(יט) כִּֽי־תָצ֣וּר אֶל־עִיר֩ יָמִ֨ים רַבִּ֜ים לְֽהִלָּחֵ֧ם עָלֶ֣יהָ לְתׇפְשָׂ֗הּ לֹֽא־תַשְׁחִ֤ית אֶת־עֵצָהּ֙ לִנְדֹּ֤חַ עָלָיו֙ גַּרְזֶ֔ן כִּ֚י מִמֶּ֣נּוּ תֹאכֵ֔ל וְאֹת֖וֹ לֹ֣א תִכְרֹ֑ת כִּ֤י הָֽאָדָם֙ עֵ֣ץ הַשָּׂדֶ֔ה לָבֹ֥א מִפָּנֶ֖יךָ בַּמָּצֽוֹר׃ (כ) רַ֞ק עֵ֣ץ אֲשֶׁר־תֵּדַ֗ע כִּֽי־לֹא־עֵ֤ץ מַאֲכָל֙ ה֔וּא אֹת֥וֹ תַשְׁחִ֖ית וְכָרָ֑תָּ וּבָנִ֣יתָ מָצ֗וֹר עַל־הָעִיר֙ אֲשֶׁר־הִ֨וא עֹשָׂ֧ה עִמְּךָ֛ מִלְחָמָ֖ה עַ֥ד רִדְתָּֽהּ׃ {פ}
שְׁמוּאֵל צַלַּחוּ לֵיהּ תַּכְתָּקָא דְשָׁאגָא, רַב יְהוּדָה צַלַּחוּ לֵיהּ פָּתוּרָא דְיוֹנָה, לְרַבָּה צַלַּחוּ לֵיהּ שַׁרְשִׁיפָא. וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי לְרַבָּה: וְהָא קָעָבַר מָר מִשּׁוּם ״בַּל תַּשְׁחִית״! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״בַּל תַּשְׁחִית״ דְּגוּפַאי עֲדִיף לִי.
I need Shabbat to be desecrated, or whether she did not say: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, one does not desecrate Shabbat for her. That is how Rav Ashi taught it. This is how Mar Zutra taught it: Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: With regard to a woman in childbirth, as long as the womb is open, whether she said: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, or whether she did not say: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, one desecrates Shabbat for her. Once the womb closed after birth, if she said: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, one desecrates Shabbat for her. If she did not say: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, and all the more so if she said: I do not need Shabbat to be desecrated, one does not desecrate Shabbat for her. Ravina said to Mareimar: Since Mar Zutra teaches leniently, and Rav Ashi teaches stringently, in accordance with whose opinion is the halakha? Mareimar said to him: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Mar Zutra, based on the following principle: In cases of uncertainty concerning a life-threatening situation, the halakha is lenient. With regard to the matter of the open womb, the Gemara asks: From when is it considered that the opening of the womb has begun? Abaye says: It begins from when the woman sits on the travailing chair. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: It begins from when the blood flows and descends; and others say when her friends need to carry her by her arms, as she can no longer walk on her own. The Gemara asks: Until when does the opening of the womb continue? Abaye said: It lasts three days. Rava said in the name of Rav Yehuda: It lasts seven days. And others say: It lasts thirty days. The Sages of Neharde’a say: For a woman in childbirth, there are halakhic distinctions between three, seven, and thirty days after she gives birth. The Gemara elaborates: During the first three days after birth, whether she said: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, or whether she did not say: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, one desecrates Shabbat for her. Between three and seven days after birth, if she said: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, one desecrates Shabbat for her. If she did not say: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, one does not desecrate Shabbat for her. Between seven and thirty days after birth, even if she said: I need Shabbat to be desecrated, one does not desecrate Shabbat for her; however, we perform all necessary prohibited labors by means of a gentile. This ruling is in accordance with the statement of Rav Ulla, son of Rav Ilai, who said: All needs of a sick person whose life is not in danger are performed by means of a gentile on Shabbat. And this ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Hamnuna, as Rav Hamnuna says: With regard to a matter in which there is no danger, but only potential illness, one says to the gentile to perform the act, and the gentile performs the act. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: For a woman in childbirth, there is a halakha of thirty days. The Gemara asks: With regard to what halakha was this stated? The Sages of Neharde’a say: It was stated with regard to the halakha of immersion. A woman does not purify herself through ritual immersion within thirty days of giving birth because she is in a weakened state and susceptible to catching cold. Rava said: We say that the ruling that she does not immerse during that period applies only when her husband is not with her. However, if her husband is with her, her husband warms her by engaging in relations with her, and she is not susceptible to catching cold, as is illustrated in this incident involving the daughter of Rav Ḥisda, Rava’s wife. She immersed within thirty days of giving birth, not in the presence of her husband, and caught cold, and afterward they brought her funeral bier after Rava to Pumbedita. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: One builds a fire for a woman in childbirth on Shabbat during the rainy season. The Sages thought to infer from here the following: For a woman in childbirth, yes, one builds a fire; for sick people, no, he does not build a fire. In the rainy season, yes, one builds a fire; in the summer, no, he does not build a fire. And the Gemara concludes: That is not the case. There is no difference between a woman in childbirth and a sick person, and there is no difference between the rainy season and the summer. In all of these cases one may build a fire on Shabbat. This conclusion emerges from that which was stated: Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Shmuel said: With regard to one who let blood and caught cold, one makes a fire for him even during the season of Tammuz, i.e., the summer. Failure to do so could result in serious illness. The Gemara relates that after Shmuel underwent bloodletting, they broke for him a wooden armchair made of teak [shaga] to build a fire. Similarly, for the sake of Rav Yehuda they broke a wooden table made of ebony [yavna], and for Rabba they broke a bench. They needed to build a fire due to the potential danger to Rabba. Since they could not find firewood, they kindled the fire with the furniture. And Abaye said to Rabba: In breaking the bench, didn’t the Master violate the prohibition, “Do not destroy” (Deuteronomy 20:19)? It is prohibited to destroy objects of value. Rabba said to him: Do not destroy also with regard to destruction of my body. Preventing illness and danger is preferable to me. With regard to the danger of bloodletting, the Gemara cites that which Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: One should always sell the beams of his house and purchase shoes for his feet with the proceeds, as shoes protect him from stepping on obstacles and from catching cold. If he let blood and has nothing to eat after the bloodletting, he should even sell the shoes on his feet, and from the proceeds provide the needs of a meal. After bloodletting, a meal is more crucial to one’s well-being than shoes are. The Gemara asks: What are these special needs of a meal? Rav said: It is referring to meat. And Shmuel said: It is referring to wine. The Gemara explains: Rav says: It is referring to meat because the soul replaces the soul, i.e., the meat replenishes the person’s strength. And Shmuel said: It is referring to wine because the red replaces the red, i.e., red wine substitutes for red blood. A mnemonic for the names of the Sages cited in the following discussion is the word shenimsar; shin for Shmuel, nun for Rabbi Yoḥanan, mem for Rav Naḥman, samekh for Rav Yosef, reish for Rava. The Gemara relates the following about bloodletting and drinking wine. Shmuel, on the day on which he would perform the practice of bloodletting, they would prepare for him a dish of cooked spleen. Rabbi Yoḥanan would drink wine after bloodletting until the odor emerged from his ears. And Rav Naḥman would drink until his spleen floated in wine. Rav Yosef would drink until the wine would emerge from the bloodletting incision. Rava would search for wine that was sufficiently aged such that three leaves had already grown over three years on the vine from which the grapes were picked (Rashash). Rav Naḥman bar Yitzhak said to the Sages: I beg of you, on the day that you undergo bloodletting, tell your households, your wives: Naḥman bar Yitzhak happened to come to visit us. Due to the visit of the important guest, the women will prepare a large meal. The husbands will eat well, recover from the lost blood, and avoid endangering themselves. And Rav Naḥman bar Yitzhak said: All types of artifice that come at the expense of others are prohibited except for this artifice, which is permitted. One who performed the practice of bloodletting and it is not possible for him to purchase food due to lack of means, let him take a worn zuz coin and go to seven stores. In each store, he tastes the wine as one who seeks to buy wine would. After tasting, he hands the zuz to the storekeeper, who will not accept it because it is worn. He then proceeds to do the same in all the stores until he has tasted the measure of a quarter of a log of wine. And if doing so is not possible, let him eat seven black dates and smear oil on his temple and lie in the sun. The Gemara relates: The gentile scholar, Ablat, found Shmuel lying in the sun. Ablat said to Shmuel: Wise man of the Jews, a matter that is evil, can it become good? Are there any circumstances in which the heat of the sun, which is harmful, can be beneficial? Shmuel said to him: It happens on a day of bloodletting, for which the heat of the sun is beneficial. The Gemara comments: And actually, that is not what occurred. Rather, there is a day on which the sun is beneficial more than the entire year, and that is the day on which the Tammuz solstice, the longest day of the year, occurs. And Shmuel thought: I will not reveal this remedy to him. Indifferent, in wind, taste, waited are a mnemonic for the following matters. It was Rav and Shmuel who both said: Anyone who is indifferent and not vigilant with regard to the meal eaten after bloodletting, they are indifferent with regard to providing his food from the Heavens. And they say in the name of Heaven: He took no pity on his life, will I take pity on him? Similarly, it was Rav and Shmuel who both said: One who performs the practice of bloodletting should not sit where the wind is blowing, due to the concern that perhaps the blood letter let too much blood from him and established the amount of remaining blood at a quarter of a log. And there is concern the wind will come and draw out a little more blood from him, and he will be endangered. The Gemara relates: Shmuel would customarily perform the practice of bloodletting in a house whose walls were seven and a half bricks thick. One day he performed bloodletting and felt himself weakened. He examined and discovered that one half-brick was lacking from the thickness of the walls. The resultant chill caused his weakness. It was Rav and Shmuel who both said: One who performs the practice of bloodletting should taste something and then go outside, since if he does not taste anything, if he encounters a corpse, his face will turn green. If he encounters one who killed a person, he will die. If he encounters something else, a euphemism for a pig, it is harmful with regard to something else, a euphemism for leprosy. It was Rav and Shmuel who both said: With regard to one who performs the practice of bloodletting, let him wait a bit and then let him rise, as the Master said: There are five matters that render one closer to death than life, and they are these: If one ate and immediately rose, if one drank and rose, if one slept and immediately rose, if one let blood and rose, if one engaged in conjugal relations and rose. Shmuel said: The interval for bloodletting is every thirty days. And during the middle periods of one’s life, he should decrease the frequency of bloodletting; and during the later periods, he should decrease its frequency again. And Shmuel said: The times for bloodletting are the first day of the week, the fourth day of the week and Shabbat eve. However, on the second and the fifth days of the week, no, one should not let blood, as the Master said: Only one who has the merit of his ancestors and relies on it should let blood on the second and on the fifth days of the week, as the court on High, in the heavens, and the court below are equal. The courts in the cities convene on Mondays and Thursdays, as does the heavenly court. Letting blood on a day of judgment is dangerous. If one is judged unfavorably all his blood could flow out. The Gemara explains: On the third day of the week, what is the reason that one does not let blood? It is because the planet Mars is dominant during the even hours. Since it is a planet of blood, and the even hours are a bad omen, that combination gives cause for concern. The Gemara asks: On Shabbat eve, Mars also dominates during the even hours. The Gemara answers: Since the multitudes have already become accustomed to letting blood on Shabbat eve, the verse: “The Lord protects the simple-hearted” (Psalms 116:6) applies in this case. Similarly, Shmuel says: On the fourth day of the week that is the fourth day of the month; on the fourth day of the week that is the fourteenth of the month; on the fourth day of the week that is the twenty-fourth of the month; and on the fourth day of the week after which there are not four days remaining in the month it is dangerous to let blood. Bloodletting on the New Moon and on the second day of the month causes weakness; bloodletting on the third day of the month leads to danger. Bloodletting on the eve of a Festival causes weakness; bloodletting on the eve of the festival of Shavuot leads to danger. And the Sages issued a decree prohibiting bloodletting on the eve of every Festival due to the festival of Shavuot. On Shavuot, an evil spirit named Tibbuaḥ, from the Hebrew word meaning slaughter, emerges, as had the Jewish people not accepted the Torah on the festival of Shavuot, Tibbuaḥ would have slaughtered their flesh and their blood. Consequently, it remains a dangerous day. Shmuel said: If one ate wheat and afterward let blood, he only let that wheat. The bloodletting was ineffective as the wheat replaced any blood that was let. And this ineffectiveness applies only if he let blood to cure an illness; however, to relieve discomfort, bloodletting after eating wheat relieves one’s discomfort. One who lets blood should engage in drinking immediately; he should not engage in eating until the time that it takes to walk half a mil has elapsed. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: When they said that one should engage in drinking immediately, does that mean that drinking immediately is beneficial; however, thereafter, it is injurious? Or perhaps, thereafter it is neither injurious nor beneficial. No resolution is found for this dilemma, therefore it stands unresolved. Similarly, a dilemma was raised before the Sages: When they said one should not engage in eating until the time that it takes to walk half a mil has elapsed, does that mean that only at that time it is beneficial, however, after that time or before that time it is injurious? Or perhaps, before and after that time it is neither injurious nor beneficial. No resolution is found for this dilemma, therefore it too stands unresolved. Rav would announce: One hundred bloodlettings for a zuz; cutting the hair on one hundred heads for a zuz; grooming one hundred moustaches does not cost anything (ge’onim). Blood letters typically served as barbers as well and did not charge for grooming a moustache. If one hundred men happened to arrive one day to have their moustaches groomed, the barber would work all day without receiving any pay. Rav Yosef said: When we were students in Rav Huna’s school, on a day when the Sages were sluggish in their studies, they would say: Today is the day of the moustaches, and I did not know what they were saying. Now that I heard Rav’s statement, I understand that they meant that it was a day without purpose. We learned in the mishna: And one may tie the umbilical cord of a child born on Shabbat. The Sages taught similarly in the Tosefta and even added to it: One may tie the umbilical cord of a child born on Shabbat. Rabbi Yosei said: One may even cut the umbilical cord. And one may insulate the placenta as a healing remedy so as to warm the newborn. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Princesses insulate the placenta in mugs of oil; the daughters of the wealthy do so in combed wool; the daughters of the poor in soft rags. Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei that it is even permitted to cut the umbilical cord on Shabbat. And Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said that Rav said: The Rabbis concede to Rabbi Yosei with regard to the umbilical cord attached to twin babies that one may cut it on Shabbat. What is the reason for this? In that case, leaving the cord attached is dangerous. Since the attached twins will try to disengage from each other, they could potentially rip each other’s cords. And Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said that Rav said: Everything stated in the passage of rebuke (Ezekiel 16) one may perform for a woman in childbirth on Shabbat. Since that chapter speaks of the dangerous birth of an abandoned child, for all other children, these issues should be addressed. As it is stated there: “And as for your birth, on the day you were born, your navel was not cut, and you were not washed in water for cleansing, and you were not salted, nor were you swaddled” (Ezekiel 16:4). The Gemara explains: “And as for your birth, on the day you were born”; from here it is derived that one delivers the newborn on Shabbat. “Your navel was not cut”; from here it is derived that one cuts the umbilical cord on Shabbat. “And you were not washed in water for cleansing”; from here it is derived that one washes the newborn on Shabbat. “And you were not salted”; from here it is derived that one salts the newborn on Shabbat. “Nor were you swaddled”; from here it is derived that one swaddles the newborn on Shabbat.
רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם חִילְפָא בַּר אַגְרָא שֶׁאָמַר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי: הַמְקָרֵע בְּגָדָיו בַּחֲמָתוֹ, וְהַמְשַׁבֵּר כֵּלָיו בַּחֲמָתוֹ, וְהַמְפַזֵּר מְעוֹתָיו בַּחֲמָתוֹ, יְהֵא בְּעֵינֶיךָ כְּעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. שֶׁכָּךְ אוּמָּנוּתוֹ שֶׁל יֵצֶר הָרָע: הַיּוֹם אוֹמֵר לוֹ עֲשֵׂה כָּךְ, וּלְמָחָר אוֹמֵר לוֹ עֲשֵׂה כָּךְ, עַד שֶׁאוֹמֵר לוֹ עֲבוֹד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְהוֹלֵךְ וְעוֹבֵד.
Talmud Babylonien Chabbat 105b
(א) שלא להשחית אילני מאכל - שנמנענו מלכרת האילנות כשנצור על עיר כדי להצר לאנשי העיר ולהכאיב לבותם, ועל זה נאמר (דברים כ יט) לא תשחית את עצה וגו' ואותו לא תכרת, וכמו כן נכנס תחת זה הלאו, שלא לעשות שום הפסד, כגון לשרף, או לקרע בגד או לשבר כלי לבטלה, ובכל ענינים אלו ובכל כיוצא בם שיהיה בהם השחתה. ואמרו זכרונם לברכה תמיד בגמרא (קידושין לב, א) והא קא עבר משום בל תשחית, ומכל מקום אין מלקין אלא בקוצץ אילני מאכל, שהוא מפרש בכתוב, אבל בשאר ההשחתות מכין אותו מכת מרדות (עי' רמב''ם מלכים ו י).
(ב) שרש המצוה ידוע, שהוא כדי ללמד נפשנו לאהב הטוב והתועלת ולהדבק בו, ומתוך כך תדבק בנו הטובה, ונרחיק מכל דבר רע ומכל דבר השחתה, וזהו דרך החסידים ואנשי מעשה אוהבים שלום ושמחים בטוב הבריות ומקרבים אותן לתורה, ולא יאבדו אפילו גרגיר של חרדל בעולם, ויצר עליהם בכל אבדון והשחתה שיראו, ואם יוכלו להציל יצילו כל דבר מהשחית בכל כחם, ולא כן הרשעים אחיהם של מזיקים שמחים בהשחתת עולם, והמה משחיתים את עצמם במדה שאדם מודד בה מודדין לו. כלומר, בה הוא נדבק לעולם, וכענין שכתוב (משלי יז, ה) שמח לאיד לא ינקה רע. והחפץ בטוב ושמח בו נפשו בטוב תלין לעולם זה ידוע ומפרסם.
(ג) מדיני המצוה. מה שאמרו זכרונם לברכה (ב''ק צא, ב), שלא אסרה תורה שלא לקץ אילני מאכל, אלא בקוצץ אותם דרך השחתה, אבל ודאי מתר לקץ אם ימצא בדבר תועלת, כגון שיהיו דמי אותו העץ יקרים וזה רצה למכרו, או לסלק בקציצתן נזק, כגון, שהיה מזיק אילנות אחרים טובים ממנו, או מפני שמזיק בשדות אחרים, בכל צדדין אלו ובכל כיוצא בו מתר. וכל אילן סרק, אמרו זכרונם לברכה (שם) שמתר לקץ ואפילו בשאינו צריך לו, וכל אילן מאכל שהוא זקן מאד עד שאינו עושה אלא מעט פרות, שאין ראוי לטרח בו בשבילן. ואמרו זכרונם לברכה, בזית כל שהיא עושה פחות מרבע זיתים מתר לקץ אותה, ובדקל שיעשה פחות מקב תמרים.
(ד) ודרך כלל אסרו זכרונם לברכה לעשות כל דבר של השחתה, והמשחית שום דבר מתוך חמה אמרו עליו (שבת קה, ב) שהוא כעובד עבודה זרה, שכן דרכו של יצר הרע, היום אומר לו עשה כן ואם יאמין אותו למחר יאמר לו לך עבוד עבודה זרה, כלומר שכל אדם חיב לגער ביצרו ולכבש תאותו עד שיגביר נפש המשכלת על נפש המתאוה עד שתהיה לה לאמה, והיא גברת לעולם ועד. ואמנם הביאו בגמרא (שם) מעשים בקצת החכמים שמראים עצמן כעוסים, כדי ליסר בני ביתם ולזרזן ומשליכין מידם שום מאכל או שום דבר, ומכל מקום השגחתם היתה בהם לעולם שלא ישליכו דבר שיהא נשחת בזה. ויתר פרטי המצוה, בבבא בתרא פרק שני [ה' מלכים פ''ז].
(ה) ונוהג אסור זה בכל מקום ובכל זמן בזכדים ונקבות, והעובר על זה והשחית אילני מאכל עבר על לאו זה וחיב מלקות. ועל שאר השחתה בכל שאר דברים שאינן מפרשים מכין אותו מכת מרדות.
(1) To not destroy fruit trees: That we have been prevented from chopping down trees when we besiege a city to distress the people of the city and to sadden their hearts. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 20:19), "you may not destroy its tree, etc. and you shall not chop it down." And likewise not to do any damage - such as burning or ripping a garment or breaking a vessel for no reason - entered under this negative commandment And in all of these matters and in all that is similar to them, they, may their memory be blessed, would always say in the Gemara (Kiddushin 32a), "But behold, he is transgressing on account of 'do not destroy.'" And nonetheless we only administer lashes for one that cuts down a fruit tree, since it is explicit in Scripture. But with other destructions, we [only] give him lashes of rebellion (See Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and Wars 6:10).
(2) The root of this commandment is well-known - it is in order to teach our souls to love good and benefit and to cling to it. And through this, good clings to us and we will distance [ourselves] from all bad and destructive things. And this is the way of the pious and people of [proper] action - they love peace and are happy for the good of the creatures and bring them close to Torah, and they do not destroy even a grain of mustard in the world. And they are distressed by all loss and destruction that they see; and if they can prevent it, they will prevent any destruction with all of their strength. But not so are the wicked - the brothers of the destructive spirits. They rejoice in the destruction of the world, and they destroy themselves - [since] in the way that a person measures, so is he measured; which is to say that he clings to it forever, as the matter that is written (Proverbs 17:5), "the one who rejoices in calamity, will not be cleared (of evil)." And the one who desires the good and rejoices in it, 'his soul will dwell in the good' forever. This is known and famous.
(3) From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Kamma 91b) that the Torah only forbade cutting fruit trees when he cuts it down destructively. But it is certainly permitted to cut [them] if he finds a beneficial matter in it, such as the value of the wood become valuable and he wants to sell it; or to remove injury by cutting them, such as [if] it was damaging other trees better than it, or because it was damaging other fields. In all of these angles and in all that is similar to it, it is permissible. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Kamma 91b) that it is permitted to cut any non-fruit bearing tree - even when he does not need [its wood] - and [likewise] any fruit tree that is very old, to the point that it only gives a few fruit, for the sake of which it is not worthwhile to toil [on it]. And they, may their memory be blessed, said with an olive tree, it is permitted to cut anything that makes less than a fourth [of a kav]; and with a palm tree, less than a kav of dates.
(4) And in general, they, may their memory be blessed, forbade to do anything destructive. And they said about anyone who destroys anything out of rage (Shabbat 105a) that he is like one who worships idolatry, as so is the way of the evil impulse: Today it says to him, "Do this"; and if he trusts it, tomorrow, it will say to him, "Go and worship idolatry" - meaning to say that every person is obligated to rebuke his impulse and to conquer his desire to the point that he makes the intellectual soul dominate the desiring soul, until it becomes its maidservant and [the intellect] dominate it forever and ever. However, they brought in the Gemara (Shabbat 105a) stories of a few sages that showed themselves to be angry and they would throw down some food or some thing from their hand, in order to discipline the members of their household and to give them alacrity. Nonetheless their supervision would always be over them, that they not throw down something that would be destroyed by this. And the rest of the details of the commandment are in the second chapter of Bava Batra (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and Wars 7).
(5) And this prohibition is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and destroys fruit trees has violated this negative commandment and is liable for lashes. And for other destruction on other things that are not explicit, we lash him [with] lashes of rebellion.
https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/ בל_תשחית
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bal_tashchit
https://www.tikkun.org/tikkundaily/2016/09/08/bal-taschit-whats-wrong-with-the-jewish-law-against-destruction-and-wastecommentary-
on-this-weeks-torah-portion-shoftim/
https://www.jewishveg.org/schwartz/chillul.html