Gemara Clarity

Temurah 4b

תמורה ד׳ ע״ב

Learn Temurah 4b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Temurah 4b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

No מלקות for a לאו שאין בו מעשה or a לאו שניתק לעשה, the dispute over נותר, and whether a forbidden act takes effect (אביי and רבא)

Overview

The גמרא explains that רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא's word 'also' adds putting תרומה before ביכורים to the rule that a לאו שאין בו מעשה gets no מלקות. It then asks why a מימר, who also acts only through speech, is flogged. רבי אבין answers that putting תרומה first is a לאו שניתק לעשה, a prohibition that can be fixed by a positive מצוה. אביי challenges רב דימי: תמורה is also fixable, yet it brings lashes. רב דימי answers that תמורה has two לאוין against one עשה. The case of a כהן אונס is set aside because כהנים have extra קדושה. Next, the גמרא shows that whether a לאו with no action brings lashes is a dispute between רבי יהודה and רבי יעקב about נותר of the קרבן פסח. It explains that for רבי יעקב the burning clause teaches a 'second morning' for burning. Finally, אביי and רבא argue whether an act the תורה forbids still takes effect.

Opening lines

אַפְּטוּרָא קָאֵי,

He was referring to the exemption,

וְהָכִי קָאָמַר:

and this is what he is saying:

לָאו שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה

a prohibition that has no action in it

אֵין לוֹקִין עָלָיו.

one is not flogged for it.

The steps (16)

  1. ResponseThe word 'also' refers to the exemption from lashes
  2. ChallengeWhy is one who makes a substitution flogged but not one who separates out of order?
  3. ResolutionSeparating out of order can be fixed by a positive command
  4. Challengeאביי questions whether every fixable prohibition is free of lashes
  5. Challengeאביי's proof: the one who makes a substitution is flogged
  6. ResolutionTwo prohibitions cannot be cancelled by one positive command
  7. ChallengeChallenge from the rapist who divorces
  8. Resolutionכהנים are a special case because of their extra holiness
  9. ProofWhether a לאו with no action gets lashes is a dispute between תנאים: רבי יהודה on נותר
  10. Statementרבי יעקב gives a different reason: no action was done
  11. ConclusionInference: רבי יהודה gives lashes for a לאו with no action
  12. QuestionFor רבי יעקב, what is the burning clause for?
  13. ResponseThe clause teaches when to burn the leftovers
  14. ProofThe verse gives a second morning for burning
  15. Statementאביי: a forbidden act still takes effect
  16. Statementרבא: a forbidden act does not take effect