The Gemara states a well known principle that warnings for Biblical prohibitions that entail corporal or capital punishment cannot be deduced from an inference such as a kal v’chomer, but rather must be an explicit verse. For example, if the Torah says one who does melacha on Yom Tov gets lashes, surely one who violates the Sabbath should get lashes. We cannot derive a warning or punishment from that Kal V’chomer, rather Shabbos requires its own explicit verse. This is a rule that is used throughout Shas and there are three opinions as to the rationale for this ruling. 

  1. Since the law is derived from an inference, we should not be so sure of our logic that we would punish someone.
  2. Since the law comes from an inference, often a kal v’chomer which involves deriving an application of the law in a case that is more severe from a case that is less severe, perhaps the punishment is inappropriately lenient for the derived application. If so, the person will believe he achieved expiation and forgiveness when he did not endure an appropriately severe punishment.
  3. It is a tradition from Sinai that inferences can only teach matters of what is permitted or forbidden, but not punishments.

The significant idea expressed in reason one, as well as likely in reason three, is that punishment requires a higher degree of certainty than other legal matters. We should consider this idea when we are angry and believe we are justified in lashing out at loved ones or in punishing children.

בטעמו יש שלוש דעות (בית האוצר ח"א כלל נה בתחילתו, ספר המקנה ד-ג ד"ה בנב"י. שתי הדעות הראשונות הן הידועות יותר):

 

(מקור: https://www.yeshiva.org.il/wiki/index.php/%D7%90%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%96%D7%94%D7%99%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9F_%D7%9E%D7%9F_%D7%94%D7%93%D7%99%D7%9F )

 

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation cool

Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)