The rabbis are concerned about transferring ritual impurity when one visits the Temple. They also discuss the consequences of rape for the rapist. A rapist must marry his victim, to provide for her for the rest of her life. And thus he is not flogged or lashed; his 'punishment' is bad enough. But if the rapist is a kohen and his victim is divorced, the rapist cannot marry his victim. Thus he should be flogged or lashed. It is not so simple. The rabbis consider whether or not a positive mitzvah outweighs a direct halacha, etc.The Gemara notes differences between a defamer and a rapist.
What if the wrongdoer nullifies the mitzvah? Practically speaking this could mean that he does not marry the woman he raped immediately, for example. He is now liable to receive lashes, we learn. Further, if he does not complete the mitzvah, he is lashed as well. Reish Lakish takes issue with this, because there may not have been the forewarning that is required. That man who was about to divorce his wife, for example, should have been forewarned about the punishment he may receive after he walks away from his mitzvah.
The rabbis suggest that a person is not punished for taking an oath. For example, one if fails to eat the loaf of bread that he swore he would eat. However, both Rabbi Yeduha and Reish Lakish agree that he should not be flogged. Rabbi Yehuda teaches that this is because this oath does not require an action; at any point in the day the person could eat a loaf and keep his oath. Reish Lakish believes this is because the forewarning is in fact uncertain.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment