## Makkot Daf 21a

###### Makkot 21a:1
[Makkot 21a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:1)

קָסָבַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: שְׂרִיטָה וּגְדִידָה אַחַת הִיא, וּכְתִיב הָתָם ״לְמֵת״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yosei derives that *halakha* from a different source, as **Rabbi Yosei holds** that **an incision** over the dead **and a laceration** over the dead **are one** transgression, **and it is written there,** with regard to laceration: “You shall neither lacerate yourselves, nor place a bald spot between your eyes **for the dead”** (Deuteronomy 14:1), indicating that one is liable for cutting oneself in mourning only over a dead person. Therefore he can derive from the term “for the soul” that one is liable for each and every soul over whom he cut the incision.


###### Makkot 21a:2
[Makkot 21a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:2)

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הַמְשָׂרֵט בִּכְלִי – חַיָּיב. מֵיתִיבִי: שְׂרִיטָה וּגְדִידָה אַחַת הִיא, אֶלָּא שֶׁשְּׂרִיטָה בַּיָּד וּגְדִידָה בִּכְלִי! הוּא דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
On a related note, the Gemara cites that which **Shmuel says: One who cuts [*mesaret*]** his flesh **with a utensil** in mourning over the dead is **liable.** The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: **An incision [*serita*] and a laceration are one** transgression, as they are both performed over the dead; **but** the difference is that **an incision is** cut **by hand,** i.e., with one’s fingernails, while **a laceration is** cut **with a utensil.** Apparently, cutting an incision is not accomplished with a utensil. The Gemara answers: Shmuel **stated** his opinion **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei,** who holds that an incision and a laceration are synonymous in every sense.


###### Makkot 21a:3
[Makkot 21a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:3)

תָּנֵי תַּנָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: עַל מֵת, בֵּין בַּיָּד בֵּין בִּכְלִי – חַיָּיב, עַל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, בַּיָּד – חַיָּיב, בִּכְלִי – פָּטוּר. וְהָא אִיפְּכָא כְּתִיב: ״וַיִּתְגֹּדְדוּ כְּמִשְׁפָּטָם בַּחֲרָבוֹת וּבָרְמָחִים״! אֶלָּא אֵימָא: בַּיָּד – פָּטוּר, בִּכְלִי – חַיָּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **A *tanna* taught** a *baraita* **before Rabbi Yoḥanan:** One who cuts an incision **over a dead** person, **whether** he did so **by hand or with a utensil,** is **liable.** Concerning one who cuts an incision **for idolatry,** if he does so **by hand,** he is **liable,** but if he does so **with a utensil,** he is **exempt.** Rabbi Yoḥanan was puzzled by this *baraita*: **But isn’t the reverse written** with regard to the priests of Baal: **“And they lacerated themselves in accordance with their custom, with swords and lances”** (I Kings 18:28), indicating that customarily laceration is with a utensil? Rabbi Yoḥanan instructed the *tanna*: **Rather,** emend the *baraita* and **say:** Concerning one who cuts an incision for idolatry, if he does so **by hand,** he is **exempt;** but if he does so **with a utensil,** he is **liable.**


###### Makkot 21a:4
[Makkot 21a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:4)

וְחַיָּיב עַל הָרֹאשׁ. מַחְוֵי רַב שֵׁשֶׁת בֵּין פִּירְקֵי רֵישָׁא. וְעַל הַזָּקָן, שְׁתַּיִם מִכָּאן וּשְׁתַּיִם מִכָּאן וְאַחַת מִלְּמַטָּה. מַחְוֵי רַב שֵׁשֶׁת בֵּין פִּירְקֵי דִּיקְנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And for** rounding the edges of his **head,** one is **liable** to receive two sets of lashes, one from here, the hair adjacent to one ear, and one from there, the hair adjacent to the other ear. The Gemara relates that when he taught this mishna, **Rav Sheshet** would **gesture** toward his temple, which is the point **between the** two **parts of the head,** the front and back. Similarly, with regard to the *halakha* in the mishna: **For** marring the edges of his **beard** there are **two** edges **from here, and two from there, and one from below, Rav Sheshet** would **gesture** toward the point **between the parts of the beard.**


###### Makkot 21a:5
[Makkot 21a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:5)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אִם נְטָלָן וְכוּ׳. קָסָבַר: חַד לָאו הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Eliezer says: If he removed** the hair on all the edges of his beard in one action, he is liable to receive only one set of lashes. The Gemara clarifies: **He maintains** that the prohibition of marring the edges of the beard **is a single prohibition,** and therefore, one is not liable for marring each edge.


###### Makkot 21a:6
[Makkot 21a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:6)

וְאֵינוֹ חַיָּיב עַד שֶׁיִּטְּלֶנּוּ בְּתַעַר. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וּפְאַת זְקָנָם לֹא יְגַלֵּחוּ״, יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ גַּלָּחוֹ בְּמִסְפָּרַיִם יְהֵא חַיָּיב? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא תַשְׁחִית״. אִי ״לֹא תַשְׁחִית״, יָכוֹל אִם לִקְּטוֹ בְּמַלְקֵט וּרְהִיטָנִי יְהֵא חַיָּיב? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא יְגַלֵּחוּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: **And one is liable** for marring the edges of his beard **only if he removes** the hair **with a razor. The Sages taught** a halakhic midrash: The verse states: **“And the edge of their beard they may not shave”** (Leviticus 21:5). One **might** have thought that for any manner of shaving, **even if he shaved** the beard **with scissors, he would be liable;** therefore, **the verse states: “You may not mar** the edge of your beard” (Leviticus 19:27), indicating that one is liable only for shaving that destroys the hair from the root, which is not the case with scissors. **If** the verse had stated only: **“You may not mar,”** one **might** have thought that even **if he removed** the hair **with tweezers or with a plane** he **would be liable** to receive lashes, as they destroy the hair from its roots; therefore, **the verse states: “They may not shave,”** indicating that only hair removal by means of shaving is prohibited, and that is not accomplished with a tweezers and a plane.


###### Makkot 21a:7
[Makkot 21a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:7)

הָא כֵּיצַד – גִּילּוּחַ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ הַשְׁחָתָה, הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר זֶה תַּעַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**How so?** Based on these two verses, for what form of hair removal is one liable? One is liable only for **shaving that involves marring. You must say** that **this** is shaving with **a razor.**


###### Makkot 21a:8
[Makkot 21a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:8)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ לִקְּטוֹ בְּמַלְקֵט וּרְהִיטָנִי יְהֵא חַיָּיב. מָה נַפְשָׁךְ: אִי גְּמִיר גְּזֵירָה שָׁוָה – לִיבְעֵי תַּעַר, אִי לָא גְּמִיר גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה – מִסְפָּרַיִם נָמֵי [לָא]!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Eliezer says: Even** if **he removed** the hair **with tweezers or with a plane, he would be liable** to receive lashes. The Gemara objects: **Whichever way you** look at it, it is difficult. **If he derives** the *halakha* by means of **a verbal analogy** that he received from his teachers between the *halakhot* of shaving written with regard to priests (Leviticus 21:5) and the *halakhot* of marring written with regard to non-priests (Leviticus 19:27), **let** Rabbi Eliezer **require** shaving with **a razor** in order to render him liable, as did the Rabbis. **If he does not derive** the *halakha* by means of **a verbal analogy,** he should **also not** exempt one who removes the hair with **scissors,** as that should be included in the category of shaving.


###### Makkot 21a:9
[Makkot 21a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:9)

לְעוֹלָם גְּמִיר גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה, וְקָסָבַר: הָנֵי נָמֵי גִּילּוּחַ עָבְדִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Actually, he derives** the *halakha* by means of **a verbal analogy, and he holds** that **these too,** the tweezers and the plane, **accomplish shaving.** His dispute with the Rabbis does not relate to the derivation of the *halakha*; rather it is a dispute with regard to the definition of shaving.


###### Makkot 21a:10
[Makkot 21a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:10)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַכּוֹתֵב כְּתוֹבֶת קַעֲקַע. כָּתַב וְלֹא קִעֲקַע, קִעֲקַע וְלֹא כָּתַב – אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב, עַד שֶׁיִּכְתּוֹב וִיקַעְקַע (בְּיָדוֹ) [בִּדְיוֹ] וּבִכְחוֹל וּבְכׇל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא רוֹשֵׁם. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוּדָה מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב עַד שֶׁיִּכְתּוֹב שָׁם אֶת הַשֵּׁם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּכְתֹבֶת קַעֲקַע לֹא תִתְּנוּ בָּכֶם אֲנִי ה׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **One who imprints a tattoo,** by inserting a dye into recesses carved in the skin, is also liable to receive lashes. If **one imprinted** on the skin with a dye **but did not carve** the skin, or if **one carved** the skin **but did not imprint** the tattoo by adding a dye, **he is not liable;** he is not liable **until he imprints and carves** the skin, **with ink, or with kohl [*keḥol*], or with any substance that marks. Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Shimon: He is liable only if he writes the name there, as it is stated: “And a tattoo inscription you shall not place upon you, I am the Lord”** (Leviticus 19:28).


###### Makkot 21a:11
[Makkot 21a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:11)

**גְּמָ׳** אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: עַד דְּיִכְתּוֹב ״אֲנִי ה׳״ מַמָּשׁ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא. כִּדְתָנֵי בַּר קַפָּרָא: אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב עַד שֶׁיִּכְתּוֹב שֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּכְתוֹבֶת קַעֲקַע לֹא תִתְּנוּ בָּכֶם אֲנִי ה׳״ – אֲנִי ה׳, וְלֹא אַחֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi:** Is Rabbi Shimon saying that one is liable only **if he actually inscribes** the words **“I am the Lord”** in his skin? Rav Ashi **said to him: No,** he is saying **as bar Kappara teaches: One is liable only if he inscribes a name of** an object of **idol worship, as it is stated: “And a tattoo inscription you shall not place upon you, I am the Lord,”** which means: Do not place an idolatrous name on your skin, as **I am the Lord, and no** one **else.**


###### Makkot 21a:12
[Makkot 21a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:12)

אָמַר רַב מַלְכִּיָּא אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: אָסוּר לוֹ לְאָדָם שֶׁיִּתֵּן אֵפֶר מִקְלֶה עַל גַּבֵּי מַכָּתוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּרְאֵית כִּכְתוֹבֶת קַעֲקַע. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִיקָא: שַׁפּוּד, שְׁפָחוֹת וְגוּמוֹת – רַב מַלְכִּיּוֹ, בְּלוֹרִית, אֵפֶר מִקְלֶה וּגְבִינָה – רַב מַלְכִּיָּא

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Malkiyya says** that **Rav Adda bar Ahava says: It is prohibited for a person to place burnt ashes on his wound** to promote healing, **because it looks like a tattoo.** Since few statements were attributed to Rav Malkiyya, and there was another Sage named Rav Malkiyyu who also cited statements in the name of Rav Adda bar Ahava, the Gemara provides a mnemonic for these *halakhot*. **Rav Naḥman, son of Rav Ika, says:** The *halakhot* of **skewer, maidservants, and follicles** were stated by **Rav Malkiyyu.** The *halakhot* of **forelock, burnt ashes, and cheese** were stated by **Rav Malkiyya.**


###### Makkot 21a:13
[Makkot 21a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:13)

רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: מַתְנִיתִין וּמַתְנִיתָא – רַב מַלְכִּיָּא, שְׁמַעְתָּתָא – רַב מַלְכִּיּוֹ. וְסִימָנָיךְ: מַתְנִיתָא מַלְכְּתָא. מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ שְׁפָחוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa says:** The distinction is a different one. Those statements that relate to **a mishna or a *baraita*** were stated by **Rav Malkiyya.** Independent ***halakhot*** were taught by **Rav Malkiyyu. And your mnemonic,** to remember that distinction, is: **The Mishna is queen [*malketa*],** indicating the connection between Rav Malkiyya and the Mishna. The Gemara asks: **What is** the practical difference **between** the criteria of Rav Naḥman and Rav Pappa in this regard? The Gemara answers: The practical difference **between them** is with regard to the *halakha* of **maidservants,** which appears in a mishna. According to Rav Pappa, this *halakha* was stated by Rav Malkiyya, not Rav Malkiyyu.


###### Makkot 21a:14
[Makkot 21a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:14)

רַב בִּיבִי בַּר אַבָּיֵי קָפֵיד אֲפִילּוּ אַרִיבְדָּא דְּכוּסִילְתָּא. רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם מַכָּה – מַכָּתוֹ מוֹכִיחַ עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara addresses the matter of placing burnt ashes on a wound. The Gemara relates: **Rav Beivai bar Abaye was fastidious** and did not place ashes **even on the wound of bloodletting [*arivda dekhusilta*],** as that too appears like a tattoo. **Rav Ashi says: Any place where there is a wound, his wound proves about itself** that the person’s intent when he covers it with ashes is to promote healing, and it is not a tattoo.


###### Makkot 21a:15
[Makkot 21a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:15)

**מַתְנִי׳** נָזִיר שֶׁהָיָה שׁוֹתֶה יַיִן כׇּל הַיּוֹם – אֵין חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ ״אַל תִּשְׁתֶּה״, ״אַל תִּשְׁתֶּה״, וְהוּא שׁוֹתֶה – חַיָּיב עַל כׇּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. הָיָה מִטַּמֵּא לְמֵתִים כׇּל הַיּוֹם – אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת, אָמְרוּ לוֹ ״אַל תִּטַּמֵּא״, ״אַל תִּטַּמֵּא״, וְהוּא מִטַּמֵּא – חַיָּיב עַל כׇּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. הָיָה מְגַלֵּחַ כׇּל הַיּוֹם – אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת, אָמְרוּ לוֹ ״אַל תְּגַלֵּחַ״, ״אַל תְּגַלֵּחַ״, וְהוּא מְגַלֵּחַ – חַיָּיב עַל כׇּל אַחַת וְאַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **A nazirite who was drinking wine all day is liable** to receive **only one** set of lashes. If onlookers **said to him: Do not drink, do not drink,** forewarning him several times, **and he drinks** after each forewarning, he is **liable** to receive lashes **for each and every** drink. If the nazirite **was rendering himself impure** through exposure **to corpses all day, he is liable** to receive **only one** set of lashes. If **they said to him: Do not render yourself impure, do not render yourself impure, and he renders himself impure** after each forewarning, he is **liable for each and every** incident. If the nazirite **was shaving** his hair **all day, he is liable** to receive **only one** set of lashes. If **they said to him: Do not shave, do not shave, and** after each forewarning **he shaves,** he is **liable for each and every** time he shaves.


###### Makkot 21a:16
[Makkot 21a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Makkot/r/21a:16)

הָיָה לָבוּשׁ בְּכִלְאַיִם כׇּל הַיּוֹם – אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת, אָמְרוּ לוֹ: ״אַל תִּלְבַּשׁ״, ״אַל תִּלְבַּשׁ״, וְהוּא פּוֹשֵׁט וְלוֹבֵשׁ – חַיָּיב עַל כׇּל אַחַת וְאַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If a person **was wearing** a garment consisting of **diverse kinds** of wool and linen **all day, he is liable** to receive **only one** set of lashes. If **they said to him: Do not wear** it, **do not wear** it, **and he removes** it **and dons** it after each forewarning, he is **liable for each and every** time that he dons the garment.