DOES THE TORAH PUNISH FOR AVEIROS THAT DO NOT TAKE EFFECT?
Version #1 - Question (against Rava - Beraisa): If a Yisrael (raped a woman and) divorced her, he remarries her, and he is not lashed.
He should be lashed for acting contrary to Torah!
Version #1A (Rashi) Answer: No, the Isur is "Shalchah Kol Yamav," to permanently divorce her. (He did not do so, for he always has a Mitzvah to remarry her).
Version #1B (Tosfos) Answer: He is exempt because the Lav is Nitak l'Aseh. It is a Mitzvah to remarry her "Kol Yamav." (The one who asked thought that the Lav is not Nitak l'Aseh, for the Aseh to marry her precedes the Isur to divorce her.) (end of Version #2)
Counter-question: According to Abaye, why must it say "Kol Yamav"? Even without this, we would know that he is not lashed, for he did not accomplish anything, since he can (Gra, Bach - must) remarry her! (Likewise, every counter-question we will ask against Abaye/Rava is that without the verse we would know that he accomplished something/did not accomplish anything.)
Answer: Had it not said this, we would have thought that he is permitted but not obligated to remarry her. The verse obligates him.
Version #2 Question (against Abaye - Beraisa): If a Yisrael divorced Anusaso, he remarries her, and he is not lashed. If a Kohen did so, he is lashed.
We should say that he accomplished something, i.e. he need not remarry her! (We are thinking that the Isur is "l'Shalchah Kol Yamav," to permanently divorce her.)
Answer: The Torah teaches that there is a Mitzvah to remarry her "Kol Yamav."
Counter-question: According to Rava, why must it say "Kol Yamav"? Even without this, he did not accomplish anything, and must remarry her!
Answer: Had it not said this, we would have thought that he is lashed and he must remarry her. The verse causes the Lav to be Nitak l'Aseh, so he is not lashed.
Question (against Rava): We must be Torem (designate to be Terumah) "mi'Kol Chelbo" (from good produce), yet if one is Torem bad produce, it takes effect!
(Mishnah): One may not be Torem bad produce on (i.e. to exempt) good produce (of Tevel). If he did, it takes effect.
Answer: A verse teaches that it takes effect:
(R. Ila'i): If one is Torem bad produce on good produce, it takes effect - "v'Lo Sis'u Alav Chet ba'Harimechem Es Chelbo." (Without the verse, we would know that he is liable for acting contrary to Torah, so) the verse must teach that it takes effect!
Counter-question: According to Abaye, why must it say "v'Lo Sis'u Alav Chet"?
Answer: One might have thought that the ideal Mitzvah is to be Torem good produce, but one who did not do so is not called a sinner.
Question (against Abaye): The Torah commands "Kol Chelev Yitzhar (v'Kol Chelev Sirosh)," to tithe from each species onto itself. B'Di'eved, tithing on a different species does not take effect!
(Mishnah): Terumah (and Ma'aser) may not be taken from a species on a different species; if this was done, it does not take effect.
Answer (Abaye and R. Ila'a): "Reishisam" (plural) teaches that each species must be tithed by itself.
Counter-question: According to Rava, why must it say "Reishisam"?
Answer: Indeed, "Chelev Yitzhar v'Kol Chelev Sirosh v'Dagen" obligates tithing Yitzhar (olives) and Sirosh (grapes) separately (each gets its own Chelev). However, one Chelev is written for grapes and Dagan (grain). We would not know that one who tithes them (or different kinds of grain) one on the other is lashed (according to a second version, transgresses). We learn this from "Reishisam".
TRANSGRESSIONS WITH KODSHIM
Question (against Abaye): The Torah says that Cherem cannot be sold or redeemed. Even b'Di'eved, it does not take effect!
(Mishnah): Chermei Kohanim cannot be redeemed. They must be given to Kohanim.
Answer: It says "Kodesh Kodashim Hu," to teach that it remains Kodesh (until it is given to Kohanim).
Counter-question: According to Rava, why must it say "Kodesh Kodashim Hu"?
Answer: "Hu" excludes Bechor (it may be sold):
(Beraisa): It says regarding Bechor "Lo Sifdeh," but it may be sold;
It says regarding Ma'aser "Lo Yiga'el." It may not be (redeemed nor) sold alive or slaughtered, Tam or Ba'al Mum.
Question (against Rava): The Torah forbids to make Temurah. If one did, it takes effect!
(Mishnah): Temurah is not permitted. Rather, if one made Temurah, it takes effect, and he receives 40 lashes.
Answer: "... V'Hayah Hu u'Semuraso Yihyeh Kodesh" teaches that it takes effect. (Tosfos - surely, the one who asked knew the verse! Really, this question merely prepares the next question.)
Counter-question: According to Abaye, why must it say "Hu u'Semuraso Yihyeh Kodesh"?
Answer: One might have thought that (the Chulin animal becomes Kodesh and) the Kodesh animal becomes Chulin. The verse teaches that this is not so.
Question (against Abaye): The Torah forbids redeeming Bechor, and doing so does not help!
(Mishnah): Any Korban or Temurah that has a Mum may be redeemed, except for Bechor and Ma'aser.
Answer: "Hem" teaches that they retain their Kedushah.
Counter-question: According to Rava, why must it say "Hem"?
Answer #1: This forbids offering their Temuros.
Question: What is Abaye's source for this?
Answer: "Im Shor Im Seh la'Shem Hu" teaches that it is offered, but its Temurah is not.
Counter-question: What does Rava learn from this?
Answer (and retraction of Answer (d)): Indeed, he agrees that "... la'Shem Hu" teaches that Temuras Bechor or Ma'aser is not offered.
Answer #2: "Hem" teaches that if blood of a Korban was mixed with Dam Bechor or Ma'aser, it is offered on the Mizbe'ach.
Question: What is Abaye's source for this?
Answer: He learns from "v'Lakach mi'Dam ha'Par umi'Dam ha'Sa'ir" (the bloods of the bull and goat mixed together);
Question: A bull has more blood than a goat (the latter should be Batel, the Torah should call the mixture "Dam ha'Par," for it is the majority!)
Answer: This teaches that Olim (things offered on the Mizbe'ach) do not Mevatel (nullify) each other.
(Beraisa - R. Yoshayah): "v'Lakach mi'Dam ha'Par umi'Dam ha'Sa'ir" teaches that the bloods of the bull and goat must be mixed together.
Question: Why doesn't Rava learn from this?
Answer: He holds like R. Yonasan, who says that the bloods are not mixed. Each is put by itself on the Keranos.
Question (against Abaye): The Torah forbids redeeming Ma'aser. Even b'Di'eved, it does not take effect!
(Mishnah): Any Korban or Temurah that has a Mum may be redeemed, except for Bechor and Ma'aser.
Answer: We learn Ma'aser from a Gezeirah Shavah "Ha'avarah-Ha'avarah" from Bechor.
OTHER QUESTIONS AGAINST RAVA
Question (against Rava): The Torah forbids taking Terumah or Ma'aser out of order. B'Di'eved, it takes effect!
(Mishnah): If one separated tithes out of order, even though he transgressed a Lav, it takes effect.
Answer: It says "mi'Kol Matnoseichem Tarimu" (sometimes Terumah must be taken from tithes, e.g. if one tithed out of order).
Counter-question: What does Abaye learn from this?
Answer: This is needed to answer Rav Papa's question. (If a Levi took Ma'aser from sheaves before Terumah was given, he does not give Terumah Gedolah from it. We learn from "Ma'aser Min ha'Ma'aser," but not Terumas Ma'aser and Terumah Gedolah from Ma'aser).
Question (Rav Papa): If so, the same should apply even if the Ma'aser was taken from a Kri (pile of grain)!
Answer (Abaye): In this case we apply "mi'Kol Matnoseichem Tarimu."
Question: Perhaps we should exempt Ma'aser from a Kri, and obligate Ma'aser from sheaves?
Answer: We obligate Ma'aser from a Kri because it was processed enough to obligate giving Terumah, Ma'aser from sheaves was not.
Question (against Rava): A Kohen Gadol may not marry a widow. If he did, it takes effect!
(Mishnah): If a woman is forbidden to a man, but he can be Mekadesh her (e.g. a widow to a Kohen Gadol), the lineage of their children follows the parent of worse lineage.
Answer: We learn this from "v'Lo Yechalel Zar'o." (If a Kohen Gadol marries a widow, the children are Chalalim (devoid of Kedushas Kehunah), and not Mamzerim. Rashi - it follows that he can be Mekadesh her. Tosfos - the extra "Lamed" in "Yechalel" teaches that he can be Mekadesh her.)
Counter-question: According to Abaye, it could have said merely "v'Lo Yechal"!
Answer: The extra "Lamed" teaches that (through relations) he makes also his wife a Chalalah.
Question (against Rava): The Torah forbids to be Makdish a Ba'al Mum for a Korban. B'Di'eved, it takes effect!
(Beraisa): If one was Makdish a Ba'al Mum for a Korban, even though he transgressed a Lav, it takes effect.
Answer: "Ul'Neder Lo Yeratzeh" teaches that it may not be offered, but it is Kodesh.
Counter-question: According to Abaye, why must it say "ul'Neder Lo Yeratzeh"?
Answer: One might have thought that he transgressed, and the Korban may be offered. The verse teaches that this is not so.