד לימא כיון דאילו גמיר לאו מצוה השתא נמי לאו מצוה התם אע"ג דגמיר מצוה דכתיב (משלי כט, יז) יסר בנך ויניחך ויתן מעדנים לנפשך
14 Ravina challenges this to Rava: [this case] excludes the father who strikes his son, the teacher who rebukes his student, and the messenger of the court, lets say, that since [the child is already] learned, it is not a mitzvah [to strike his son], also now [regarding cutting wood] is not a mitzvah [and therefore not required]. There, even though he is learned, it is a mitzvah [to strike him], as it is written: ... “correct your son and he will please you. He will give delight to your soul.” (Proverbs 29:17).
טו הדר אמר רבא לאו מילתא היא דאמרי (דברים יט, ה) ואשר יבא את רעהו ביער (מה יער) דאי בעי עייל ואי בעי לא עייל ואי סלקא דעתך מצוה מי סגיא דלא עייל
15 Rava returned and said: "I said nothing! [This is what I should have said:] 'When he comes with his friend into a forest' (Deuteronomy 19:5). What [does it mean] 'forest'? If he goes or if he didn't go [i.e. it's an optional act]. And if you were to think it were a mitzvah, could he be sufficient [in meeting his obligation] if he didn't go?"
טז אמר ליה רב אדא בר אהבה לרבא כל היכא דכתיב אשר דאי בעי הוא אלא מעתה (במדבר יט, כ) ואיש אשר יטמא ולא יתחטא אי בעי מיטמא אי בעי לא מיטמא מת מצוה דלא סגי דלא מיטמא הכי נמי דפטור
16 Rav Ada bar Ahavah said to Rava: "Is every case where it's written 'when (asher)' an optional action? From this [reasoning], 'When (asher) anyone has become impure fails to purify himself [they will be cut off from their people]' (Numbers 19:20)—if he wants to [touch a corpse], he can be impure, and if he doesn't want to he isn't impure; and a mitzvah corpse (of an unknown stranger) where it is not possible that [the finder] would become impure—would he be exempt [from the penalty of entering the Sanctuary while impure]?"
יז שאני התם דאמר קרא
17 "That is different, since the verse says:
Previous ChapterNext Chapter