Why are there different death penalties?

[rosends]

Why would the Torah and halacha establish 4 different methods of capital punishment instead of just one? And why wouldn't the method be the fastest and simplest method if the goal is just "death"?

 

[Tumah]

The goal is definitely atonement, I think that's pretty clear from the end of Yoma. For the reason for the four types, I'd probably suggest checking out the extra passage in Krias Shema she'al HaMitah of the Ariza"l as a starting point. I also found this fairly cryptic explanation from the Mahara"l:

ויש לך להבין מאד, כי נמסרו ד' מיתות לבית דין, כי המיתה הוא הקצה והחיים הוא הנקודה האמצעית, ודבר זה בארנו פעמים הרבה, וכמו שהחיים יש להם האמצעי, כך המיתה יש לה הצדדין שהם ארבעה שכל אחד קצה אחד, וכנגד זה הם ארבע מיתות שכל חוטא נדון בקצה שראוי לו, ואף אם החוטא היה נוטה אל קצה עד שנתחייב מיתה, מכל מקום הוא בעל עולם הבא, שאינו בעל העדר גמור מכל צד מצד מה, אבל בלעם ראוי לו העדר הגמור, עד שראויה אליו המיתה מכל צד, ודבר זה ידוע למבינים, ולכך דנו אותו בכל ד' מיתות, ואין להאריך
​

I don't know where else he speaks about this, but I'm holding out for his Chidushei Aggados from Machon Yerushalayim, so I don't have one available to check an index.

 

[rosends]

The goal is definitely atonement, I think that's pretty clear from the end of Yoma. For the reason for the four types, I'd probably suggest checking out the extra passage in Krias Shema she'al HaMitah of the Ariza"l as a starting point. I also found this fairly cryptic explanation from the Mahara"l:

ויש לך להבין מאד, כי נמסרו ד' מיתות לבית דין, כי המיתה הוא הקצה והחיים הוא הנקודה האמצעית, ודבר זה בארנו פעמים הרבה, וכמו שהחיים יש להם האמצעי, כך המיתה יש לה הצדדין שהם ארבעה שכל אחד קצה אחד, וכנגד זה הם ארבע מיתות שכל חוטא נדון בקצה שראוי לו, ואף אם החוטא היה נוטה אל קצה עד שנתחייב מיתה, מכל מקום הוא בעל עולם הבא, שאינו בעל העדר גמור מכל צד מצד מה, אבל בלעם ראוי לו העדר הגמור, עד שראויה אליו המיתה מכל צד, ודבר זה ידוע למבינים, ולכך דנו אותו בכל ד' מיתות, ואין להאריך
​

I don't know where else he speaks about this, but I'm holding out for his Chidushei Aggados from Machon Yerushalayim, so I don't have one available to check an index.

He makes an almost geometric argument but doesn't explain why the methods have to provide the 4 sides and not the concept of "death" providing the consequence of straying towards an edge.

The viduy of the Ari Z'L seems only to say "if I did the things related to letter X which makes me chayav the judgement of ________" but it doesn't explain (to my limited understanding) what things would specifically earn what punishment and why, and why all sins wouldn't earn a single type of death. [I don't know exactly what he means when he says "ufagamti b'ot __]

 

[rosends]

By the way, I posted a similar question here and am wrestling with it on that site as well.

 

[Tumah]

He makes an almost geometric argument but doesn't explain why the methods have to provide the 4 sides and not the concept of "death" providing the consequence of straying towards an edge.

Yeah, he doesn't explain anything over there. I assume that he speaks about it more at length somewhere else, as he mentions that he's spoken about it in other places.

The viduy of the Ari Z'L seems only to say "if I did the things related to letter X which makes me chayav the judgement of ________" but it doesn't explain (to my limited understanding) what things would specifically earn what punishment and why, and why all sins wouldn't earn a single type of death. [I don't know exactly what he means when he says "ufagamti b'ot __]

The bracket part was actually the part I was referring to. It appears that different sins cause problems in different spheres and require atonement commensurate to the ruined sphere to rectify.

 

[rosends]

The bracket part was actually the part I was referring to. It appears that different sins cause problems in different spheres and require atonement commensurate to the ruined sphere to rectify.

then he is establishing 4 categories of sin, each one somehow connected to a letter which then would (mystically) relate to an aspect of the name? (Could one, by looking at the example he gives try to extrapolate a logic for the 4 groups?)

 

[Tumah]

then he is establishing 4 categories of sin, each one somehow connected to a letter which then would (mystically) relate to an aspect of the name? (Could one, by looking at the example he gives try to extrapolate a logic for the 4 groups?)

That's what he appears to be doing. The original version of the text in the Ariza"l doesn't actually include the specific choices for sins. So I'm not 100% sure who added that in, although I did find it in commentaries on that version.
I'm sure that there is a logic behind the selection, and that it could be applied to others as well. But I'm also sure that I have no where near the requisite understanding in these things to be able to do so.

 

[rosends]

This is what I found - does it match what you saw in the commentary?
[which, now that I look at it, makes no sense, because bitul of these 4 shouldn't incur a death penalty]

 

[Tumah]

This is what I found - does it match what you saw in the commentary?

View attachment 31266

Yeah, that's the same idea that was mentioned by the commentary (although he explains it in sentences rather than a chart) and what is found in later siddurim. I'm guessing those four were picked because they're all connected to Shema. But why the link between each set, I have no idea.

 

[rosends]

Yeah, that's the same idea that was mentioned by the commentary (although he explains it in sentences rather than a chart) and what is found in later siddurim. I'm guessing those four were picked because they're all connected to Shema. But why the link between each set, I have no idea.

I made the chart for clarity -- as I noted in my edit, the bitul of these four (though I'm not sure what is meant by "bitul" here) should not incur a death penalty.

 

[Tumah]

I made the chart for clarity -- as I noted in my edit, the bitul of these four (though I'm not sure what is meant by "bitul" here) should not incur a death penalty.

Bitul here is short for bitul mitzvas asei. It appears from here that not fulfilling a positive commandment also causes a degree of blemish to these specific spheres.
I also looked it up in the Ariza"l (check out this link) and apparently he does actually specify these four things. But he writes just to have intent for them and doesn't include them in the part you should say.

 

[rosends]

Bitul here is short for bitul mitzvas asei. It appears from here that not fulfilling a positive commandment also causes a degree of blemish to these specific spheres.
I also looked it up in the Ariza"l (check out this link) and apparently he does actually specify these four things. But he writes just to have intent for them and doesn't include them in the part you should say.

But does bitul mitzvas asei call forth a death penalty? I took a quick look מנחות מא. האם יש עונש למבטל עשה ? - פורום לתורה and it doesn't seem so. [I found this quote on another site כידוע מביאים קרבן עולה על ביטול מצות עשה במזיד, כגון שביטל להניח תפילין במזיד but the site isn't working so you have to look at the cache ]

 

[Tumah]

But does bitul mitzvas asei call forth a death penalty? I took a quick look מנחות מא. האם יש עונש למבטל עשה ? - פורום לתורה and it doesn't seem so. [I found this quote on another site כידוע מביאים קרבן עולה על ביטול מצות עשה במזיד, כגון שביטל להניח תפילין במזיד but the site isn't working so you have to look at the cache ]

No, you're definitely write that there's no death penalty for it. But like you found, there is a sacrifice for it, which implies that there is a sin. So if there's a sin, then it's caused a blemish in some sphere, and that needs rectification on some level. I think it's related to the principle that הקב"ה מדקדק עם הצדיקים כחוט השערה.

 

[rosends]

No, you're definitely write that there's no death penalty for it. But like you found, there is a sacrifice for it, which implies that there is a sin. So if there's a sin, then it's caused a blemish in some sphere, and that needs rectification on some level. I think it's related to the principle that הקב"ה מדקדק עם הצדיקים כחוט השערה.

If I say this viduy (forget that I would then be counting myself as a tzadik) then am I obligating myself on a level much stricter than is expected of most people?

 

[Tumah]

If I say this viduy (forget that I would then be counting myself as a tzadik) then am I obligating myself on a level much stricter than is expected of most people?

I don't think it's like that. There are probably more normal people like us saying it than tzadikim. It's basically just considered like a different nusach. I think it's standard in some Chassidus, like Chabad.