|(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
(a) We just learned from "Kol Cherem" to include even the less stringent Misos (she'Nitnu Shigegasan le'Kaparah) in the prohibition of accepting money to spare them from death. We only know from the Pasuk "ve'Lo Sikchu Kofer le'Nefesh Rotzei'ach", that if one killed with an upward stroke (where he has no Kaparah be'Shogeg), he cannot pay his way out, but perhaps if he killed him with a downward stroke (where he has a Kaparah be'Shogeg) he will indeed be permitted to do so.2)
(a) Rami bar Chama establishes the need to preclude from Misah and Mamon from "Kol Cherem", because from "ve'Lo Yihyeh Ason" we would only know to exempt someone who, for example, blinded someone's eye and killed him with the same stroke, but not when he blinded him with one stroke, and killed him simultaneously with the other hand. We reject Rami bar Chami's explanation however - on the basis of another Tana de'Bei Chizkiyah, which learns this from "Ayin Tachas Ayin" 've'Lo Ayin ve'Nefesh Tachas Ayin".3)
(a) According to Rebbi Yossi ha'G'lili, someone who rapes a girl who was betrothed but is now divorced, is Patur from K'nas. The author of the first Mishnah in the Perek, which obligates someone who rapes the wife of his brother or of his father's brother (who must be divorced or widowed, as we explained there) to pay K'nas - is Rebbi Akiva, in whose opinion, a girl who was betrothed and is now divorced is subject to K'nas, and the K'nas goes to her.4)
(a) We Darshen from the word ...1. ... "Na'arah" - 've'Lo Bogeres' (that a Bogeres is not subject to K'nas at all).(b) This D'rashah dispenses with the D'rashah that we just made to explain Rebbi Akiva - because we ought then to have made the same D'rashah from "Na'arah" and Besulah" (that a Bogeres and a Be'ulah are subject to K'nas and that the K'nas go to them).
(a) We have just used "Asher Lo Orasah" for a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' (so that a Na'arah who was betrothed and is now divorced remains subject to K'nas) according to Rebbi Akiva, and precluded a Be'ulah from the word "Besulah". We know not to do the opposite (to learn the same 'Gezeirah-Shavah' from "Besulah" "Besulah", so that a Be'ulah remains subject to K'nas), and to preclude a Na'arah who was betrothed and is now divorced from "Asher Lo Orasah" - because it is more logical to preclude a Be'ulah (whose body has undergone a change) from K'nas than an Arusah who is divorced (who remains physically as she was).6)
(a) We now have two opinions in Rebbi Akiva regarding the K'nas of an Arusah she'Nisgarshah. He holds ...7)1. ... in our Mishnah - that she is subject to K'nas, and that it goes to her.(b) His opinion in our Mishnah initially appears to be more sound than the one in the Beraisa - because he does not Darshen a Gezeirah-Shavah that clashes with the plain meaning of the Pasuk (which implies that the K'nas of an Arusah who is divorced goes to herself); whereas, in the Beraisa, that is precisely what the Gezeirah-Shavah is doing.
(a) We need a Pasuk for Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak's D'rashah, because, in spite of the fact that the man who raped her is already Chayav Misah - we would otherwise have thought that, precisely because K'nas is a Chidush, we would say 'Miktil u'Meshalem'.8)
(a) The Tana Kama of the Beraisa says 'K'nasah le'Avihah'. Yesh Omrim (Rebbi Nasan) says - 'K'nasah le'Atzmah'.9)
(a) Abaye learns from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "ve'Nasan la'Avi ha'Na'arah" - 've'Lo le'Avi Meisah' (that if the Na'arah died after having been raped, the rapist is Patur from paying K'nas.Next daf