Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

August 3, 2017 | ื™ืดื ื‘ืื‘ ืชืฉืขืดื–

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Sanhedrin 18

The kohenย gadol and the king have unique laws that apply to them. ย The mishna delineates similarities and differences between them as well as mentions some unique laws that relate to each of them. ย The Gemara begins by analyzing these details.


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

ืžืืชื™ื ื•ืฉื‘ืขื™ื ื•ืฉื‘ืขื”

The number of people needed in a city for it to be eligible for a lesser Sanhedrin is 277. This number is based on the opinion of Rabbi Neแธฅemya, who requires 230 men, but requires an additional 47 men in case it happens that the Sages of the court reach a situation where they are not able to arrive at a verdict, and pairs of judges need to be added, potentially increasing the number of judges on the court from 23 to 70, a maximum of 47 additional judges.

ื•ื”ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืžืืชื™ื ืฉื‘ืขื™ื ื•ืฉืžื ื” ืœื ืงืฉื™ื ื”ื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื”ื ืจื‘ื ืŸ

The Gemara asks: But isnโ€™t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The number of men needed in a city for it to be eligible for a lesser Sanhedrin is 278? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This baraita that said Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi requires 277 residents is stated in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that there are 70 judges on the Great Sanhedrin, and this baraita that quoted the number as 278 is stated in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who hold that there are 71.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืณื•ืฉืžืช ืขืœื™ื”ื ืฉืจื™ ืืœืคื™ื ืฉืจื™ ืžืื•ืช ืฉืจื™ ื—ืžืฉื™ื ื•ืฉืจื™ ืขืฉืจืชืณ ืฉืจื™ ืืœืคื™ื ืฉืฉ ืžืื•ืช ืฉืจื™ ืžืื•ืช ืฉืฉืช ืืœืคื™ื ืฉืจื™ ื—ืžืฉื™ื ืฉื ื™ื ืขืฉืจ ืืœืฃ ืฉืจื™ ืขืฉืจื•ืช ืฉืฉืช ืจื™ื‘ื•ื ื ืžืฆืื• ื“ื™ื™ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืฉื‘ืขืช ืจื™ื‘ื•ื ื•ืฉืžื•ื ืช ืืœืคื™ื ื•ืฉืฉ ืžืื•ืช

Apropos the opinion of Rabbi Neแธฅemya, which links the issue of the lesser Sanhedrin with the appointment of the ministers in the wilderness, the Gemara relates: The Sages taught: The verse states: โ€œAnd place over them ministers of thousands, ministers of hundreds, ministers of fifties, and ministers of tensโ€ (Exodus 18:21). The number of ministers of thousands was 600, as there were 600,000 men in total; the number of ministers of hundreds was 6,000; of ministers of fifties, 12,000, and of ministers of tens, 60,000. Therefore, it is found that the total number of judges of the Jewish people was 78,600, and suitable people were found to fill all of these positions.

ื”ื“ืจืŸ ืขืœืš ื“ื™ื ื™ ืžืžื•ื ื•ืช

 

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื“ืŸ ื•ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ื—ื•ืœืฅ ื•ื—ื•ืœืฆื™ืŸ ืœืืฉืชื• ื•ืžื™ื™ื‘ืžื™ืŸ ืืช ืืฉืชื• ืื‘ืœ ื”ื•ื ืื™ื ื• ืžื™ื™ื‘ื ืžืคื ื™ ืฉื”ื•ื ืืกื•ืจ ื‘ืืœืžื ื”

MISHNA: The High Priest judges others if he is sufficiently wise, and others judge him when he transgresses. He testifies before the court and others testify concerning him. He performs แธฅalitza with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother performs แธฅalitza with his wife; and his brother consummates levirate marriage with his wife. But he does not consummate levirate marriage with his brotherโ€™s widow, because it is prohibited for him to marry a widow (see Leviticus 21:14), and can therefore never fulfill the mitzva of levirate marriage, as a yevama is by definition a widow.

ืžืช ืœื• ืžืช ืื™ื ื• ื™ื•ืฆื ืื—ืจ ื”ืžื˜ื” ืืœื ื”ืŸ ื ื›ืกื™ืŸ ื•ื”ื•ื ื ื’ืœื” ื”ืŸ ื ื’ืœื™ืŸ ื•ื”ื•ื ื ื›ืกื” ื•ื™ื•ืฆื ืขืžื”ืŸ ืขื“ ืคืชื— ืฉืขืจ ื”ืขื™ืจ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ

If a relative of the High Priest dies, he does not follow the bier carrying the corpse, since it is prohibited for the High Priest to become ritually impure even for immediate relatives (see Leviticus 21:11). Rather, once the members of the funeral procession are concealed from sight by turning onto another street, he is revealed on the street they departed, and when they are revealed, then he is concealed, and in this way, he goes out with them until the entrance of the gate of the city, from where they would take out the corpse, since the dead were not buried in Jerusalem. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืื™ื ื• ื™ื•ืฆื ืžืŸ ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ ืžืฉื•ื ืฉื ืืžืจ ื•ืžืŸ ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ ืœื ื™ืฆื

Rabbi Yehuda says: He does not emerge from the Temple at all for the burial of his relatives, as it is stated: โ€œAnd from the Temple he shall not emerge and will not desecrate the Temple of his God; for the separateness of the oil of the anointment of his God is on himโ€ (Leviticus 21:12).

ื•ื›ืฉื”ื•ื ืžื ื—ื ืื—ืจื™ื ื“ืจืš ื›ืœ ื”ืขื ืขื•ื‘ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื–ื” ืื—ืจ ื–ื” ื•ื”ืžืžื•ื ื” ืžืžืฆืขื• ื‘ื™ื ื• ืœื‘ื™ืŸ ื”ืขื ื•ื›ืฉื”ื•ื ืžืชื ื—ื ืžืื—ืจื™ื ื›ืœ ื”ืขื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืœื• ืื ื—ื ื• ื›ืคืจืชืš ื•ื”ื•ื ืื•ืžืจ ืœื”ืŸ ืชืชื‘ืจื›ื• ืžืŸ ื”ืฉืžื™ื ื•ื›ืฉืžื‘ืจื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ื›ืœ ื”ืขื ืžืกื•ื‘ื™ืŸ ืขืœ ื”ืืจืฅ ื•ื”ื•ื ืžื™ืกื‘ ืขืœ ื”ืกืคืกืœ

The mishna continues: And when he consoles others in their mourning when they return from burial, the way of all the people is that they pass by one after another and the mourners stand in a line and are consoled, and the appointed person stands in the middle, between the High Priest and the people. And when he is consoled by others in his mourning, all the people say to him: We are your atonement. And he says to them: May you be blessed from Heaven. And when they comfort him with the first meal after the burial of one of his relatives, all the people recline on the ground as if they are taking his mourning on themselves, and he reclines on the bench out of respect for his status as High Priest.

ื”ืžืœืš ืœื ื“ืŸ ื•ืœื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืœื ื—ื•ืœืฅ ื•ืœื ื—ื•ืœืฆื™ืŸ ืœืืฉืชื• ืœื ืžื™ื™ื‘ื ื•ืœื ืžื™ื™ื‘ืžื™ืŸ ืœืืฉืชื• ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืื ืจืฆื” ืœื—ืœื•ืฅ ืื• ืœื™ื™ื‘ื ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืœื˜ื•ื‘ ืืžืจื• ืœื• ืื™ืŸ ืฉื•ืžืขื™ืŸ ืœื•

The mishna continues, enumerating the halakhot pertaining to the king in similar matters: The king does not judge others as a member of a court and others do not judge him, he does not testify and others do not testify concerning him, he does not perform แธฅalitza with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother does not perform แธฅalitza with his wife, and he does not consummate levirate marriage with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother does not consummate levirate marriage with his wife, as all these actions are not fitting to the honor of his office. Rabbi Yehuda says: These are not restrictions, but his prerogative: If he desired to perform แธฅalitza or to consummate levirate marriage, he is remembered for good, as this is to the benefit of his brotherโ€™s widow. The Sages said to him: They do not listen to him if he desires to do so, as this affects not only his own honor but that of the kingdom.

ื•ืื™ืŸ ื ื•ืฉืื™ืŸ ืืœืžื ืชื• ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ื ื•ืฉื ื”ืžืœืš ืืœืžื ืชื• ืฉืœ ืžืœืš ืฉื›ืŸ ืžืฆื™ื ื• ื‘ื“ื•ื“ ืฉื ืฉื ืืœืžื ืชื• ืฉืœ ืฉืื•ืœ ืฉื ืืžืจ ื•ืืชื ื” ืœืš ืืช ื‘ื™ืช ืื“ื ื™ืš ื•ืืช ื ืฉื™ ืื“ื ื™ืš ื‘ื—ื™ืงืš

And no one may marry a kingโ€™s widow, due to his honor. Rabbi Yehuda says: Another king may marry the widow of a king, as we found that King David married the widow of King Saul, as it is stated: โ€œAnd I have given you the house of your master and the wives of your master in your bosomโ€ (IIย Samuel 12:8).

ื’ืžืณ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื“ืŸ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืื™ืฆื˜ืจื™ื›ื ืœื™ื” ื”ื ื ืžื™ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืื™ ืœื ื“ื™ื™ื ื™ื ืŸ ืœื™ื” ืื™ื”ื• ื”ื™ื›ื™ ื“ื™ื™ืŸ ื•ื”ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ืชืงื•ืฉืฉื• ื•ืงื•ืฉื• ื•ืืžืจ ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืงืฉื˜ ืขืฆืžืš ื•ืื—ืจ ื›ืš ืงืฉื˜ ืื—ืจื™ื

GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the High Priest judges others as a member of a court. The Gemara asks: Isnโ€™t that obvious? Why would one think that he would be unfit to serve as a judge? The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the mishna to mention the latter clause: And others judge him, and therefore, it taught the related halakha with it. The Gemara objects: This is also obvious; if others do not judge him, how can he judge others? But isnโ€™t it written: โ€œGather yourselves together, yea, gather together [hitkosheshu vakoshu]โ€ (Zephaniah 2:1); and Reish Lakish says: This verse teaches a moral principle: Adorn [kashet] yourself first, and then adorn others, i.e., one who is not subject to judgment may not judge others.

ืืœื ืื™ื™ื“ื™ ื“ืงื ื‘ืขื™ ืœืžื™ืชื ื™ ืžืœืš ืœื ื“ืŸ ื•ืœื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืชื ื ื ืžื™ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื“ืŸ ื•ื“ื ื™ืŸ ื•ืื™ ื‘ืขื™ืช ืื™ืžื ื”ื ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื›ื“ืชื ื™ื ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืฉื”ืจื’ ืืช ื”ื ืคืฉ ื‘ืžื–ื™ื“ ื ื”ืจื’ ื‘ืฉื•ื’ื’ ื’ื•ืœื” ื•ืขื•ื‘ืจ ืขืœ ืขืฉื” ื•ืขืœ ืœื ืชืขืฉื” ื•ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื”ื“ื™ื•ื˜ ืœื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื•

Rather, neither halakha concerning the High Priest is a novelty. But since the tanna wants to teach that the king does not judge others and others do not judge him, he also taught that the High Priest judges others and others judge him. And if you wish, say instead that this teaches us the halakha as it is taught in a baraita (Tosefta 4:1): A High Priest who killed a person intentionally is killed; if he killed unintentionally, he is exiled to a city of refuge, and he transgresses a positive mitzva and a prohibition, and he is like an ordinary person concerning all of his halakhot.

ื‘ืžื–ื™ื“ ื ื”ืจื’ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื‘ืฉื•ื’ื’ ื’ื•ืœื” ืื™ืฆื˜ืจื™ื›ื ืœื™ื”

The Gemara analyzes the baraita: A High Priest who killed another intentionally is killed. Isnโ€™t that obvious? Why would he be punished differently than other murderers? It was necessary for it to mention the latter clause: If he killed unintentionally, he is exiled, so it taught the related case with it.

ื”ื ื ืžื™ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืื™ืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืฉื‘ ื‘ื” ืขื“ ืžื•ืช ื”ื›ื”ืŸ ื”ื’ื“ืœ ืื™ืžื ื›ืœ ื“ืื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืชืงื ืชื ื‘ื—ื–ืจื” ืœื™ื’ืœื™ ื“ืœื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืชืงื ืชื ื‘ื—ื–ืจื” ืœื ืœื™ื’ืœื™ ื“ืชื ืŸ

The Gemara objects: This is also obvious. The Gemara responds: It was necessary for the baraita to state the latter clause, lest it enter your mind to say: Since it is written about one who kills unintentionally and is exiled to a city of refuge: โ€œAnd he should dwell in it until the death of the High Priestโ€ (Numbers 35:25), say: Anyone for whom there is a rectification by returning from the city of refuge is exiled, but one for whom there is no rectification by returning is not exiled. The High Priest has no such rectification, as we learned in a mishna (Makkot 11b):

ื”ื”ื•ืจื’ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืื• ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืฉื”ืจื’ ืืช ื”ื ืคืฉ ืื™ื ื• ื™ื•ืฆื ืžืฉื ืœืขื•ืœื ืื™ืžื ืœื ืœื™ื’ืœื™ ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื•ืื™ืžื ื”ื›ื™ ื ืžื™ ืืžืจ ืงืจื ืœื ื•ืก ืฉืžื” ื›ืœ ืจืฆื— ืืคื™ืœื• ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื‘ืžืฉืžืข

With regard to one who kills a High Priest or a High Priest who killed a person, he never departs from the city of refuge. Therefore, I will say that a High Priest is not exiled at all. For that reason, the baraita above teaches us that he is exiled. The Gemara suggests: Why not say that the halakha is indeed that the High Priest would not be exiled, since he would not be able to return home? The Gemara responds: The verse states concerning the city of refuge: โ€œThat every manslayer may flee thereโ€ (Deuteronomy 19:3), and even a High Priest is indicated by the inclusive term โ€œevery.โ€

ืขื•ื‘ืจ ืขืœ ืขืฉื” ื•ืขืœ ืœื ืชืขืฉื” ืœื ืกื’ื™ ื“ืœื ืขื‘ืจ ื”ื›ื™ ืงืืžืจ ืื ืขื‘ืจ ืขืœ ืขืฉื” ื•ืขืœ ืœื ืชืขืฉื” ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื”ื“ื™ื•ื˜ ืœื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื•

The baraita teaches that a High Priest transgresses a positive mitzva and a prohibition. The Gemara understands the baraita as an independent statement asserting that the High Priest must transgress a positive mitzva and a prohibition, and asks: Is it not possible that he doesnโ€™t transgress a positive mitzva and prohibition; i.e., must the High Priest transgress a positive mitzva and a prohibition? The Gemara responds: This is what the baraita is saying: This is not an independent statement asserting that the High Priest must transgress a positive mitzva and a prohibition; rather, the baraita teaches that if he transgressed a positive mitzva and a prohibition, then he is considered to be like an ordinary person concerning all of his halakhot, judged just as anyone else for common transgressions.

ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ืชื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืœื ืืช ื”ืฉื‘ื˜ ื•ืœื ืืช ื ื‘ื™ื ื”ืฉืงืจ ื•ืœื ืืช ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืืœื ืขืœ ืคื™ ื‘ื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉืœ ืฉื‘ืขื™ื ื•ืื—ื“ ื•ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืื“ื ื‘ืจ ืื”ื‘ื” ื›ืœ ื”ื“ื‘ืจ ื”ื’ื“ืœ ื™ื‘ื™ืื• ืืœื™ืš ื“ื‘ืจื™ื• ืฉืœ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืื™ืžื ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื• ืฉืœ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ

The Gemara asks: Isnโ€™t that obvious? The Gemara responds: No, as it could enter your mind to say that since we learned in the mishna (2a): The court judges cases involving an entire tribe that sinned, or a false prophet, or a High Priest, only on the basis of a court of seventy-one judges, i.e., the Great Sanhedrin, and since Rav Adda bar Ahava says that the phrase โ€œevery great matter they shall bring unto youโ€ (Exodus 18:22), refers to the matters of a great person, the High Priest, who is judged in a court of seventy-one, therefore, one might say that this means all the matters of a great person, including non-capital transgressions, are judged in a court of seventy-one. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that for non-capital transgressions, he is treated like an ordinary person, and judged even by a court of three.

ื•ืื™ืžื ื”ื›ื™ ื ืžื™ ืžื™ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื”ื“ื‘ืจ ื”ื’ื“ืœ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื“ื‘ืจ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืžืžืฉ

The Gemara suggests: But why not say that indeed, the halakha is that all cases involving the High Priest must be adjudicated in a court of seventy-one? The Gemara rejects this. Is it written: The matters of a great person? โ€œEvery great matterโ€ is written, meaning actually a great matter, one involving a capital transgression, not only one related to a great person.

ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ื”ืชื ื™ื ืณื•ื”ืชืขืœืžืชืณ ืคืขืžื™ื ืฉืืชื” ืžืชืขืœื ื•ืคืขืžื™ื ืฉืื™ ืืชื” ืžืชืขืœื ื”ื ื›ื™ืฆื“

ยง The mishna teaches that the High Priest testifies before the court and others testify concerning him. The Gemara expresses surprise: He testifies? But isnโ€™t it taught in a baraita that in the verse: โ€œYou shall not see your brotherโ€™s ox or his sheep wandering and ignore them; you shall return them to your brotherโ€ (Deuteronomy 22:1), the use of the unusual term โ€œand ignore them,โ€ as opposed to the more direct: Do not ignore them, indicates that there are times when you ignore lost items and there are times when you do not ignore them. How so?

ื›ื”ืŸ ื•ื”ื•ื ื‘ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืงื‘ืจื•ืช ื–ืงืŸ ื•ืื™ื ื” ืœืคื™ ื›ื‘ื•ื“ื• ืื• ืฉื”ื™ืชื” ืžืœืื›ื” ืฉืœื• ืžืจื•ื‘ื” ืžืฉืœ ื—ื‘ื™ืจื• ืœื›ืš ื ืืžืจ ืณื•ื”ืชืขืœืžืชืณ

The baraita answers: If the one who found the item was a priest, and the lost item is in the cemetery, where priests are prohibited from entering; or if he was an elderly person and it is not in keeping with his dignity to tend to a lost item of that kind; or if his work, which he would need to suspend in order to tend to and return the item, is of greater value than the lost item of the other, one might think that he must nonetheless return it. Therefore, with regard to those cases, it is stated: โ€œAnd ignore them.โ€ Since a distinguished individual may ignore a mitzva that is incumbent on others if it is not in keeping with his dignity, perhaps the High Priest would be allowed to ignore the obligation to testify, due to his honor.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืžืขื™ื“ ืœืžืœืš ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ืœื ื“ืŸ ื•ืœื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืืœื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื–ื™ืจื ืžืขื™ื“ ืœื‘ืŸ ืžืœืš ื‘ืŸ ืžืœืš ื”ื“ื™ื•ื˜ ื”ื•ื

Rav Yosef said: A High Priest testifies only about a king, since such testimony would not compromise his dignity. The Gemara objects: But didnโ€™t we learn in the mishna above that the king does not judge and is not judged, and he does not testify and others do not testify concerning him? Rather, Rabbi Zeira said: The meaning of Rav Yosefโ€™s statement is that a High Priest testifies about a son of a king. The Gemara objects: The son of a king is an ordinary person, without special status in halakha, so it is not in keeping with the High Priestโ€™s dignity to testify concerning him.

ืืœื ืžืขื™ื“ ื‘ืคื ื™ ื”ืžืœืš ื•ื”ื ืื™ืŸ ืžื•ืฉื™ื‘ื™ืŸ ืžืœืš ื‘ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื™ืงืจื ื“ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืืชื ื•ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืžืงื‘ืœื™ ื ื™ื”ืœื™ื” ืœืกื”ื“ื•ืชื™ื” ืงืื™ ื”ื•ื ื•ืื–ื™ืœ ื•ืžืขื™ื™ื ื™ื ื ืœื™ื” ืื ืŸ ื‘ื“ื™ื ื™ื”

Rather, the meaning of Rav Yosefโ€™s statement is that he testifies before the king, and it is not in keeping with the dignity of the High Priest to testify if the king is a presiding judge. The Gemara objects: But didnโ€™t we learn in a baraita (Tosefta 2:8) that a king is not seated on the Sanhedrin? The Gemara explains: Rav Yosef is referring to a special arrangement: Due to the honor of the High Priest, the king comes and sits as one of the judges, they receive his testimony, he rises and goes, and we deliberate about the case.

ื’ื•ืคื ืื™ืŸ ืžื•ืฉื™ื‘ื™ืŸ ืžืœืš ื‘ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ื•ืœื ืžืœืš ื•ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื‘ืขื™ื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื ื” ืžืœืš ื‘ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืœื ืชืขื ื” ืขืœ ืจื‘ ืœื ืชืขื ื” ืขืœ ืจื‘

ยง Having mentioned this baraita, the Gemara turns its attention to the matter itself: A king is not seated on the Sanhedrin, nor is a king or a High Priest seated on a court for intercalating the year. The Gemara explains: With regard to a king on the Sanhedrin, the source is as it is written: โ€œDo not answer in a cause [riv]โ€ (Exodus 23:2), which is explained to mean: Do not answer to a great person [rav]. Therefore, one whose stature will make the other judges afraid to contradict him may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin.

ืœื ืžืœืš ื•ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื‘ืขื™ื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื ื” ืžืœืš ืžืฉื•ื ืืคืกื ื™ื ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืžืฉื•ื ืฆื™ื ื”

The Gemara continues its explanation of the baraita: Nor is a king or a High Priest seated on a court for intercalating the year. A king does not serve as a judge concerning this matter due to the sustenance of soldiers. Taxes were collected on a yearly basis, while the soldiers were paid monthly, so the king had a vested interest in not adding a month to the calendar. A High Priest does not serve as a judge concerning this matter due to the cold. If a month is added to the calendar and the High Priest must perform his Yom Kippur immersions and walk barefoot on the floor of the Temple deeper into the cold autumn, he too will have a vested interest in not adding a month.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ืฉืžืข ืžื™ื ื” ืฉืชื ื‘ืชืจ ื™ืจื—ื ืื–ื™ืœ ืื™ื ื™ ื•ื”ื ื”ื ืš ืฉืœืฉื” ืจื•ืขื™ ื‘ืงืจ ื“ื”ื•ื• ืงื™ื™ืžื™ ื•ืฉืžืขื™ื ื”ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื“ืงืืžืจื™

Rav Pappa says: Learn from the ruling concerning the High Priest that the weather of the year follows the months, meaning that changes in the seasons are in accordance with the sequence of the months in the standard, non-intercalated calendar. The High Priest would not want the year to be intercalated, because then the colder weather of Marแธฅeshvan would occur during Tishrei. The Gemara asks: Is that so? But isnโ€™t that contradicted by the incident of those three cattle herders that were standing around, and the Sages heard them saying various statements about annual weather signs?

ื—ื“ ืืžืจ ืื ื‘ื›ื™ืจ ื•ืœืงื™ืฉ ื›ื—ื“ื ื™ื™ื ืฅ ื“ื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื ืื“ืจ ื•ืื ืœืื• ืœื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืื“ืจ ื•ื—ื“ ืืžืจ ืื ืชื•ืจ ื‘ืฆืคืจ ื‘ืชืœื’ ื™ืžื•ืช ื•ื‘ื˜ื™ื”ืจื ื‘ื˜ื•ืœ ืชืื™ื ื” ื™ื“ืžื•ืš ื™ืฉืœื— ืžืฉื›ื™ื” ื“ื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื ืื“ืจ ื•ืื ืœืื• ืœื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืื“ืจ ื•ื—ื“ ืืžืจ ืื ืงื™ื“ื•ื ืชืงื™ืฃ ืœื—ื“ื ื™ื”ื ื™ืคื— ื‘ืœื•ืขืš ื ืคื™ืง ืœืงื™ื‘ืœื™ื” ื“ื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื ืื“ืจ ื•ืื ืœืื• ืœื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืื“ืจ ื•ืขื‘ืจื•ื” ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืœื”ื”ื™ื ืฉืชื

One of them said: If the first grains and the late-ripening grains sprout at the same time, that is Adar, but if not, that is not Adar but still Shevat. And one of them said: If an ox dies in the morning in the snow, indicating that it is still very cold, and at noon in the shade of a fig tree it sleeps, rubbing against it to strip off its skin because of the heat, that is Adar, but if not, that is not Adar. And one of them said: If there is a very strong east wind, which is cold, yet the warm air that you blow with your jaw goes out and toward it and overcomes its effect, that is Adar, but if not, that is not Adar. And since those signs had not yet come to pass, the Sages intercalated the calendar that year.

ื•ืชืกื‘ืจื ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืืจืขื•ื•ืชื ืกืžื•ืš ืืœื ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื—ื•ืฉื‘ื ื™ื™ื”ื• ืกืžื•ืš ื•ืจื•ืขื™ ื‘ืงืจ ืื™ืกืชื™ื•ืขื™ ื”ื•ื ื“ืื™ืกืชื™ื™ืขื ืžื™ืœืชื™ื™ื”ื•

The Gemara rejects this: And can you understand that the Sages relied on cattle herders to determine halakha? Rather, the Sages relied on their own calculations, and those cattle herders were supported inasmuch as their statements were supported by the Sagesโ€™ independent conclusion.

ื—ื•ืœืฅ ื•ื—ื•ืœืฆื™ืŸ ื›ื•ืณ ืงื ืคืกื™ืง ื•ืชื ื™ ืœื ืฉื ื ืžืŸ ื”ืื™ืจื•ืกื™ืŸ ื•ืœื ืฉื ื ืžืŸ ื”ื ื™ืฉื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ืฉืœืžื ืžืŸ ื”ื ื™ืฉื•ืื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื™ ืขืฉื” ื•ืœื ืชืขืฉื”

ยง The mishna teaches that the High Priest performs แธฅalitza with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother performs แธฅalitza with his wife, but in any case he does not consummate levirate marriage with his brotherโ€™s wife. The Gemara comments: The mishna categorically teaches that the High Priest does not consummate levirate marriage, and there is no difference whether his brotherโ€™s wife was a widow from betrothal alone and no difference whether she was a widow from a marriage that had been consummated. Granted, it is understood that he does not consummate levirate marriage with a widow from marriage, since there is both a positive mitzva: โ€œAnd he shall take a wife in her virginityโ€ (Leviticus 21:13), and also a prohibition: โ€œA widow, or one divorced, or a แธฅalala, or a zona, these shall he not takeโ€ (Leviticus 21:14),

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Sanhedrin 18

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Sanhedrin 18

ืžืืชื™ื ื•ืฉื‘ืขื™ื ื•ืฉื‘ืขื”

The number of people needed in a city for it to be eligible for a lesser Sanhedrin is 277. This number is based on the opinion of Rabbi Neแธฅemya, who requires 230 men, but requires an additional 47 men in case it happens that the Sages of the court reach a situation where they are not able to arrive at a verdict, and pairs of judges need to be added, potentially increasing the number of judges on the court from 23 to 70, a maximum of 47 additional judges.

ื•ื”ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืžืืชื™ื ืฉื‘ืขื™ื ื•ืฉืžื ื” ืœื ืงืฉื™ื ื”ื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ื”ื ืจื‘ื ืŸ

The Gemara asks: But isnโ€™t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The number of men needed in a city for it to be eligible for a lesser Sanhedrin is 278? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This baraita that said Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi requires 277 residents is stated in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that there are 70 judges on the Great Sanhedrin, and this baraita that quoted the number as 278 is stated in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who hold that there are 71.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืณื•ืฉืžืช ืขืœื™ื”ื ืฉืจื™ ืืœืคื™ื ืฉืจื™ ืžืื•ืช ืฉืจื™ ื—ืžืฉื™ื ื•ืฉืจื™ ืขืฉืจืชืณ ืฉืจื™ ืืœืคื™ื ืฉืฉ ืžืื•ืช ืฉืจื™ ืžืื•ืช ืฉืฉืช ืืœืคื™ื ืฉืจื™ ื—ืžืฉื™ื ืฉื ื™ื ืขืฉืจ ืืœืฃ ืฉืจื™ ืขืฉืจื•ืช ืฉืฉืช ืจื™ื‘ื•ื ื ืžืฆืื• ื“ื™ื™ื ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืฉื‘ืขืช ืจื™ื‘ื•ื ื•ืฉืžื•ื ืช ืืœืคื™ื ื•ืฉืฉ ืžืื•ืช

Apropos the opinion of Rabbi Neแธฅemya, which links the issue of the lesser Sanhedrin with the appointment of the ministers in the wilderness, the Gemara relates: The Sages taught: The verse states: โ€œAnd place over them ministers of thousands, ministers of hundreds, ministers of fifties, and ministers of tensโ€ (Exodus 18:21). The number of ministers of thousands was 600, as there were 600,000 men in total; the number of ministers of hundreds was 6,000; of ministers of fifties, 12,000, and of ministers of tens, 60,000. Therefore, it is found that the total number of judges of the Jewish people was 78,600, and suitable people were found to fill all of these positions.

ื”ื“ืจืŸ ืขืœืš ื“ื™ื ื™ ืžืžื•ื ื•ืช

 

ืžืชื ื™ืณ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื“ืŸ ื•ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ื—ื•ืœืฅ ื•ื—ื•ืœืฆื™ืŸ ืœืืฉืชื• ื•ืžื™ื™ื‘ืžื™ืŸ ืืช ืืฉืชื• ืื‘ืœ ื”ื•ื ืื™ื ื• ืžื™ื™ื‘ื ืžืคื ื™ ืฉื”ื•ื ืืกื•ืจ ื‘ืืœืžื ื”

MISHNA: The High Priest judges others if he is sufficiently wise, and others judge him when he transgresses. He testifies before the court and others testify concerning him. He performs แธฅalitza with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother performs แธฅalitza with his wife; and his brother consummates levirate marriage with his wife. But he does not consummate levirate marriage with his brotherโ€™s widow, because it is prohibited for him to marry a widow (see Leviticus 21:14), and can therefore never fulfill the mitzva of levirate marriage, as a yevama is by definition a widow.

ืžืช ืœื• ืžืช ืื™ื ื• ื™ื•ืฆื ืื—ืจ ื”ืžื˜ื” ืืœื ื”ืŸ ื ื›ืกื™ืŸ ื•ื”ื•ื ื ื’ืœื” ื”ืŸ ื ื’ืœื™ืŸ ื•ื”ื•ื ื ื›ืกื” ื•ื™ื•ืฆื ืขืžื”ืŸ ืขื“ ืคืชื— ืฉืขืจ ื”ืขื™ืจ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืžืื™ืจ

If a relative of the High Priest dies, he does not follow the bier carrying the corpse, since it is prohibited for the High Priest to become ritually impure even for immediate relatives (see Leviticus 21:11). Rather, once the members of the funeral procession are concealed from sight by turning onto another street, he is revealed on the street they departed, and when they are revealed, then he is concealed, and in this way, he goes out with them until the entrance of the gate of the city, from where they would take out the corpse, since the dead were not buried in Jerusalem. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืื™ื ื• ื™ื•ืฆื ืžืŸ ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ ืžืฉื•ื ืฉื ืืžืจ ื•ืžืŸ ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ ืœื ื™ืฆื

Rabbi Yehuda says: He does not emerge from the Temple at all for the burial of his relatives, as it is stated: โ€œAnd from the Temple he shall not emerge and will not desecrate the Temple of his God; for the separateness of the oil of the anointment of his God is on himโ€ (Leviticus 21:12).

ื•ื›ืฉื”ื•ื ืžื ื—ื ืื—ืจื™ื ื“ืจืš ื›ืœ ื”ืขื ืขื•ื‘ืจื™ืŸ ื‘ื–ื” ืื—ืจ ื–ื” ื•ื”ืžืžื•ื ื” ืžืžืฆืขื• ื‘ื™ื ื• ืœื‘ื™ืŸ ื”ืขื ื•ื›ืฉื”ื•ื ืžืชื ื—ื ืžืื—ืจื™ื ื›ืœ ื”ืขื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืœื• ืื ื—ื ื• ื›ืคืจืชืš ื•ื”ื•ื ืื•ืžืจ ืœื”ืŸ ืชืชื‘ืจื›ื• ืžืŸ ื”ืฉืžื™ื ื•ื›ืฉืžื‘ืจื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ื›ืœ ื”ืขื ืžืกื•ื‘ื™ืŸ ืขืœ ื”ืืจืฅ ื•ื”ื•ื ืžื™ืกื‘ ืขืœ ื”ืกืคืกืœ

The mishna continues: And when he consoles others in their mourning when they return from burial, the way of all the people is that they pass by one after another and the mourners stand in a line and are consoled, and the appointed person stands in the middle, between the High Priest and the people. And when he is consoled by others in his mourning, all the people say to him: We are your atonement. And he says to them: May you be blessed from Heaven. And when they comfort him with the first meal after the burial of one of his relatives, all the people recline on the ground as if they are taking his mourning on themselves, and he reclines on the bench out of respect for his status as High Priest.

ื”ืžืœืš ืœื ื“ืŸ ื•ืœื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืœื ื—ื•ืœืฅ ื•ืœื ื—ื•ืœืฆื™ืŸ ืœืืฉืชื• ืœื ืžื™ื™ื‘ื ื•ืœื ืžื™ื™ื‘ืžื™ืŸ ืœืืฉืชื• ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ืื ืจืฆื” ืœื—ืœื•ืฅ ืื• ืœื™ื™ื‘ื ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืœื˜ื•ื‘ ืืžืจื• ืœื• ืื™ืŸ ืฉื•ืžืขื™ืŸ ืœื•

The mishna continues, enumerating the halakhot pertaining to the king in similar matters: The king does not judge others as a member of a court and others do not judge him, he does not testify and others do not testify concerning him, he does not perform แธฅalitza with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother does not perform แธฅalitza with his wife, and he does not consummate levirate marriage with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother does not consummate levirate marriage with his wife, as all these actions are not fitting to the honor of his office. Rabbi Yehuda says: These are not restrictions, but his prerogative: If he desired to perform แธฅalitza or to consummate levirate marriage, he is remembered for good, as this is to the benefit of his brotherโ€™s widow. The Sages said to him: They do not listen to him if he desires to do so, as this affects not only his own honor but that of the kingdom.

ื•ืื™ืŸ ื ื•ืฉืื™ืŸ ืืœืžื ืชื• ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืื•ืžืจ ื ื•ืฉื ื”ืžืœืš ืืœืžื ืชื• ืฉืœ ืžืœืš ืฉื›ืŸ ืžืฆื™ื ื• ื‘ื“ื•ื“ ืฉื ืฉื ืืœืžื ืชื• ืฉืœ ืฉืื•ืœ ืฉื ืืžืจ ื•ืืชื ื” ืœืš ืืช ื‘ื™ืช ืื“ื ื™ืš ื•ืืช ื ืฉื™ ืื“ื ื™ืš ื‘ื—ื™ืงืš

And no one may marry a kingโ€™s widow, due to his honor. Rabbi Yehuda says: Another king may marry the widow of a king, as we found that King David married the widow of King Saul, as it is stated: โ€œAnd I have given you the house of your master and the wives of your master in your bosomโ€ (IIย Samuel 12:8).

ื’ืžืณ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื“ืŸ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืื™ืฆื˜ืจื™ื›ื ืœื™ื” ื”ื ื ืžื™ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืื™ ืœื ื“ื™ื™ื ื™ื ืŸ ืœื™ื” ืื™ื”ื• ื”ื™ื›ื™ ื“ื™ื™ืŸ ื•ื”ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื”ืชืงื•ืฉืฉื• ื•ืงื•ืฉื• ื•ืืžืจ ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ ืงืฉื˜ ืขืฆืžืš ื•ืื—ืจ ื›ืš ืงืฉื˜ ืื—ืจื™ื

GEMARA: The mishna teaches that the High Priest judges others as a member of a court. The Gemara asks: Isnโ€™t that obvious? Why would one think that he would be unfit to serve as a judge? The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the mishna to mention the latter clause: And others judge him, and therefore, it taught the related halakha with it. The Gemara objects: This is also obvious; if others do not judge him, how can he judge others? But isnโ€™t it written: โ€œGather yourselves together, yea, gather together [hitkosheshu vakoshu]โ€ (Zephaniah 2:1); and Reish Lakish says: This verse teaches a moral principle: Adorn [kashet] yourself first, and then adorn others, i.e., one who is not subject to judgment may not judge others.

ืืœื ืื™ื™ื“ื™ ื“ืงื ื‘ืขื™ ืœืžื™ืชื ื™ ืžืœืš ืœื ื“ืŸ ื•ืœื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืชื ื ื ืžื™ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื“ืŸ ื•ื“ื ื™ืŸ ื•ืื™ ื‘ืขื™ืช ืื™ืžื ื”ื ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื›ื“ืชื ื™ื ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืฉื”ืจื’ ืืช ื”ื ืคืฉ ื‘ืžื–ื™ื“ ื ื”ืจื’ ื‘ืฉื•ื’ื’ ื’ื•ืœื” ื•ืขื•ื‘ืจ ืขืœ ืขืฉื” ื•ืขืœ ืœื ืชืขืฉื” ื•ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื”ื“ื™ื•ื˜ ืœื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื•

Rather, neither halakha concerning the High Priest is a novelty. But since the tanna wants to teach that the king does not judge others and others do not judge him, he also taught that the High Priest judges others and others judge him. And if you wish, say instead that this teaches us the halakha as it is taught in a baraita (Tosefta 4:1): A High Priest who killed a person intentionally is killed; if he killed unintentionally, he is exiled to a city of refuge, and he transgresses a positive mitzva and a prohibition, and he is like an ordinary person concerning all of his halakhot.

ื‘ืžื–ื™ื“ ื ื”ืจื’ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ื‘ืฉื•ื’ื’ ื’ื•ืœื” ืื™ืฆื˜ืจื™ื›ื ืœื™ื”

The Gemara analyzes the baraita: A High Priest who killed another intentionally is killed. Isnโ€™t that obvious? Why would he be punished differently than other murderers? It was necessary for it to mention the latter clause: If he killed unintentionally, he is exiled, so it taught the related case with it.

ื”ื ื ืžื™ ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืื™ืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืฉื‘ ื‘ื” ืขื“ ืžื•ืช ื”ื›ื”ืŸ ื”ื’ื“ืœ ืื™ืžื ื›ืœ ื“ืื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืชืงื ืชื ื‘ื—ื–ืจื” ืœื™ื’ืœื™ ื“ืœื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืชืงื ืชื ื‘ื—ื–ืจื” ืœื ืœื™ื’ืœื™ ื“ืชื ืŸ

The Gemara objects: This is also obvious. The Gemara responds: It was necessary for the baraita to state the latter clause, lest it enter your mind to say: Since it is written about one who kills unintentionally and is exiled to a city of refuge: โ€œAnd he should dwell in it until the death of the High Priestโ€ (Numbers 35:25), say: Anyone for whom there is a rectification by returning from the city of refuge is exiled, but one for whom there is no rectification by returning is not exiled. The High Priest has no such rectification, as we learned in a mishna (Makkot 11b):

ื”ื”ื•ืจื’ ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืื• ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืฉื”ืจื’ ืืช ื”ื ืคืฉ ืื™ื ื• ื™ื•ืฆื ืžืฉื ืœืขื•ืœื ืื™ืžื ืœื ืœื™ื’ืœื™ ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื•ืื™ืžื ื”ื›ื™ ื ืžื™ ืืžืจ ืงืจื ืœื ื•ืก ืฉืžื” ื›ืœ ืจืฆื— ืืคื™ืœื• ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื‘ืžืฉืžืข

With regard to one who kills a High Priest or a High Priest who killed a person, he never departs from the city of refuge. Therefore, I will say that a High Priest is not exiled at all. For that reason, the baraita above teaches us that he is exiled. The Gemara suggests: Why not say that the halakha is indeed that the High Priest would not be exiled, since he would not be able to return home? The Gemara responds: The verse states concerning the city of refuge: โ€œThat every manslayer may flee thereโ€ (Deuteronomy 19:3), and even a High Priest is indicated by the inclusive term โ€œevery.โ€

ืขื•ื‘ืจ ืขืœ ืขืฉื” ื•ืขืœ ืœื ืชืขืฉื” ืœื ืกื’ื™ ื“ืœื ืขื‘ืจ ื”ื›ื™ ืงืืžืจ ืื ืขื‘ืจ ืขืœ ืขืฉื” ื•ืขืœ ืœื ืชืขืฉื” ื”ืจื™ ื”ื•ื ื›ื”ื“ื™ื•ื˜ ืœื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื•

The baraita teaches that a High Priest transgresses a positive mitzva and a prohibition. The Gemara understands the baraita as an independent statement asserting that the High Priest must transgress a positive mitzva and a prohibition, and asks: Is it not possible that he doesnโ€™t transgress a positive mitzva and prohibition; i.e., must the High Priest transgress a positive mitzva and a prohibition? The Gemara responds: This is what the baraita is saying: This is not an independent statement asserting that the High Priest must transgress a positive mitzva and a prohibition; rather, the baraita teaches that if he transgressed a positive mitzva and a prohibition, then he is considered to be like an ordinary person concerning all of his halakhot, judged just as anyone else for common transgressions.

ืคืฉื™ื˜ื ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ืชื ืŸ ืื™ืŸ ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืœื ืืช ื”ืฉื‘ื˜ ื•ืœื ืืช ื ื‘ื™ื ื”ืฉืงืจ ื•ืœื ืืช ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืืœื ืขืœ ืคื™ ื‘ื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืฉืœ ืฉื‘ืขื™ื ื•ืื—ื“ ื•ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืื“ื ื‘ืจ ืื”ื‘ื” ื›ืœ ื”ื“ื‘ืจ ื”ื’ื“ืœ ื™ื‘ื™ืื• ืืœื™ืš ื“ื‘ืจื™ื• ืฉืœ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืื™ืžื ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื• ืฉืœ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ

The Gemara asks: Isnโ€™t that obvious? The Gemara responds: No, as it could enter your mind to say that since we learned in the mishna (2a): The court judges cases involving an entire tribe that sinned, or a false prophet, or a High Priest, only on the basis of a court of seventy-one judges, i.e., the Great Sanhedrin, and since Rav Adda bar Ahava says that the phrase โ€œevery great matter they shall bring unto youโ€ (Exodus 18:22), refers to the matters of a great person, the High Priest, who is judged in a court of seventy-one, therefore, one might say that this means all the matters of a great person, including non-capital transgressions, are judged in a court of seventy-one. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that for non-capital transgressions, he is treated like an ordinary person, and judged even by a court of three.

ื•ืื™ืžื ื”ื›ื™ ื ืžื™ ืžื™ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื”ื“ื‘ืจ ื”ื’ื“ืœ ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื“ื‘ืจ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืžืžืฉ

The Gemara suggests: But why not say that indeed, the halakha is that all cases involving the High Priest must be adjudicated in a court of seventy-one? The Gemara rejects this. Is it written: The matters of a great person? โ€œEvery great matterโ€ is written, meaning actually a great matter, one involving a capital transgression, not only one related to a great person.

ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ื”ืชื ื™ื ืณื•ื”ืชืขืœืžืชืณ ืคืขืžื™ื ืฉืืชื” ืžืชืขืœื ื•ืคืขืžื™ื ืฉืื™ ืืชื” ืžืชืขืœื ื”ื ื›ื™ืฆื“

ยง The mishna teaches that the High Priest testifies before the court and others testify concerning him. The Gemara expresses surprise: He testifies? But isnโ€™t it taught in a baraita that in the verse: โ€œYou shall not see your brotherโ€™s ox or his sheep wandering and ignore them; you shall return them to your brotherโ€ (Deuteronomy 22:1), the use of the unusual term โ€œand ignore them,โ€ as opposed to the more direct: Do not ignore them, indicates that there are times when you ignore lost items and there are times when you do not ignore them. How so?

ื›ื”ืŸ ื•ื”ื•ื ื‘ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืงื‘ืจื•ืช ื–ืงืŸ ื•ืื™ื ื” ืœืคื™ ื›ื‘ื•ื“ื• ืื• ืฉื”ื™ืชื” ืžืœืื›ื” ืฉืœื• ืžืจื•ื‘ื” ืžืฉืœ ื—ื‘ื™ืจื• ืœื›ืš ื ืืžืจ ืณื•ื”ืชืขืœืžืชืณ

The baraita answers: If the one who found the item was a priest, and the lost item is in the cemetery, where priests are prohibited from entering; or if he was an elderly person and it is not in keeping with his dignity to tend to a lost item of that kind; or if his work, which he would need to suspend in order to tend to and return the item, is of greater value than the lost item of the other, one might think that he must nonetheless return it. Therefore, with regard to those cases, it is stated: โ€œAnd ignore them.โ€ Since a distinguished individual may ignore a mitzva that is incumbent on others if it is not in keeping with his dignity, perhaps the High Priest would be allowed to ignore the obligation to testify, due to his honor.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืžืขื™ื“ ืœืžืœืš ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ืœื ื“ืŸ ื•ืœื ื“ื ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ ื•ืœื ืžืขื™ื“ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืืœื ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื–ื™ืจื ืžืขื™ื“ ืœื‘ืŸ ืžืœืš ื‘ืŸ ืžืœืš ื”ื“ื™ื•ื˜ ื”ื•ื

Rav Yosef said: A High Priest testifies only about a king, since such testimony would not compromise his dignity. The Gemara objects: But didnโ€™t we learn in the mishna above that the king does not judge and is not judged, and he does not testify and others do not testify concerning him? Rather, Rabbi Zeira said: The meaning of Rav Yosefโ€™s statement is that a High Priest testifies about a son of a king. The Gemara objects: The son of a king is an ordinary person, without special status in halakha, so it is not in keeping with the High Priestโ€™s dignity to testify concerning him.

ืืœื ืžืขื™ื“ ื‘ืคื ื™ ื”ืžืœืš ื•ื”ื ืื™ืŸ ืžื•ืฉื™ื‘ื™ืŸ ืžืœืš ื‘ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ื™ืงืจื ื“ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืืชื ื•ื™ืชื™ื‘ ืžืงื‘ืœื™ ื ื™ื”ืœื™ื” ืœืกื”ื“ื•ืชื™ื” ืงืื™ ื”ื•ื ื•ืื–ื™ืœ ื•ืžืขื™ื™ื ื™ื ื ืœื™ื” ืื ืŸ ื‘ื“ื™ื ื™ื”

Rather, the meaning of Rav Yosefโ€™s statement is that he testifies before the king, and it is not in keeping with the dignity of the High Priest to testify if the king is a presiding judge. The Gemara objects: But didnโ€™t we learn in a baraita (Tosefta 2:8) that a king is not seated on the Sanhedrin? The Gemara explains: Rav Yosef is referring to a special arrangement: Due to the honor of the High Priest, the king comes and sits as one of the judges, they receive his testimony, he rises and goes, and we deliberate about the case.

ื’ื•ืคื ืื™ืŸ ืžื•ืฉื™ื‘ื™ืŸ ืžืœืš ื‘ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ื•ืœื ืžืœืš ื•ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื‘ืขื™ื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื ื” ืžืœืš ื‘ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืœื ืชืขื ื” ืขืœ ืจื‘ ืœื ืชืขื ื” ืขืœ ืจื‘

ยง Having mentioned this baraita, the Gemara turns its attention to the matter itself: A king is not seated on the Sanhedrin, nor is a king or a High Priest seated on a court for intercalating the year. The Gemara explains: With regard to a king on the Sanhedrin, the source is as it is written: โ€œDo not answer in a cause [riv]โ€ (Exodus 23:2), which is explained to mean: Do not answer to a great person [rav]. Therefore, one whose stature will make the other judges afraid to contradict him may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin.

ืœื ืžืœืš ื•ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ื‘ืขื™ื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื ื” ืžืœืš ืžืฉื•ื ืืคืกื ื™ื ื›ื”ืŸ ื’ื“ื•ืœ ืžืฉื•ื ืฆื™ื ื”

The Gemara continues its explanation of the baraita: Nor is a king or a High Priest seated on a court for intercalating the year. A king does not serve as a judge concerning this matter due to the sustenance of soldiers. Taxes were collected on a yearly basis, while the soldiers were paid monthly, so the king had a vested interest in not adding a month to the calendar. A High Priest does not serve as a judge concerning this matter due to the cold. If a month is added to the calendar and the High Priest must perform his Yom Kippur immersions and walk barefoot on the floor of the Temple deeper into the cold autumn, he too will have a vested interest in not adding a month.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ืฉืžืข ืžื™ื ื” ืฉืชื ื‘ืชืจ ื™ืจื—ื ืื–ื™ืœ ืื™ื ื™ ื•ื”ื ื”ื ืš ืฉืœืฉื” ืจื•ืขื™ ื‘ืงืจ ื“ื”ื•ื• ืงื™ื™ืžื™ ื•ืฉืžืขื™ื ื”ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื“ืงืืžืจื™

Rav Pappa says: Learn from the ruling concerning the High Priest that the weather of the year follows the months, meaning that changes in the seasons are in accordance with the sequence of the months in the standard, non-intercalated calendar. The High Priest would not want the year to be intercalated, because then the colder weather of Marแธฅeshvan would occur during Tishrei. The Gemara asks: Is that so? But isnโ€™t that contradicted by the incident of those three cattle herders that were standing around, and the Sages heard them saying various statements about annual weather signs?

ื—ื“ ืืžืจ ืื ื‘ื›ื™ืจ ื•ืœืงื™ืฉ ื›ื—ื“ื ื™ื™ื ืฅ ื“ื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื ืื“ืจ ื•ืื ืœืื• ืœื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืื“ืจ ื•ื—ื“ ืืžืจ ืื ืชื•ืจ ื‘ืฆืคืจ ื‘ืชืœื’ ื™ืžื•ืช ื•ื‘ื˜ื™ื”ืจื ื‘ื˜ื•ืœ ืชืื™ื ื” ื™ื“ืžื•ืš ื™ืฉืœื— ืžืฉื›ื™ื” ื“ื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื ืื“ืจ ื•ืื ืœืื• ืœื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืื“ืจ ื•ื—ื“ ืืžืจ ืื ืงื™ื“ื•ื ืชืงื™ืฃ ืœื—ื“ื ื™ื”ื ื™ืคื— ื‘ืœื•ืขืš ื ืคื™ืง ืœืงื™ื‘ืœื™ื” ื“ื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื ืื“ืจ ื•ืื ืœืื• ืœื™ืช ื“ื™ืŸ ืื“ืจ ื•ืขื‘ืจื•ื” ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืœื”ื”ื™ื ืฉืชื

One of them said: If the first grains and the late-ripening grains sprout at the same time, that is Adar, but if not, that is not Adar but still Shevat. And one of them said: If an ox dies in the morning in the snow, indicating that it is still very cold, and at noon in the shade of a fig tree it sleeps, rubbing against it to strip off its skin because of the heat, that is Adar, but if not, that is not Adar. And one of them said: If there is a very strong east wind, which is cold, yet the warm air that you blow with your jaw goes out and toward it and overcomes its effect, that is Adar, but if not, that is not Adar. And since those signs had not yet come to pass, the Sages intercalated the calendar that year.

ื•ืชืกื‘ืจื ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืืจืขื•ื•ืชื ืกืžื•ืš ืืœื ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืื—ื•ืฉื‘ื ื™ื™ื”ื• ืกืžื•ืš ื•ืจื•ืขื™ ื‘ืงืจ ืื™ืกืชื™ื•ืขื™ ื”ื•ื ื“ืื™ืกืชื™ื™ืขื ืžื™ืœืชื™ื™ื”ื•

The Gemara rejects this: And can you understand that the Sages relied on cattle herders to determine halakha? Rather, the Sages relied on their own calculations, and those cattle herders were supported inasmuch as their statements were supported by the Sagesโ€™ independent conclusion.

ื—ื•ืœืฅ ื•ื—ื•ืœืฆื™ืŸ ื›ื•ืณ ืงื ืคืกื™ืง ื•ืชื ื™ ืœื ืฉื ื ืžืŸ ื”ืื™ืจื•ืกื™ืŸ ื•ืœื ืฉื ื ืžืŸ ื”ื ื™ืฉื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ืฉืœืžื ืžืŸ ื”ื ื™ืฉื•ืื™ืŸ ื”ื•ื™ ืขืฉื” ื•ืœื ืชืขืฉื”

ยง The mishna teaches that the High Priest performs แธฅalitza with his brotherโ€™s widow and his brother performs แธฅalitza with his wife, but in any case he does not consummate levirate marriage with his brotherโ€™s wife. The Gemara comments: The mishna categorically teaches that the High Priest does not consummate levirate marriage, and there is no difference whether his brotherโ€™s wife was a widow from betrothal alone and no difference whether she was a widow from a marriage that had been consummated. Granted, it is understood that he does not consummate levirate marriage with a widow from marriage, since there is both a positive mitzva: โ€œAnd he shall take a wife in her virginityโ€ (Leviticus 21:13), and also a prohibition: โ€œA widow, or one divorced, or a แธฅalala, or a zona, these shall he not takeโ€ (Leviticus 21:14),

Scroll To Top