Monday, November 26, 2007

Beat him Until he Dies

The Gemora (Kesuvos 86a) cites a braisa: When does one receive forty lashes for violating a Biblical law? That is only in regard to a negative commandment; however, with respect to a positive commandment, for example – if we tell someone, “Make a sukkah” and he refuses, or we tell him, “Make a lulav,” and he refuses, we beat him until his soul departs.

The question is asked: Why is there permission to kill one who is not interested in fulfilling a positive commandment; the punishment for not fulfilling a positive commandment is not death?

Reb Tuvia Lisitzin, in his sefer Kerem Tuvia answers that permission is granted to beat him until his death because by not fulfilling a positive commandment (and especially, when people are attempting to persuade him, and he, nevertheless, refuses), this is tantamount to desecrating the name of Hashem.

This can also explain why Pinchas was allowed to kill the Midyanis woman. He was able to kill Zimri because the halacha is that one who cohabits with an idolater, the zealots are permitted to kill him. However, why was he allowed to kill the Midyanis woman; she does not have any prohibition of cohabiting with a Jew? The answer is: It was due to her that a tremendous desecration of Hashem’s name occurred; for this, she was deserving to die.

The Chasam Sofer writes that we are not permitted to strike him with a blow that will kill him; permission is granted to hit him time after time until he eventually agrees to fulfill the mitzvah. When do we stop beating him? When he dies from the beatings.

The Chinuch writes that one who does not repay a debt has violated a negative commandment in the Torah. The Minchas Chinuch asks: If so, why does our Gemora inquire if a person who refuses to repay a debt should be compelled to do so; of course, we should force him, just like any other negative commandment?

12 comments:

lomeid said...

The Shitah says that it means that you should him until he is "weakened."

Beginner said...

Rabbi, why can't he use someone else's sukkah?

Avromi said...

Rabbi Braun, in his sefer proves from your question that the Gemora is discussing a case that is on Sukkos and he is eating in his house and he does not want to go to the sukkah; he then discusses if you are allowed to pasken or makin on Shabbos and Yom Tov.

Anonymous said...

The mitzvah to pay back starts now does not need to be now

Anonymous said...

Someone in our shiur today asked a great question what is the difference between gorem and garmi?the maggid shiur answered ill give you a kuntress dgarmi and if you can explain it i would love to hear it is impractical to answer that question ion a daf yomi shiur but i would love for you to address the question since it will continuously come up throughout Shas here is a guy who did a great job in his blog on Baba Kama
http://iyunim.blogspot.com/search/label/Garmi

Anonymous said...

Great memories of shiurim in the past each time it come up explain according to one shita and in the end you will have the daf notes Kuntress Dgarmi?[hopeful thinking out loud?;)]

Avromi said...

What are you referring to when you say "great memories of the past"? I do wish I would have the time though for such a kuntres.

Anonymous said...

Iyun shiurim on gramah and garmi

Beginner said...

Who writes that?

Pashtan said...

A Maggid shiur told me that this Gemora is discussing eating in a sukkah, not building one!

ben said...

I suggested that this is why Moshe was chayav misah for not circumcising his son. It was a chilul HaShem, especially for someone from Shevet Levi not to perform bris milah

Avromi said...

shkoyach! good tzu shtel.