Makkot 23a (כג.) — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: He binds him: he binds both his hands to the pillar, one hand on either side of the pillar, and the synagogue attendant grips his garments; if they tear, they tear.

And we raised a difficulty concerning this:

What is the reason?

And the Gemara explains:

Because

the one who is flogged must be

disgraced,

humiliated, as it is written in the passage concerning flogging: “And your brother shall be degraded before your eyes” [Deuteronomy 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

from a calf?

Because

it is written [Deuteronomy 25:3]

“Forty shall he strike him.”

And adjacent to it

in the same passage, in the following verse, is

“You shall not muzzle an ox while it is threshing,”

and from the adjacency of the verses we learn that the flogging is administered with a strap made from an ox’s young—that is, a calf.

Since the Gemara cited here Rav Sheshet’s teaching in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, which he derived from the adjacency of verses, the Gemara cites additional teachings derived from the adjacency 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 yavam who is

afflicted with boils, that she is not muzzled,

that the court does not silence her arguments when she claims that she does not wish to enter into levirate marriage with him; rather, they listen to her words, compel him, and he performs chalitza with her.

Because

it is written, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is threshing,” and adjacent to it

in the following verse is the passage concerning levirate marriage, in which it is written

“When brothers dwell together,” and so on.

And from the adjacency of the verses we learn that just as one may not muzzle an animal’s mouth while it threshes grain, so one may not muzzle the mouth of a yevama who claims that she does not wish to enter into levirate marriage with a man afflicted with boils.

And Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: Anyone who demeans the Festivals,

by performing labor during Chol HaMoed, is considered

as though he worships idols.

As it is written [Exodus 34:17]

“You shall not make molten gods for yourself,”

and adjacent to it

in the following verse is

“The

Festival of Matzot you shall observe.”

And from the latter verse we learn in tractate Chagiga [18a] the prohibition against performing labor during Chol HaMoed. Since the verse “You shall not make molten gods” is adjacent to it, we learn from here that the prohibition against performing labor during Chol HaMoed is considered equivalent to the prohibition against idolatry.

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

a.

Anyone who speaks evil speech,

b.

and anyone who accepts evil speech,

who accepts it and believes it concerning another person, c.

and anyone who gives false testimony—

it is fitting to cast him to the dogs!

As it is written [Exodus 22:30]

“You shall cast it to the dog,”

and adjacent to it

in the following verse is

“You shall not bear a false report,”

meaning that you shall not accept evil speech, and

it may also be read, “You shall not cause others to accept,”

meaning that you shall not cause others to accept evil speech—that is, you shall not relate it. And at the end of the verse “You shall not bear a false report” it is also stated: “Do not join hands with the wicked to be a malicious witness,” which is the prohibition against giving false testimony.

We learned in the Mishna:

And two straps

made

of donkey hide rise and descend with it.

The tanna

taught in a beraita: The reason that the two additional straps are made of leather

of a donkey

is

as that Galilean expounded before Rav Chisda:

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 contemplate.”

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 was one handbreadth, its width was one handbreadth, and its end

of the strap

reached to the opening of his abdomen.

Abaye said: Infer from this

that the length of the strap was adjusted:

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

according to the size of each person’s back they fashioned the strap’s length.

Rava said to him: If so, there would be an enormous number of straps.

The court would need to have many straps, one for every measurement.

Rather, Rava said: It has a loop

—a knot or a loop—

on it,

with which one can shorten or lengthen the strap;

when he wishes, he ties it there

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

and when he wishes, he loosens it

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

We learned in the Mishna:

He is flogged one-third in front of him and two portions behind him:

And we raised a difficulty concerning this:

From where are these matters

learned—that this is the arrangement of flogging, in sets of three, one in front of him and two on his back?

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

“

The judge shall cast him down, and he shall strike him before him according to his wickedness, by number.”

And we expound “before him according to his wickedness” to mean that he is flogged according to

one act of wickedness in front of him,

and “by number” refers to behind him.

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

two acts of wickedness behind him.

We learned in the Mishna:

They do not flog him, and so on:

Rav Chisda said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: From where

do we learn

concerning the strap

with which they flog,

that it

must be

folded?

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:

And we challenge this:

But it is needed

to expound “and he shall cast him down”

for its own meaning,

namely, that the person being flogged must be cast down so that he is bent over while he is flogged.

And we answer: If the verse had been written only to teach that the person must be bent over,

then let the verse write, “he shall bend him”; why does it say, “he shall cast him down”?

Why was it written in this manner?

Infer from this

that we derive

two

teachings from it: both that the person being flogged must be bent over and that the strap must be folded.

We learned in the Mishna:

The one who strikes strikes with his hand:

The Sages taught: They appoint as attendants

to administer flogging

only

those who are weak in strength and abundant in understanding.

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

For there is no concern in this regard.

Rava said: The opinion of Rabbi Yehuda is more logical. As it is written

there in the passage concerning flogging:

“He shall not add, lest he add

to striking him.”

Granted, if you say

that the attendants administering the flogging are

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

—it is understandable why the Torah had to warn them about this.

But if you say

that they were

abundant in understanding, who would need to caution them

about it?

And the Rabbis,

who disagree with Rabbi Yehuda, maintain:

One cautions only someone who is already cautious

—the Torah warns only someone who is careful.

The tanna

taught in a beraita:

When he

—the attendant—

raises

the strap in order to flog,

he raises it with both hands

so that he can raise it higher,

in order to raise it as high as possible,

, and when he

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 on:

The Sages taught

in a beraita:

The greatest of the judges reads

the verses that are read during 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

the person being flogged has been assessed as capable of receiving

many blows,

meaning that he can withstand many lashes, the reader

lengthens

his melodious reading, so that he will not finish before the flogging is completed.

And

when

the person being flogged has been assessed as capable of receiving

few blows,

for example, when he was assessed as capable of receiving fewer than twenty , the reader

shortens

his reading, so that he can finish when the flogging is completed.

And we challenge this:

But did we not learn

in our Mishna that when he finishes,

he returns to the beginning of the reading?

And we answer:

It is a mitzva to be precise,

so that the reader should precisely finish together with the one administering the blows.

And if he was not precise,

and the reader finished before the flogging was completed,

he returns to the beginning of the reading.

The Sages taught

in a beraita: The Torah states: “

Do not add, lest he add to striking him

a greater blow.”

The verse teaches that it is forbidden to add to the lashes that are due to him.

I have derived

from here

only

the prohibition against adding

a greater blow

—a powerful blow—but what is the source for the prohibition against adding

a lesser blow

—a weak blow—

from where

is it forbidden?

The verse states, “Do not add,”

in any event, even a lesser blow.

If so, what is the meaning of the phrase “a greater blow”?

It teaches concerning the first lashes,

which he must receive as a matter of strict law,

that they are a greater blow

and may be administered with all one’s strength.

We learned in the Mishna:

If he soiled himself, and so on:

The Sages taught

in a beraita:

Both a man and a woman

are released from flogging only if they soiled themselves

with excrement, and not

if they soiled themselves

with water, this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yehuda says: A man

is released only if he soiled himself

with excrement, but a woman

is released even if she soiled herself only

with water.

And the Sages say: Both a man and a woman

are released,

whether

they soiled themselves

with excrement,

or

whether

they soiled themselves

with water.

And we challenge this:

But it was taught

in a beraita:

Rabbi Yehuda says: Both a man and a woman, with excrement,

which indicates that Rabbi Yehuda maintains that a woman too is released only if she soiled herself with excrement!

Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said:

The intention of the beraita is to say that according to Rabbi Yehuda,

both of them,

both the man and the woman,

are equal

when they have soiled themselves

with excrement,

as both are exempt. But when they have soiled themselves with water, there is a distinction between the man and the woman.

Shmuel said: If it happened that

he

was bound

in order to flog him,

and he ran

out of fear

from the court,

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

, he is exempt

from flogging. Since he has already been disgraced, and the passage concerning flogging states, “And your brother shall be degraded,” we expound: Once he has been degraded, he is your brother, for his sin has already been atoned for.

Meytivi

from a beraita that we learned:

If he was disgraced

—he soiled himself—

whether at

the

first

raising, when the attendant raises his hand to strike him for the first time,

or at

the

second

raising, after he has already struck him—

if he soiled himself at that raising out of fear,

they release him,

since he has already been disgraced.

And if

the

at the

strap broke—if this occurred

at the

second

raising,

when

he had already received one blow,

they release him,

since he was already disgraced by that blow.

And if

at the

raising

first

the strap broke before he was struck,

they do not release him,

for this is not “disgrace.”

And we challenge this:

Why

if the strap broke before he was flogged 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 by this flight.

Here, he did not run.

The Sages taught

in a beraita:

They assessed him

—the physicians assessed—that

when he is flogged he will be disgraced

—as soon as he is flogged, he will soil himself—

they release him.

Since it is written, “Lest he add, and he be disgraced,” they do not give him a blow that will immediately cause him to be disgraced.

But if they assessed him as not becoming disgraced until after the flogging, but only

when he leaves the court he will be disgraced,

the law is that

they flog him.

Moreover, even if he was disgraced at the outset

before they began flogging him,

they flog him.

As it is stated, “And he shall strike him

and so on,

and he shall be disgraced,” and not that he was already disgraced in the court

before he was struck.

Mishna:

All those liable for karet who

were warned by witnesses concerning a prohibition carrying the punishment of karet and

were flogged

in court

are released

from

their liability to karet

and the Heavenly Court no longer exacts punishment from them.

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

the statement of Rabbi Chananya ben Gamliel.

And Rabbi Chananya ben Gamliel said: If one who commits a single transgression forfeits his life for it,

for he may die as a result of the blows,

then one who performs a single mitzva,

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

meaning that his life will be extended.

For the measure of good is five hundred times greater than the measure of punishment. Regarding 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,” whereas regarding the measure of good it is written there: “Showing kindness to thousands.” The Targum explains this as “to thousands of generations.” Thus, four generations correspond to two thousand generations —for the minimum plural of “generations” is two—meaning one five-hundredth.

Rabbi Shimon says: He learns it from its context.

We learn this matter from those liable for karet: even one who merely refrains from committing a transgression merits a reward equivalent to the punishment for the transgression.

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: