Sanhedrin 26
וּמִיגַּנְזוּ כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא. כִּי אָתֵי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִמַּאן נִבְעֵי?
And everyone would hide. When the head tax collector would arrive, Rabbi Zeira’s father would say to him: From whom shall I request taxes? The city is scarcely populated, and only a small sum of taxes should be imposed on it.
כִּי נִיחָא נַפְשֵׁיהּ, אֲמַר לְהוּ: שְׁקוּלוּ תְּלֵיסַר מָעֵי דְּצַיְירִי לִי בִּסְדִינַאי, וְאַהְדַּרוּ לֵיהּ לִפְלָנְיָא, דִּשְׁקַלְתִּינְהוּ מִינֵּיהּ וְלָא אִיצְטְרִיכוּ לִי.
When he was dying, he said to those standing around his deathbed: Take thirteen ma’a that are tied up in my sheet and return them to so-and-so, as I took them from him but I did not need them to pay the tax. Evidently, some tax collectors are God-fearing, and should not be disqualified.
אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: בַּתְּחִילָּה הָיוּ קוֹרְאִין אוֹתָן ״אוֹסְפֵי שְׁבִיעִית״.
§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Shimon said: Initially people would call them: Gatherers of the produce of the Sabbatical Year. Once the tax collectors grew abundant they would then call them: Merchants who trade in the produce of the Sabbatical Year.
מַאי קָאָמַר? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: הָכִי קָאָמַר, בַּתְּחִילָּה הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: אוֹסְפֵי שְׁבִיעִית – כְּשֵׁרִין, סוֹחֲרִין – פְּסוּלִין.
The Gemara asks: What is he saying? What is Rabbi Shimon teaching in this statement? Rav Yehuda says this is what he is saying: Initially the Sages would say that gatherers of the produce of the Sabbatical Year, i.e., those who gather a large quantity of produce of the Sabbatical Year for themselves, are fit to bear witness, but merchants who trade in the produce of the Sabbatical Year are disqualified.
מִשֶּׁרַבּוּ מַמְצִיאֵי מָעוֹת לַעֲנִיִּים, וְאָזְלִי עֲנִיִּים וְאָסְפִי לְהוּ וּמַיְיתוּ, חָזְרוּ לוֹמַר: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה פְּסוּלִין.
Once those who would offer money to the poor to gather produce for them grew abundant, and the poor would go and gather the produce for those who hired them and bring it to them, then gathering a large amount of produce of the Sabbatical Year was considered a business. The Sages then said that both this category, gatherers of the produce of the Sabbatical Year, and that category, merchants who trade in the produce of the Sabbatical Year, are disqualified.
קָשׁוּ בָּהּ בְּנֵי רַחֲבָה: הַאי ״מִשֶּׁרַבּוּ הָאַנָּסִים״? ״מִשֶּׁרַבּוּ הַתַּגָּרִין״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!
The children of the Sage Raḥava had a difficulty with this explanation, as accordingly this phrase: Once the tax collectors grew abundant, is inaccurate; the mishna should have stated: Once the merchants grew abundant.
אֶלָּא, בַּתְּחִילָּה הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה פְּסוּלִין. מִשֶּׁרַבּוּ הָאַנָּסִין – וּמַאי נִינְהוּ? אַרְנוֹנָא – כִּדְמַכְרִיז רַבִּי יַנַּאי: ״פּוּקוּ וּזְרַעוּ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית מִשּׁוּם אַרְנוֹנָא״. חָזְרוּ לוֹמַר: אוֹסְפִין כְּשֵׁרִין, סוֹחֲרִין פְּסוּלִין.
Rather, Rabbi Shimon’s statement should be explained differently, as follows: Initially the Sages would say that both this category, gatherers of the produce of the Sabbatical Year, and that category, merchants who trade in the produce of the Sabbatical Year, are disqualified. Once the tax collectors grew abundant it was permitted to gather the produce of the Sabbatical Year. And what tax did they collect? Arnona, which was a heavy tax on property collected both during the Sabbatical Year and in other years, placing pressure on those observing the Sabbatical Year. As Rabbi Yannai proclaimed: Go out and sow the fields during the Sabbatical Year due to the arnona that you must pay. Once this happened, the Sages then said: Gatherers of the produce of the Sabbatical Year are fit to bear witness, as they were no longer viewed as transgressors, but merchants who trade in this produce are still disqualified.
רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר זַרְנוֹקֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוֹצָדָק הֲווֹ קָאָזְלִי לְעַבֵּר שָׁנָה בְּעַסְיָא. פְּגַע בְּהוּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ, אִיטַּפַּל בַּהֲדַיְיהוּ. אָמַר: אֵיזִיל אִיחְזֵי הֵיכִי עָבְדִי עוֹבָדָא.
§ The Gemara recounts an incident connected tangentially to the discussion concerning the Sabbatical Year: Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnokei and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak were going to intercalate the year in Asya, as circumstances did not enable them to perform the intercalation of the year in Eretz Yisrael. Reish Lakish met them and joined with them. He said: I will go see how they do the deed, i.e., how the intercalation is performed practically.
חַזְיֵיהּ לְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דְּקָא כָרֵיב. אָמַר לָהֶן: כֹּהֵן וְחוֹרֵשׁ! אָמְרוּ לוֹ, יָכוֹל לוֹמַר: ״אַגִּיסְטְוָן אֲנִי בְּתוֹכוֹ״.
Reish Lakish saw a certain man plowing a field. He said to the other Sages: Look at this priest who is plowing during the Sabbatical Year. They said to him that he could say in his own defense: I am a hired worker [agiston] in the field, which belongs to a gentile. Therefore, it is permitted.
תּוּ חַזְיֵיהּ לְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דַּהֲוָה כָּסַח בְּכַרְמֵי. אָמַר לָהֶן: כֹּהֵן וְזָמַר! אָמְרוּ לוֹ: יָכוֹל לוֹמַר ״לְעֵקֶל בֵּית הַבַּד אֲנִי צָרִיךְ״. אָמַר לָהֶם: הַלֵּב יוֹדֵעַ אִם לְעֵקֶל אִם לַעֲקַלְקַלּוֹת.
Reish Lakish further saw a certain man pruning vines in the vineyards. He said to the other Sages: Look at this priest who is pruning vines during the Sabbatical Year. They said to him that he could say: I need the branches to make a bale [ekel ] for my olive press, i.e., a basket to hold olives for pressing. Since he is not pruning the vines for agricultural purposes but to use the branches, it is permitted for him to do so in the Sabbatical Year. Reish Lakish said to them, in a play on words: The heart knows whether he is doing so for a bale [ekel ], or whether he is saying this as deceit [la’akalkalot].
הֵי אֲמַר לְהוּ בְּרֵישָׁא? אִילֵימָא הָא קַמַּיְיתָא אֲמַר לְהוּ בְּרֵישָׁא, הָא נָמֵי לֵימְרוּ: ״אַגִּיסְטְוָן אֲנִי בְּתוֹכוֹ״! אֶלָּא, הָא אֲמַר לְהוּ בְּרֵישָׁא, וַהֲדַר אֲמַר לְהוּ הָךְ.
The Gemara asks: Which did he say to them first? Which incident occurred first? If we say that first he said to them that first exclamation, that a priest was plowing the field, let them say to him in this latter incident too, in which someone was pruning vines, that he could claim in his defense: I am a hired worker in the field. This would have been a better justification than claiming he needed the branches. Rather, apparently first he said to them this exclamation, that a priest was pruning vines, and only then he said to them that a priest was plowing the field.
מַאי שְׁנָא כֹּהֵן? מִשּׁוּם דַּחֲשִׁידִי אַשְּׁבִיעִית.
The Gemara asks: What is different about a priest? Why did Reish Lakish assume the man was a priest? The Gemara answers: It is because priests are suspected of desecrating the Sabbatical Year.
דִּתְנַן: סְאָה תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנָּפְלָה לְמֵאָה סְאִין שֶׁל שְׁבִיעִית – תַּעֲלֶה. פָּחוֹת מִיכֵּן – יֵרָקְבוּ.
As we learned in a baraita: A se’a of teruma, the portion of the produce designated for the priest, that fell into a hundred se’a of Sabbatical Year produce and was indistinguishable, is nullified, i.e., it no longer has the status of teruma, and can be eaten until the time that Sabbatical Year produce must be removed from one’s possession. If it fell into a lesser quantity of Sabbatical Year produce, the entire mixture must be left to rot, as it is prohibited for non-priests to partake of teruma.
וְהָוֵינַן בַּהּ: אַמַּאי יֵרָקְבוּ? יִמְכְּרֶנּוּ לַכֹּהֵן בִּדְמֵי תְרוּמָה, חוּץ מִדְּמֵי אוֹתָהּ סְאָה.
And we discussed it: Why must the produce rot? Let its owner sell it to a priest in accordance with its value as teruma, which is less expensive than regular produce because it can be eaten only by priests, and except for the value of that se’a of teruma that fell in, which the owner is required to give to a priest for free. The priest may then partake of the produce, treating the entire mixture as though it has the sanctity of teruma, and both the priest and the owner will benefit.
וְאָמַר רַב חִיָּיא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּעוּלָּא: זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת, נֶחְשְׁדוּ כֹּהֲנִים אַשְּׁבִיעִית.
And Rav Ḥiyya said in the name of Ulla: That is to say, i.e., one can infer from the fact that one is not permitted to sell the mixture to a priest, that priests are suspected of desecrating the Sabbatical Year by partaking of its produce after the time it must be removed from one’s possession. They did so because they considered it theirs, the same as teruma, as both mitzvot pertain to the produce of Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, produce of the Sabbatical Year should not be given or sold to priests. Similarly, Reish Lakish assumed that those who desecrated the Sabbatical Year were priests.
אָמְרוּ: טָרוֹדָא הוּא דֵּין. כִּי מְטוֹ לְהָתָם, סְלִיקוּ לְאִיגָּרָא, שַׁלְּפוּהּ לְדַרְגָּא מִתּוּתֵיהּ.
After Reish Lakish continually bothered them with his comments, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnokei and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak said: This one is a nuisance. In order to rid themselves of him, when they reached the location where they intended to intercalate the year, they went up to the roof and took the ladder out from under them so that he would stay below and would not be able to join them.
אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּנֵי אָדָם הַחֲשׁוּדִין עַל הַשְּׁבִיעִית, כְּשֵׁרִין לְעַבֵּר שָׁנָה?
Sometime later, Reish Lakish came before Rabbi Yoḥanan. Reish Lakish said to him: Are people who are suspected of desecrating the Sabbatical Year fit to intercalate the year? He believed that the two Sages who were sent to intercalate the year treated the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year with disrespect.
הֲדַר אָמַר: לָא קַשְׁיָא לִי, מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַשְּׁלֹשָׁה רוֹעֵי בָקָר, וְרַבָּנַן אַחוּשְׁבָּנַיְיהוּ סְמוּךְ.
Reish Lakish then said in response to his own question: This is not difficult for me; just as the Sages once intercalated the year in accordance with the assessment of three cattle herders (see 18b), which was permitted, as the Sages depended not on the assessment of the cattle herders but on their own calculation, perhaps here too the Sages depended on their own calculations and not on the decision of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnokei and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak.
וַהֲדַר אָמַר: לָא דָּמֵי. הָתָם, הֲדוּר אִימְּנוֹ רַבָּנַן וְעַבְּרוּהָ לְהָהִוא שַׁתָּא. הָכָא, קֶשֶׁר רְשָׁעִים הוּא, וְקֶשֶׁר רְשָׁעִים אֵינוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: דָּא עָקָא.
Reish Lakish changed his mind and then said: It is not similar. There, in the case of the cattle herders, afterward the Sages were counted, i.e., they made a decision, and intercalated that year themselves. Here, by contrast, it is a conspiracy of wicked people, as the Sages who intercalated the year are disqualified from doing so; and a conspiracy of wicked people is not counted. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This problem you raise is troublesome.
כִּי אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: קָרֵי לַן ״רוֹעֵי בָקָר״, וְלָא אֲמַר לֵיהּ מָר וְלָא מִידֵּי? אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְאִי קָרֵי לְכוּ ״רוֹעֵי צֹאן״, מַאי אָמֵינָא לֵיהּ?
When Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnokei and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak subsequently came before Rabbi Yoḥanan, after hearing about his discussion with Reish Lakish, they said to him bitterly: Reish Lakish referred to us as cattle herders, and the Master said nothing to him in response? Rabbi Yoḥanan said to them dismissively: And even if he had referred to you as shepherds, who are disqualified from bearing witness in addition to being disqualified from serving as judges, what should I have said to him? He is correct.
מַאי קֶשֶׁר רְשָׁעִים? שֶׁבְנָא הֲוָה דָּרֵישׁ בִּתְלֵיסַר רִבְּוָותָא, חִזְקִיָּה הֲוָה דָּרֵישׁ בְּחַד סַר רִבְּוָותָא.
§ The Gemara asks: What is the source of the halakha that a conspiracy of wicked people is not counted as part of a group? The Gemara answers: Shebna, a steward and a minister in King Hezekiah’s court, was a prominent and influential figure. He would teach Torah to an audience of 130,000 followers, whereas King Hezekiah would teach Torah to an audience of merely 110,000 followers.
כִּי אֲתָא סַנְחֵרִיב וְצַר עֲלַהּ דִּירוּשְׁלֶם, כְּתַב שֶׁבְנָא פִּתְקָא שְׁדָא בְּגִירָא: ״שֶׁבְנָא וְסִיעָתוֹ הִשְׁלִימוּ, חִזְקִיָּה וְסִיעָתוֹ לֹא הִשְׁלִימוּ״. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי הִנֵּה הָרְשָׁעִים יִדְרְכוּן קֶשֶׁת כּוֹנְנוּ חִצָּם עַל יֶתֶר״.
When Sennacherib came and besieged Jerusalem, Shebna wrote a note and shot it over the wall with an arrow. It read: Shebna and his camp have appeased Sennacherib and are ready to surrender; Hezekiah and his camp have not appeased Sennacherib. As it is stated in allusion to this incident: “For behold, the wicked bend the bow, they have made ready their arrow upon the string” (Psalms 11:2).
הֲוָה קָא מִסְתְּפֵי חִזְקִיָּה, אֲמַר: דִּילְמָא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם נָטְיָה דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּקוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא בָּתַר רוּבָּא, כֵּיוָן דְּרוּבָּא מִימַּסְרִי אִינְהוּ נָמֵי מִימַּסְרִי. בָּא נָבִיא וְאָמַר לוֹ: ״לֹא תֹאמְרוּן קֶשֶׁר לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יֹאמַר הָעָם הַזֶּה קָשֶׁר״, כְּלוֹמַר, קֶשֶׁר רְשָׁעִים הוּא, וְקֶשֶׁר רְשָׁעִים אֵינוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן.
Hezekiah was afraid. He said: Perhaps, God forbid, the opinion of the Holy One, Blessed be He, will follow the majority; and since the majority have submitted to the Assyrians, even those who have not submitted will also be submitted into their hands. The prophet Isaiah then came and said to him: “Say not: A conspiracy, concerning all of which this people say: A conspiracy” (Isaiah 8:12). Meaning, it is a conspiracy of wicked people, and a conspiracy of wicked people is not counted. Therefore, although they are many, they are not considered the majority.
הָלַךְ לַחְצֹב לוֹ קֶבֶר בְּקִבְרֵי בֵּית דָּוִד. בָּא נָבִיא וְאָמַר לוֹ: ״מָה לְּךָ פֹה וּמִי לְךָ פֹה כִּי חָצַבְתָּ לְּךָ פֹּה קָבֶר… הִנֵּה ה׳ מְטַלְטֶלְךָ טַלְטֵלָה גָּבֶר״.
Shebna went to carve out a grave for himself among the graves of the house of David, as he thought that the kingship would be given to him. The prophet Isaiah then came and said to him: “What have you here, and whom have you here, that you have carved out a grave for yourself here? You, who have carved yourself out a grave on high, and hollowed a habitation for yourself in the rock? Behold, the Lord will make you wander like the wandering of a man; and he will wind you round and round” (Isaiah 22:16–17).
אָמַר רַב: טִלְטוּלָא דְּגַבְרָא קָשֵׁי מִדְּאִיתְּתָא.
The Gemara mentions tangentially: Rav says that the wandering of a man is more difficult than that of a woman. He derives it from the expression “like the wandering of a man.”
״וְעֹטְךָ עָטֹה״ – אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁפָּרְחָה בּוֹ צָרַעַת. כְּתִיב הָכָא ״וְעֹטְךָ עָטֹה״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם ״וְעַל שָׂפָם יַעְטֶה״.
With regard to the phrase: “And he will wind you round and round,” Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: This teaches that Shebna developed leprosy; it is written here: “And he will wind you round and round [ve’otkha ato],” and it is written there, in the Torah, with regard to a leper: “And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be torn, and the hair of his head shall go loose, and he shall cover his upper lip [ya’te]” (Leviticus 13:45). The Hebrew word for upper lip is from the same root as the verb in the verse cited from Isaiah.
״צָנוֹף יִצְנׇפְךָ צְנֵפָה כַּדּוּר אֶל אֶרֶץ רַחֲבַת יָדָיִם וְגוֹ׳״. תָּנָא: הוּא בִּיקֵּשׁ קְלוֹן בֵּית אֲדֹנָיו, לְפִיכָךְ נֶהְפַּךְ כְּבוֹדוֹ לְקָלוֹן. כִּי הֲוָה נָפֵיק אִיהוּ, אֲתָא גַּבְרִיאֵל אַחְדֵּיהּ לְדַשָּׁא בְּאַפֵּי מַשְׁרְיָיתֵיהּ.
The Gemara continues to interpret the prophecy about Shebna: “He will violently roll and toss you like a ball into a large country; there you shall die, and there shall be the chariots of your glory, you shame of your lord’s house” (Isaiah 22:18). A baraita taught: He, Shebna, desired shame for his master’s house; therefore his glory turned to shame. This is what happened to him: When he was going out of the gate of Jerusalem to submit to the Assyrians, the angel Gabriel came and held the gate in front of his camp so they could not follow him. Consequently, he went out by himself.
אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: מַשְׁירְיָיתָךְ הֵיכָא? אֲמַר: הֲדַרוּ בִּי. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: אִם כֵּן, אַחוֹכֵי קָא מַחְיְיכַתְּ בַּן! נְקָבוּהוּ בַּעֲקָבָיו וּתְלָאוּהוּ בְּזַנְבֵי סוּסֵיהֶם, וְהָיוּ מְגָרְרִין אוֹתוֹ עַל הַקּוֹצִים וְעַל הַבַּרְקָנִין.
The Assyrians said to him: Where is your camp? Shebna said: They backed out on me. They said to him: If so, you are mocking us; you led us to believe that behind you stands a large camp of supporters. They punched holes in his heels and hung him by the tails of their horses, and dragged him on the thorns and on the bristles.
אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: שֶׁבְנָא בַּעַל הֲנָאָה הָיָה. כְּתִיב הָכָא: ״לֶךְ בֹּא אֶל הַסֹּכֵן הַזֶּה״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם: ״וַתְּהִי לוֹ סֹכֶנֶת״.
Rabbi Elazar says: Shebna was a hedonist. It is written here: “Go, get yourself to this steward [hasokhen], to Shebna, who is over the house” (Isaiah 22:15), and it is written there with regard to Abishag the Shunammite: “And let her be a companion [sokhenet] to him; and let her lie in your bosom, that my lord the king may get heat” (I Kings 1:2).
וְאוֹמֵר: ״כִּי הַשָּׁתוֹת יֵהָרֵסוּן צַדִּיק מַה פָּעָל״. רַב יְהוּדָה וְרַב עֵינָא, חַד אָמַר: אִילּוּ חִזְקִיָּה וְסִיעָתוֹ נֶהֱרָסִים, צַדִּיק מַה פָּעָל? וְחַד אָמַר: אִילּוּ בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ יַהָרֵס, צַדִּיק מַה פָּעָל? וְעוּלָּא אָמַר: אִילּוּ מַחְשְׁבוֹתָיו שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע אֵינָן נֶהֱרָסוֹת, צַדִּיק מַה פָּעָל?
And following the aforementioned verse: “For behold, the wicked bend the bow, they have made ready their arrow upon the string,” the next verse states: “When the foundations are destroyed, what has the Righteous One done?” (Psalms 11:3). Rav Yehuda and Rav Eina interpret this verse. One says: If Hezekiah and his camp are destroyed, what has the Righteous One done? And one says: If the Temple should be destroyed, what has the Righteous One done? And Ulla says: If the intentions of that wicked person, Sennacherib, are not destroyed, what has the Righteous One done?
בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: אִילּוּ מַחְשְׁבוֹתָיו שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב ״כִּי הַשָּׁתוֹת יֵהָרֵסוּן״.
The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that the verse means: If the intentions of that wicked person are not destroyed, what has the Righteous One done, this is the reason that it is written: “When the foundations [hashatot] are destroyed,” i.e., the intentions of Sennacherib are destroyed, as intentions are called shatot.
וּלְמַאן דְּאָמַר בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, נָמֵי – דִּתְנַן: אֶבֶן הָיְתָה שָׁם מִימוֹת נְבִיאִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, וּשְׁתִיָּיה הָיְתָה נִקְרֵאת.
And according to the one who says it is referring to the Temple, the word hashatot is also clear, as we learned in a mishna (Yoma 53b): There was a stone in the Holy of Holies from the days of the early prophets, David and Samuel, who laid the groundwork for construction of the Temple, and this stone was called the Foundation [shetiyya] Stone.
אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה וְסִיעָתוֹ, הֵיכָא אַשְׁכְּחַן צַדִּיקֵי דְּאִיקְּרוּ ״שָׁתוֹת״?
But according to the one who says that the reference is to Hezekiah and his camp, where do we find that righteous people are referred to as shatot?
דִּכְתִיב: ״כִּי לַה׳ מְצֻקֵי אֶרֶץ וַיָּשֶׁת עֲלֵיהֶם תֵּבֵל״. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא מֵהָכָא: ״הִפְלִיא עֵצָה הִגְדִּיל תּוּשִׁיָּה״.
The Gemara answers: As it is written: “He raises up the poor out of the dust, He lifts up the needy from the dung hill, to make them sit with princes and inherit the throne of glory; for the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s, and He has set [vayyashet] the world upon them” (I Samuel 2:8). Since the righteous are considered the foundations of the world, this verse is interpreted in reference to them. And if you wish, say instead that it is derived from here: “Wonderful is His counsel, and great His wisdom [tushiyya]” (Isaiah 28:29). Accordingly, the wise, righteous people are called shatot.
אָמַר רַבִּי חָנָן: לָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ תּוּשִׁיָּה? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא מַתֶּשֶׁת כֹּחוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם. דָּבָר אַחֵר: תּוּשִׁיָּה – שֶׁנִּיתְּנָה בַּחֲשַׁאי מִפְּנֵי הַשָּׂטָן. דָּבָר אַחֵר: תּוּשִׁיָּה – דְּבָרִים שֶׁל תּוֹהוּ שֶׁהָעוֹלָם מְשׁוּתָּת עֲלֵיהֶם.
With regard to the latter verse, Rabbi Ḥanan says: Why is the Torah called tushiyya? Because it weakens [matteshet] the strength of a person who engages in its study. Alternatively, tushiyya can be interpreted as an abbreviation: That it was given in secret [shenittena beḥashai]. This was done because of the Satan, lest he claim that the Jewish people are not worthy of it. Alternatively, tushiyya can be interpreted as an abbreviation for amorphous [tohu] matters that seem foreign and strange, but nevertheless the world is founded [meshotat] on them.
אָמַר עוּלָּא: מַחְשָׁבָה מוֹעֶלֶת אֲפִילּוּ לְדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מֵפֵר מַחְשְׁבוֹת עֲרוּמִים וְלֹא תַעֲשֶׂינָה יְדֵיהֶם תּוּשִׁיָּה״.
Ulla says: Thought, i.e., concern, is effective [mo’elet] in disturbing even the study of statements of Torah, as it is stated: “He frustrates the thoughts of the crafty, so that their hands can perform nothing [velo…tushiyya]” (Job 5:12), and tushiyya is a reference to Torah.
אָמַר רַבָּה: אִם עֲסוּקִין לִשְׁמָהּ, אֵינָהּ מוֹעֶלֶת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״רַבּוֹת מַחֲשָׁבוֹת בְּלֶב אִישׁ וַעֲצַת ה׳ הִיא תָקוּם״. עֵצָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ דְּבַר ה׳ הִיא תָּקוּם לְעוֹלָם.
Rabba says: If people engage in Torah study for its own sake, concern is not effective; as it is stated: “There are many devices in a man’s heart; but the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand” (Proverbs 19:21). Rabba interprets this to mean that a counsel that has in it the statement of the Lord shall rise forever and cannot be disturbed.
אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אֵימָתַי. אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.
§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yehuda says: When are all these people, e.g., gamblers and those who lend with interest, disqualified from bearing witness? It is when they have no occupation other than this one. Rabbi Abbahu says that Rabbi Elazar says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: כּוּלָּן צְרִיכִין הַכְרָזָה בְּבֵית דִּין.
And Rabbi Abbahu says that Rabbi Elazar says: All of these require a proclamation in the court. In other words, one is disqualified only after it is proclaimed in court that he was found guilty of this behavior.
רוֹעֶה – פְּלִיגִי בַּהּ רַב אַחָא וְרָבִינָא: חַד אָמַר בָּעֵי הַכְרָזָה, וְחַד אָמַר לָא בָּעֵי הַכְרָזָה.
With regard to a shepherd, who is also disqualified from bearing witness, Rav Aḥa and Ravina disagree. One says that he requires a proclamation that he is disqualified due to his being a shepherd, and one says that he does not require a proclamation and is disqualified automatically.
בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר לָא בָּעֵי הַכְרָזָה, הַיְינוּ דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: סְתָם רוֹעֶה פָּסוּל. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בָּעֵי הַכְרָזָה, מַאי סְתָם רוֹעֶה פָּסוּל?
The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that he does not require a proclamation, this is what Rav Yehuda means when he says that Rav says that an ordinary shepherd is disqualified, i.e., he does not require a specific proclamation. But according to the one who says that a shepherd requires a proclamation, what is meant by the statement that an ordinary shepherd is disqualified?
דְּבִסְתָמָא מַכְרְזִינַן עֲלֵיהּ.
The Gemara answers: It means that in an ordinary case, the court proclaims about him that he is disqualified for having engaged in shepherding. If the court discovers that he regularly engages in this trade, it proclaims immediately that he is disqualified, and the court does not need to prove that he shepherds his flock in the fields of others.
הָהִיא מַתָּנָה דַּהֲווֹ חֲתִימִי עֲלַהּ תְּרֵין גַּזְלָנִין, סְבַר רַב פָּפָּא בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל לְאַכְשׁוֹרַהּ, דְּהָא לָא אַכְרְזִינַן עֲלַיְיהוּ.
The Gemara recounts: With regard to a certain deed of gift on which the names of two robbers were signed, Rav Pappa bar Shmuel thought to deem it valid despite the identity of the witnesses, as the court did not proclaim about them that they were disqualified.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: נְהִי דְּבָעֵינַן הַכְרָזָה בְּגַזְלָן דְּרַבָּנַן, בְּגַזְלָן דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא מִי בָּעֵינַן הַכְרָזָה?
Rava said to him: Although we require a proclamation in order to disqualify a robber from bearing witness, this is only with regard to a robber who is guilty of stealing by rabbinic law; with regard to a robber who is guilty of stealing by Torah law, do we require a proclamation? He is disqualified automatically.
סִימָן: דָּבָר, וַעֲרָיוֹת, גַּנָּב.
§ The Gemara states a mnemonic for the following statements with regard to disqualification from testifying: Something; and forbidden sexual relations; and a thief.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: אוֹכְלֵי דָּבָר אַחֵר פְּסוּלִין לְעֵדוּת.
Rav Naḥman says: Those who eat something else, a euphemism for pork, are disqualified from bearing witness. This is referring to those who accept charity from gentiles, thereby causing a desecration of God’s name. They are tantamount to wicked people guilty of monetary transgressions, as they are willing to desecrate God’s name for monetary gain.
הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא, אֲבָל בְּצִינְעָה לָא. וּבְפַרְהֶסְיָא נָמֵי לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא דְּאֶפְשָׁר לֵיהּ לְאִיתְּזוֹנֵי בְּצִינְעָה, וְקָא מְבַזֵּי נַפְשֵׁיהּ בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא. אֲבָל לָא אֶפְשָׁר לֵיהּ – חַיּוּתֵיהּ הוּא.
The Gemara comments: This statement applies with regard to taking charity from gentiles in public [befarhesya], but if one takes it in private he is not disqualified. And even if he takes it in public, we said that he is disqualified only in a case where he can sustain himself by accepting charity from gentiles in private and despite this he disgraces himself by taking it in public. But if he cannot support himself in any other manner, he is not disqualified, as it is his livelihood.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: הֶחָשׁוּד עַל הָעֲרָיוֹת כָּשֵׁר לְעֵדוּת. אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: עֲנִי מָרִי, אַרְבְּעִין בְּכַתְפֵּיהּ וְכָשֵׁר?
Rav Naḥman says: One who due to a rumor is suspected of engaging in forbidden sexual relations is fit to bear witness. Rav Sheshet said to him: Answer me, my Master: The halakha is that one who is rumored to have engaged in forbidden sexual intercourse receives forty lashes on his shoulders, and yet you say he is fit to bear witness?
אָמַר רָבָא: וּמוֹדֶה רַב נַחְמָן לְעִנְיַן עֵדוּת אִשָּׁה שֶׁהוּא פָּסוּל. אָמַר רָבִינָא, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַב פָּפָּא: לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא לְאַפּוֹקַהּ, אֲבָל לְעַיּוֹלַהּ – לֵית לַן בַּהּ.
Rava said: And Rav Naḥman concedes that he is disqualified with regard to testimony about the status of a married woman, as he is clearly under suspicion with regard to this matter. Ravina says, and some say Rav Pappa says: We said he is disqualified only with regard to testimony that removes her status as a married woman, e.g., testimony that her husband died, as he is suspected of wanting her for himself. But with regard to testimony that establishes her in that status, we have no problem with it.
פְּשִׁיטָא! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא הָא עֲדִיפָא לֵיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״מַיִם גְּנוּבִים יִמְתָּקוּ וְגוֹ׳״? קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּכַמָּה דְּקַיְימָא הָכִי שְׁכִיחָא לֵיהּ.
The Gemara asks: Isn’t that obvious? Why should he be suspected of lying in order to render a woman married? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that if he wants her for himself, this situation, i.e., her being married to another, is preferable to him; as it is written: “Stolen waters are sweet and bread eaten in secret is pleasant” (Proverbs 9:17), i.e., the forbidden is more pleasant than the permitted, Rav Pappa teaches us that this is not the case, as the way the woman is now, being unmarried, she is more available to him. He therefore is not motivated to testify falsely that she is married.
וְאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: גַּנַּב נִיסָן וְגַנַּב תִּשְׁרֵי – לָא שְׁמֵיהּ גַּנָּב.
And Rav Naḥman says: A thief of Nisan and a thief of Tishrei, i.e., one who steals during the harvest seasons, is not called a thief and is therefore not disqualified from bearing witness.
וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי בַּאֲרִיסָא, וְדָבָר מוּעָט, וּבְדָבָר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ.
The Gemara explains: This statement applies specifically with regard to a tenant farmer, and it is a situation where he took a small amount, and in a case where it was an item whose work was completed, i.e., that needed no further processing. Since the produce was sufficiently processed, the tenant may assume that he deserves additional pay for any further labor and justify taking a small amount of the produce for his effort. Consequently, his theft is not willful.
אִיכָּרֵיהּ דְּרַב זְבִיד, חַד גְּנַב קַבָּא דִשְׂעָרֵי, וּפַסְלֵיהּ, וְחַד גְּנַב קִיבּוּרָא דַאֲהִינֵי, וּפַסְלֵיהּ.
The Gemara recounts: An incident occurred with the tenant farmers of Rav Zevid. One stole a kav of barley, and Rav Zevid disqualified him from bearing witness, and one stole a cluster of dates, and he disqualified him. The reason for their disqualification is that the quantity of produce they stole is not considered a small amount.
הָנְהוּ קָבוֹרָאֵי דִּקְבוּר נַפְשָׁא בְּיוֹם טוֹב רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל עֲצֶרֶת, שַׁמְּתִינְהוּ רַב פָּפָּא וּפַסְלִינְהוּ לְעֵדוּת, וְאַכְשְׁרִינְהוּ רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ.
The Gemara relates: There were these gravediggers, who buried a person on the first day of the festival of Shavuot, desecrating the Festival. Rav Pappa excommunicated them and then disqualified them from bearing witness, and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, deemed them fit to bear witness.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא: וְהָא רְשָׁעִים נִינְהוּ? סָבְרִי: מִצְוָה קָא עָבְדִי.
Rav Pappa said to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua: But aren’t they wicked people, as they violated a Torah prohibition? Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, answered him: They assumed they were doing a mitzva, as they were burying the dead.
וְהָא קָא מְשַׁמְּתִינַן לְהוּ? סָבְרִי: כַּפָּרָה קָא עָבְדִי לַן רַבָּנַן.
Rav Pappa asked: But didn’t I excommunicate them for this? Nevertheless, they continued to bury people on the Festival. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, answered: They assumed: We were not excommunicated for doing something wrong. Rather, since the mitzva of burying the dead involved desecrating the Festival, the Sages are achieving atonement for us, although our behavior was appropriate.
אִיתְּמַר:
§ A conspiring witness is one who testified that a certain incident occurred at a particular time and place, and then two other witnesses testify that he was elsewhere at that time. The Gemara discusses the disqualification of a conspiring witness from providing testimony in other cases. It was stated
