Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

Sefaria · Mishnah > Rishonim on Mishnah > Bartenura > Seder Nezikin · 148 sections

1.1.1
כיצד העדים נעשים זוממין – this is how it should be read: those witnesses who were found to be scheming and with them, we do not enact the punishment for evidence disproved by an alibi, that is to say, we do not fulfill through them [the Biblical verse – Deuteronomy 19:19]: “you shall do to him as he schemed to do to his fellow.” How are they made scheming [witnesses]?
1.1.2
מעידין אנו באיש פלוני – a Kohen
1.1.3
שהוא בן גרושה – in our presence his mother was divorced prior to his birth, and therefore he is one unfit for the priesthood on account of his father’s illegitimate connection.
1.1.4
אין אומרים – if they were found to be scheming [witnesses], and they are Kohanim, this one should be made the son of a divorcee [mother], to fulfill through him “as he schemed” (Deuteronomy 19:19) – but it is written, “you shall do to him as he schemed [to do to this fellow],” to him, but not to his progeny, and if we make him unfit for the priesthood, and he is a Kohen, you have disqualified his progeny forever. And if you should say, let us disqualify him alone and not his progeny, we require [in the Biblical verse] “as he schemed to do”, but it is not there [if he is not a Kohen], for he plotted to disqualify the judged (i.e., a Kohen) and his progeny.
1.1.5
אלא לוקה ארבעים – for it says in the Biblical verse (Deuteronomy 25:1-2): “[When there is a dispute between men and they go to law,] and a decision is rendered declaring the one in the right and the other in the wrong – if the guilty one is to be flogged, [the magistrate shall have him lie down and be given lashes in his presence, by count, as his guilt warrants],” the other one in the wrong – if the guilty one is to be flogged,” but rather, the witnesses who [rendered] the one in the right to be wrong, and other witnesses came and “rendered declaring the one in the right,” for from the outset, they declared him to be like these wicked men: “if the guilty one is to be flogged…etc.”
1.1.6
אין אומרים יגלה זה – As it is written concerning the murderer (Deuteronomy 19:5): “…that man shall flee [to one of these cities and live].” He and not those who scheme against him.
1.1.7
שגירש את אשתו – [who divorced his wife] in our presence on a certain day, and he says: I did not divorce her and I am not liable for her Ketubah.
1.1.8
והלא בין היום ובין למחר – that is to say, what they should pay him, and if you would say, the entire [worth of the] Ketubah, but would it not be lest he die or lest he divorce her today or tomorrow so that he would ultimately give it (i.e., the Ketubah value) to her, and it is found that they would not cause him to lose anything.
1.1.9
אומרין כמה אדם רוצה ליתן בכתובתה של זו – from doubt . for if she had been widowed or divorced, the purchaser would take her, and if she died, her husband would inherit her and he would love the monies that he gave, and this would be given to the witnesses of the husband.
1.2.1
שלא השם המחייבו מלקות – The Biblical verse that makes him liable for flogging is not the one that makes him liable for payment. Flogging [comes] from (Exodus 23:2): “you shall not give perverse testimony;” payment from (Deuteronomy 19:19): “and you do to him as he schemed.”
1.2.2
כל המשלם אינו לוקה – as it is written (Deuteronomy 25:2): “…[and be given lashes in his presence, by count,] as his guilt [warrants].” You make him liable for one [act] of guilt, but you do not make him liable for two [acts] of guilt, for as the Rabbis say, he pays [a fine] but is not flogged, and they did not say that he is flogged but does not pay [a fine], we learn from this, that whenever that wherever there are two [acts of guilt] – flogging and payment [of a fine], we do not say that he should be flogged and not pay [a fine] but he should pay [a fine] and not flogged, and such is the Halakha.
1.3.1
משום לא תענה – for since it is impossible to fulfill [the Biblical verse] “you shall do to him as he schemed to do to his fellow” concerning witnesses , such as “we testify about a certain person that he is the son of a divorcee,” the witnesses are flogged because of [the Biblical verse – Exodus 23:2]: “you shall not give perverse testimony [in a dispute]…”, here where is the warning of “you shall not give perverse testimony” and there is also, “[and you do to him] as he schemed” (Deuteronomy 19:19), he is flogged eighty [times]. Bu the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.
1.3.2
משלשין בממון – scheming witnesses who are liable for monetary payments, pay the money according to the number of witnesses. If there were three witness who were found to be scheming, each of one of them pays one-third of the money that had wanted to cause him to lose.
1.3.3
ואין משלשין במכות – But each one of the witnesses is not flogged one third of the [requisite] flogging, but rather each one is flogged for forty, for we require: “and you shall do to him as he schemed to do” (Deuteronomy 19:19), and each one of them who had desired to cause the defendant to be flogged, a complete round [of flogging] and the money is combined, for when each one of them (i.e., the three scheming witnesses) gives his third [of the money] he accepted [upon himself] what they wanted to cause him to lose, between all of them. But flogging is not combined.
1.4.1
עד שיזומו עצמן – that they rebut them in matters of their essence, but not in the matters of the murderer [or the murdered], as it is explained further on, and we derive this from the Biblical verse, as it is written (Deuteronomy 19:18): “if the man who testified is a false witness,” until the lie is within the essence/substance of the witnesses.
1.5.1
ואפילו היו מאה – [one-hundred] sets [of witnesses] who testified one after the other with [the same] one [particular] testimony and one set [of witnesses] rebutted all of them, all of them are killed.
1.5.2
איסטטית היא זאת – that is to say, this particular set [of witnesses] is corrupt and deviationist/rebellious, for they took advice among themselves to rebut in this testimony. Another explanation is that this is sycophancy, for it is testimony which teaches of a system of information which colors everything that it touches.
1.5.3
ואינה נהרגת אלא כת ראשונה בלבד – for Rabbi Yehuda holds that after the first set of witnesses were proven to be scheming witnesses, we do not accept [additional] testimony from the second set that comes to testify after it, and if testifies and is found to be scheming, we do not kill it, nor do we call/refer to it as “and you shall do [to him]” (Deuteronomy 19:19), for we do not kill by his mouth; but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
1.6.1
עד יגמר הדין – of the judged, who would be killed by their word, and after that, they (i.e., the witnesses} were found to be scheming.
1.7.1
ומנין אפילו מאה – that two [witnesses] rebut one hundred [witnesses] who testified together.
1.7.2
מה שנים אינן נהרגין עד שהוזמו שניהן – as it is written (Deuteronomy 19:18): “if the man who testified is a false witness” and the Master said: Every place where it states, “witness,” we have here two [witnesses] until the Biblical verse explicitly states “one.”
1.7.3
עד שיהיו שלשתן זוממין – and it is the case that each of them testified immediately after the conclusion of his fellow, but if two testified and after some time, the others testified, they are considered as two separate sets for every thing.
1.7.4
רבי עקיבא אומר: לא בא השלישי אלא להחמיר עליו – that is not to say that since without the third [witness], their testimony would have been accepted, they should not make of him a judgment of scheming, for the verse teaches you that even he is judged.
1.7.5
על אחת כמה וכמה – for virtue is greater than cruelty
1.8.1
במה דברים אמורים בדיני נפשות – As it is written (Numbers 35:25): “The assembly shall protect the manslayer from the blood-avenger,” and we go around searching for acquittal (i.e., a verdict in favor).
1.8.2
אחד דיני ממונות – also their testimony is nullified.
1.8.3
בזמן שהתרו בהן – we are speaking of [the laws] of capital cases, that is to say, when we say that it is nullified, and this is at the time when a relative or some who is ineligible joins ab initio to be one of those who warn those who commit a sin, but if they didn’t warn them, and didn’t intend to be a witness in the matter, the testimony of the others is not nullified because of the evidence of this one, and the Halakha is according to Rebbe (i.e., Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi).
1.9.1
ואחד מתרה בו באמצע – He who warns combines with the set of witnesses, since he sees them and they see him at the time of the warning [given]. Therefore, if there were two sets that were in the two windows who see him, these combine with those and they are together one testimony.
1.9.2
הוא והן נהרגין – He [i.e., the defendant] is killed, since there still is one set [of witnesses] that had not been proven to be scheming, and those who were refuted are killed for they had been found to be scheming.
1.9.3
שלא תהא סנהדרין שומעת מפי התורגמן – for the we require that the judges know recognize/know the language of the witnesses and not have a need for an interpreter to be placed between them. And such is the Halakha.
1.10.1
סנהדרין – who are ordained in the Land [of Israel]; they have permission to adjudicate the laws of fines and capital cases, whether in the Land [of Israel] or outside the Land [of Israel], as long as there is the large Jewish court in the Chamber of Hewn Stones, as it states (Deuteronomy 17:12): “…and disregard the priest [charged with serving there the LORD your God], or the magistrate…” At the time when there is a Kohen who offers sacrifices on the altar, there is a judge who adjudicates capital cases; at the time when a Kohen [does not offer sacrifices on the altar, there is no judge who adjudicates capital cases].
1.10.2
סנהדרין ההורגת אחת בשבוע – once in seven years
1.10.3
נקראת חובלנית – since one must be deliberate in judgement and reconsider capital cases for acquitt
1.10.4
לא נהרג אדם מעולם – that they should examine the witnesses in the matter when they don’t know how to respond. If [dealing with] a murderer, [the judges ask]: what did you see? Did he kill a person afflicted with a fatal organic disease, or someone totally healthy? If you wish to say that he killed a totally healthy individual, lest it was in a place where a sword punctured [a vital organ], and if he was [guilty] of incest, did you see it as the painting stick was inserted into the tube?
1.10.5
אף הן מרבים שופכי דמים – and because of this, we do not restrain the wicked who continuously shed blood.
2.1.1
אלו הן הגולין. היה מעגל במעגילה – a smooth round stone that we roll on top of the plaster or clay that is at the tope to smooth out the fissures/cracks.
2.1.2
היה משלשל בחבית – from above to below
2.1.3
אבל אם היה מושך במעגילה – from below to above
2.1.4
כל שבדרך ירידתו גולה – As it is written: (Numbers 35:23): “or inadvertently dropped upon him/ויפל עליו [any deadly object of stone, and death resulted – though he was not an enemy of his and did not seek his harm],” until it would be through falling, [and the word] "כל" includes even descending which is for the need of ascending.
2.1.5
נשמט הברזל מקתו – from the sleeve that it is fastened to
2.1.6
רבי אומר: אינו גולה – Rabbi (Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi) holds that if the iron (axe) chipped off the wood – that is, which was to be split (and the chip struck a person dead – see Tosefta Makkot, Chapter 2, Halakha 6), and not the wood handle which it is fastened to. But the Rabbis “from the wood” – from the wood handle to which it is fastened. And the Halakha is according to the Sages, for the wood that was to be split is an indirect action and via an indirect action, one is not exiled.
2.2.1
זרק את האבן לרשות הרבים – and even though it is close to acting with premeditation, for he should have thought that people would always be found in the public domain. Here we are dealing with a dunghill that was made in the public domain to be removed from there during the daytime and occasionally, it happens that he sits thee, and because of this, he is exiled, but it is not negligence nor is it totally unavoidably preventable (i.e., victim of an accident).
2.2.2
והוציא הלה את ראשו וקבלה פטור – As it is written (Deuteronomy 19:5): “[…the ax-head flies off the handle] and strikes the other [so that he dies. That man shall flee to one of these cities and live].”
2.2.3
אם יש רשות לניזק – if the owner gave him permission to enter
2.2.4
מה חטיבת עצים רשות – if he wants to go up to chop [wood], and if he does not want to, he does not go up.
2.2.5
יצא האב הרודה את בנו – for he is doing a Mitzvah
2.3.1
האב גולה על ידי בנו – for he did not hit him to teach him Torah or ethics or a trade
2.3.2
הכל גולין על ידי ישראל – and even a slave or a Cuthean
2.3.3
חוץ מעל ידי גר תושב – for if he inadvertently killed the son of an Israelite, he is not exiled, but is killed.
2.3.4
הסומא אינו גולה – As it is written (Numbers 35:23): “or inadvertently dropped upon him/"בלא ראות" [any object of stone, and death resulted – though he was not an enemy of his and did not seek his harm],” excluding someone blind.
2.3.5
רבי מאיר אומר: גולה – [The words] "בלא ראות"/”or inadvertently dropped upon him (without seeing) , includes he blind person. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.
2.3.6
השונא – all who did not speak with him for three days because of enmity (see Mishnah Sanhedrin Chapter 3, Mishnah 5 – but Israelites were not suspected of this, according to that Mishnah). And the Halakha is not either according to Rabbi Yosi B’Rabbi Yehuda nor like Rabbi Shimon, but rather, the one who hates is not killed nor is he given the shelter of asylum because his legal status is close to acting with premeditation.
2.4.1
להיכן גולין לערי מקלט – and forty-two Levitical cities also all of which provide the shelter of asylum, but those six cities of refuge, whether the one who enters there is murderer with the knowledge that he will receive asylum or whether one enters without the knowledge that he will receive asylum, it provides asylum. And the forty-two cities, with the knowledge that it absorbs, for without the knowledge that it absorbs, they do not absorb, and if the blood avenger was to kill him there, he is exempt.
2.5.1
ומכוונות היו להם הדרכים – they would make the roads so that they would be in a line to the Cities of Refuge so that the murderer would not err on the way (see Talmud Makkot 9b – in which the cities in the Land of Israel and on the opposite side of the Jordan wer in straight parallel lines like two rows in a vineyard). And [the words] "מקלט מקלט" /”Asylum/Refuge”, “Asylum/Refuge” were written at the crossroads, in order that the murder would recognize it and turn to there.
2.5.2
וידברו אליו – they speak to the blood avenger: “do not follow the practice of those who shed blood; this matter came to his hand inadvertently.”
2.5.3
הוא מדבר על ידי עצמו – no Sages are required to speak to the blood avenger on his behalf, but he (i.e., the murderer) makes claims to himself. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.
2.6.1
ואחד המרובה בגדים – since after the flask of anointing oil was hidden, he was not inaugurated to become the High Priest other than the wearing of eight garments.
2.6.2
ואחד שעבר ממשיחתו – that a nocturnal emission befell the High Priest on Yom Kippur and they appointed another n his place. With the death of all of those, he returns, even though the other one is alive, since “High Priest” is written three times in the portion.
2.6.3
רבי יהודה אומר: אף משוח מלחמה – Another Biblical verse is written (Numbers 35:32): “…enabling one to return to live on his land before the death of the priest.” But the Rabbis, since “High Priest” is not written in this verse, they don’t expound it. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.
2.6.4
שלא יתפללו על בניהם שימותו – and they were negligent, for they should have requested for mercy on this generation that no religious offense should happen on them, and they did not request this.
2.6.5
משנגמר דינו – for exile, for when the proceedings were finished (i.e., the sentence was pronounced), and he is about to be exiled, it is as if he was exiled.
2.7.1
נגמר דינו בלא כהן גדול – for there was no High Priest in the world
2.7.2
לא לעדות מצוה – for example, for testimony of the [New] Month
2.7.3
וכל אדם – except for the blood-avenger that killed him outside the City of Refuge is not liable for him, as it is written (Numbers 35:27): “[and the blood avenger comes upon him outside the limits of his city of refuge, and the blood-avenger kills the manslayer,] there is no bloodguilt on his account.” For the blood-avenger has the permission to kill him. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiba. And these words [of our Mishnah] is if he left [having murdered] with premeditation; but if he left [having murdered] inadvertently, every person who kills him is killed on his account.
2.7.4
הכל הולך אחר הנוף – The Gemara explains that even the location of the branches decides the nature of the territory (see Mishnah Ma’aserot, Chapter 3, Mishnah 10) is spoken of, for if the root was inside the borders of the City of Refuge and the branches stretch outside the boundary, since he enters under the branch, he is “absorbed,” [by the City of Refuge] since its roots are inside and we judge that the branches follow after the roots, but if the roots were outside and the branches were inside, for just as within its branches, he cannot kill him, in its root also, he cannot kill him, for we cast the root after the branch for a stringency.
2.8.1
מעלים היו שכר ללוים – In the forty-two cities [of the Levites] that also absorb, the murderer accounts a reward to the owner who dwells in it.
2.8.2
ורבי מאיר אומר וכו' – But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir, and specifically in the forty-two [Levitical] cities, but in the six Cities of Refuge, everyone admits that we do not account a reward to the owner.
2.8.3
לא היה חוזר לשררה שהיה בה – as it is written (Leviticus 25:41): “…he shall go back to his family and return to his ancestral holding.” To his family he returns, but he does not return to what his family held. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
3.1.1
אלו הן הלוקין – not exactly these, for the Mishnah taught and left out many of those who were to be flogged, but since the Mishnah taught those who were liable for extirpation, to teach us that there is flogging with those liable for extirpation, and the Mishnah taught a widow and a divorcee, to teach us that a widow who is also a divorcee is liable upon her two titles. , And it is taught [in Mishnah 2 of this chapter] that eatables forbidden pending the separation of sacred gifts and First Tithe when priest’s due had not been taken, but it doesn’t explain their explicit prohibition clearly, and similarly, property dedicated to the Temple that had not been redeemed, for since the Mishnah taught about property dedicated to the Temple, it taught [about] the Second Tithe, for both of them [are punishable] by flogging because of lack of redemption, and similarly with most of them there is a side that is novel.
3.1.2
נתינה – She is from the Gibeonites, and her flogging is from (Deuteronomy 7:3): “You shall not intermarry with them.”
3.1.3
אלמנה – She became widowed from another man, and she is a divorcee, and one is liable upon her two [sets] of floggings.
3.1.4
משום שני שמות – because of two explicit prohibitions, for both of them are explained in Scripture, and the explicit prohibitions for both of them are stated.
3.1.5
גרושה – and she is a woman released from leviratical marriage, and he is not liable concerning her for two titles, for the woman released from leviratical marriage has no Jewish marriage contract, other than through extension of scope/amplification [of the Biblical passage] we bring it to her, as it is taught in a Baraita: “I don’t know anything about a divorcee other than the divorcee itself; a woman released from leviratical marriage, from where do I know it, as we learn, “and a woman” (Leviticus 18:18).
3.2.1
המפטם את השמן – He who makes oil sample of the anointing out.
3.2.2
והסך בשמן המשחה – that Moses our teacher of blessed memory, made.
3.2.3
אכל טבל – Its explicit prohibition is from (Leviticus 22:15): “But [the priests] must not allow the Israelites to profane the sacred donations that they set aside for the LORD.” The verse speaks of what they will donate in the future.
3.2.4
ומעשר ראשון שלא נטלה תרומתו – and even he is [punished] with death, as it is written (Numbers 18:27): “This shall be accounted to you as your gift. As with the new grain from the threshing floor [or the flow from the vat].”
3.2.5
ומעשר שני שלא נפדה – Second Tithe that became defiled and even if he is in Jerusalem, it is prohibited to eat it until it is redeemed, but a person who eats it in Jerusalem while it is not yet redeemed, is flogged. And its explicit prohibition is from (Deuteronomy 26:14): “I have not cleared out any of it while impure,” whether I am defiled and it is ritually pure, whether I am ritually pure and it is ritually impure. And from where do we learn that Second Tithe which was defiled – that we redeem it in Jerusalem? As it states (Deuteronomy 14:24): “…should you be unable to transport them,” is explained as you are unable to eat it, as it is written (Genesis 43:34): “Portions were served them from the table…”
3.2.6
והקדש שלא נדפה – There is no prohibition written directly, but its explicit prohibition comes from an analogy of [the words] "חטא"\"חטא" /”sin,” “sin” – from the priest’s due, but even though the All-Merciful (i.e., God), excluded [the words] (Leviticus 22:9): “and they die for it,” but not through religious sacrilege, from death, [Scripture] excluded him, but not from an explicit prohibition.
3.2.7
באוכל נמלה שהוא חייב – because (Leviticus 11:29): “…from among the things that swarm on the earth,” and even though it lacks according to the measure.
3.2.8
אף חטה אחת כברייתה – But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon. And we don’t call it a creature – other than that which has in it a soul alone.
3.3.1
עד שלא קרא עליהם – “My father was a wandering Aramean, etc.” (Deuteronomy 26:5). But after he recited [the formula/declaration – Deuteronomy 26:5-10] he is not flogged if he eats of it, because it is the money of the Kohen. And these are the words of Rabbi Akiva. But the Sages state: First Fruits, laying them down is indispensable for them, the recitation [of the declaration/formula] is not indispensable. As one who consumes them (i.e., First Fruit) after laying them down in the Temple courtyard, even though he had not yet recited [the formula/declaration], is not flogged. And the Halakha is according to the Sages. And their explicit prohibition is from as it is written (Deuteronomy 12:17): “You may not partake in your settlements of the tithes of your new grain [or wine or oil, or of the firstlings of your herds and flocks….] or of your contributions.” And the Master said: “your contributions” – these are the First Fruits, for the Priest’s Due/Terumah does not require being brought into the Place (i.e., the Temple). And regarding First Fruits also, one is not flogged on them other than if one ate them after they saw the “face” of Jerusalem before they are placed down in the Temple court, but if he ate them outside of Jerusalem prior to their being entered into Jerusalem, one is not flogged.
3.3.2
קדשי קדשים חוץ לקלעים קדשים קלים חוץ לחומה – All of these, their explicit prohibition is from (Deuteronomy 12:17): “You may not partake in your settlements, ….or of any of the votive offerings that you vow…,” for all consumption outside of the fixed place for it is called “eating in your settlements.”
3.3.3
ומעשר שני – it is taught [in the Mishnah] above (Mishnah 2), that impure Second Tithe that was not redeemed, as we have explained. And here, the Mishnah teaches that Second Tithe that is consumed outside the wall [of Jerusalem]. And specifically, that they ate outside the wall after it saw the “face” of Jerusalem is when he is flogged. But the individual who eats Second Tithe outside of Jerusalem before it enters into Jerusalem is not flogged, as it is written (Deuteronomy 12:18): “These you must consume before the LORD our God…” and afterwards (verse 17): “You may not partake in your settlements.”
3.3.4
המותיר – is not flogged, as it is written (Exodus 12:10): “You shall not leave any of it until morning; if any of it is left until morning, you shall burn it.” The verse comes to bring a positive command after a negative command, to state that if you transgressed the negative commandment, you have fulfilled the positive commandment connected with it, and you are not flogged. And furthermore, “you shall not leave any of it” is a negative commandment which lacks a positive commandment [associated with it], and every negative commandment that lacks with it a positive commandment, one is not flogged [for its violation].
3.3.5
השובר – a bone of an impure Passover offering is not flogged, as the All-Merciful (i.e., God) states (Exodus 12:46): “…nor shall you break a bone of it,” with a kosher/fit [sacrifice], not an invalid one.
3.4.1
לוקה ואינו משלם – for Rabbi Yehuda holds that (Deuteronomy 22:7) "שלח תשלח" /”Let [the mother] go” is implied from the outset, and even though, it is written,” let [the mother] go” after (verse 6) “do not take [the mother together with the young],” it is not to say that if you took it, you should let it go, but rather, do not take [the mother] but send her prior to the taking. And this is not a prohibitive law the transgression of which must be repaired by a succeeding [positive] act.
3.4.2
וחכמים אומרים משלח ואינו לוקה – for they hold, “let [the mother] go” after taking, is implied, and it is a prohibitive law the transgression of which must be repaired by a succeeding act. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.
3.4.3
כל מצוה לא תעשה ישי בה קום עשה – for the Torah stated, if you transgressed on the negative commandment, fulfill the positive commandment, such as (Deuteronomy 22:6): “Do not take the mother together with her young.” But if you took it, “let [the mother] go” (verse 7); [and another example] (Deuteronomy 24:10): “[When you make a loan of any sort to your countryman], you must not enter his house to seize his pledge.” But if you seized his pledge, “you must restore the pledge to him” (verse 13). All of these, if he fulfilled the positive commandment, he is not flogged. But if he did not fulfill the positive commandment, such as the case where he took the mother [animal] with her young and slaughtered it or it died, or he took the pledge from his house (i.e. the home of the person who had borrowed something) and it was burned and he cannot fulfill the positive commandment, behold, that person is flogged.
3.5.1
הקורח קרחה – because he is liable for each act of making a bald spot (Tractate Makkot 20a) and for each act of making an incision for a dead person and for every corner of his head that he mars, which is not the case when one eats forbidden fat repeatedly, and because of this, it is taught in our Mishnah, but the rest of the mere negative commandments which lack a novel [lesson], it did not teach.
3.5.2
קרחה – of the dead, as it is written (Deuteronomy 14:1): “or shave the front of your heads because of the dead.” And even though that concerning the Kohanim, it is not written, “on the dead,” we have already learned through an analogy from [the repetition of the word]: "קרחה" "קרחה" (see Leviticus 21:5 –“They shall not shave smooth any part of their heads, or cut the side-growth of their beards, or make gashes in their flesh” together with Deuteronomy 14:1); just as Israelites are commanded because of the dead, so too are Kohanim, and the measure of the “shaving smooth” is the size of a bean.
3.5.3
המקיף את ראשו – He who makes his temples as hairless as the spot back of his ears (Makkot 20b), and his forehead, and even on shaving with scissors where there is no destruction [of the head], he is liable regarding the corner of his head, and specifically on his beard (i.e., “or cut the side-growth of their beards” – Leviticus 21:5 and Leviticus 19:27: “You shall not round off the side-growth on your head”), it is written “destroy” only with a razor, but regarding the corner of the head, [the word] "הקפה"/”rounding” is written (Leviticus 21:5 – “they shall not shave smooth any part of their heads”), in every matter in which he “rounds” – he is liable.
3.5.4
שריטה אחת על חמשה מתים או חמש שריטות על מת אחד – as it is written (Leviticus 19:28): “You shall not make gashes in your flesh for the dead” to be liable for each and every gash and for each and every dead person, and even though there wasn’t anything other than one warning, all five gashes at one time, one is liable [for each and every one].
3.5.5
על הראש שתים – one on the right and one on the left
3.5.6
ועל הזקן שתים מכאן ושתים מכאן – the place of the attachment of the jaw to the bone, one on the right of the chin and the other on its left, and the pointed ends of the chin (i.e., the lower jawbones and the chin proper) in the middle, that makes “three.” And the attachment of the temples from one side and the other makes “five.” The upper cheekbone which is attached to the temples and the lower cheekbone on the right, and the upper cheekbone and the lower cheekbone on the left – these are two from here and two from there, and finally the beard and the hair coming out from it like a spike/ear of corn; therefore, it is called "שיבולת"/like an ear of corn/a spike, that makes “five.”
3.5.7
אינו חייב אלא אחת – for since it is one negative commandment, it is like someone who eats two olives of forbidden fat with [only] one warning.
3.5.8
עד שיטלנו בתער – it refers to the corner of the beard, as it is written [in the Torah] concerning shaving and destroying (Leviticus 19:27 – “nor destroy the side-growth of your beard” and Leviticus 21:5 – “or cut the side-growths of their beards”).
3.5.9
מלקט – an instrument that is made like tongs, to remove the hair.
3.5.10
רהיטני – in the language of the Bible, it is an adze. It is an instrument that a carpenter uses to separate the face of the board.
3.6.1
כתבת קעקע – to scrape with a knife on his skin like letters (i.e., marking the outline of letters by abrasion), and afterwards, he fills in the abrasions with ink or powder used for painting the eye-lids/stibium.

Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020. Via Sefaria (sefaria.org), Sefaria-Export. Version source: http://sefaria.org/ Licence: CC-BY. Source.