Author Topic: Makey oviv, vomays  (Read 10077 times)

Offline YOSEF

  • Dansdeals Lifetime Platinum Elite
  • *******
  • Join Date: Nov 2009
  • Posts: 2185
  • Total likes: 27
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 16
    • View Profile
Re: Makey oviv, vomays
« Reply #40 on: June 14, 2010, 03:22:12 PM »
MeHaicha Taisi to look at it like that. Maybe the torah just added another oinesh. Who says it "Ramped it up"
you want to prove that the case is similar, so you go ahead and prove.  I was just saying, that it COULD be that that is the chiluk.  (going to mincha, so seder is over for now)

Offline Deal Guy

  • Dansdeals Presidential Platinum Elite
  • ********
  • Join Date: Apr 2009
  • Posts: 4957
  • Total likes: 131
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 9
    • View Profile
Re: Makey oviv, vomays
« Reply #41 on: June 14, 2010, 08:46:19 PM »
Superflyer, you caught me off guard. I was only up to daf vav when you posted this, so im kind of out of this conversation.
 BTW, in the subject tile, I would've spelled it v'mais, to make it easier. (until I clicked in, I had no clue what you were referring to.

Offline SuperFlyer

  • Dansdeals Lifetime Presidential Platinum Elite
  • *********
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 9310
  • Total likes: 398
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
    • View Profile
Re: Makey oviv, vomays
« Reply #42 on: June 15, 2010, 05:55:09 AM »
In english there is no rule as to what sounds like what; I spell 'indeed' in yiddish as 'takke', and others would spell it 'tukka'...

Offline SuperFlyer

  • Dansdeals Lifetime Presidential Platinum Elite
  • *********
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Posts: 9310
  • Total likes: 398
  • DansDeals.com Hat Tips 0
    • View Profile
Re: Makey oviv, vomays
« Reply #43 on: June 15, 2010, 05:56:11 AM »
I got the following message:

Regarding your first point: "kim lei" for two death penalties; there definitely is such a concept. See the mishna and g'mara in Sanhedrin 81a. However, you must realize that here it's not a true "kim lei". A true "kim lei" is where it would have theoretically been possible to give BOTH penalties (eg misah and mamon) and the Torah tells us, without any outside s'vara, that we should only do one. "Kdei rish'aso" says the Torah; "mishum risha achas ata m'chayvo etc". Here however; it would not have been possible to do both, even had the Torah not said so. I mean, you can't kill somebody twice! So with s'vara alone, we would have known that he won't get both. Therefore the p'tur for the second misah is not really "kim le". And the fact that, of the two, we give him the more chamur one is also a  s'vara. He did both aveiros, he is chayav both, he has as much an actual chiyuv for the chamur death penalty as he does for the more kal one, so why should he not get the most chamur? But the p'tur from the second death penalty is not really "kim lei". Do you understand what I'm saying? (For a similar idea, see the machlokes between the Pnei Yehoshua and the Avnei Milu'im in Kiddushin regarding the reason that kiddushin won't work on a married woman. Is it because she is already married, so there's no room for an additional kiddushin be chal, or is it because she's an erva, and kiddushin isn't chal on any of the arayos.)

Regarding your second point. There is no such thing as galus paturing for misah. Have a good look at the sugya of "ha'av goleh al yedei haben" in Makkos 8b. There the g'mara entertains the possibility that galus wouldn't work for killings ones father, since there is a double penalty (sayif and chenek) and the more chamur acc to R' Shimon is chenek, and maybe galus doesn't work for a shogeg of chenek. But that's about a shogeg where there is no misah. But in a case of misah there is absolutely no way that galus can patur. It's a pasuk in the torah. "V'lo sikchu kofer etc.".