Makkot 23a — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: He binds him: he binds both his hands to the post, this way and that way, on the two sides of the post, and the attendant of the synagogue holds his garments; if they are torn, they are torn.

And we raised an objection concerning it:

What is the reason?

And the Gemara explains:

Because

the one who is flogged must be

degraded,

shamed, as it is written in the passage concerning flogging: “And your brother shall be degraded before your eyes” [there, 25:3].

Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: From where

do we learn

concerning the strap

with which they flog,

that it

must be made of leather

of a calf?

Because

it is written [Deuteronomy 25:3]

“Forty shall he strike him.” And

juxtaposed to it is

in that passage, in the verse after it,

“You shall not muzzle an ox while it threshes,”

and from the juxtaposition of the verses we learn that he administers the flogging with a strap of a young ox—that is, a calf.

And since the Gemara brought here a teaching of Rav Sheshet in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, who derived it from the juxtaposition of verses, the Gemara brings additional teachings derived from the juxtaposition of verses.

And Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: From where

do we learn

concerning a yevama who fell

for levirate marriage

before

a levir who is

afflicted with boils, that she is not muzzled,

that the court does not silence her claims when she claims that she does not wish to enter levirate marriage with him, but rather hears her words, and compels him, and he performs halitza for her?

Because

it is written, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it threshes,” and juxtaposed to it is

in the verse after it, the passage of levirate marriage, in which it is written

“When brothers dwell together,” and so forth.

And from the juxtaposition of the verses we learn that just as one may not muzzle the mouth of an animal at the time it threshes grain, so one may not muzzle the mouth of the yevama who claims that she does not wish to enter levirate marriage with one afflicted with boils.

And Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: Whoever treats the Festivals contemptuously,

by doing work during the intermediate days of the Festival, this is considered

as though he worships idolatry.

For it is written [Exodus 34:17]

“You shall not make for yourself molten gods,” and

juxtaposed to it is

in the verse after it

“The

Festival of Matzot you shall observe.”

And from the latter verse we learn in tractate Chagigah [18a] the prohibition against doing work during the intermediate days of the Festival. And since the verse “Molten gods” is stated adjacent to it, we learn from here that the prohibition against doing work during the intermediate days of the Festival is considered like the prohibition of idolatry.

And Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya:

1.

Whoever speaks evil speech,

2.

and whoever accepts evil speech,

who accepts it and believes it concerning his fellow, 3.

and whoever testifies false testimony—

it is fitting to cast him to the dogs!

For it is written [Exodus 22:30]

“To the dog you shall cast it,” and

juxtaposed to it is

in the verse after it

“You shall not bear a false report,”

that you shall not accept evil speech, and

it may also be read: “You shall not cause to bear,”

that you shall not cause others to accept evil speech, that is, you shall not tell it. And at the end of the verse “You shall not bear a false report” it is also said, “Do not place your hand with the wicked, to be a false witness,” which is the prohibition against testifying false testimony.

We learned in the Mishna:

And two straps

of a donkey

go up and down with it.

The tannai

taught in a baraita: The reason that they make the two additional straps from leather

of a donkey

is

as that Galilean expounded in the presence of Rav Hisda:

It is stated in Isaiah [1:3]

“An ox knows its owner, and a donkey its master’s trough. Israel does not know,

My people does not understand.”

The Holy One, blessed be He, said: Let the one who recognizes his master’s trough come

the donkey,

and exact punishment from the one who does not recognize his master’s trough

the transgressor.

We learned in the Mishna:

Its handle is one handbreadth, its width is one handbreadth, and its end

of the strap was

reaching to the opening of his belly.

Abaye said: Infer from this

that the length of the strap was adjusted,

for each and every one, according to his back we make it,

according to the size of the back of each individual defendant they would make the length of the strap.

Rava said to him: If so, they would have very many straps.

The court would have to possess many straps for every measurement and measurement.

Rather, Rava said: It has a loop

a knot, a loop

on it

on the strap, by means of which he can shorten and lengthen the strap, for

when he needs it, he ties it there

when he wishes to shorten the strap, he ties it there, and

when he needs it, he loosens it there

when he wishes to lengthen it, he loosens the knot.

We learned in the Mishna:

He flogs him one-third from in front of him and two portions from behind him:

And we raised an objection concerning it:

From where are these words?

From where do we learn that this is the form of flogging, in series of three, one from in front of him and two on his back?

Rav Kahana said: For the verse says [Deuteronomy 25:2]

“And the judge shall cast him down, and strike him before him according to his wickedness, by number.”

And they expound “before him according to his wickedness,” that he is flogged according to

one wickedness from in front of him, and “by number” from behind him.

And since the smallest number that is counted is two, therefore he is flogged according to

two wickednesses from behind him.

We learned in the Mishna:

They do not flog him, and so forth:

Rav Hisda said that Rabbi Yohanan said: From where

do we learn

concerning the strap

with which they flog

that it

must be

doubled?

As it is stated: “And he shall cast him down.”

Do not read “and he shall cast him down,” but rather “and he shall double him.”

As it is stated, “And he shall cast him down.” Do not read “and he shall cast him down,” but “and he shall double him.”

And we object:

But it is needed for him to expound “and he shall cast him down”

for its own matter,

that he must cast down the defendant in such a manner that he is inclined while he is flogged.

And we answer: If it were written only in order to derive from it that the defendant must be inclined,

then let the verse write “he shall incline him”; what is the meaning of “he shall cast him down”?

Why was it written in this formulation?

Infer from this

that they expound from it

two

explications: both that the defendant must be inclined and that the strap must be doubled.

We learned in the Mishna:

The one who strikes strikes with his hand:

The Sages taught: They appoint as attendants

to flog

only those weak in strength and abundant in understanding,

Rabbi Yehuda says: Even those weak in understanding and abundant in strength.

For there is no concern about this.

Rava said: The position of Rabbi Yehuda is reasonable. For it is written

there in the passage concerning flogging

“He shall not add, lest he add

to strike him.”

Granted, if you say

that the attendants who flog are

weak in understanding, this is why it was necessary to warn them.

But if you say

that they were

abundant in understanding, who needs to warn them

about this?

And the Rabbis,

who disagree with Rabbi Yehuda, hold:

One admonishes only one who is already admonished

that the Torah warns only one who is careful.

The tannai

taught in a baraita:

When he

the attendant

raises

the strap in order to flog,

he raises it with both hands [A0168]]so that he raises it more.

—the attendant—

, and when he

lowers and

strikes, he strikes with one hand, so that [A0172]]its force should come from him [A0173]]so that it should come from his wrist

so that he can raise it higher,

in order to raise it as high as possible,

so that the blow should come with great force.

lowers it and

strikes, he strikes with one hand, so that

it does not derive its force from him

but comes from the force of the strap,

so that the blow comes with great force.

We learned in the Mishna:

And the reader reads, and so forth:

The Sages taught

in a baraita:

The greatest of the judges reads

the verses that are read at the time of the flogging.

And

the second judge counts

the lashes,

and

the

third judge says

to the attendant for each and every blow:

Strike him!

When

they assessed the defendant as fit for

many blows,

that he can receive many lashes,

he lengthens

the reader’s recitation, so that he should not finish before they finish flogging him.

And

when

they assessed the defendant as fit for

few blows,

for example, they assessed him at fewer than twenty ,

he shortens

the reader’s recitation, so that he can finish at the time they finish flogging him.

And we object:

But we learned

in our Mishna that when he finishes,

he returns to the beginning of the reading.

And we answer:

It is a mitzva to make it exact,

that the reader should make it exact so as to finish together with the one who strikes.

And if he did not make it exact,

and the reader finished before the one who strikes finished,

he returns to the beginning of the reading.

The Sages taught

in a baraita: It is written in the Torah: “

He shall not add, lest he add to strike him beyond these

a great blow.”

The verse teaches that there is a prohibition against adding to the lashes due to him.

I have only

to learn from here

but

the prohibition against adding

a great blow

a strong blow; but to add

a small blow

a weak blow,

from where

is it prohibited?

The verse says: “He shall not add,”

in any event, even a small blow.

If so, what does the verse come to teach by saying “a great blow”?

It taught concerning the first lashes,

which he must receive according to the basic law,

that they are a great blow

which he may strike with all his strength.

We learned in the Mishna:

If he became soiled, and so forth:

The Sages taught

in a baraita:

Both the man and the woman

are released from flogging specifically if they became soiled

with feces, and not

if they became soiled

with water, the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yehuda says: The man

is released specifically if he became soiled

with feces, and the woman

is released even if she became soiled only

with water.

And the Sages say: Both the man and the woman

are released,

whether

they became soiled

with feces,

and

whether

they became soiled

with water.

And we object:

But it was taught

in a baraita:

Rabbi Yehuda says: Both the man and the woman, with feces,

which implies that Rabbi Yehuda holds that a woman too is released only if she became soiled with feces!

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:

The intention of the baraita is to say that according to Rabbi Yehuda

both of them,

both the man and the woman,

are equal

when they became soiled

with feces,

for both are exempt. But when they became soiled with water, there is a difference between the man and the woman.

Samuel said: If it happened that they

bound him

to flog him, and he

ran

out of fear

from the court,

even if they merely raised the hand to strike him with the first blow,

, he is exempt

from flogging. Since he has already been degraded, and it is written in the passage concerning flogging, “And your brother shall be degraded,” and they expound: Since he has been degraded, he is your brother, for his sin has already been atoned.

The meitivi

from a baraita in which we learned:

He became degraded

he became soiled,

whether at the

first

raising,

when he raises his hand to strike him the first time,

or at the

second

raising,

after he has already struck him, ,

if he became soiled during that raising because of fear,

they release him,

since he has already been degraded.

And if the

strap was severed

—if this occurred

at the

second

raising,

when he had already struck him one blow,

they release him,

for he was already degraded through that blow with which he struck him.

And if at the

first

raising the strap was severed before he struck him,

they do not release him,

for this is not “he became degraded.”

And we object:

Why?

If the strap was severed before they flogged him, why is he not released?

Let him be like one who ran

from the court, who is released!

And we answer:

There, he ran

and was disgraced through this flight.

Here, he did not run.

The Sages taught

in a baraita:

They assessed him

that

when he is flogged he will become degraded

when they flog him, he will immediately become soiled with feces,

they release him.

Since it is written, “Lest he add, and he be degraded,” they do not give him a blow through which he will immediately become degraded.

But if they assessed him that he would not become soiled until after the flogging, but only

when he leaves the court he will become degraded,

the law is that

they flog him.

And not only that, but even if he became degraded at the outset

before they began flogging him,

they flog him.

As it is stated: “And he shall strike him

and so forth, and he shall be degraded,” and not one who has already been degraded in the court

before he struck him.

Mishna:

All those liable for excision who

witnesses warned them concerning a prohibition for which there is a punishment of excision, and

were flogged

in court,

are released

from

the hands of their excision

and the Heavenly Court no longer exacts payment from them.

were flogged

As it is stated: “And your brother shall be degraded before your eyes”; once he has been flogged, he is like your brother,

the words of Rabbi Hananiah ben Gamliel.

from

And Rabbi Hananiah ben Gamliel said: If one who commits one transgression forfeits his life on account of it,

for it is possible that he will die through the blows,

one who performs one mitzva, all the more so that his life should be given to him,

that they should add to his life.

For the measure of goodness is greater than the measure of punishment by five hundred times. For with the measure of punishment it is written [Exodus 20], “Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generations,” while with the measure of goodness it is written [there], “Doing kindness to thousands.” And the Aramaic translation explained: to thousands of generations. If so, four generations correspond to two thousand generations

for the minimum of the plural “generations” is two; this is one five-hundredth.

then one who performs a single mitzva,

how much more so will his life be granted to him,

Rabbi Shimon says: It is learned from its place.

From those liable for excision we learn this matter: that even one who sits and does not commit a transgression merits a reward equivalent to the punishment for the transgression. As it is stated concerning forbidden sexual relations: “For everyone who does any of all these abominations and the souls who do them shall be cut off,” and so forth. This shows that the Torah makes one who fails in them liable for excision,

and it says

the verse before the verses concerning forbidden sexual relations:

As it is stated

in the passage concerning forbidden sexual relations: “For anyone who performs any of all these abominations,

the souls that perform them shall be cut off,” and so on. [Leviticus 18:29]

The verse thus imposes karet upon one who succumbs to these transgressions,

and the verse says

before the passages concerning forbidden sexual relations: