25 Makkos Overview Final

[Music] Welcome to our overview of Marus. With this maka, the gammer continues to discuss the subject of judgment and punishment of criminal matters by bez. This small maka consists of just three pacim with each parrot discussing a distinctively separate topic. The first parrot discusses the laws of Edith Sheer, witnesses who falsely testify to Bezdon, specifically Eden Zan. The second parrot discusses the laws of gullis, the punishment of exile imposed on someone who killed another person inadvertently. And the third and final parrot discusses malus the punishment of lashes one is given by basin for being most aim the param writes in reference to who testify in front of the and the judges should cross-examine the witnesses and when they come to the conclusion that they're lying about their brother and as Rash explains The Disha of this Pik is not referring to the Disha of the first set of Adam who testified. They already went through a earlier but rather the Tyra is referring to the second set of Adam who come later to testify against the first set of Adam by saying you meaning the first set of Adam were with us elsewhere on that day and therefore you could not possibly have heard or seen what actually happened. And as to the difference between regular Adesher and Adiden Zman is that Adisher testify falsely about the event whether the event happened or not. While Adam testify against the actual witnesses themselves as the teaches and say complaining the two of you could not have been witnesses to the event since you were elsewhere with us at that time about such a scenario the writes it is a mit to do to them in other to punish these with the same punishment they conspired to punish the defendant. So now if this was a typical case where we have two conflicting sets of aid and best is unable to determine which set is telling the truth the would be that they're both simply dismissed. However, in the case of Azama, the Torah teaches that the second set of Adamim are to be believed. And the first set of are not only disqualified, but are given the same punishment they had intended to cause the defendant. As the Ty writes, "And you shall do to them that which they intended to do to their brother, the defendant." And the general rule with a few minor exceptions are if they intended for the defendant to pay money, they will now have to pay that amount to the defendant. If they intended for the defendant to receive malus, they would now receive malus. And if they intended for the defendant to receive the death penalty, they will now receive the same death penalty with a few minor exceptions. Our actually begins by focusing on these exceptions. Z. How are witnesses punished for being Z when they cannot be given the same punishment they intended to inflict on the defendant? And the mission goes on to list certain cases where for various reasons the exact same punishment is not applicable. Later in the pericur discusses other unique regarding z as well as in general only if the haz took place after the court handed down its final verdict but not if the second set of adim came during the trial itself. In other words, if the adamim testified during the deliberations and before the final verdict, the first set of adim are not put to death. Another very unique denab is asi teaches the only time that Adam would actually be killed by basin for falsely testifying is if the defendant was not yet killed on account of their false their false testimony. However, if the second set of adim came after the defendant was already put to death then the ad are not put to death. A general rule that applies to all the writes famously asks. If the threshold to create a valid set of is two witnesses, then of course three witnesses would also be good. The Torah is teaching us is that a set of three witnesses is no better or stronger or more believable than a set of two witnesses. So in other words, just as a group of three witnesses is obviously believed to render a smaller group of two into Z. So to Adam comprised of two witnesses can make a larger group of three or even more witnesses into Adam Z. As the mission goes on to teach, just as a group of a 100 witnesses are called to a group of two witnesses are also called. In other words, just because one set of Adam is comprised of a larger group of people does not make their adis any more believable in Basin than a set of Adam comprised of just two witnesses. With the second parag begins to discuss the punishment of gullis exile in parish the Torah writes if one strikes a man intentionally and he dies he shall be put to death. However if he had no intention of killing the other man but yet Hashem caused that man to die by his hand. Hashem says, "I will provide for you a designated place to which you can flee and where you will receive atonement as well as be protected from anyone wishing to harm you in revenge." This designated place is called an ear miklot. So by forcing an unintentional killer to go into gullis, the ty is in a sense accomplishing a dual purpose. First is exile where the killer is punished and that he must leave his home and go into exile, go live in a strange city away from family and friends. And the other purpose is to protect him from the Ladam eventful relative. For so long as the unintentional killer moves out and stays in any of the six cities designated as Orilet, the Ladam may not touch him. However, should he wander outside of the air mikl. At any point in time, he would put his life in danger of being killed by the goadam who was permitted to avenge the death of his relative. As the says, Goodbye. Only someone who was a true shyik and killed unintentionally is subject to gullis. However, if the killer was a car of lenus where the killer's action was not at all expected to harm anyone, he's not held responsible and does not require any punishment. And also the goyam may not take revenge by killing him. On the other end of the spectrum, if the killer was a shuggy curve mason, he did a dangerous act without taking proper precautions and it led to someone's death, his sin is too severe to be atoned for by just galis. Rather, his punishment is left in the hands of Hashem. And in this case, the goadam may avenge the killer even if the killer runs to an ear miklet. Once he's subject to gullis, he must remain there as long as the kanga is alive. Once the kangalo died, the killer was free to leave the mikllet and return to his home and he no longer needed to fear retribution from the guadam since the guadam was no longer permitted to avenge the death of his relative. The third and final peric discusses the punishment of malus of lashes. The 613 mitz are divided into two categories. Mitsay of which there are 248 such as the mitz to blow the or eating mat and mits of which there are 365 such as the prohibition to eat non-cor writes in a reference to one who was judged by basin to have violated and it will be that the wicked one meaning the one who is liable to lashes the judge shall cast him down and strike him according to his wickedness by a specific count. He shall receive 40 lashes, but no more. As must be careful not to go above that count, lest he strike him an additional blow beyond these 40 and your brother will be degraded before your eyes. The next PK states, you should not muzzle an ox while it is threshing. Now, while on the surface, this pix seems to be out of place. However, teaches that that by juxtaposing this alongside the laws of Malcus, this Pik is teaching that malus is only given for that are similar to the of only for a loy but not for only transgress a negative commandment such as not to muzzle your ox while threshing but not for not fulfilling a mitz obligation and only for a love where the love involves a physical action such as applying the mus onto the animal. However, where the love can be transgressed even while not doing any action, he does not get malus. Also, we do not give malus for a transgression that can be undone by fulfilling an attached positive commandment such as if one stole an item from his neighbor. Rather than being punished with malus, he's commanded to return the stolen item. And also he does not receive malus for a shenan las if in addition to being obligated to receive malus. One is also subject to receiving the death penalty he does not receive malus. This is learned out from the of malus as a punishment is indeed a harsh punishment as we see how the garra and goes into the great and harsh detail. Nevertheless, the Gomorrah also teaches how the mala's punishment was made out with great compassion, being extremely careful that the person be evaluated as to how much punishment he's able to withstand, be it physically and also emotionally. If he is deemed too weak physically to withstand the full complement of 39 lashes, the amount is reduced to the amount he could withstand. And also if the person suffers great humiliation while receiving the lashes such as soiling himself during the proceedings he's immediately dismissed on account of his being humiliated as the Torah writes that throughout the process you must remember that the one who is being punished is indeed your brother and that once he has received atonement through Malis he's to be treated by everyone as an equal as a brother and closes out with two beautiful stories. about how Riyako with his great insight consoled his colleagues as they visited and observed the bitter side of the Ba Mdash which lay in ruins. And after consoles them, they answer with these famous words. We should indeed be to be consoled by experiencing the gurishes along with rebuilding mdash of remain. [Music]