1)

WHO RECEIVES THE PAYMENTS? (cont.)

(a)

(Gemara) Question: We already learned this!

1.

(Mishnah): A seducer pays three things and a rapist pays four. A seducer pays embarrassment, blemish and fine, and a rapist also pays for pain.

(b)

Answer #1: Our Mishnah teaches that the payments go to the father.

(c)

Objection: This is obvious, since a seducer pays;

1.

If the payments were to her, why would he pay? She consented!

(d)

Answer #2: Our Mishnah teaches the argument of R. Shimon and Chachamim when the father dies after the trial.

2)

AN ASHAM FOR A FALSE OATH

(a)

(Mishnah) Reuven claimed against Shimon 'You raped (or seduced) my daughter!'

1.

Shimon: I didn't!

2.

Reuven: I impose an oath on you!

3.

Shimon: Amen (I accept the oath).

(b)

Later, Shimon admitted that he swore falsely. He is liable (to pay the principal and a Chomesh (an added fifth) and to offer an Asham Gezeilos, the Korban for a false oath to deny a debt);

(c)

R. Shimon exempts, since one does not pay a fine due to his admission.

1.

Chachamim: Even so, he pays embarrassment and blemish due to his admission.

(d)

Question (Abaye): Would R. Shimon obligate (a Chomesh and an Asham) in the following case?

1.

Reuven: You raped (or seduced) my daughter. I took you to trial, and you were obligated to pay!

2.

Shimon: That is all false!

3.

Reuven: I impose an oath on you!

4.

Shimon: Amen.

5.

Since there already was a trial, the payment is like regular Mamon (so he is liable);

i.

Or, do we still consider it like a fine (so he pays only the principal)?

(e)

Answer (Rabah): It is like Mamon.

(f)

Question (Abaye - Beraisa - R. Shimon): Reuven claimed 'You raped (or seduced) my daughter', or 'your ox killed my slave';

1.

Shimon: That is false!

2.

A slave (to his master): You knocked out my tooth or blinded my eye!

3.

His master: I didn't!

4.

Shimon or the master swore falsely and later admitted.

5.

Suggestion: Perhaps he is liable (to bring an Asham)!

6.

Rejection: "He denied a deposit, loan or theft... (which are Mamon)" - this excludes these cases, which are fines.

42b----------------------------------------42b

7.

Suggestion: The case was already brought to trial.

(g)

Answer (Rabah): No, it was not.

(h)

Question: Since in the Reisha the case already went to trial, surely the same applies to the Seifa!

1.

(Reisha) Question: We know (that one adds a Chomesh and brings an Asham for a false oath) about matters for which one pays (only) the principal. What is the source for a thief who pays double, four or five times the value, a rapist or seducer, and Motzi Shem Ra?

2.

Answer: We learn from the repetition "u'Mo'alah Ma'al".

3.

Question: What is the case?

i.

If there was not yet a trial, there is no obligation to pay double!

4.

Answer: Rather, the case went to trial.

5.

Also in the Seifa, the case went to trial

(i)

Answer #1 (Rabah): The entire Beraisa is R. Shimon. The Reisha is after trial and the Seifa is before trial.

(j)

Rabah: This is a poor answer. If so, 'R. Shimon says' should appear at the beginning or end of the Beraisa (and not in the middle)! I will give you a better answer!

(k)

Answer #2 (Rabah): The entire Beraisa is after trial. The Reisha is Chachamim and the Seifa is R. Shimon. I agree that R. Shimon exempts from an Asham due to "He denied a deposit..."

1.

I said that it is Mamon to teach that the father bequeaths it to his sons.

(l)

Question (Mishnah - R. Shimon): If she did not collect until the father died, she keeps the payments!

1.

If it is like money to bequeath to the sons, her brothers should get the money!

3)

THE QUESTION IS FINALLY ANSWERED

(a)

Rava: Rabah and Rav Yosef could not answer this for 22 years. It was only answered when (Rabah died and) Rav Yosef became head of the Yeshivah.

(b)

Answer (Rav Yosef): The fine of a rapist is different, since the Torah said "v'Nasan (he will give) to the father" - it is not considered the father's until it is given.

1.

Rabah said that other fines are Mamon to teach that the sons inherit them.

(c)

Question #1: In the Parashah of a slave killed by an animal it says "Yiten (he will give)." Does the master merit it only after it is paid?!

(d)

Answer: We only learn from the word "v'Nasan", not from "Yiten".

(e)

Question #2: The Beraisa says that we learn from "He denied..." It should say that we learn from "v'Nasan"!

(f)

Answer (Rava): "He denied..." teaches about (the exemption from an Asham) when after the trial she became a Bogeres and died. Her father inherits the fine from her. (Therefore, we cannot learn this from "v'Nasan l'Aviha".)

(g)

Question (Beraisa): ... This excludes these cases, which are fines.

1.

If it discusses after the trial, they are Mamon!

(h)

Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): It means, this excludes these cases which were originally fines.

(i)

Question (Beraisa): R. Shimon exempts (from the Asham) since he does not pay due to his admission.

1.

This applies only before the trial. After the trial he pays due to his admission, so he should bring an Asham!

(j)

Answer: R. Shimon addresses the Chachamim according to their reasoning:

1.

R. Shimon: I hold that even after the trial, the Torah exempts from "He denied..." You should agree with me that before the trial the claim is only a fine, and one who admits to a fine is exempt (so no Asham is brought)!

2.

Chachamim say that the father demands payment for embarrassment and blemish (Mamon).

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF