In order to be found liable by the court for a transgression, the defendant must have been issued a warning (התראה) that the action is prohibited. If this warning must be given תוך כדי דיבור, i.e. within a very short interval of time such as is sufficient to say שלום עליך רבי (“peace unto you rebbi”), before the transgression, how is the warning effective for transgressions that take time? For example, if one is about to eat חלב (prohibited fats), and receives a warning from the witnesses, the warning is effective for his first bite. But since he has to eat an entire כזית (the volume of an olive), and has כדי אכילת פרס (the maximum allotted period time within which to accomplish the act to be found liable, i.e. the time it takes to eat half a loaf of bread) to do so, he can claim that the initial bite, less than a כזית, was in fact במזיד (intentional), but the remainder of the כזית, which was eaten after תוך כדי דיבור of the התראה, was only בשוגג (unintentionally)?
3
-
masa machsia, Welcome to Mi Yodeya, and thanks for bringing us this interesting question! Could you please edit in support for your first, foundational assertion? That would make the question more compelling and could also help people get started toward answering it. Also, please take a look at our jargon policy, and edit to make this post more readable to people who may be interested in the topic but aren't familiar with the Hebrew terms.– Isaac Moses ♦Jul 7, 2022 at 13:23
-
1I recall a Gemara (or rishon) perhaps about shabbos, that says the eidim need to keep giving the warnings until he finishes the aveira– ChatzkelJul 7, 2022 at 14:34
-
I always assumed that התראה given within תוך כדי דיבור of התחלת המעשה was sufficient to cover the entire action provided the perpetrator was continuously involved in the action.– DeuteronomyJul 8, 2022 at 13:06
Add a comment
|