Bava Metzia 115: Widows & Collateral, Distracted by Too Many Wives, Punishments for Collateral Transgressions

After finishing yesterday's conversation about how and when and from whom to take collateral, we are introduced to a very short Mishna.  It teaches that one may not take collateral from a widow whether she is poor or rich.  This is based on the simple prohibition in Deuteronomy (24:17) where we are told not to take the garment of a widow as collateral.

In their discussion, Rabbi Yehuda holds the above opinion while Rabbi Shimon believes that only a poor widow is subject to this guideline.  He explains that rich widows will not be subject to someone returning their collateral to them repeatedly.  Only poor widows will then be suspected of inappropriate behaviour with the agent of the court.

The Gemara turns to other arguments that might reflect this discussion.  Deuteronomy (17:17) teaches that one should not multiply wives for himself so that his heart might turn away.  This applies even to wives like Abigail, who stopped King David from sinning. Even a king should not have too many wives.  The rabbis suggest that 'turning one's heart away' is the problem here.  Not only might too many wives turn a King away from his primary wife, they might turn his heart away from G-d.  That is the true concern.

A second new Mishna teaches that taking an upper or lower millstone as collateral is prohibited by Torah in Deuteronomy (24:6).  In fact, taking any item used for food preparation may be prohibited as well.  This is due to the verse's ending, "for he takes a man's life as collateral".   The Gemara focuses on the punishment for transgressing this prohibition.  Taking one half of a millstone is punishable by flogging.  Taking both halves doubles the punishment.  Finally, a third punishment is added for taking a man's life as collateral.

Rabbi Yehuda and Rav Huna argue about the punishments meted out for these transgressions.  Their argument is compared with a past argument regarding the Pesach offering.  It was taught that the offering was not to be eaten raw or cooked in water, but to be roasted in fire.  If a person transgressed these directives, the punishment would be flogging - each transgression would be met with a different punishment.  We end our daf with the suggestion that "taking one's life as collateral" might be explained through this other argument.

One question that arises regards multiple punishments for multiple transgressions that occur during the same episode.  I remember learning that only the most severe punishment is enacted in such cases.  If the punishment is flogging x 3, does that mean that a person is only flogged once?  Or does  this principle not apply to this type of transgression?